n\ -, i^'V'7^* ■^' ^^ ^ 2_ 2. (IK THK PRINCETON, N. J. X> O rv ^-Tt- T I O X- CJ !•* SAMUEL AGNEW, OK PHILADELPHIA, PA. 1: C'«.sv% Division ^| I Shelf. . S^ctirn \,^ |) Bool:. llr MtMHhdiiilflLA h^ p m' DEFENCE OF THE REVEREND THEOPHILUS LINDSEY FROM THE ATTACK OF WILLIAM BURGH, Efq. INTERSPERSED WITH REMARKS ON CHURCH AUTHORITY; O N REASON as the Judge, and SELF-DENIAL as the Test, O F RELIGIOUS TRUTH. (Firll Publiflied in Ireland in 1776.) BY A PHYSICIAN. It we, or an angel from heaven, preach unto you any other Gofpel, than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accurfed. Paul. Take ye therefore good heed unto yourfelves (for ye faw r\ofiinilitude in the day that the Lord fpake unto yon in Horeb out of the midft of the fire) lelt ye corrupt yourfelves, and make you a graven image, the Jimilitude of any figure, the likenefs o/* Male or female. Moses. Had ye believed Mofes, ye would have believed me-. But if ye believe not his ivritings, how ftiall ye believe my \'orld; and fetting afidc the prohibi- tion contained in the fecond command, have given Jehovah, the infinite, omniprefent, and unfeen, the form and habiliments of one of ourfclves! The extreme vanity of our fpecies, in this fur- prifing doftrine, appears beyond example. No being, forfooth, but the Almighty himfelf, habited in the body of a man, born of a woman, [ xvi ] I am the Lord, that is my name, and my glory will I not give to another." Another what? Lord or Perfon, without doubt. In comparifon with this explicit command, what becomes of Mr. Burgh's pile of human au- thorities? Why, like all piles put together by mortal hznds, it muft link under its own weight. For my part, I would rather have no Deity at all, other than the fun, moon, , and ftars, (thofe natural deities) than with more patience than ever faint poffefTed, to fearch for him in fuch a chaos of fcholaftic mire and dirt, as this gentleman has colled:- ed from the antients. The antient Fathers were inferior to many of the prefent age, except in credulity, fuperftition, and pious fraud. I am forry fo corredl a writer as Mr. Lindfey fhould have fet Mr. Burgh the ex- ample of building upon the authority of the Fathers. a woman, was confidered to be glorious enough, to vifit our earth, in the latter ages of the Church, and reform its inhabitants! Is this the humility and lowlinefs of the Gofpel? — Yet, in defence of this extraordinary converfion of God into man, Mr. Mac- gowan attacks Dr. Prieftley — Sancho Pancho attacking a giant! And what Ihall we think of a bookfeller, (in Belfaft) who pub- lilhes propofals for printing a cheap edition of Mr. Macgowan's pamphlet ?— Vv'hy, that he wanted to make a little money of tht (idorahle man-god. [ xvii ] Fathers. Their authority fhould be rejected by all fides, as differing effentially from one another i nay, every particular writer, in ma- ny inffances, from himfelf. As we have the original refcript of evidence lying before us, the Scriptures, we may be faid to have lived before the Fathers j or, rather, as cotempora- ries with Chriff and his Apoftles : may be faid to lijlen to them, to converfe with them, to hear their dodrines, andy^^ their exam- ple. Farther than thcfe -^e cannot go. If I have read an a(5t of parliament, and may confult it as often as I pleafe, furely, I re- quire no abffrads of, no commentaries on it, by cotemporary writers, to render its meaning obligatory. The argument, 1 believe, has not been flated in this way before. To me it appears conclulive. With refpecft to laymen writing on theolo-^ ^/Wfubjedts, a few words fhall fuffice. All men, as Chrifiians, are clergymen, and have a right, infeparable from difciplefiip, to preach the Gofpcl, Vv'henever and wherever they pleafe, except in eftablifhed churches, into which beadles and vergers, it is probable, B would [ xviii ] would prevent them from going. To fup- pofe it otherwife, would be confidering our- felves as yews, and not as Chrijiians. God ap- pointed a particular clafs of me?iy among the Jews, to officiate in holy things, becaufe their religion was ritual and ceremonial, and was connected with a particular edifice, called the temple. All could not officiate promif- cuoully there, without confufion and diflur- bance; therefore, a few from the many were felecfted to preferve the decorum and regu- larity of the place. The temple was de- ftroyed, in fulfilment of exprefs prophecy j and, of courfe, the diftindlion, between the clergy and the laity, was for ever abolifhed. The Levite became as one of the people, or, ra- ther, every one of the people became a Le- vite for himfelf and his family. Indeed it would have been abfurd to continue the of- fice, when the place appropriate to the office had been deftroyed, and no other building appointed in its room. The Apoflles were commiffioned to inform all nations of this very alteration , and that the moral law y which is wordiipping God " in fpirit and in truth,'' was to take place of the temple-fervice, and every [ XIX ] every profclyte to Chriftianity to commence a prieil in bis own right ; or, in other words, that the difference between pried and lay- man was to ceafe Jor ever. The moral law, compriCed in the decalogue, requires no pricllhood: the rites and ceremonies among the Jews did : fo that, in /?ot/j cafes, the wif- dom of divine adminiftration is apparent. Chrift and his Apoftles have left the moral law, or the great outlines of duty towards God and man, plainer, and better illuftrated, than any fet of men, 720W living, can make them. Human condu(5l, in ifpiritiial fenfe, looks not beyond Scripture, except to the laft day: in a civil fenfe, without doubt, it muft be refponfible to civil authority. The above is my idea of the matter; and it juftifies Mr. Burgh, as well as myfelf, in taking upon us the difcuffion of religious to- pics, notwithllanding we have not had the hand of a Bifhop on our heads. He, it is true, b's a greater veneration for the prieft- hood than / have; and, to be confifient, it (hould have prevented him from invading it altogether. In my cafe, there can be no inva- B 2 fion [ ''X ] fion of a right, where none is acknowledged. Mr. Burgh, however, is only a layman in ?iame. He magnifies the Churchy reveres its deciiions, abufes Reafon, vilifies the TJnder- Jiandingy believes without comprehending, and alTerts dodlrines without explaining them, like any Clergyman of the land. He has already the fubjlance of facerdotal identity in him : perhaps, by coming into contaSl with fome holy prelate, (being capitally touched) the Jloadow, the mere appellation, may follow. He has made one ftep towards it. A learned college has conferred on him a doctor's de- gree. Had he written in defence of Reafon ^ had he generoufly maintained, that every one has a right from God to think for himfelf in religious matters; had he reprobated the idea of civil magiftrates a6ling 2.%fpiritual'y had he fpoke with manly freedom of the Clergy, as thejlatterers of princes y the fomenters of civil dijfentionsy the authors of perfecution for confci- ence fake, the buyers and fellers of livings in the churchy like their brethren of old, the dove- fellers and mo7iey-excha?igers of the temple: had he infifted on it, that every part of Scripture, necejfary to falvation, is plain and eafy to be under- [ xxi ] underftood, and that the glojfaries and com- ments of the church have confufed and em- barralTed the word of God : laftly, had he ear- neftly called upon all Chriftlans, to throw off the clerical yoke, and to receive no doc- trines as dlviney but fuch as their own un- derftanding fhould convince them are divine: I fay, had Mr. Burgh trod on the heels of the Church in the above important particii- larSy inftead of being thought worthy of an honorary degree, he would have been clalTed with fuch heretics as--Locke, Newton, Clarke, Hoadley, Dawfon, Blackburne, Prieftley, Price, Lindfey, Jebb, Evanfon, Temple, &c. The Clergy, no doubt, in confequence of the writer's- declared want of veneration for their body, will treat this publication with much clamour and abufe. — I am prepared for it. One eledrical fliock of indignation, on a fuppofed affront, runs- thro' the whole body : a fure proof that the clergy are mecha- nical in their feelings. Thus feels every foci- ety held together by mercenary attachments, and local laws. As a layman I have as jufl: a right to PREACH, through the medium of the B 3 prefs. i xxii i prefsf as any clergyman through the medium of the pulpit. Farther, in confequence of this publi- cation, I fhall have to encounter the preju- dices and habits of moft people; of thofe who never think, of thofe who feldom think, of thofe who are afraid to think, and of thofe who are ajhamed to think. Some will be- hold me with coldnefs^ fome with negledi, and fome with 2,perfecutingfpirit. — I have already experienced a large portion of e?iraged ortho- doxy, in a fifter kingdom.* The times are fuch, that every writer, who dares to declare his * — — In Ireland, where the writer praftifed feveral years. But there, unfortunately for him, orthodoxy and bigotry had pitched their tents. He happened to take a decided part in a theological difpute carried on by two neighbouring clergymen. As it may be fuppofed, he took the fide of liberal enquiry, and generous principles. In confequence thereof, he raifed enemies to himfelf of all defcriptions: thofe ca\\t^ High Church, and thofe called Old-light Prejbyterians; the fame fort of Chriftians both, though diiFerently named, and both Papijls in the ilrideft fenfe, only that they never kiffed the Pope's toe. — The pulpit teemed with inveftive againft him, while the ejiablijhed clergy, almoft to a man, left no (lone unturned to injure him, not only in h.\s pri- 'vate charaSler, but \\\s public prcfej/ion. The whole exhibited a genuine pidlure of clerical pcrfecution^ which will never ceafe till the Priefthood, in its pre fent form, as a common enemy to foci- ety, [ xxiii ] his opinion openly, muft run rifques.' — I am prepared to run any rifques, rather than give up the honourable pojj'ejjion of iny mindy or ftifle thofe flrong impreflions, refpeding our pre- fent fyftem of religion, which I cannot do without forfeiting that pofleffion. We muft all pufs through life one way or other. He that can do it with the approba- tion of his mind, with th« reflection (by no means ignoble) that his writings may inftrudt mankind after his deceafe, may be faid to pof- fefs a treafure for which there is no fubftitute. B 4 Had ety, to peace, and good neighbourhood, fhall be — deftroyed! — It ended, however, as matters of this fort, by an happy change in political fcience, no^iu generally end, in bluller and impotence on the clergy's fide. Rome's bulls have loft their horns.— On the above occafion he was kept in countenance, next- to the goodnefs of his cauf^, and the integrity of his intentions, by the fteady and afFeftionate attachment of all who were ellccmed of the bell un- derftanding and private virtue in the place. His opponents were chiefly people who never read beyond the trafh of Wefley or Ro- maine ; and who make it a point of confcience, never to think, becaufe their grandfathers and grandmothers, their godfathers and godmothers, thought for them before they ivere lorn. He owes much gratitude to the inhabitants of , and many worthy charadlers in the country round it, whofe fricndlhip and protec- tion bore him triumphantly through an unprovoked fcene of in- jury, in defiance alfo of the fir ft man of the place, a profcfled court oninion, placeman, and religious bigot. [ xxiv ] Had the writer fallen in with the habits, opi- nions, and humours of thofe about him, he might have been 2i popular man, perhaps a rich man, poflibly a great man: but from fuch fafiionable acquiefcence he has ever been held back by this one conjideration, that it is bet- ter to be in friendfhip with one's-felf, than with all the world befide. A man may {^t afide the worldy but he cannot fet him/elf afide. He may live and be happy at a diftance from the world; but he cannot live and be happy at a diftance from himfelf. — Laftly, he (hall leave the world behind him; but he cannot leave himfelf behind. — Yet, I would wifh to have every man my friend : nor can I conceive why a difference in opinion fhould create a difference in friendfhip. I know many whofe opinions are not mi?ic-y yet, per- fonally, I refped: and love them. I would quarrel with no man for entertaining fenti- ments different from mine. Why fhould he then quarrel with me? Were he to take the trouble of fetting me right, by fair reafon- ing, and ingenuous argument, I would fin- cerely thank him, and blefs the generous means he ufed. Alas! [ XXV ] Alas! people are now almoft come the length of being ajhamed or afraid to talk of religion ! Sofnc afliamed, becaufe they have been brought up in a particular perfuafion, which they find cannot bear enquiry. Others afraid, becaufe the teachers of their feB have allured them, that the gofpei difpenfation is a myjlery, which cannot admit of explana- tion: thofe very teachers, who not only with high prefumption afFed: to explain it, but, for the very acfl of explaining, enjoy lucra- tive livelihoods. — Between thefe two, which comprife moft profeffing Chriftians, the reli- gion of 'J ejus has loft its value and efficacy; while the clergy feail on its corruptions, and fatten on its fpoils. Hence alfo it is, that numbers of worthy people, not finding fa- tisfa(5lion or comfort in the ejiablijh^d church, become an eafy prey to defigning men, who eredt chapels and tabernacles, from whence, by letting pews, they fell the Gofpei, as ta- verns are ereded to fell wine and fpirits.