Page images

posing myself an Arian; and supposing too at the same time, that I had some degree of impartiality left, (which it must be owned is a pretty hard supposition,) I see not but that I might give much such an account as this to an inquirer.

But then I fear he would be apt to draw a conclusion, by no means favourable to my friend the Country Clergyman. He would suspect that he had been instrumental to his own defeat, by forcing into the field of controversy a gentleman, so much superior to himself in the abilities and qualifications which it requires; and who had so effectually baffled both him and his assistants, that the rancour and bitterness of his present manner of writing were (as is usual in such cases) only the effects of his rage, resentment, and despair.

Let me now, in my proper character, venture to affirm, that this conclusion is just; or at least to desire our author to furnish us with a better reason for his conduct. Had Dr. Waterland failed in his attempt, yet it was so kindly intended, that a grateful mind would upon that account have abstained from all insolent language and personal abuse. But had he failed, he had not met with this usage: it is his success that creates envy, and it is envy and the like black passions that have opened our author's mouth against him, in the lowest and vilest terms of scurrility and reproach.

But his calumnies and invectives are not confined to the modern defenders of the orthodox faith; the fathers of the fourth century particularly are treated by him with as little ceremony and respect. He is not content to charge them with introducing such corruptions as he calls "impious, "antichristian, diabolical;" but he erects a tribunal over their consciences, and definitively pronounces (p. 3.) that these corruptions were "wilful." Thus again, p. 48, 49, they are a "parcel of false witnesses,"" engaged to support innovations made in the faith," &c. Upon these accounts, as well as for the detested cause which he promotes, I make no apology, and offer no excuse for any harsh expressions that may be dropt concerning him in the follow


ing pages. He has lost all title to respect; and it is a piece of justice, which we owe to the fair writer and the modest man, to treat such as are of a quite contrary character with contempt or abhorrence.

It is a maxim of apostolical authority, that evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived. The learned prelate, who confuted the late blasphemous discourses upon the miracles of our blessed Saviour, has shewn by what steps and gradations the wretched author of them arrived at that pitch of profaneness b. And it is not merely to throw an odium upon this writer, if I mention him as another instance in which that apostolical maxim is sadly verified. If we compare his first performance in the cause of Arianism with his last, there is so visible an alteration for the worse, that one would hardly suppose them to be written by the same hand. His positions then were less shocking, his assertions not so bold and impious, but, above all, his manner was far less execrable and unrighteous. "Whoever opposes him now" (to return him his own words) "must expect nothing but rage and rude"ness." Misreport, misrepresentation, calumny, and slander, run through (I need not add almost) every page. This as to his manner; then, as to his heresy itself, he has sure now carried it as far as he will attempt to carry it, and as far as he can desire. The charge of making Christ a creature was not long since highly resented, but he is now made a creature with a witness;-a limited creature like one of us, confined to the dimensions of a human body; and yet even this body is represented as capable of adding increase of glory and happiness to the Son of God.

But not to make this preface too disproportionate to the piece to which it belongs, I shall only lay before the reader some general observations on our author's performance ; which though he may perhaps meet with again separately, yet it will not be improper to throw together in this place,

* 2 Tim. iii. 13.

b See the preface to the first volume of bishop Smalbroke's Vindication of the Miracles of our blessed Saviour.

that he may thus get some idea of the man and his management at one view: as,

1. He has given up the present question, concerning the importance of the doctrine, in the first page, and wanders into the other concerning its truth, which is wide and foreign to the purpose.

2. He calls for proofs of the truth of the doctrine, in a book not intended to prove the truth, but the importance chiefly, or solely; whereas, had his design been to dispute the truth, he should have made his pamphlet an Answer to Dr. Waterland's several Defences, a just and complete answer, if possible.

3. In his contesting the truth of the doctrine, he drops the main part of all, the defensive part, never replying to the many and solid proofs given from scripture and antiquity, to shew that God the Son is " uncreated, necessarily "existing, eternal, one God with the Father; not another "God, but having the same common dominion,” and entitled to the common adoration." Those proofs are left in their full force as before, unconsidered, unexamined, untouched; and the author pretends only to object, or to bring counter-proofs, such as they are.



4. In producing his counter-proofs, he has only revived and repeated stale things, before confuted by bishop Bull and Dr. Waterland. Whose solutions were never yet particularly replied to; neither has this writer taken notice of them which is a shrewd presumption that he has nothing to rejoin.

5. To these several articles of disingenuous dealing, he has added this other, that he has, for the most part, misrepresented not only the ancients, but moderns also, such as bishop Pearson and bishop Bull; but more particularly Dr. Waterland, almost every where, as often as he mentions him.

6. To many gross misrepresentations, he has further added scurrilities in great variety, without any just provocation, so far as appears.

As to myself, I have been so little desirous to enlarge

the catalogue, or aggravate the nature of his unjust and abusive passages, that I have scarce perhaps pointed out what may be judged sufficient to justify my own charges. But more than one of his late productions may yet be come at, which will witness for me; and I was unwilling to transcribe what must be offensive to most readers, and agreeable to none but such as have a very corrupt taste, or a most unchristian temper. Neither have I very likely exposed all his unfair dealing with regard to ancient authorities; because I did not think it worth my while to examine all his quotations: but I think I may say, that I have given such a specimen, as is enough to make any man, who is not willing to be deceived, cautious how he trusts him upon his bare word.





THE author whom I have undertaken to remark upon, gives his pamphlet the title of Christian Liberty asserted, and the Scripture Doctrine of the Trinity vindicated; whereas the liberty asserted in his book is as far from being Christian, as his doctrine of the Trinity is from being scriptural. However, though his title-page be thus justly exceptionable, he shews himself not a little wiser than ordinary, in not calling his book an Answer to Dr. Waterland's Importance, &c. Indeed it is nothing less; and if this attack be all that the party is able to make against it, we may justly esteem it unanswerable. The point which the doctor was to prove, (and which he solidly has proved,) was the importance of the doctrine of the holy Trinity. What now has our author said against this? Why, he entirely gives up the point in the very first page;-" the doctrine "of the Trinity," says he, "as revealed and de"clared in scripture, is an important doctrine." One would think then that the controversy should be determined, and all the rest that follows in our author should be wholly impertinent, and wide of the question. Well, but Dr. Waterland's doctrine (as he af

« PreviousContinue »