Self-Interest we must allow them to be good Witnesses of those Matters of Fact which happened in their Times as that such Doctrines were then generally received such Books then written such Discipline then in use but it will not follow that I must receive those Doctrines as true because the Fathers thought they were so since those very Fathers were subject to Error and therefore their Belief of such Propositions can under no pretence be looked upon as an Authority over us but when the antient Christian Writers give their Reasons why they received such Opinions we have a natural Right of examining the Reasons they alledg and if we will act like Men we ought so to do before we receive their Opinions Now by what I perceive in the late Unitarian Prints they are sensible of the Weakness of Human Reason and therefore they submit their Opinions and the Reasons upon which they are grounded to the Examination of Mankind and yet being sensible that their Reason such as it is is the only Guide God has given them as to the three great Points afore mentioned they think it their Duty to examine the Opinions of others thereby not pretending to any Authority over others nor conceiving in their Minds any Displeasure against those who differ from them And upon this Foot all Controversies may and ought to be managed betwixt differing Parties without the least breach of Peace for the benesit of each other in the discovery of Truth But hence comes the breach of Peace in Christian Churches that tho they own themselves fallible yet their Convocations and even their private Doctors will considently alledg that they are in the Right and will therefore impose their Sense of Scripture upon others so that a Man must not write or speak any thing contrary to their Determinations under severe Penalties Let any Man judg whether this be to instruct us in the Faith of Christ or to make themfelves Masters of our Faith since our Understandings and Belief must be wholly submitted to their Interpretations After this manner the Dean of St. Paul's has lately insinuated his new-fangled Notion of a Real Trinity to the Ld Mayor the Judges and Citizens of London in that Sermon he shews the Danger of corrupting the Faith by Philosophy and then taking it for granted that his Interpretation of Scripture is the Faith he concludes in his own favour that we must not use our Reason or Philosophy as Dr. S th hath learnedly done to let the World see that the Dean's Notion of three distinct insinite Minds and Spirits is Tritheistical and Idolatrous This way of arguing if Assuming may be called so is grounded only in the Self-confidence Men have in their own Abilities Thus the Dean speaks p. 8. of his Sermon As for the Doctrine of the Incarnation nothing can be plainer in Scripture than that the Son of God was made Man that the Word was made Flesh and dwelt among us that God was manifest in the Elesh And yet since the Incarnation of God is no where expressed in Scripture it can be no more than meerly a Deduction from thence but yet the Doctor will impose it upon all Christians as if it were express Scripture it self Suppose a Papist should say As for Transubstantiation nothing can be plainer in Scripture than that Christ when he held the Bread in his Hand said This is my Body and hereupon conclude that you must distinguish Philosophy from Faith and casting away your vain Philosophy hold fast to the Faith of Transubstantiation 'T were a parallel Argument to that in the Doctor 's Sermon both of them being founded in the Considence Men have of the Truth of their own Interpretations and Inferences But after all this a Protestant would not forgo the use of his Philosophy to shew that the Popish Doctrine is not only obscure but false and an Unitarian will still use his Reason to shew that the Doctor 's Inference is not only obscure but unconcluding As to the Doctor 's first Text The Son of God was made Man were those very Words in Scripture as they are not the Unitarian will say the Son of God does not always or necessarily signify God So to the second Text he will say that Expression viz. the Word does not plainly signify God and in like manner to the third Text alledg'd by the Doctor he will say that God may be manifest in the Flesh or by Flesh as his Power Wisdom and Goodness are made manifest by all Flesh or in all Flesh without being Incarnate So that the Unitarian cannot discern that Inference or Doctrine which the Doctor says is so plain in or from Scripture that nothing can be plainer What must be done in this Case then let the Doctor enjoy his Opinion but not impose it nor stir up any Strife about it nor should the Unitarian Notion be imposed on him but as the Doctor may have free leave to use his Philosophy of Self-consciousness and mutual Consciousness to support his own Opinion or attack the Unitarian Notions so 't is humbly desired that the use of Reason may be permitted to other Men for their examination of his Real Trinity and particularly that the use of Arithmetick may be indulg'd so far as to cast up whether a God and a God and a God do not amount to more than one God Now Mr. Gailhard if one of the great Doctors and Dignitaries of the Church may be mistaken in his Interpretations of Scripture and Inferences from it how shall you who are but a meer Layman hope to gain a Parliamentary Sanction to establish your Interpretations of Holy Writ and Inferences from thence Perhaps you will say 't is the Doctrine of the Church of England you would have penally establish'd by the Church you mean the Convocation which made the Articles Service-Book and Homilies now this Convocation was no more than