* In * A Lady of rank has made herfelf confpicuoas in this way. The goodnefs of the Right Hon. gentlewoman's intentions, I difpute not. But thefe are not fufficient tocondudl public infti- tutions, and to carry Chriftianity, pure, fimpJe, and intelligible ia [ xxvi ] In fhort, however my fortunes may be af- fected, and however I may fuffer in the opi- nion of my orthodox friends y by this publica-^ tion, I fhall hereby leave my teftimony, be- hind me, of the unity, or one perfonality, of the Supreme Being, as implied in the firfl and fecond commandments, which nothing can fet afide; that I am not afhamed to pub- lifli in itfelf, through intricate channels, and myftical mazes. The refult has been, and will increafe to be after her deceafe, afpirit of delujton, a high-fea/oned fpiritual prudery, among the taught, chiejly the Icwer orders of the people ; and a fpirit of grofs impofi- tion, and refined pharifaical hypocrify, among the teachers. — Had this Lady's head been equal to her heart, fhe would have been con- tented to pafs through life in the private path of an humble, mo- deft, felf-denied Chriftian : winning by the irrefiftible beauty of retired example, and domeftic charity, not by the parade of out- ward profeffion, which our Lord every where condemns, and by which y%^ may make Methodifts, praying and whining in every corner, but will never be able to make true Chrlfiians. " When ye pray, ufe not vain repetitions, as the heathens do, for they think that they fhall be heard for their much fpeaking. Be not ye therefore like unto them." — Methodifm is a revival alfo of what a great Apoflle fo fharply reprehends. ** I am of Paul, I am of Apollos, I am of Cephas. Who is Paul? ^who is Apollos? ivho is Cephas?" Elfcwherehe fays, " Mark them which caufedivi- fions and offences, and avoid them. They that are fuch k\\& not the Lord Jefus Chrift, but their oivn bellies, and by good loords and fair fpceches deceinjc the hearts of the fimple; creep into houfes, and lead captive filly luomen laden of their fins." How admi- rable a caricature of modern enthufiafti, the followers of Wcfley and Romaine, and of ournumerous herd of methodiftical ranten ! [ xxvii ] lifh this my belief, in oppofition to private views ; and that, in an Athanajian age^ I had the courage to live, and was not afraid to die, A Unitarian on Socinian principles. Moreover, left any hafty reader fliould infinuate that I write perfonally prejudiced in favour of Mr. Lindfey, I hereby declare, I have not the honour to know him, except as a writer; although I do fincerely wifh to be farther acquainted than this with fo re- fpedable a man. On account of his dilinte- refted principle, and honeft attachment to truth, in conjund:ion with his real learning and ingenuity, I look upon him as one of the firft charaders of the age; with whom compared, Mr. Burgh, in poffelTion of an ho- norary degree for defending political Chrifti- anity, the gofpel of the ftate, is a character rather too commonly to be met with, in thefe our days, than to be admired or envied. — Added to this — the times have a Popijh afpedi. Government has not only taken ofF thofe falutary rcftri(5lions which our wife and prudent anceftors thought necelfary to lay on the perjkutingf Moody religion of Rome, by which [ xxviii ] which indulgence papijls, in time, will have more than half the landed property of the kingdom in their hands; but the Univerii- ties, and the national Clergy, in the perfon of their champion Mr. Burgh, affert and maintain one of the groflcfl: tenets of the Romifli Church, worJJoip through a ?}iedium, or the adoration of the Deity in the form of a man! ( — why not of a wafer"? — ) It is time there- fore for Whigs and Protestants to unite as one man. My concern is with the latter, at prefent. — The objedt of thefe fheets is to combat Chriflian Idolatry, avowed and de- fended by our feminaries of learning, and our bifliops. — But to end the Preface : The fair and generous critic, it is to be prefumed, will not attempt to depreciate the writer's theological opinions, by contrafting them in the fpirit of party with certain poli- tical onesy fcattered up and down the follow- ing work, and which, perhaps, even candid, moderate men may think, have been unne- ceiTarily introduced. But the writer begs leave to differ in fentirnents (a right every man poffeiTes, and cannot be deprived of) from fuch [ xxix ] fuch readers, however refpedable. Civil and religious liberty are intimately, are tenderly connedcd. — They cannot fubfift, in their found, perfea ftate, feparately. If the ruling civil powers are corrupt and defpotic, the priefthood, in alliance loith them, muft be corrupt and defpotic likewife. Indeed, the latter impofe dodrines on the confciences of men, from the fame afTumed, unwarrantable principle from which the former impofe ar- bitrary and unjuft reftraints on perfonal free- dom and property. A bigot would always be a tyrant, with power : and every tyrant, in po- litical matters, muft either be a practical atheift, or a cringing fycophant to the ejlabtifoed church. Civil and facerdotal polity, when the liberties and properties of mankind are to be invaded, muft always officially draw together j elfe fuch obftrudion would happen, fuch ajar- ring interference of intereft, as would ever defeat the meafures of either, confcquently countera6t the interefled- views of ambitious men. A man, whofe mind is free, will never voluntarily fufier his body to be inflaved: contrariwife, when it is in thraldom to na- tional faith, perfonal flavery, fooner or later, fucceeds [ XXX ] fucceeds of courfe. Hence all the royal and imperial defpots and butchers of the world have uniformly had the ejiabiijloed priejihood at their back. They could not have been fuccefsful otherwife^ for the mind mufl: be Jiibdiiedy before the body can. By mind and body, I mean the fpiritual and political prin- ciple, or that ftandard of right and wrong, which has a double reference, the one to this world, and the other to the 72ext. The prieft- hood, in modern times, is a creature of the ftate. Authorized and endowed by it, were priefts to counteract the defigns of their Cre- ator, annihilation would be their punifhment, as a vifible body. Civil government would not fondle a viper in her bofom, but in cafe of injury received, and in future felf-prefer- vation, would crufh the ingrate to death. An impermm in imperio cannot, eventually, but end in the deftruction of one or both. What has been advanced will bean apo- logy for the writer, in the hands of candor and juft reafoning, for his aifociating politics with religion; I mean, the religion of our day, t\iQ Jptcuiations of the clergy » The reli- pioi; [ xxxi ] gion of the New Teflament is quite another thing. Every one who repeats the Athana^ Jian creed (a compound of glaring contradic- tion and fahliood) by command of the civil power, — and let it be confidered, there is no other command for it, — would, to be felf- confiflent, if the ftate were popijhy and com- manded it, fall down to a crucifix; and, in partaking of the facramental bread and wine, would devoutly pride himfelf in the thought of eating and drinking bis God. — Whenever religion fubmits to be regulated or controul- ed by the ftate, in matters only referable to God, and another world; that religion is not chriftianity, or the religion of Chrijiy but the religion of the prince, and prime minifter, for convenience fake. Of courfe, while prin- ces and prime minifters are undermining the liberties of mankind, (their conftant aim) confequently, fapping the foundations of mo- rals and piety, they are generally the moft exad: men living in going' to church, liften- ing to fermons, and refponfmg doxologies. Would to God France, Spain, and Portugal, were my only examples! Moreover, Considering [ xxxli ] Considering the awful crifis to which the Britidi empire has been precipitated, by the ignorant perfeverance, or wicked obfli- nacy of minifters, (I had almofl faid of one man) and that it becomes and behoves every member of our free flate, at this perilous moment, to be ferioufly impreiTed with the fatal confequences moft likely to enfue, the writer flatters himfelf, every genuine Protef- tant, ?iX\dWhigj will take him under his pro- tedlion, and overlook what otherwife might be deemed deviations from his fubjedl ; but which, undoubtedly, are to be confidered as connedted with the deareft interefts of Pro- tejiant liberty , and tied to the tenderefl firings of the Britifli heart! — Great-Britain is no longer the guardian of cojjjiitutional freedom ^ and the true principles of Protejlant dijfent from Popery. Inftead of this, fhe has been adluated by a regular fyflem of tyranny, for fome years pad; has deeply dyed her mater- nal hands in the blood of her offspring, her free-born fons and daughters ; and has legif- latively taken that power into her bofom, which now is, for a thoufand years back has been, and cannot for ever otherwife than be, the [ xxxiii ] the fomentor of civil troubles, the patronefs of defpotifm, perfecution, and cruelty! The ejlablijloed church has counfelled, aided, and abetted the minifter and his junto, in all thefe proceedings ; by which fhe mayjuftly be faid to have lifted up the hand of death againfl herfelf, as flie muft fall with that power whofe ally and creature (he is. — One confolation remains: her corrupt and idola- trous dodlrines will fall with her. Requiefcat, qui nunquam quievit ! N. B. The following work was moftly printed off, previous to Mr. Burgh's having been made a Do(5lor, as a reward for defend- ing the unfcriptural dogmas of the fchools, by the learned univerfity of Oxford, the Frotejlant Patronefs of religious truth : he and his friends, therefore, will not impute to incivility his not getting that honourable title from a brother layman^ in the prefent volume. (JJr Many inaccuracies, befide thofe marked in the following table, will occur to the correft reader ; but it is to be hoped, they will not be found greater than his indulgence. ERRATA. P, 27, 1. J4, for " begot," read begotten. P. 19, 1. 13, for " but can," read but they can. P. 49, 1. 26, for " no perfon can," read no perfon ivould. P. 60, 1. 1, for " of his fellow," read of another. P. 81, 1. 12, before " than he," read no longer, P. 124, 1. 23, for " thefe lips," read thofe lips. P. 129, 1. 10, for " fufficient," read infufficient. P. 193, laft line but one, after " a thoufand," read pound. P. 225, 1. 23, for " the only one," read the one only. P. 229, 1. 22, for " in reprefentation," read of reprefentation. P. 240, 1. 6, a comma after adverfari't. P. 249, laft line but one, dele haJ. P. 304, for " Chap. VII." read Chap. VIII. P. 337, 1. 22, for " retorted againft," read retorted on. P. 404, laft line but two, for *' ftatefman,'* xtiAflatefmen. GENERAL CONTENTS. Preface^ - - . . page iii Introdunion, - _ _ . 1 Chap. I. Comprifing a variety of obfervations on what JJiould feem the fit t eft teft or criterion of truth. — Mr. Burgh'' s opinion in this matter examined: and Self denial or Difintereftednefs pointed out^ in oppofiticn to him., as alone amounting to this teft or criterion \ without which every other proof cannot hut be mutilated., equivocal., and unfatisfa^cry. 1 1 Chap. II. Containing an enquiry into the fufficiency of Reafon., or the Human Under ft anding., to judge of and finally to decide upon the fenfe of Revelation: in the courfe of which it will appear that., if we fet this diftinguiflied Faculty afide., in our interpre- tations of the word of God., we fhall never cer- tainly know what it means., but be at the mercy of an interefted., dogmatizing., fuperftitious^ and tyran- nical Priefthcod. - *- - - 47 Chap. III. The fubjeB continued -^ with occajional remarks on the condu£f of the Clergy., in deprecia- ting Reafon, magnifying Myftery., and defending the artificial Chriftianity of Creeds., Articles., and Con- fejfions. -_- _ > - c)2 GENERAL CONTENTS. Chap. IV. The fuhje6i farther extended : with quo- tations from feveral authors^ to prove the danger and abfurdity of abandoning Reafon^ in religious enquiries; one of them from Mr. Burgh. 129 Chap. V. Mr. Burgh^s inconfifiency laid before the reader in making ufe of that very Power he would difavow and difcredit ^ and his unhappinefs pointed out in mojl of his firi^ures and animadverjions on Mr. hindfey., many of which are retorted on him- felf ...... 169 Chap. VI. Jn explanation of the following terms^ left unexplained by Mr, Burgh. — Trinity — Unity — — God — Nature — P erf on — Subflance — IVorfhip — one with — equal to^ &c. - - - 203 Chap. VII. The remaining terms — Nature — Perfon ■ — Subflance — Worfliip — one with — equal to., ex- plained ; whereby it will appear how unhappy Mr. Burgh has been in his Scriptural pofitions. 232 Chap. VIII. A variety of incorjiflent., felf-contradic- tory paragraphs^ from Mr. Burgh's book (almofi without fekoiion) laid before the reader^ to con- vince him how little qualified that Gentleman was for the tajk he undertook. - • 304 Conclu^on, - , - - - 405 C " ] DEFENCE O F T H E REVEREND THEOPHILUS LINDSEY, &c. INTRODUCTION. MR. BURGH falls into much confufion and obfcurity, by not drawing a line of dif- tinftion between truth perceived by the Deity, and truth perceived by man. They arc objedls of inquiry totally diftindt, and cannot be complexly confidered, without leading us aftray from the very fubjedb we wifh to inveftigate. In all controverfies of length and moment, we fhould firft of all re- duce our ideas to as great a degree of fimplicity as poflible ; bring them back to the ftandard of firft principles, before habit and prejudice have had A any [ i ] any potent effe£l in varniftiing them over with falfe and artificial appearances -, and chufe terms of clearnefs and energy to do juftice to thofe firft principles •, (o that readers may be ufefully in- formed, at the fame time that they are affeded and ftruck. If this be not particularly attended to, the far- ther we proceed on any given topic, the more flovenly and embarrafled we (hall leave it, till it runs us a-ground on the fhoals and quick-fands of overbearing confidence, and bold afTertion. The man who commands his own thoughts with diftindnefs and precifion, will never dogmatize or confidently affert •, becaufe the bare tranfcript of thefe thoughts laid before the reader in appro- priate language, will effed the only confideration he has in view, the convi6tion of his reader, pro- vided he has been accuftomed to think and judge liberally for himfelf. A poverty of genius, and incompetency of knowledge on the fubje(5V he handles, unavoidably tends to make a writer dog- matical ; for he has no other way than being fo, to obtain what he ambitions, ejlimation ^nd. popularity ; which he never fails of obtaining from the world at large ; — the world at large being pretty much on a level with, if not inferior to himfelf, in liberality of fentiment and inquiry. Hence he never finds C 3 ] his expeftations difappointed ; the credulous eafi- nefs of temper common to moft readers, and the downright indolence