and we hope that we are approaching nearer and nearer to the happy Times, when God of his great Wisdom and Goodness will bring this to pass; but ftill with Submiffion to his holy Will and Pleasure,

But do you ever expect Unanimity among Infidels; and that Men fhould be all of a Mind, when they fhall have no Standard, no Rule to measure by?

If you Gentlemen, who please yourselves with talking fo highly of Reason, had the governing Power in your Hands, and were to settle and establish your Religion of Nature and Reafon, do you apprehend that you fhould be unanimous in fettling the Articles of your Rational Creed? Vain Imagination! Alas! Alas! * The Experience of all Ages and Nations is against you.

And we may defy you to fhew, that Reafon has ever been a fufficient Guide in Religion, in any Country, where they had no Helps from the Sacred Writings. What St. Paul

× P, 18,

faid

said was manifeftly true, that the World by Wif dom knew not God.

Therefore it is very unfair and difingenucus of you Freethinkers, to draw your Systems of Morality from the Sacred Writings, and then endeavour to put them off as the Productions of your own Reason.

If fome reading and inquifitive Perfons could be able to improve themselves by your refined Speculations, what would you do for the common People; are they all to be made Rationalists?

We fee, by the Help of the Church Catechism, by hearing the Holy Scriptures read in the Church, and by Sermons, they may be taught to behave themselves like Christians ¿ but fure you cannot think it poffible to makę them all Moral Philofophers.

But you who feem to think, that you can fathom the Depth of God's Wisdom by the Line of your Natural Reason, and penetrate

y I Cor. i. 21.

into

into all the fecret Counfels of the Most High, without the Help of Revelation; what Reason can you give us, why God fhould permit fo many ftrange and abfurd Notions, as have been imposed upon the World for Doctrines of Religion?

You who fo clearly can fee into the " Ori "der, Wisdom, and Perfection of all God's "Works," tell us, why God has been pleafed

2

to make fome Things that appear noxious and destructive to the reft; as Poifons, Vermine, Beasts of Prey, Fishes, and other Creatures, to devour one another; and many Creatures, which seem to be made only to be a Torment and Vexation to others: Tell us why it hath pleafed God to make these Things. For if the Generality of us are left to our weak and fhallow Reason, we may fancy thefe Things to be the Work of evil Spirits, or that they were made by Powers at enmity with the good God. For we certainly know, that this has been the Opinion of fome great and wife Men of old, fome of thofe Sages and Philofophers among the Heathens, whom

you

would put

upon us for Deifts.

z P. 81.

Now

Now according to your Way of Proving, one might argue thus; I cannot fee why thofe Things that appear hurtful, should be confidered as Part of God's Works; and confequently I must conclude, that these Things were not made by the good God: Therefore they must be the Work of some evil and malicious Powers. And this Conclufion would be as fairly drawn, as most of those contained in your Vindication of Deifm. For I must confefs, that my natural Reason, if it was left to itself, and not affisted by the Aids of Divine Revelation, would never be able to account for many Things which appear among God's Works, no more than I can account for the Ways of Men, why fome should take so much Pains to be the Plagues and Scourges of their Fellow-Creatures, and others allow themselves no Reft from doing Mischief; or why you should give yourself fo much Trouble to difturb the Minds of many well meaning Chriftians, by publishing your erroneous Opinions in Religion.

And I believe you yourself must confefs, that the natural Reason, of far the greater Part of Mankind, is not able to give a good Account of all these Things; whatsoever high

Value you may fet upon your own fublime Reafon.

Your Reason, you fay, cannot tell

God should beget a Son:

a

you why

And I tell you,

that my Reason cannot refolve me why God, (if it so pleased him) fhould not beget a Son.

So

you fee, upon the Foot of natural Reafon, this will amount to no Certainty either Way. But you cannot see why God should beget a Son; and if one Son, why not more Sons? And then, according to your ufual Way of Reafoning, you tell us, that this "furnishes an Argument in Reafon, against his having any begotten Son at all." b

૬.

What ridiculous and nonfenfical Blafphemy is this? Either he must have as many Sons as you pleafe, or elfe he can have no Son at all.

* P 76.

b P. 77.

And