an Assembly of Doctors and Clergy-men each of whom were subject to Error and tho they enacted their own Opinions into Articles and Homilies and oblig'd their own Clergy to subscribe them in order to their admittance into Benesices I cannot from thence see why we Laymen should put the Yoke of the Clergy upon our own Necks and be so zealous as you are to establish the Opinions of the Ecclesiasticks under the penalty of Fire and Faggot I should think it more desirable that a Gentleman may receive his Rents or a Tradesman his Prosits or even a labouring Man his Wages without subscribing the Articles or Homilies It once seem'd good to the Holy Ghost and the Apostles to impose no Burdens but what were necessary and those necessary Truths were inspired too Besides Men cannot help the altering of their Minds all the Subscriptions of the Clergy to the Predestinarian Doctrine contained in the Articles and Homilies has not preserv'd them from contrary Sentiments such as when Van Harman first broach'd them were universally judged to be contrary to the Doctrine of the Church
as they can for their own Use without sending them to your Field of Honour Upon what pretence do you claim the Christian Privilege of marking Men out to destruction I suppose you will justify your self by saying that the Doctrine which you would have Penally established is contained in the Articles of the Church of England but to make good this Point 't will be necessary for you to show that the Convocation which drew up the 39 Articles were priviledged from Error and had a just Authority over the Faith of all Englishmen in their succeeding Generations But on the contrary 't is evident even to you as appeareth by your Complaint of the Increase of Arminianism that the present Clergy do very much vary from some Doctrines contain'd in the 39 Articles And have not the present Clergy in Convocation as much right to repeal as the former to declare Articles and may not a future Clergy declare contrary to the present so that were we as well built as the Antediluvian Patriarchs we were not like to reach their Years but must be forc'd to breath our last in your Field of Honour should the Parliament of every Age penally establish the Clergy-Opinions unless we could conform to their successive contrary Sentiments The Protestants agree with the Papists that the Word of God is the Rule of Faith the Difference is about the Interpreter of this Rule The Papists depend upon the Interpretation of Authority whilst the Protestants rely upon their own Reason with all the helps it can get for the Interpretation of Holy Scripture but do not submit to any Antient Writers besides the Inspired as Masters of their Faith And why should we do otherwise The Fathers had no more Right to interpret Scripture for themselves or future Generations than we have to interpret it for our selves or Successors or future Ages for themselves and those who shall come after them Upon these Principles I cannot see what Obligation lieth upon the present Parliament in 1697 from the Authority of the Convocation held Anno 1562 to establish the Articles so long since agreed upon under the penalty of Sanguinary Laws But suppose the Article of the Trinity the first of the 39 were established upon pain of Death I do not see any certain danger that will from thence arise to the Unitarians The Article is this There is but one Living and True God Everlasting without Body Parts or Passions of infinite Power Wisdom and Goodness the Maker and Preserver of all things both visible and invisible and in Vnity of this Godhead there be three Persons of one Substance Power and Eternity the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost Now the Unity and Nature of God with all his Attributes declared in the former part of this Article they are known to believe the Belief of the three Persons is the only thing they can be questioned upon And if their Trial should proceed upon the words contain'd in the latter part of the Article they are safe for by some of their late Prints I perceive that they for peace sake submit to the Phrase of the Church and expresly own three Persons c. tho they think the word Person not so proper as another word might be But if their Trial must proceed upon the Sense of this latter part of the Article the Event will be doubtful because 't will depend on the Judg his desining the word Person If the three Persons should be defined by three distinct Minds Spirits or Substances the Unitarian will be cast but if Person be defined by Mode Manifestation or outward Relation he will be acquitted and where is the Blasphemy in disowning three infinite distinct Minds and Spirits I pray consider who are those you call blasphemous Socinians whom you would put to death they believe all the Articles of the Apostles Creed which was heretofore thought a full and sufficient Summary of Faith they believe the Law of Christ contained in the 4 Gospels to be the only and everlasting Rule by which they ought to live here and by which they shall be judged hereafter 'T is the Principle of these Men to fear the Lord of Heaven and Earth and to walk humbly before him as likewise thankfully to lay hold on the Message of Redemption by Christ Jesus and they strive to express their Thankfulness by the Sincerity of their Obedience to the Law of Christ upon which account they are heartily sorry when they come short of their Duty and walk more watchfully in the denial of themselves holding no Correspondency with any Lust or known Sin 'T is their Principle to be just in their Actions charitable to all Men and sincere in their Devotions and to have their Hope