and averfenefs to ftudy, com- mon to all, co-operating effedlually in his favour. But this reciprocation of aflcrtion and belief, of demand and acquiefcence, fets forward in the fame channel with all fafhionable rules and maxims, that deferve more the name of conceits and follies ; every man taking his neighbour as he finds him, or as he reprefents himfelf, without going or wiih- ing to go farther. We may divide the world, with regard to the* confideration of books, into fix clafTes. The great; kings, nobles, and gentry. The three learned Profeffions of Law, Phyfic, and Divinity. The mercantile ; the handicraft ; the laborious -, and the voluntarily idle. The firft feldom read any thing ferious, from excefs of greatnefs. The fe- cond, but what immediately brings them in money. The third have fcarce a moment to fpare from the fatigues of bufmefs and feafting. The fourth, if they read at all, have their plan'of reading laid down to them by their refpedive Paftors, that is, fuch books as prefervc to them their ftipends and finecures, and nothing elfe. The fifth are too ftupid and ignorant, fuppofing even they have learned their letters, to read. And the fixth clafs cannot bear the Herculean emprife, the gally- A 2 flave [ 4 ] flavc labour of reading. In this fliort rq^refenta- tion of life, which I believe, is not in the main ex- aggerated, when a new publication comes abroad into the world, one or two individuals in the three firft clafles of fociety, who by a wonderful cafualty have {tumbled on the opening and reading of a ferious book, will always be fufficient to fet a cha- rader of it a-going, either in the progrefTive or retrograde path of popularity •, and once the firft note of the trumpet is blown, it loudens and deepens by repercuflion, till it has diffufed itfelf through numberlcfs unrefifting mediums, and has at length fettled in one univerfal buz or murmur. According to this view of things, it will In- ftantly ftrike the fagacious obferver of human na- ture, of what leading confequence it muft be, for an author to hit on a catching title to his book ; and generally fpeaking it happens, that the greater the dafh of felf-importance and confcious fuperi- ority thrown into the title-page, the greater the avidity of the public to purchafe the book j fo that, in this refpeft, the paradoxical faying, pars plus toto, has often been verified. That fublime effort of human Genius, Milton's Paradife Lofl, was, for a long time after its publication, almoft unknown, and it is probable from the very modefly of its ti- tle— Paradife Lofl, in twelve Books, Author, John Milton. People little expeded in a poem of fo unafTuming i C 5 ] unafTuming a front, to find the invention, gran- ' dcur, elevation, energy, fplendor, majefty, fire and vigour of the Epic. Hence it was fuf?ered for a difgraceful length of time to loiter in fnuff-fhops and paftry-cellars, though fit to be read in Para- dife itfelf, and to awaken the firings of a Raphael into eulogy and admiration. Many a performance, I am perfuaded, has not only met the fetting-off fate of that immortal poem, but ever after has been unable to recover the flroke ; thrown by in oblivion's filent and negle6led corner, inaccefTible but to fpiders, that covered it in pity with their webs ! — Modern times, however, have learned a de- gree of experience in this matter, that will ever pre- vent fuch overlayings in the birth, fuch untimely occultations of merit : — I might have called it an excefs of experience, as the titles and the contents of books are often at crofs purpofes j The Man of feelings without feeling, and Sentimentd Journies^ unfentimental. The title therefore of Mr. Burgh's book, was moft aptly and providently chofen, ai captum Re- verendum ReverendiJJimum — vulgus. It was dire6lly calculated, not for intelligent fpirited individuals, in confequence of balancing its weight of evidence in the accurate and impartial fcales of Reafon, but for the mighty confentaneous body of Archbifhops, Bifhops, Archdeacons, Deans, Dodtors, Redors, A 2 Curates, [ 6 3 Curates, Clerks, Wardens, Beadles, Sextons, Bell- men ; who were, as if by a voice from Heaven, convinced of its excellence and unanfwerablenefs— before they read it. Had Mr. Burgh*s book come abroad with the qualified title-page of — An Hum- ble Attempt to Confute the Arguments of Mr. LiNDSEY, for the Exiftence of One God, on the Principles of Common Senfe and the Human Un- derftanding — how foon would their Graces, their Lordfhips, their Reverences, pofitive, compara- tive, and fuperlative, have ordered it, in the Ho- ratian ftyle, ad-— — vendentem thus et odores, Et piper^ et quicquid chartis amicitur ineptis. And moreover, if we here include the almoft innumerable ranks of fociety, who look upon thefe feveral orders of the Hierarchy as their — gods, and feldom, for fear of offending their mitred, furpliced, and black-gowned godfhips, look be- yond a Creed or a Catechifm, the modern Deca- logue of their godfhips ; we fhall fcarce leave one reader in five thoufand to be picked up by Com- mon Sense : a forlorn, neglefted ftranger upon earth, notwithflanding, as flrangers, fome have heretofore entertained— z^^^^/j for men. When C 7 ] When a man fteps abroad into the world as an author, he conftitutes that world his final judge; and the very idea of ftanding before fo auguft a tribunal, involves humility, or a felf-difqualified demeanour, till the decifive fenfe of that tribu- nal fhall be obtained : but Mr. Burgh, by the ti- tle he has beftowed on his book, has virtually anti- cipated the public judgment, that is, the verdidt of his judge and jury ; and what fhould have been the eventual refult of every one's reading and pri- vate opinion, he has made to forerun and prejudge both. Acting in two contradi(5lory capacities at once, firft by his afb of publication, or laying his caufe open to mankind, and fecondly afT-jming, as he does in the title-page, what ought only to have been confidered, as confequent upon the fair hear- ing and examining of his caufe, he has reduced his readers, in this age of manly thought and li- beral difcuffion, to the difagreeable dilemma, of concluding, that either Mr. Burgh's book has thrown the negative on his title-page, or his title- page on his book. This fhould feem but an un- favourable manner of fetting out for an author, and cannot fail of being materially di/Terviceable to his procuring that fuffrage of credit, he is certainly a candidate for, from an enlightened world, and un- prejudiced pofterity. — But not to ftop at the thre- ihold, fpying little pebble-defe6ts in the walls, when many capital objeds within are in a manifeft A 4 ftate [ « ] ftate of archIte<5tonic difarrangement, 1 fliall dif- m'lfs the title-page, with humbly obfcrving, that if Mr. Burgh has Scripturally confuted any thing, it ishimfelf; which I fhall endeavour afterwards to prove, only begging leave to notice here a piece of bookfeller-craft, as I can never bring myfelf to father it at Mr. Burgh's door. Mr. Lindsey*s celebrated Apology for refign- ing his Living of Catteric, was unknown in this kingdom,* at the time the Scripiural Confutation (2iS it is called) appeared, except to a few individuals who commiflloned it from London : it was therefore very uncommon management in a bookfeller, to print an Anfwer in Ireland to a Book that never had been fold there. Audi alteram partem, is a good old faying ; but, in the above cafe, the alteram par- tem is reverfed, by a true Hibernicifm. Several months after the Scriptural Confutation had been trumpeted forth in the news- papers, I wrote to Dublin for a copy of Mr. Lindsey's Apology, but could not procure it, there being but one in a private bookfeller*s hands, who had fome thoughts of publifhing an Irifli edition of it, as my corre- fpondent, a man of bufinefs, informed me : full time indeed, when its alledged Confutation had circulated through the kingdom. It was only like fcparating • Irelan'-d, where the prefent work was firft publiftied. [ 9 ] feparating the fubftance and the fhadow, and ex* hibiting them at different periods : or rather ex- pofing a man, after he had been knocked on the head, as a rareeihow. But there is fomething (o extraordinary in this affair, that I would not give the merit of it to a bookfeller, though, I am perfuaded, he found his perfonal account in the ftratagem. — Some time ago a very fenfible Pamph- let was publifhed, in defence of the exiftence of one Godi * upon the back of which a card ap- peared in a well-known paper, defiring the public to fufpend their opinion about the merits of that Pamphlet, as an anfwer to it was preparing with all fpeed: the purport of v/hich requifition was nei- ther more norlefs than, " Gentlemen of the public, ** I requeft you will fufpend the faculty of thinking " and judging of truth from falfehood, till I give " you the word of command, by the publication " of my book being announced in the news-papers ; " /. e. in plain Engllfh, be no better than an oyfter, " and far inferior to the half-reafoning elephant, *' till you receive from me the fignal of permiffion, " by my printer, to re-commence the human form " again." This intended padlock on the mind, was the fole work of a Reverend Clergyman, anxious * Gorpel Defence of the Unitarian Doftiine, by a wiiter under the fignature of Epaphras ; a very ingenious man, but not fuS^ciently known . [ «o ] anxious for the fate of the hierarchic Mother that begat him : and to me it feems probable, that the wonderful device of anfwering a book in Ireland, which had never appeared in Ireland, was the fug- geftion of the fame Clergyman, or fome perfon of his complexion and fpirit ; the wit and underftand- ing of both having been fublimed in one common alembic of orthodoxy. A circumftance attending the advertifing of the Scriptural Confutation, ought to be mentioned here alfo. The public were duped to buy it, from a declaration of its rapid fale in England. But Mr. Lindsey's Apology had vaftly the advantage of it in this refped, having undergone three editions within a twelvemonth, confequently, might be faid to have vaftly more me- rit: moreover, if the rapidity of demand for a book be a demonftration of its excellence, then all the tawdry obfcene pieces that have ever been pub- liflicd, and many works of infidelity and fccpticifm likewife, are intitled to a confiderable fhare. CHAPTER II CHAPTER I. Comprizing a variety of obfervations on what Jlwuld feem the fittejl teft, or criterion of Truth. Mr, Burgh's opinion in this matter examined: And Self-denial^ or Bifinterefted-nefs pointed out, in oppo- fttion to him, as alone amounting to this teji or cri- terion ; without which every other proof cannot hut be mutilated, equivocal and unfatisfaElory. Whofoever he he of you that forfaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be my Difciple. — Jesus Christ. IT has been obferved, In the introdudion, that Mr. Burgh has confufed himfelf greatly, as well as his readers, by aflbciating the ideas of Truth, occupying the divine and human mind ; and (notcommendably) endeavouring to withdraw our veneration and efteem from the only criterion of truth, as it appears to me, in this world, felf- denial. Virtue, in its pure and fublime fenfe, is nothing elfe than felf-denial ; and thefe three. Truth, Virtue, and Self-denial, interchangeably imply each other. When I talk of truth, I would be underftood to mean moral or intclledual, not fcientific or phyfical truth. Truth, as laft deno. minated, [ 12 3 mlnated, is the flow and gradual refult of experi- ment, and mathematical procefs, afcertained by the final determination of the fenfes. All the axioms of Euclid, natural philofophy, aftronomy, muft unavoidably pafs through this fort of pro- cefs, before their ftamp of validity and currency can or ought to be admitted genuine. Refpefting thofe original and fuperior fpirits, whofe mental extent of powers is adequate to the intricate and laborious inveftigation, as well as confequcnt con- vidion, truth may be faid to ftrike in the firft in- ftance, or almoft intuitively : with regard to thofe of fubordinate genius, in the fecond inftance, or confidentially, having a diredl dependence on the veracity of the firft-mentioned order of adventurers in the paths of philofophy. With this fort of truth, being conneded with external perceptible objeds, it is confefTed, Self-denial has nothing to doi perfevering induftry, or patient refearch, is its immediate parent, and, confequently, the head more particularly concerned than the heart. But intelledual or religious truth is quite of a different nature, not pafTing through any mediums from without to the inward affeftions, or in confequence of intricate fpeculative procedure ; but origina- ting from within, from a happily conditioned mind or well-regulated heart, the invaluable purchafe of praftical virtue and unaffeded piety. The head or higher powers of the underftanding are in no degree [ 13 3 degree concerned here, farther than making out a fincere aflent to a few fimple fads, leaning on the integrity of human record : to perfeft which aft of aflent is as much on a level with the capacity of a peafant, as a philofopher ; of a bellman, as a lawn-fleeved prelate.— -The fads I mean are thefe : that there is one God, one only in an abfolute fenfe ; and one Mediator or medium of manifefta- tion between God and man, the man Chrift Jefus, or Jefus the anointed ; that God commiffioned andfenthim forth into the world becaufc he loved the world, to deliver the whole of his mind and will to mankind ; that he preached to inftruct us in virtue, or the love of God and our neighbour ; died to evince a refurreftion, and that he will come in the glory of his Father, at the appointed time, to judge the quick and the dead. These, with a few other particulars of lefl'er moment, are the eflentials of chriftian belief or religious truth j and thefe, it is quite evident, all point to the heart as their firft mover and authen- ticator, after merely taking it for granted, that the Scriptures are the word of God, which, with re- fpeft to the many, muft be taken for granted on the credit of the /^w, who are learned in the lan- guages and hiftory : for the fame reafon that, m political fociety, ^agna. Charia, and its fubfc- quent C -4 3 quent ratification, the Bill of Rights, arc taken for granted. However, as, in Philofophy or Phyfics, there is a right and a wrong, a falfe and a true theory ; fo alfo in Religion there is both the one and the other : nor is there a more mortifying diflimili- tude between Des Cartes's whirlpools and the pre- fent eftablifhed Newtonian fyftem, than between Religion, limply revealed to us in the Scriptures, and that contained in Creeds and Articles, by au- thority of the ftate. But let the members of the Hierarchy, with all their abettors and defenders, be for once fufceptible of the blufti, when it is confidered, that, while in matters of Phiiofophi- cal belief, though refting on immutable firft prin- ciples, and mathematical demonftration, we are not even obliged to believe them by any compul- /ive authority J in matters of intelleftual or reli- gious fpeculation, we are abfolutely under vile durance to canonical reftraint and ecclefiaftical def- potifm. The inference in its abfurdity ftares every man in the face, but a bifliop, or the expeding fatellite of a biftiop ; and can be accounted for only in one way, forafmuch as, without compul- fion, and the emoluments conneded with acquief- cence, not one in a thoufand would believe Arti- cular Chriftianity, I mean would fubmit to declare he believes it ; for belief of it on light and evi- dence ] 15 ] dence is impoffible. This legalized fort of truth, laid up in our eftabljihed ftandards, and retailed by our pulpit orators and controvertiils, I agree with Mr. Burgh, is folely and exclufively an ob- jeft of the head; and were a cleric to affure mc his heart is deeply interefted in believing it, I would readily credit him, fo far as a iinccure, a rich deanery or bifhoprick, would feem too power- ful a temptation for flefh and blood to refift. This fpecies of truth can be fupported no other way than by force ; or, if defenfible at all, can only be defended by the exercitations of a meta- phyfical brain, at the fame time that the heart of a Judas, a Cataline, or a Nero, may be aflbciated with this brain. Truth in alliance with the good things of this world, truth formed into ftepping ftones from one ftage of lucrative preferment to another, will ever be admired and beloved ; but the fame criterion that afcertains the value and im- portance of this high allied truth, ferves alfo to afcertain the value and importance of worldly riches and honours ; but as all worldly riches and honours are corruptible and come to an end, fo alfo muft truth in alliance with thefe. elfe the houfe become divided agaijiji itfclf, the confequence of which is likewife deftrudlion. Now, whatever comes to a paufe or period, cannot poff.bly have God for its objedl, who is himfelf eternal and indefecti- ble. C 16 3 ble, confequently cannot be genuine oi* divine ; therefore, whoever deliberately and voluntarily breaks afunder this alliance, (o far changes truth from a perifhable to an immortal nature, and gives the only proof a human being can give, of its ori- ginally coming from God : in other words, he who evinces a fuperiority to this world, by a uni- form tenour of felf-denial, as this fuperiority is cxprefsly injoined and highly extolled in Scripture, gives the fame evidence of the truth of what he maintains, as if a mefienger, commiflioned by God from the invifible world, fhould deliver it viva voce. A man capable of, and habitually pradifing felf- denial, difcovers an habitual deteftation of fin, a contempt of vice -, feeing a ftate the reverfe of felf-denial would have furnifhed him with the means and opportunities of indulging himfelf in each ; confequently, he becomes like God him- felf, who cannot lie or deceive, but is the foun- tain and obje(5t of truth ; and fuch a perfon ought to be believed, for the fame reafon that Chrift re- quired to be believed. Which of you convinces me of fin ? and when I fpeak the truth, why do ye not believe me ? Had Chrift betrayed a covetous at- tachment to this world, when he declared, I am the way, the truth, and the life, in the above in- terrogation he gave the Jews a right to have con- fidered him as no better than his own bag-keeper, Judas, an hvpocrite and a deceiver. In [ '7 3 In this matter, refpeding a foverelgn teft of truth, no one fhould feem fo definitive and un- exceptionable a judge, as that diftinguifhed Per- fonage, whofe Revelation is an entire fyftem of divine truth. Mr. Burgh, I am confident, can have no objedlion to his teftimony being admitted on this occafion, after having conftituted him in his thoughts, and endeavoured to prove him in his book, the one only fupreme God. His being, at the fame moment, the fender and the fent j commiffioning and commiffioned ; anointing and anointed ; the comforter and the comforted ; the addrefler and the addrefled; the begetting and the begot ; the infinite and the finite, the greater and the lefs ; the impaflabie and the fuffering ; the vi. fible and the invifible ^ the whole, and yet only the third part ; one, two, three numerically, and ftill no more than one •, his own high priefl:, yet a facrifice to himfelf, and a mediator between his of- fending creatures, and his oivn felf ; thefe, I fay, will ftill bear off the palm of the hyperbole and marvellous, from the mere circumftance of his dif- agreeing in fentiment with Mr, Burgh, and con- tradi6ling his pofition, in the Scriptures. Were I to bring forward to the reader's eye all the paflages that exprefsly make felf-denial the teft of truth, nay, one and the fame thing, I would B "do [ i8 ] do more than enough to convince the reader. I flia'l, therefore, confine myfelf to a few of the principal; only. taking occafion to obferve, that I only here mean divine truth, as abftradedly conne6led with our duty to God, without pafling through any human medium whatfocver. Te /hall know the truth, (fays our Lord) and the truth /hall make you free. Free from what ? There are only two forts of freedom that can be implied here : freedom from fin, and freedom from fpiri- tual mafters. In proportion, then, as we are free from fin, or exert felf-denial, which is the fame thing, we know the truth -, and in proportion like- wife as we ftiake off human domination, or the Priefl:hood, we lean upon the Son of God ; recog- nize him as our common mafi:er, and, confequent- ly, become entitled to all the fpecial bleflings and comforts promifed to us, and entailed upon us, as his difciples and fervants. His fervice, totally unconnefted and unfhared, with every fub-gover- nor whatfoever, is the fervice of truth itfelf: therefore, as fure as God and his Son cannot He, whoever relinquifhes his ties and connexions with the Hierarchy, held together by force, and the baneful popularity of fubfcription to one another, and commences a voluntary difciple of the Lord Jefus, in the face of fafhionable fcorn and con- tempt ; I repeat it, whoever evinces fo indepen- dent C -9 ] dent a hardihood of fpirit, mujl have truth on his fide : and if this renunciation of illegal attach- ment be accompanied with the chearful furrender of worldly goods and advantages, the pofleflion of truth becomes the more confpicuous and undeni- able. Sin is the indulgence of vicious inclina- tions ; felf-denial is the reftraint upon this indul- gence; the rcftraint amounts to abfolute virtue ; abfolute virtue is Chriftianity ; and Chriftianity is truth in fubftance, defcending from th^'fkl^s. ' So- phiftry and corporation eloquence may fecret the whole chain, as here exprefled, in lumber and rub- bifh, but can never unloofe or feparate one link. Farther, If any man will come after me^ let him deny him- felf He that loveth father or mother more than me, is not worthy of me : and he )hat loveth fon or daugh- ter more than me^ is not worthy of me •, whofoever he he of you^ that forfaketh not all that he hath, he can- not be my difciple. Would Mr. Burgh require greater energy in language, to prove felf-denial, or emptying ourfelves of affedion for a vain and flattering world, to be the genuine touchftone of truth ? With his fo fupertranfcendent idea of the Lord Jefus, as to fuppofe him the one only felf- exiftent God, he cannot confidently avoid being deeply ftruck with his own words, wherein we B 2 learn. [ 20 ] learn, that the a.6t of giving up valuable poflef- fions, if the tenure of them be inconfiftent with the peace, tranquility, and integrity, of our minds, (and who does not find them fo ?) is the a6l of be- coming his difciple. Did the pidure admit of any additional colouring, we might adduce here the parable of the young man in the Gofpel, who had fo uncommonly acquitted himfelf in fulfilling the law, and. in the general outline of his condud had rendered' himfelf, /q amiable, that, Jefus beholding him loved him. . But — one thing thou lackejl, (Self- denial) go thy ivay, fell -whatfoever thou haji and give to the poor, and thou Jhalt have treasure in hea- ven^ and come and follow me. And he was fad at that faying., and went away grieved, for he had GREAT possessions. Our Lord's remark is poig- nant and alarming. How hardly fhall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of Go4 ! It is eafier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle , than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God f Thus have I, I hope effecftually, vindicated Mr. LiNDSEY, by the authority of Mr. Lindsey*s Mafter. I may add, Example-, for, additional to his miracles, we have the hiftory'of his life, as one fhining pattern of felf-denial, or fuperior contempt of this world, which was only reducing into ad a declaration he often made, that, his kingdom was n»t of this world. Befide, he has left the duty of imitation [ 21 ] imitation on record to all Chriftians in thefe words; " I have fet you an example that ye fhoutd *' follow my fteps." Mr. Lindsey's condu6l there- fore, in abandoning the religious corporation, that once claimed him as its badged and ticketed member, was only a folemn recognition of what his Lord had aflerted, with relation to his kingdom not being of this world: and if Chrift had authority to pronounce it fo at firft, Mr. Lindsey, by throw- ing up his commifTion in the vifible Church, adled under the fame authority latterly; and became im- mediately intitled, notwithftanding all the attempts of his enemies to difpoflefs him of it, to the fol- lowing fingular remuneration. Verily I fay unto you^ there is no man that has left houfe^ cr parents, or brethren, or wife, or children, for the kingdom of God's fake, who fhall not receive manifold more in this pre- fent time, and in the world to come life everlajiing. Whoever, indeed, goes this glorious length, may exped, like Mr. Lindsey, to meet with abundance of fcorn and ridicule, be traduced in his chara6ter, and difparaged in the worthinefs of his motives ; in the moll illiberal and unmanly manner, be reprefented to the world as an enthu- ilaft, a fe6lary, a fchifmatic. What then ? thefe are names of appropriate Scriptural dignity, fuch exa6lly as Chrift and his Apoftles had beftowed on them by the proud and difdainful members of the B 3 Jewifh C " ] Jewllh eftablifliment, the Scribes and Pharifees and High Priefts -, who were no way different from our prefent Archbifhops, Biihops, Dodtors, and other Church-governors, except in lefs fbew, gran- deur, opulence, ambition, and fccularity. Such divine hetcroclites, fuch difinterefted ex- centrics from a falfe fyftem, have more than a counter-balance in their bofoms, having the con- folations of Jefus, the Son of the Higheft, imme- diately addreifed to them. Did he appear to them as he did to Thomas, it would be to upbraid their unbelief, but not to add genuinenefs to the confo- lation. Bkjfed are ye when men /hall hate you^ and when they Jhall feparate you from their company^ and Jhall reproach you, and caji out your names as evil, for the Son of Man* s fake : rejoice ye in that day, and leap for joy ; for behold your reward is great in Hea- ven *. I would humbly prefume Mr. Burgh en- tirely overlooked fuch pafTages as thefe, having beenfo amazingly engroffed with thtfummum totum of modern Chriftianity, viz. finding out a Trinity in Unity ; or, which is the fame thing, three Sub- ftances in one Subftance ; three Perfons in one Perfon j and three Gods in one God. Common language, and common fenfe, know no difference ; nor has Mr. Burgh, the Church of England, the Church • Luke vi. Z2, 22. [ n 3 Church of Scotland, or the Church of Rome, any more right, than Conftantine the Great had, while he was yet a Pagan and an Idolater, to change common fenfe and common language. As well may they prefume, to change into bleflings and benedidions, the following emphatic and dif- tindlive woes, announced — more than feventeen hundred years ago againft thofe renowned Churches, with the imperial convert fromHeathen- ifm at their head, by the Saviour of mankind, and immediately fucceeding the foregoing texts, fo as to form a moft memorable contraft. JVo unto you that are rich, fcr ye have received your confola- tion ! IVo unto you that are full, for ye Jtiall hunger ! JVo unto you that laugh now, for ye Jliall mourn and iveep ! JVo unto you when all men fhall fpeak well of you, for fo did your fathers to the falfe prophets I — All thefe inftantly regard great fpiritual bodies and aflbciations, and by no means, ftates, or civil communities -, fo that our celebrated modern Efta- blifhments, thofe of England, Scotland, and Rome, comprehending all their advocates, whether in or out of orders, cannot, upon a ferious peru- fal of the text, but make the direft felf-application. All thefe, in their feveral invirons of power, may moft expreffively be faid to be rich, to be /«//, to laugh, to be fpoken well of by all men : while fuch folitary diflentients as Mr. Lindsey, Dr. Robin- son, Dr. Pp.imatt, Dr. Jebb, &;c. are, on all oc- B 4 cafions. [ H 3 cafions, attempted to be thrown into the unenvied frefco of poverty •, the predicament of being laughed at and evil fpoken of — yet ftill continue to be the true evangelical objeds of felicitation, and bleflednefs. It is confefied they are few in number, and very unformidable in afpedl : what then ? this very cir- curnftance conftitutes them the difciples of Chrift. Fear not little flock, for it is your Father's good pkafure to give you the kingdom. Few as they are, how glorioufly are they patronized and proteded. My Father which gave them me^ is greater than all: and none is able to pluck them out of my Fathers hand, Whofoever offendeth one of thefe little ones which be- lieve in me, it were better for him that a millfione were hanged ahont his neck, and that he were drowned in the depths of the fea. " Now, it is impoflible the " term (little ones) can ever apply to bifhops and *' high Church-dignitaries, who rather immedi- " ately rank, under the title of Great Ones, being " at once objeds of awe, envy, and ambition. It " would be throwing an air of perfed burlefque on " the decorum and propriety of fpeech, to call " them little onesT * — By leaving fuch a body, held together by the powers of this world, and infor- cing dodrines of their own invention, the tradi- tions * Striftuies, Mifcellaneous and Comparafive, Page 17a. C 25 ] tions of men fetting afide the commandments of God, Mr. LiNDSEY only returned to the fervice of his Mafter, from worfhipping an unknown God, like the Athenians, and the Samaritans, whom our Lord thus charadlerifes : Te worjliip ye know not what : and a/Turedly becomes intitled to the reward of the returning Son. // was meet that we JJiould make merry and be glad : for this my brother was dead and is alive again j and was loji, and is found. Joy fliall be in heaven over one Jinner that re- penteth, msre than over ninety and nine juft perfons, which need no repentance. I PROCEED now to confider fome paflages in Mr. Burgh's book, relative to this fubjedt. " Let me " never fay that from the rcditude of his (Mr. " Lindsey's) heart, I can deduce the reditude of " his opinion." Page 2. No one can oblige Mr. Burgh to fay fo if he docs not chufe it; neither can Mr. Burgh, with any juftice prevent another from thinking and faying the reverfe. Our au- thor confounds himfelf here by not drawing a line of diftindtion between religious and other truths. Religious truths, fuppofing only common {tx\{Q,.