and Conversation in Heaven Now suppose these Men after serious Consideration should not be convinced of a Trinity of Infinite Minds and Spirits each of which is a God and suppose they could believe nothing whereof they have no Idea 't is hard to revive the Writ de Haeretico comburendo for their sakes when they believe all things contained in the first Article of the Church of England and all the Articles contain'd in the Apostles Creed and sincerely endeavour to lead quiet and peaceable Lives in all godly Conversation and Honesty It may be after all you will say that the Socinians do not believe what is declared in the Gospel concerning the Trinity and Incarnation but rather oppose it and therefore their Doctrine is blasphemous and they deserve Death I confess this is the Pretence under which every Party of Christians when in Power destroys one another by turns Bonner said the Doctrine of Transubstantiation was plainly revealed in Scripture this Opinion of Bonner Latimer oppos'd and was therefore sent to the Field of Honour for what for denying Scripture says Bonner which expresly declares This is my Body Now in this particular Case every Protestant sees that Bonner's Accusation of Latimer for denying Scripture was but a meer Pretence to uphold his Power and cover his Malice Latimer own'd the Scripture as much as Bonner and believed the Divine Authority of that particular Expression This is my Body as much as he the Matter in difference was not the Text but the Interpretation which the one held to be literal the other figurative so that Latimer was not burnt for disbelieving the Scripture but for disbelieving and in words opposing that Interpretation of it which Bonner and the Roman Clergy gave out So Mr. Gailhard under the Banner of the Church of England may cite Texts of Scripture to prove his own Notion of the Trinity Incarnation c. and upon this he will charge the Unitarians with Blasphemy and an heretical Opposition to Holy Scriptures whereas the Unitarians are convinced of the Truth and Authority of the Scriptures as much as he is The Matter in difference is only this the Unitarians do not interpret the Scripture as he doth nor do they therefore infer from the Text so
Christian it will make him for ever asham'd of Persecution I dare not say it will make an angry Calvinist so for it is I am afraid impossible that such a fated Zealot should fall from the Grace of implacable Anger against all that reject the Geneva Platform of Christianity I have now finished the Remarks which I thought proper upon Mr. G's Epistle Dedicatory to the Parliament and upon the Preface to his Book of which I made a shift to read six or seven Pages The reason which mov'd me to this was a just Indignation that this siery Gentleman should pretend that no man was fit to write against the Socinians but a Calvinist and that the chief Doctors of the Church of England who are of the Arminian Perswasion favour the Socinians go hand in hand with them and mince the matter with them For is it not the highest Impudence in him after he had condemn'd the Socinians to the Fire which perhaps might be born with to go about to prove that the Arminian Clergy and Laity are little better than Socinians In the beginning of this running Century we had few or no Calvinists but among the Puritans they governed all during the Civil War yet at the Restoration were set aside again and discountenanc'd that we have some of them crept into the Church now is I much fear for no other reason but to betray it I am confirm'd in this fear by the very Title of another Book just come to my hands it is inscribed The Growth of Errour being an Exercitation concerning the Rise and Progress of Arminianism and more especially Socinianism c. The first part of the Title is pointed against the Growth of Deism which Pamphlet I believe was wrote by a sincere Christian with a real Design however he is mistaken to prevent the Growth of Deism The Author of this Growth of Errour now I have a little lookt into him designs to prevent the spreading of Arminian and Socinian Doctrines both which he takes to be much the same and equally erroneous In his Preface he says that there are sundry Principles advanced by Men of Reputation among the sound in Faith that do in their tendency lead to what these drive at who are of the worst sort i.e. the English Socinians and in the Introduction to his Book he tells us Many of them who cannot see how they differ from their Brethren but in the way and method of explaining the same Doctrine which they both hold slide into Arminianism and from thence pass over unto the Tents of Socinus A little after he says Tho they set up for a middle way between the extreams of Calvin and the Excesses of Van Harman commonly called Arminius yet on their turn from the former they fall in so far with the latter that 't is impossible for them to make a just defence of what they hold contrary to the Arminian System and therefore they fall in with them and run their Length As much as say deviate but one Hair's Breadth from the System of John Calvin and you are presently over head and ears in Arminianism Again he says That the Arminians who pretend a middle way between the Orthodox and the Socinian are in the twinkling of an eye fallen under Socinus his Banner His Book produces some sort of Instances to make good this Charge which tempts me to compare Mr. Gailhard and this Author to Brutus and Cassius of whom the Historian Vbicunque ipsi essent ibi praetexebant esse Rempublicam Wheresoever they were there they gloried was the Commonwealth of Rome So these bonny Calvinists exclusively to all others especially