^ are fituated in the heart of man ; confequently, the reclitude of the heart eftablifhes the reditude of the head. Chrift himfelf declares it in fo many words. If any man will do his will, he fliall know of the do^rine, whether it he of God, or whether Ifpeak sf [ 26 ] ofmyfelf.* — Again, *' Let it (finccrity) recom- *' mend the heart, but by no means the head, the " errors of which may be as fincerely believed as " the beft-eftablifhed maxims." Page 5. Here we have more confufion : fincerity ufed as an abftradt term recommending the heart, but by no means the head. Sincerity, however, is a relative term, and never refers to any thing but the heart, as its feat and objed. A clear head,' a learned head, a diftlnft head, are well known expreflions : but a Jincere head, I believe, never was heard of before. That " the errors of the head may be as fincerely " believed as the beft-eftablifhed m?.xims," I am proud to agree with Mr. Burgh ; but I doubt much if he will agree with me, that the beft-efta- blifhed maxims are oftentimes nothing elfe than errors of the head. There are no maxims better, I mean more firmly eftablifhed in the world, than that the Church hath power to decree Rites and Cere- monies and authority in Controverjies of faith ; yet to me IT appears leading to errors of the head of the firft magnitude. For inftance, image-worfhip, tranfubftantiation, penance, extreme undlon, pur- gatory, the defcent of our Saviour into Hell, the Doctrine of the Trinity, auricular confeflion, rehearfals of belief, infinite demerit in Adam, vi- carious punilhment, imputed righteoufnefs, &c. A SHORT * John vil. 17. f 27 ] A SHORT ftateofthe cafe will fliew how funda- mentally erroneous, and at the fame time glaringly abfurd, the above eftablifhed maxim is. The power and authority of decreeing, placed in the hands of the Church of Rome, and extended the length of her ambition, would deftroy the Church of England. The Church of E^3GL and, with the fame power and authority, would annihilate the Church of Scotland. The Church of Scotland, again, would exterminate the other two. Nothing but civil government prevents it, the fecular arm. Therefore, Chriftianity, fuppofing Chriftianity alone fubfifting in thefe Churches, inftead of be- ing extended over the earth, and perpetuated to the end of time, fhould come to an end-, or, at beft, would piteoufly exhibit the maimed and mangled condition of one gladiator furviving three; and he too fitter to be admitted into an hofpital of incurables, than to be employed in any future fervice of emprife, difficulty, or danger. • Yet it is held an eftablifhed maxim, what would certainly end, if not powerfully over-ruled, in fuch a cataf- trophe. Nay, what is more extraordinary, he who had fpirit enough to quit a Conflitution, where fuch maxims pafs current, has had the Apology for his conduft anfwered, re-anfwered, and him- felf loaded with unmanly and illiberal inuendo's. Mr. Burgh acqufes him of " aiTailing every fun- " damentai docirine of the Church from the rnini- " frrr [ 28 ] •' Itry of which he had retired, degrading the God " of our falvation, and fnatching from us the ob- " jed of our religion." Again, " fubverting the " fixt fabric of our religion, and forcing it from " the bafis of revelation. Page i. Would not one fuppofe Mr. Burgh had taken up his pen againft an Atheift, a Pagan, or a Mahommedan ? If he had, his language could not have been more inde- cently acrimonious and reproachful. And where- fore did he allow his pen fuch liberties ? becaufe a learned man, a man of reading and refiecflion, of pure morals, refpe6lable characfler, and his vene- rable fenior by many years, prefumed to differ from him about the dodtrinc of the Trinity, and refign his Living in that Church which fupports and inculcates it : a doftrine which Mr. Burgh himfelf freely acknowledges, *' altogether furpafles " his own faculties." Page 215. He goes on further in his attempt to invalidate Mr. LiNDSEY*s unaffuming plea of merit. "I " fuffer for a poiition, and becaufe I have believed "- it, upon arguments feemingly fufficient to me, *' if they be in faft fufficient, I have done well to ** adhere to them, and they were as valid before " my fufferings as afterwards." Doubtlefs their very validity was the caufe, it is to be prefumed, of his fufferings. " But if they are defedive," continues Mr. Burgh, " my miferies cannot alter " the C 29 ] *' the conclufions following from them." True ; but would Mr. Burgh, in cold blood, undergo mi- feries for fake of a pofition that appeared to himi defedive, that is, falfe ? His z/ would feem to im- ply as much ; our author makes too much ufe of if^s. With the omnipotent aid of an if^ I might derange the whole fyftem of nature, and new create Heaven and Earth. The only trifling requifite is — // 1 were able ! — Farther, fpeaking of the above arguments. " I hear truth or falfehood, juftice " or injuftice, would have been precifely the fame, " though I had never been born, as if I had made " my exit at a flake." Page 4. How, the per- ception of truth the fame, to a dead as a living man .'' This is indeed a fummary method of fet- tling the fubjed. Mr. Burgh, I would fuppofe, never intended his pofition to be extended fo far, notwithftanding the extention is unavoidable, according "to his ird worfhip of God altogether, or to take up with the firft obje£l of adoration, that chance or caprice may happen to throw in our way, whe- ther recommended by the Church of Rome, or any .of the Pagan nations around. If [ 9' ] If I have not a flatidard within my own breaft, by which I may judge of one God from another, the true from the falfe, how fhall I ultimately make my choice from knowledge ? How iliall I know whether to fall down and worfhip the fun, that fills and animates our world with his glory; or a ftill more auguft and glorious Being in the regions of invifibility, who placed that fun in the firmament, a {hred from his own garment of light, and the fmalleft fparkle of the fmalleft jewel in the front of his diadem ? — I here fpeak in the charader of an Indian, at the moment he has Chri- ftianity offered to his confideration, free from the fetters and embarraflments of education and arti- ficial knowledge. This is farther confidered in the next chapter. CHAP. C -9* ] CHAP. III. ^he fubje5i continued-^ with occafional remarks on the conduct of the Clergy^ in depreciating Reafon^ mag' nifying Myjiery^ and defending the artificial Chrijli- anity of Creeds^ Articles^ and Confejftons. O fooliih Galatians, who hath bewitched you. Paul. ALL the inhabitants of Chriftendom, at this moment, under the age of adults, that is, not arrived at the capacity of knowing and chu- fing good from evil, right from wrong, truth from falfhood, are in the uninformed ftate of Indians, with regard to Chriftianity received as an a<5t of choice and convidlion. Baptifm and Catechifms, t^t initiatory rites of modern Chriftianity, can no more make a Child a voluntary Chriftian, than they can make a lamb, or a dove from the neft, one : nor can godfathers take upon them the account- able identity of infancy, refpeding future belief, any more than refpedling — a future arrangement of features, a future mode of fpeaking, locomo- tion, or attitude. Befide, godfathers muft firft vacate their own identity, before they can aflume (^at [ 9Z 1 that of others ; that is, fulfil Indefinitely mort than their own accountablenefs to God, before they can become perfonally accountable for others. A fuppofal of the affirmative here, would be an high abfurdity; no lefs than one human perfon becoming two human perfons, one human fpirit becoming two human fpirits. We know indeed an animal of the reptile fpecies, that can be cut into a thoufand parts, each thoufandth cutting a perfedl being of its kind ; but this fort of poly- pous divifibility and vivification has not yet been afccrtained, I believe, as a quality of the human mind. Every child, every youth whatfoever, till it ar- rive at the ratiocinative powers of willing and chufing for itfelf, in fpiritual matters, is in the ftate of an Indian : nor can he poffibly commence a chriftian, till he wills and chufes himfelf to be fo, any more than the baptifmal font, or the water fprinkled on its face, can become confcious. The proof is unanfwerable. A MAN arrived at the maturity of judgment, may throw oif his baptifmal and catechetical ob- ligations, and abfolutely become an Indian or a Pagan, if he wills and chufes : fo that, what the form of infant baptifm, what his godfathers, what his catechifm, pretended to do for him, amounts to no C 94 ] no more, in reality, than a fuit of deaths, or a pair of gloves, which every one may put off or on as he pleafes. Many, conceitedly and fqueamifhly righteous, will be ready to cry out here about the guilt of JuHanifm, or apoftacy : but there can be noapoftacy with regard to what was not confefTedly our own av5t and deed. What the orthodox would call the crime of Julian, fhould feem rather felf- efteem, and felf-veneration ; that is, a man be- ginning to aft like a God ; to think for himfelf, to feel for himfelf, and to fpeak for himfelf; not to think, feel, and fpeak, as others prefumptuoufly; did for him while yet on the breaft. This they had no more right to do, than to circumftantiate the future growth of his mufcles, the activity of his joints, or the momentum of his circulating fluids. — Infant baptifm, therefore, and catecheti- cal inftruftion, carry abfurdity.on the face of them. They anticipate many years an aft of free agency, and of the underflanding, which they can no more do, than afcertain future contingencies and events. Children, moreover, are in that ftate of falvation which it is the whole amount of Chriftianity to ef- fe(5l : fo that, fprinkling, or nominating them Chriftians, is adding a fliadow to a fubftance, in order to make it more fubftantial, or the fcale of a fifh's fkin to a diamond, to improve its fparkle. Except ye become as little children^ ye cannot enter into the kingdom of heaven, Matth. xviii. 3. Every [ 95 3 Every young perfon, therefore, remains in that flnlefs ftate, predicated of children by our Lord; (the ftate of Adam when he dropt from his Crea- tor's hands) till the powers of his mind are fo far matured as to enable him, from knowledge, and choice, to come under the additional requifitions and obligations of theGofpel. God no more expeds us to become the Difciples of his Son, till oar owa ripened refleding minds informs us, what it is ta be his Difciple, than he expeds us to walk before nature has given us the ufe of our feet, or to fpeak before the mouth is formed to articulate founds. He then that becomes a chriftian by baptifm, and catechetical initiation only, that Is, who, after he has come to years of difcretlon and judgment, does not voluntarily, feduloufly, and ferioufly, compare every thing he has been taught for Chriftianity, by the ftandard of his own mind, the divine oracle within him, fo as to make it his own, as truly (o ns the light that fills his eye, or the found that ftrikes upon his ear-, he Is in no one fenfe more emphatically a Chrlftlan, than any of the Jews that heard our Saviour fpeak, but turned them- felves on their heel, and remained Jews ftilL Nay, they are infinitely worfe. If they take it for granted, and rely upon It, that they are Chriftians, from mxcrely rccolleding their baptifm^ or having certain catechetical queftions and anfwers by rote -, they are guilty of idolatry by mifprifion: that is, they [ 96 ] they have fubftituted fallible, imperfecfl, human fpirits, in place of God's all-perfed infallible fpirit; and placed that final truft and confidence in man, "whofe breath is in his noftrils, and who withers like the flower of the grafs, which is only due to the Deity, the fame yefl:erday» to-day, and for ever. The chicane and fophiftry of Catechifms cannot var- nifh the failure here, any more that art can white- waih the negro. In Catechifms, the queftioner is the anfwerer, and the anfwerer the queflioner. This is at once robbing us of free agency and the cxercife of Reafon, and reducing us to the condi- tion of parrots and magpyes, taught to rhyme the fame form and jingle of \vords, over and over and over again. Hence it comes to pafs, that we feldom meet perfons acquainted with Chriftianity, beyond a catechifm or creed -, which are no more Chrifti- anity, than the drawings of a human body the human body itfelf. Few have had more accefs to people of all conditions and perfuafions than my- felf i yet it is with