the Arminians will be the Church of England I would old Peter Heylin were alive to tell 'em their own in truth I think he was over-modest which was but rarely his fault to esteem a Presbyterian i.e. a Calvinist for so it was in his days worse than a Papist For my part I esteem a Christian from whatsoever Sect denominated not excepting the Socinians more honourable than a persecuting Calvinist and this is my comfort that tho the Courage of this zealous Sect is great yet their Number is small they have but half the Retinue which Mr. G. allows the Socinians there are no real Deists nor Arminians among them and but few Papists not more than there are Dominicans some handfuls of conceal'd Hugonots in France a pugil of ingrateful Refugees in England Their main Strength lies among Mahometans and Atheists of which Confederates they have so few within call that I may venture to apply to them dat Deus immiti Cornua curta Bovi In English we say Curst Cows have short Horns Let me by the way commend the discerning Spirit of the Church of Rome who commits the management of her flaming Inquisition to the Order of St. Dominic a Race of bloody Calvinists as wisely knowing what Priests are by their Principles best fitted to do the work of Devils But I wonder in my Heart how the Author of the Growth of Errour having condemned the English Socinians as the worst of Men that so they might be given up to his and Mr. Gailhard's Mercy and taken a great deal of pains to lay the Arminians under the same Condemnation should yet have the confidence to tell his Readers that many who knew him think his Charity towards Men of very different Principles of a Latitude to a Fault whenas all that I can find by his Book is that his Soul is never so disturb'd with tormenting Regret as when an Orthodox Brother is not able to make good his false Accusation against an Arminian Festus Hommius had plaid the knave a little and put the change on Episcopius his Words tho for no other reason in the world but to fasten the Imputation of Socinianism upon him this foul play the honest Author of the Growth of Errour takes notice of and makes this charitable Reflection upon it I must confess that in an instance or two the report made of Episcopius was not so well grounded as might be wished p. 72. When I consider St. Paul's Character of Charity in the 13th Chapter of the 1st Epistle to the Corinthians I cannot but conclude that our Author's Friends banter'd him when they found fault with the Latitude of his Charity for my part I cannot see how any Charity at all can be honestly laid to his charge for he desies Long-suffering and Kindness is full of Envy and Pride behaves himself unseemly seeketh to serve the Cause of his own Party is easily provoked thinketh evil in his Heart rejoiceth in Iniquity and not in the Truth beareth nothing but believeth as ill as he can of his Neighbour and still hopes and wishes the worst What would this Gentleman have giv'n that the Report made of Episcopius had been true why what would he have got by 't Why then the poor Man might have been ran down like a Wolf hang'd like a Dog or burnt for an Heretic whereas he was only banish'd a small satisfaction that in respect of what our Author might have received had the States of Holland treated Episcopius with Mr. Gailhard's extream Remedy I am sorry I have not Health and Leisure to do this Author farther Justice but must break off without so much as commending his Learning Wit and Reasoning which are of a Latitude equal to his Charity I beg his Excuse But the Debt which I cannot pay him I have some Temptation to hope that a couragious Master among the Tritheists will because some pages are particularly aim'd at him in one of which p. 161. there are these words If the contradictory Affirmation of three individual Essences being but one individual Essence will clear the Notion from being Heresy then Val. Gentilis Lismaninus Blandrata and the many other Propagators of the Socinian Abominations must be also for the same reason clear'd from Heresy Upon this Passage I have but one Observation and the Reader is at an end of his trouble If Dr. Sh ck be cleared from Heresy so also must the Socinians in the judgment not of this Author only but of Dr. S th also with whom are a Moiety if not a Majority of the Church If Dr. S th be clear'd from Heresy so also must the Socinians in the judgment of Dr. Sherlock who concludes all the Opposers of his real Tritheistic Trinity under Sabellianism and with him are some great Names and no contemptible Numbers What to do with these Socinians if I know never trust me if I brand them for Hereticks let me assign what merit I please I shall be thought as Growth of Errour phrases it to bereticate one or other Division of the Church If I pass them without censure Mr. Gailhard will vouch that I mince the matter with them notwithstanding the Protestation which I make that I am an obedient Son of the Church of England I think I had best after the example of the Areopagites engag'd in a Difficulty which puzzl'd them as much as this does me bid the Cause come before me a hundred Years hence FINIS ADVERTISEMENT Lately printed An Essay concerning the Power of the Magistrate and the Rights of Mankind in Matters of Religion With some Reasons in particular for the Dissenters not being oblig'd to take the Sacramental Test but in their own Churches and for a General Naturalization Together with a Postscript in answer to the Letter to a Convocation-man The Art of Memory A Treatise useful for all especially such as are to speak in publick By Marius D' Assigny B. D. Both sold at the Cross-keys and Bible in Cornhil