equal truth and pain I aflure the reader, that fcarcely have I met with one in five hundred who knew more of Revelation at the age of twenty, thirty, and upwards, than the fame perfons knew when they were five or fix years old -, that is, they had not forgot the godly queftions and anfwers, their godly parents had taught C 97 ] taught them ; who had them likewlfe from theifSy up-up-up along retrogradation of godly progeni- tors, till you plump, at length, into the godly bo- fom of the Church of Rome. This almoft general ignorance, I would by no means impute to any inward depravity, perverfe- nefs of temper, or unufual habits of vice ; but folely to carelefTnefs, and inattention, too much en- couraged by our public teachers, in order to pre- ferve their own importance and popularity. Our fathers and mothers were good fort of people -, they lived and died contented with Creeds and Catechifms : fhall we be lefs contented, or pretend to be more knowing than they ? — But this proves too much. It may likewife be faid. Our fathers and mothers were fubjed to fuch and fuch difor» ders ; they lived and died contented with thefe diforders ; and fhall we not do all in our power to contraft and nourifh fuch diforders .? — In this un- accountable ignorance of the fcriptures, I have thrown many into aftonifhment, by accidentally mentioning certain texts that clearly ftrike at the very root of fome favourite dodrines. Some were confounded, that they did not remember to have met with fuch texts ; others again roundly infinuated, that no fuch texts were in the Bible, till they were convinced from ocular proof. — Even upon reading them with their own eyes, they G feemed C 98 ] feemcd cautious of trufting them, till they exa- mined how they were handled by a particular au- thor of their own perfuafion, howDotftor fuch a one, or his Lordiliip fuch a one, has interpreted them. For it is not our Saviour's command. Search the Scriptures^ for they are they which tejlify of me. But it is the command of mortals like ourfelvcs. — Search Creeds and Catechifms, for they are they which teftify of us. It Is not the evangelical In- jundion, PI hofo readeth, let him underjland. fiut whofo readeth, let him not underftand.* It is not our Mafter's amiable precept, lie that hath ears to hear., let him hear. But the precept of fellow mor- tals, fpeaking d_ecretorIally, in Articles and Con- fcflions. He that hath ears to hear, let him not hear. — What I have told you in fecret (in parables) that preach ye on the houfe-tops. "What was ordered to be preached on the houfe-tops, that we tell you in fecret. — "To you it is given to know the myf- teries ef God}, but unto them it is not given. To us it is given to know the myfteries of God, but unto you it is not given. Why even of your f elves judge ye not what is right ? fays cur Lord. Why of yourfelves prefume ye to judge what is right .? fay our Methodift teachers. — Whom the Son makes free^ they are free indeed, fays the former. Whom tlie * Oiildren can no mot'e ilndcrft and Creeds and Catechifms, (I may even tol's in minifters into the account) than fo much algebra or conic feftions. They have been the ruin of Chriftianity. [ 99 ] Son makes free they are noi free, fay the latter.-— Call no one father^ no one mafter upon earthy fays our Lord. Call us your fathers, us your mafters, fay the pretended fervants. — The Apoftolic precepts are thefe. l!ry the fpirits 'whether they be of God. Try all things, hold fajl that which is good. Let every one be perfuaded in his own mind. Thefe are the precepts of our Creeds, Articles, Confeflions, and Catechlfms. Try not the fpirits whether they be of God, but believe tis, fpirits fent from God. Try not 2i\\ things, to hold faft that which is good. Let no one be perfuaded in his own mind ; be perfuaded by us alone. To fum up the whole contrail in a few words. Our Saviour's declara- tion is. If ye would enter into life, keep the command- ments. The declaration of our modern Saviours runs thus ; If ye would enter into life, believe, however ye cannot comprehend, our doctrines and terms of falvation, contained in Catechifms longer and fhorter. Thus it is that we are going backward, and not forward, in divine knowledge. The Infpiration of the Almighty, the Underftanding, is of no more ufe to us, than if we had it not, or were adually afraid of growing wifer and more enlightened. Thus it is that Chriftianity is almoft totally eva- porated into profefTion, into vain attendance on particular Churches and Meeting-Houfes j while G 2 charity C 100 ] chanty and benevolence, the ornaments of a meek and quiet fpirit, are thrown to the winds and the waves : the fhell of the Gofpel preferved, and exhibited once a week, as a raree-fhow, while we have allowed the kernel to be devoured by the fwine on our dunghills. Thus It is that people of all ranks change their vifible religion every day, with their political or focial fituation in life ; abandon the Church or Meeting-Houfe they have been all along brought up in, to gratify a beloved friend, a wife, or a hufband. I have never met with any perfons that could account for their change in the manner of worfhipping the unchangeable God, on principles of rational choice, or enlightened convidion. Nay, we find numbers hurrying to Church and Meeting promifcoufly, and greedily glutting over the Sacramental bread and wine, in both places, as if there were no difference in the decorum of going through that ad: of grateful and afFedio- nate commemoration. They are rcfolved, as it would feem, by a fort of obtrufive force, to meet with God in one or other of the places, not refledl- ing that they left the better chance of finding him in their clofets. — A certain Jew, wonderfully de- vout for the time, rapturoufly cries out to our Sa- viour, / will follow thee wherefoever thou goeji. But I believe his fervour was foon cooled. Our Lord replie*s, replies, The foxes have holes ^ and the birds of the air have nejis ; but the Son of Man hath not whereon to lay his head. I am afraid, were not our commu- nion tables gaudily covered, and the participation, of the bread and wine attended with many circum- ftanccs of fplendid fuperftition, the Son of Man, even at this day, would have few, very few difci- ples indeed ! These improprieties in our conduct are owing to our not exerting thofe powers which God has given us ; each one for himfelf, but no one for another, unlefs applied to in the way of friendly counfel and advice. Religion fits upon us, now- a-days, with the eafinefs and accommodation of a fummer*s glove, which we rather wear for orna- ment, than ufe -, unlefs when we enlift ourfelves under a fpiritual mafter, and then, indeed, we dif- covcr what manner of fpirits we are of, our mo- deration turned into frenfy, and our coolnefs into heart-burnings. I am of Paul, fays one ; I am of Apollos, fays another ; I am of Cephas, fays a third ; till we have as many Pauls, Apollos's, and Cephas's, as we have hard words and names to beftow on each other. — Chriftianity, in modern times, is really become a fort of licenced fyftem of fcolding and detradtion. Orthodoxy is the word of command that fets us all a-going, as many tongues always as the company confifts of j while G 3 cur [ 102 ] our Bibles are fuffered to repofe at home with moths and ipidcrs, no doubt as honourable in our thoughts as rufty coins and time-worn medallions. Who taught you to make fuch a figure in argu- ment ? Paul. And who taught you ? Apollos. And who taught you ^ Cephas. Wonderful in- deed ! — Is Chriji divided? -was Paul crucified for yen? — Surely it would appear fo from our choofing fo many fpiritual leaders j every one magnifying and idolizing his own leader beyond all others. — For what .? On account of exemplary wifdom, vir- tue, and felf-denial .? No : this cannot be faid in a thoufand inftances ; for where-ever truly faid, the idea of a leader fubfides inftantly into filence, hu- mility, anddifqualification. What then is the rea- fon of our preference ^ Becaufe he has a pair of ftrong lungs, and a fluent tongue, deafens us into wonder, and flares us into conviftion j likes what we like, hates what we hate, and ufes the fame words of belief we were taught when no more than boys whipping our tops, or girls drelTing our dolls. — JVho is Paul? ivho is Apollos? fays the mafterly writer to the Corinthians, but minijlers (fervants, meffengers) by ivhom ye believed? I have planted^ ylpollos watered: neither is he that plant eth any things nor he that water eth •, but God who give th the increnfe. When one of the firft and moft eminent preachers of the Gofpel calls himfelf nothing ; what may we call [ 103 ] call our modern preachers ? — Doubtiefs, lefs than nothing, and vanity. Alas ! we fet {o poor a value on our under- ftandings, although the only thing about us of in- trinfic value, that we make a prefent of them to the firfl falfe Chrift, or falfe prophet, that ap- proaches us : not refle^fling that we have the true Chrift and the true Prophet preaching ,every day to us at home, in the plained and fimpleft lan- guage. There is fomething wrong in us, forne- thing quite the reverfe of vyhat it (hould be, when we fufFer ourfclves to be feduced and tickled, Jed captive like filly women, by the former^ flouncing every feventh day into the pulpit, deeply defiled with the vanities and pleafures of the fix prece- ding i and never think of lifl:ening to the latter^ who fpakeas man never fpake % ivho knew no fni^ nei- ther was ini(iHity found in his mouth. His leflbns oi wifdom and holinefs are the leiTons of every day, not of one day only-, and his pure and excellent inftruftions, juft as they fell from his own lips, without comment or gloffary, have the promifc of the divine fpirit immediately to accompany them, and are alone calculated to make us wife unto falvation. It is one of the paradoxes of modern times, that God fliould have made it our duty to attend G 4 on [ 104 ] on the weekly preaching of corrupt finful men like ourfelves ! men — fwoln into pride by their pafTions, inflaved by their prejudices, felfifhly im- merfed in the deepeft fecular concerns of life, and only afting like other penfionaries and mercena- ries— for hire. The Priefts and Levites among the Jews, be- fore they were permitted to enter into the fervice of the Sandtuary and Tabernacle, were wafhed, purified, and anointed by the command of God himfelf. And what is very remarkable, even na- tural defeds and infirmities, as well as perfonal pollutions, incapacitated men for the office. With refpcdl to the firft preachers and propagators of the Gofpel, they were under the inftant teachings and direction of God's holy fpiritj fo that neither in the Jewifh or Chriftian difpenfation, could the people be deceived or led aftray. I ASK, what is it that renders holy the modern priefthood ? the hands of Bifhops or Prefbyters ? Alas ! the hands of Bifhops and Prefbyters are as full of fin and iniquity as the hands of thofe that fland candidates before them ; infomuch that, if virtue and purity were to cafl the die, Lay-men might as well ordain Bifhops, as Bifhops Lay-men. The Church of Rome declares ordinationally, I alone communicate the Holy Ghofl. No, fays the Church C 105 ] Church of England, it is I. By no means, re- plies the Church of Scotland, it is I, Here we have a trinity of Holy Ghofts, as well as a trinity of Churches : fuppofing each of thefe Holy Ghofts a perfon, we have then three perfons aflerting dif- ferently of each other. If the truth be fomewhere among the three, only one can be faid properly to have it; therefore two of thefe ordinational Holy Ghofts muft be — I was going to utter a word which I hate, but ftiall be content to foften the term into — ftory-tellers. In truth, not arbitrarily to magnify one in difparagement of the other two, I would chriften them all alike ftory-tellers, and maintain, on the principles of common chriftia- nity and common fenfe, that not one of the three truly communicates the Holy Ghoft, or has the leaft fandlion for the rite, more than a Mahometan Mufti, or one of the Mexican high-priefts in the temple of the fun. Thb writer need make no apology for the free- dom and bluntnefs of his remarks : a celebrated Apoftle has made one for him, fevcnteen hundred years ago. Though we^ or an angel from heaven^ preach any other gofpel unto you than that -which we have preached unto you^ let him be accurfsd. Now we have as many gofpels among us as we have eftabliftied feds ; the Roman Catholic, the Pro te ft ant [ >o6 ] Pro.teftant Epifcopalian, the Proteftant Prefbyte- rlan, with their endlefs divifions and fubdivifions, increailng everyday. — All but one of thefe muft be held accurfed in the Apoftle*s fenfe ; and all their feveral teachers, falfe Chrijls, falfe propheis^ men of fin^ and fons cf perdition ; T^hofe coming is after the '-jjorking of Satan with all power ^ and figns and lying wonders^ and dcceivablenefs of unrghteoiifnefs. If thefe churches teach not different Gofpsls, that is, are not effentially different from each other, why do they differ at all, to fet afide the onenefs of Chriiv, the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace ? But this diverfity of Gofpels, this violently tear- ing afunder the body of ChriR, which is equal to crucifying him afrefti, and putting him to open fhame, can never ceafe, till reafon Ihall regain its fupremacy in the human breall; -, which, with the afiiftance afforded by the fpirit of God in the fcrip- tures, is fufficient to v/ork out every man's falv.a- tion, but not fufficient for more than himfelf, and is as infallible in the breaft of a plow-man, as of a Newton. — In other words, till every one, without exception, fhall become his own prieft and teacher, under Chrift alone, the fpiritual head of all, as God is the head of Chrift •, but fuch an head as cannot be divided, any more than the perfonal unity of God, or the unity of a man's own fpirit. Xhat [ 1^7 ] That the Human Underflanding has been con- ftituted the only infallible judge upon earth in religious matters, and that every man ought to be his own prieft and law-giver, under Chrift, ap- pears to me as obvious and undeniable, as that the fun is fupreme, with regard to light, and that every individual, the clown as well as the monarch, the grave-digger as well as the Archbifliop at Lambeth, is totally uncontroulable in his appropriation of that light. — Prophecy declares it in fo many words. If ye ivill obey my voice indeed aJid keep my covenant^ ye /hall be a peculiar people unt9 me : ye /fiall be unto me a kingdom of priefts and an holy nation. "^ — • This was addrefTed to the Ifraelites, but now com- prehends the whole world : for in the fulfilment of prophefy, in the Chriftian Difpenfation, we find it aflerted, God is a Spirit^ and they that wor/fiip him muft worfhip him infpirit and in truth. This at once deftroys a local, incorporated priefthood. Knoiv ye not tliat ye are the temple of the Living God. Now, no one but the individual can have accefs to this temple -, that is, every one muft be his own prieft. i> (all Chriftians fcattered through- out Ponnis, Galatia, Cappadocia, Afin, and Bithy- nia) are an holy priefthood to offer fpiritud fatrificer.^ acceptable to God by Jefus Chrift. This liiceuife annihilates every hierarchy or cftablifhed order of the Clergy. If ail are priefts, no one can be more a prieft * Ex. xix, 5, 6. [ io8 ] prieft than another, except as he is perfonally and eficntially holier. Agreeable to this we find that one part of the new fong Tung to the Lamb in the Rerelations, is on account of his having made us kings and priejls unto God. The Clergy eftablifhed are the mortal enemies of the Human Undcrftanding ; therefore, in the prefent chapter they fell particularly under ani' madverfion, as well as in a former. Mr. Burgh I would look upon only as one of the lighteft arrows in Achilles's quiver; but the Clergy as Achilles himfelf : and as the Grecians were invincible till Achilles was flai-', fo will the enemies of Human Underftanding be invincible, till the Reverend, Right and moft Revirend phalanx of the vifible Church fhall be broken and routed. The very exiftence of the Clergy, as a char- tered body, refts upon one of the greateft abfur- dities in the world, viz. that the underftanding of every man is not adequate to his own happinefs, when the means of effedling it are honeftly and plainly laid before him. It is acknowledged on all hands, even by the Clergy themfelves, that every man has a fecret dcfire, an inward propen- fity, to be happy : now, if he indeed has the un- extinguifhable defire, without knowing what can fill up his mcafurc of happinefs, he talks, ftruts, and C 109 ] and fwaggers, on this our clod of earth, as a mere fhadow of fomething, a miftake of being, an abor- tion of exiftcnce, the mockery of fome daemon ; inftcad of being a fon of God, a child of the Moft High i God's reprefentative in this lower world, an heir of immortality, and a joint heir with Chrift. The ox at his ftall, and the afs at his crib, are his fuperiors. — They too defire to be happy-, they accurately know th(i means, and they enjoy them. But rather than fo grofs an abfurdity fhould be fuppofed, which reduces God to an idol of falfe w'orfliip, a Moloch, delighting in cruelty and tan- talization — delenda eji Carthago. Every inftituted body, let it be what it will, however fupported, and however patronized, muft be brought to no- thing. Chriftianity is nothing elfe than an oiter of happinefs to all mankind on the moft excellent and approved terms. Thefe terms are as eafy and obvious, as to fit down when one is wearv, eat when one is hungry, and drink when one is thirfty. Come unto me all ye that are weary and heavy laden, and I will give yen reji : take my yoke upon you ; for my yoke is eafy and my burden is light. If ye would enter into life., keep the commandments. By this fnall all men know that ye are iuy difdples, if ye have love cm to another. If thou /halt confefs with thy rr.cnth the Lord Jefus., and flialt believe in thine heart that God hath raifed him from the dead., thcu fJialt be faved. Whofoever believeth that Jefus is the Chrijl, is born [ no ] of God. This is the love of God^ that we keep his commandments^ and his commandments are not griev- ous. JJk^ and it Jhall he given you ; feek, andyefliall find i k'riock^ and it /hall he opened unto you : for every one that afketh, receiveth -, and he that feeketh, find- eth ; and to him that knocketh^ it ffiall be opened. All beyond the above is only what ferves to catch the eye, play upon the ear, and captivate the imagination: and if a (landing Priefthood benecef- fary for thefe, fo is the ftage with much higher pretenfion. If the one can with propriety lay claim to a divine inftitution, fo may the other ; as virtue and vice, honour and bafenefs, fincerity and difllmulation, are always ftrongly marked on the ftage, as well as the follies and caprices of man- kind : and can it be juftly faid, that Religion, without virtue, honour, and fincerity, is any thing better than the flourifh of a mountebank, the rant of a fanatic, or the fervour of an enthufiaft ? The Clergy, moreover, have all along, fince the days of Conftantine, been inftrumental in ful- filling the Scriptures, by realizing thofe falfe pro- phets, falfeChrifls, and falfe teachers, plainly pre- didled and marked out there. They have fet king- dom againft kingdom, province againfl province, city againfl city, neighbourhood againft neigh- bourhood, family againft family, and man againft man. [ ..I ] man. Even at this day, in all parts of the world, as well as at home among ourfelves, they continue to keep up, with unyielding ftubborn fpirit, their rcfpedive parties and factions among the people; teaching things they might not fcrfdthy lucre's fake: ever learnings but never able to arrive at the truth : creeping into houfes and leading captive Jilly women: teaching cunningly devifcd fables and endlefs genealo- gies^ and through covetoufnefs with fair zvords making j.uerchandize of fouls. ■ How notorious, but far from refpe6l.ible, the conduft of the Clergy ! Before they could ered: themfelves into dominion, and eilablifh their in- fluence and confequence among the people, it'be- hoved them firft to model and garble the Scrip- tures, and formally difable the Underftahding. They durfl not trufi: the monopolizing fpirit of their caufe to the word of God, as it came fair .ind pure from the hands of tbofe he infpired, or to the liberal exercife of Reafon. They had too much fagacity not to know, that while thefe were fuffered to raife obftrudlions and embarraiTments in their way, they could not advance one ftep in the new-made road of encroachment. Gold was the darling objed that inflamed their defires, and firfl: fet their ambition a-going. The idol they adored v.as not a golden calf, it is confefled : but gold rounded in the mint, and ftamped with royal or imperial [ .12 ] imperial effigies; which to this day, while the wor- ihip of the one God and Father of all (except in rain repetition, and doxological rant) is fet almoft wholly afide, preferves its veneration unabated among all orders of our Clergy. ^ifquis ingentes oculo retorto 'fpe5fat acervos ? ^he love of money is the root of all evil\ which while fome coveted after they have erred from the faith^ and pierced themfelves through with many forrows. They that will be rich^fall into temptation and afnare-, into many foolifh and hurtful hifts^ that drown men in deflru5lion and perdition : but thou, O man of God ! flee thefe things. Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world : if any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him : for all that is in the world., the luft of the flefJi, the lujl of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, hut is of the world. This is ftrong but juft co- louring. Paul's and John's Mafter had, before them, thrown off the tints with a bolder and more glowing pencil. How hardly fhall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God : it is eafier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich men to enter into the kingdom of God. How C "3 ] How Clergymen, the profefTed fcrvants of ano- ther and a better world, can read thefe ftriking and awful paflages, and yet unceafingly hunt after the riches and glories of this life, to me, I confefs, ap- pears utterly unaccountable! HowBifhops, whom we may ftile the leading and effeftive part of the Clergy, can coolly and peaceably, with perfeft cafe, enjoy the grandeur and opulence of princes, is likewife a marvellous circumftance; efpecially, when they muft be confcious of having obtained their mitres in confequence of a long difingenuous apprenticcfhip ; a long courfe of artful, flattering attendance on the levees of ftatefmen ; where the man was often funk in the Courtier, the Chriftian in the Prieft, and the humble difciple of the lowly Jefus, in the time-ferving hypocritical Pharifee. The parable of a certain rich man, who was ehathed in purple and fine linen, and fared fumptu- eujly every day, in its conclufion, ought, methinks, to make bifliops recoiled themfelves ; ought to humble in the duft their lawn fleeves and fenato- rial robes I Son, fays Abraham, remember that thou in thy life-time receivedji thy good things, and likewife Lazarus evil things : but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented. It is a pitiful confidera- tion in behalf of the Clergy, that if we had not large appointments and revenues to tempt them to preach the Gofpel, they would not preach it H at C "4 ] at all ; any more than the puppet-fhow man, the mountebank, or the play-aftor, mount his refpec- tive ftage, without a fimilar temptation. — If they had the fpirit to preach without hire, as Chrift and his Apoftles formerly preached, they would go to Indian and Heathenifh nations, where Chriftianity is ftill unknown, inftead of flaying at home, where we have the Bible to teach us, and, confequently, in no refped require them. If the writers of the New Teftament fail to convince and perfuade us, furely men like ourfclves, fubjed, equally with us, to all the draw-backs, littlenefTes, and mainnefles of humanity, cannot either convince or perfuade. They are watch-men indeed, but like thofe of If- rael, dumb dogs^Jleeping^ lying down, loving to Jlum- her ; yea^ they are greedy dogs, which can never have enough ; all looking their own way^ every one for his gain from his quarter. — The prophet dipt his pencil deep in futurity, in the charaders and manners of the eighteenth century, where he drew his pidure of Ifrael's watchmen and fhcpherds. The Human Undcrftanding is to be considered as paramount to all confederated bodies whatfo- ever : he therefore that defends it, however he may offend certain individuals, defends the only bafis on which they ought to fubfift, or can ever be permanent. Whatever cannot be defended by Rcafon, is not worth defending at all, and the fooncr C i'5 ] fooner fuch an inftitutlon is brought to nought, the better. The longer it continues to exift by the fupport of adventitious and artificial caufes, the more interiorly corruptible it becomes in it- felf, and the more fignaliy ruinous muft be its overthrow : for fall it muft, as furely as the rock that has been long corroded and undermined by the wave. Religion is defenfible on princi- ples common to the whole fpecies, and as im- pregnable in one latitude as another, when fairly and regularly attacked. He who defends and honours Reafon, defends and honours man, as he dropt from his Creator's hands, a living image of himfelf; and, confc- quently, defends God, fo far as mortality can do it, againft thofe who would reprefent (rather mif- reprefent) him, as fculking in myftery, and hi- ding his decrees and difpcnfations under a bufhel or feather-bed. — Every thing that regards man in the aggregate, regards the Deity. Whatever regards a party, a junto, or a fedl, has no refe- rence to the Deity in any fhape, rather would feem to be independent of him, by devifing and pulliing forward fchemes, for which he is not re- fponfible ; nay, cannot be refponfible, without in- jury and injuftice to a greater number of his crea- tures than they comprehend : without being a re- fpeder of perfons, contrary to the Scripture idea H 2 of E "6 ] of him, and atfluated by that mean felfifh fyfl-em of favouritifm, which biafles our civil rulers. Such are all political inftitutions, all rational or pro- vincial hierarchies, appropriated excluflvely to the necefllties and accommodations of a few ; and of- tentimes fundamentally repugnant to each other. With the members of fuch afibciations and com- inunities, the Deity has no farther concern than as they are men; that is, reducible to individuals under his own univerfal government, and fulfil- ling the innate laws of eternal equity, truth, mercy, benevolence, and kind affedions. This rcafoning (and if the matter Is reafoned at all, it cannot be otherwife) juftifies every de- gree of indignation at the Clergy, as a chartered body; feeing that, with the pretence of being an order peculiarly fet apart to the fervice of God, and only conneded with another world, they are no better in their eftablifhment than any of the incorporated companies among us •, and their de- crees no morefacred or binding, than the bye-laws of Free Mafons, or of the Royal Society. Nay, they occupy a fcale of credit below the two laft- mentioned afibciations, as they authorife compul- five methods with regard to the world around them, reprobate and doom to intolerable punifh- ment, all non-contents, non-entrants, and non- conformlfts. "Whereas the Grand Lodge and the Royal C i>7 ] Royal Society ad upon the jufleft maxims and trueft liberality J give free and generous admifllon to all who have any pretenfions to wifdom and vir- tue; and look on no one fub luce maligna^ who have not applied to be admitted. Yet with all thefe advantages in their favour, do the members of either the one or the other pretend to deduce their origin, authority, or perpetuation, from the Scriptures? No ; this mifdeed of prefumption was referved for the Clergy, verifying the word of God (againft themfelves) in every part of their condud and procedure. Take heed thai no man de- ceive yow, for many falfe frofhets fJiall arife^ andJJiall deceive many : behold, I have told you before. fVell hath Efaias prophejied of you hypocrites : this people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me: howbeit, in vain do they ivorfhip me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men; making the word of God of none effe£f, through their tradi^ tiojis. Ye are they which jujiify y our f elves before men : but God knoweth your hearts ; far what is highly ef- teemed among men, is an abomination in the.fight of God, Respecting fuch men, laying the Underftand- ing under difqualification was atling with true fore- fight and fagacity ; nay, with a ftrong allowable fenfe of felf-prefervation, as they couM not have been a moment fecure of their poflcflions, had this divine faculty been fuffered to range with un- H 3 bounded [ "8 ] bounded freedom through our Chriftian dynaflies; like the fun, difFufing light, obvioufnefs, fatisfac- tion, and complacency around, ^id talpam? num defiderare lumen putas ? — How appofite to our pur- pofe here, but how poignantly farcaftic the lan- guage of the Prophet. U'^o unto them that feek deep to hide their counfel^ and their works are in the dark, and they fay, who feeth us ; and who kncweth us ? Surely, your turning of things upfide down fliall be efleemed as the potters clay : for fliall the work fay of him that made it. He made me not ? or fhall the thing framed fay of him that framed it. He had no under- flanding ?* ^he prieji and the prophet have erred through flrong drink; they are f wallowed up of wine — thy are out of the way through flrong drink — they err in vifton — thy fiinnble in judgment. Whom fhall he (God) teach knowledge? — whom fhall he make to tinderfland dc^rine?—them that are weaned from the milk and drawn from the breafls?-\- Is wifdom no more in Temfji ? — is council periflied from the pru- dent ? — is their wifdotn vanifhed? — Who feeth me? I am ccjjtpajfed about with darknefs — the walls cover me, and no man feeth me. What need I to fear ? — Such a man only feareth the eyes of men, and knoweth not, that the eyes of the Lord are ten thoufand times brighter than the fun, beholding all the ways of men, and con/tdering the moji fecret parts. If a fkilful man hecr a wife word, he will commend it, and add unto it: • Ifaiah, Chap. xxix. f Ifaiah, Chap, xxviii. • *• C "9 ] // : but as foon as one of no underjianding heareth //, // difpleafeth him, and he cafteth fi behind his back. Learning is unto a wife man as atPornament of gold, and like a bracelet upon his right arm* Such ftrlking paflages cannot be miftaken by any but thofe to whom they apply, in whom it is a voluntary and deliberate miftake. After having taken the pearl out of the oyfter, they would fhut up the means by which they difcovered it in the (hell. They combated and fubdued Popery by the aflift- ance of the Underftanding j and when they had fecured to themfelves fome of the forfeited goods of Popery, they did all they could to difgrace and incapacitate that very Underftanding, left others fhould be difpofed to attack them by her aid. — There is fomething intrinftcally worthlefs and dif- ingenuous in this affair •, and tends too truly to prove, that Clergymen of all Religions are alike ; that thofe of thtfalfe have not ftiewn themfelves Icfs fuperior to the vanities and allurements of this world, than thofe of the true ; and that it is not requifite for our priefts to pafs over the Bri- tifti channel, and get into the natale folum of po- pery, to give up their chief cares and folicitudes to ambition, the love of riches, the love of plea- fure, and the love of eafe -, ereding families and fcraping together fortunes from nothing, under H 4 the Prov. XXV. 12. C I20 ] the plaufible mafk of officiating at the altar of God, and difpenfing his holy ordinances. I. Whoever reads the controverfy between the writers of the Roman and Anglican Churches, will at once perceive what prodigious advantages thofe of the latter derived from the free, bold, and manly exerclfe of reafon ; In what high and unre- ferved a ftrain of elogium they fpeak of that fu- pereminent faculty. Indeed with no lefs candour than gratitude, as the fuperlorlty they on every occafion gained over their opponents, was folely in confequence of ufing its great authority. In point of fyllogiftlc addrefs, fcholaftic fubtilty, the tiflufe of argument, and the parade of learning, they were well matched ; at leaft, the plume of conqueft by no means nodded on the brows of our reformers, in any of thefe refpeds. But what are thefe, even managed by the ableft difputants, In comparifon with the genuine powers of the Un- derftanding, the Divinity exerting itfelf by the medium of the human mind ! nothing better, than the artificial gem mimicking the fparkling of the diamond, without being folid and durable as the diamond : or a peacock, in the fpread and glitter of his feathers, fuftalning the attack of the ftrong and mighty bird of Jove. — That compleat vidory obtained over the Roman Church, by our illuf- trious champions of Truth, Liberty, and Protef- tantlfm. t "I ] tantlfm, is at this day fccurcd by the fame aufpi- cious power. Thofe worfe than hydra monfters. Infallibility in a mortal man ; the Real Prefence ; the worfhip dulia and hyperdulia ; Purgatory, &c. never fhould have been laid proftrate at our feet, by a hero lefs puiflant, than the Human Under- ftanding. It is allowed thefe were gigantic mon- fters : but others, alas ! at the fame time, were left to range at liberty in the Antichriftian foreft, unfubdued by the mighty huntrefs j viz. Church- authority-, Church-tyranny over the confciences of mcnj Church-revenues, Church-titles of honour: — Predcftination ; the Righteoufnefs of another, which could only fill up his own meafure of wor- thinefs, imputed to us ; the dodrine of three Per- fons, or diftind intelligences, in one fimple fpirit, &c. Why were thefe monfters of vainhypo- thefis infurgent againft common fenfe, why were they fufFered to enjoy their retreats of fecurity, their dens of darknefs, their faftnefles and ftrong places, unkennelled and unhunted down ? There can be but one reafon •, — becaufe we wifhed, in- ftead of conquering and deftroying, to exhibit them as a fhew to make money of them, like lions in the tower, or bears in the bear-garden. Further, material monfters are more endr-ible than fpiritual i becaufe the former exiic on') 'y the [ 122 ] the inhalation of a breath of air, of which they may be deprived by the gripe of a blood-hound, the thruft of a lance, or the perforation of a bul- let.— But the latter would boaft an exiftence which nothing on this fide immortality can cither give or take away -, immaterial, and ftretching forth into infinite fpace, and infinite duration. A mon- fler, depainted on paper, with all the bold and pro- minent effedl of technical outlines, metaphyfical draperv, and animated coloration, is not lefs a monfter, furely, becaufe it cannot be felt warm under the hand, its blood and juices falient to the touch, in the form of flefh and bones. — Nay, it is a monfter of a more horrid and dangerous kind, as it claims kindred with the mind j a unity with thofe ideas, that divine arrangement within us, which we muft carry with us into the other world, to meet God, Jefus Chrift, and the fpirits of juft men made perfedt : or, to give the whole in the Apoftle's glowing language, 'To Mount Sion, the city of the Living God — to an innumerable company of angels — to the general- affemhly and church of the firji horn which are written in Heaven — and to God the judge of all — and to the fpirits of juji men made per- fe^ — and to Jefus the mediator of the new covenant. To drop allegorical painting, and only to ufe terms level to all comprehenfions, I would a{k our bifhops [ 123 ] bifliops and other dignified churchmen, why they would formally incapacitate that faculty, by whofe aid they juftify their feparation from the Church of Rome, and continue to be what they really are, independent of earthly controul, and accountable to none fuperior to themfelves in this world? By what authority do they denominate the Pope An- tichrift, his decrees ufurpative, and his dccifions nugatory ? Is it not by Reafon interpreting the word of God, and fixing ultimately its fenfe and meaning? Why did not our Reformers deted the corruptions and enormities of the Romifh Com- munion, many centuries before they did ? — Was it not becaufe the Human Underftanding, before that period, did not awake from her lethargy of a thoufand years, fecreted and immured in the friar's cell, and the monk's dungeon ? — When fhe awoke to deeds of venerable emprize, whifpered in the ear by an angel from Heaven, now is the acceptable year of the Lord, this is the day of falva- tion \ who adminiftered the fatal narcotic that lleeped her fenfes once more in indolence and in- adivity, before (be had done half her work? i He that putteth his hand to the plough and looketh back, is not fit for the kingdom of Heaven. The Church of England is this delinquent. To juftify and proted herfelf, in breaking off from the ■[ in ] the parent of abominations, fhe called in the Un- derftanding, as her high ally, without whofe in- terpofition, fhe lay expofed and defencelefs ; and when fhe had gained a complete vidory, fiie dif- mifled her proteftrefs with repeated marks of in- gratitude and difrefped. Moreover, when fhe had pofTefled herfelf in part of that independence and fupremacy fhe had reprobated in her adverfary, by the omnipotence of Reafon, (he confoled her- felf in the words of the text, Scul^ thou hafi much goods laid up for many year<, take thine eafe, eaty drinky and be merry. Nf t only fo, but the very lea- der that marfhalled her flraggling forces, and led them on from one fplendid conquefl to another, fhe threw into a dungeon, in a catochymical mood of avarice and jealoufy. What was this better than one ruffian robber conquering another, feiz- ing his cave and his trcafures, and commencing robber paramount himfelf 1— — The above enormity mufl be put into forcible reprefentation, or it will fail, to rouze a fenfe of wrong, a fenfe of decency, of kindling ingenuous fhame, on thefe frigid and flaccid cheeks where it ought. The flmple unafFeded didion of the New Tcflament, has hitherto pafTed as a thing of nought; the noble and fpirited interference of ge- niufes, fublime and original, in defence and illuf- tration [ 125 ] ration of the New Teftament (that volume of Heaven, figned by God, and by Jefus the Son of God, and counter-figned by ten thoufand times ten thoufand angels) has pafled aifo for nought: who knows that the widow's mite thrown into the trcafury, the ftripling's fling pointed at the head of the boaflful Goliah, may not fucceed ? With regard to inconfiderable advocates in the caufe of Chriftianity, it may, perhaps, juftly be faid, God hath chofen the fooliJJi things of the world, to confound the wife -, and God hath chvfen the weak things to confound the things which are mighty : while, refpedling our fyflematic teachers, our bifhops, deans, and dodors, may it not aptly be enquired? Thou which teacheji another, teacheji thou not thy- felf? thou that preachsft, a man fhould not Jleal, dofi thou fteal ? thou that fayejl a man fhculd not commit adultery, dojl thou commit adultery ? — thou that ah- horrejl idols, doji thou commit facrilege ? — thou that makejl thy boajl of the law, through breaki7ig the law, difJionoureJi thou God ?* Alas ! to thefe inter- rogations it may be added, with reference to fuch as would be periodically wifer ^nd better than their neighbours, fo far as haranguing from the pulpit, every fabbath day, can make them. Thers is none righteous, no not one. There is none that un~ derjfande'h, * Rom, ij, 11, «», 13. C 1^6 ] derjiandeth, there is none that feeketh after God. ^hey are all gone out of the way — they are together become unprofitable — there is none that doeth good, no, not me — their throat is en open fepulchre — with their tongues they have ufed deceit — the poifon of afps is under their lips — whofe mouth is full of curfing and bitternefs — their feet is fwift to flied blood — deflruc- iion and mifery are in their ways — and the way of peace have they not known — there is no fear of God before their eyes* If we honeftly examine the annals of the Church from Conftantlne, the firft Chrlftian perfecutor for Confcience fake, down to thofe Convocations and aJtTemblies of the Clergy, that WOULD have perfecuted fuch men as Whif- ton, Clarke, Hoadley, Emlyn, Clayton, &c. we ihall find every part of the above apoftolic pre- didion, verified and fulfilled. — Verified and ful- filled by men that took every opportunity to ca- lumniate the See of Rome for thofe very mif- deeds, of which they themfelves were afterwards guilty J though they, at the fame time, pretended a reforming fpirit, a fpirit of temper and modera- tion, a fpirit of bringing matters back to their original purity and fimplicity. Either the Reformers fubjefted themfelves to ccnfure, in fo far as they made ufe of Reafon againft * Rom. iii. lo, ii, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16/17, 18. [ '27 ] agalnft the Church of Rome, or our fyftematic Clergy fince the days of Henry VIII. have fub- jeded themfelves to a like cerfure, on account of not making ufe of Reafon to reform farther. An affirmative and negative cannot be pronounced of the fame thing ; one of the above muft be true, and the other falfe. Which we ought to lay our finger on in the latter difhonourable fenfe, let thofe immediately concerned, let the Clergy tell us. The fame interdidl that now lies on the Un- derftanding, by the interference of Priefts, lay on it previous to the Engliih diffent from the Catho- lic Church. Who had a right to take it ofF at that celebrated dawn of genuine Chriftianity ? that identical order of men which now obftinately ftand in the way of its being taken off. And why ? becaufe the end was obtained, pre-eminence and authority tranflatcd from Italy to England, from Papifts to Proteftants. But if a confiderable por- tion of what effentially ferves to denominate Pa- pifts Papifts, be retained and chcriftiedby that Church which affededly ftyles herfelf the Reformed^ what are Proteftants better than Papifts P—They are no better j much worfe rather ; in fo far as the hypocritical pretence of amendment, fupcr- added to lawlefs claims, may be faid to increafe moral delinquency. The hierarchy of England, while ftie formally difables Reafon, difclainTs and di fa vows C 128 ] difavows Infallibility : /. e. fhe leaves her members in the condition of mariners out at fea, amid in- ftant dangers, naked coafts, impetuous currents, and tempeftuous winds; without keel, compafs, rudder, or main-fail ; the fport of the elements, and the mockery of creation. CHAP. [ 129 3 CHAP. IV. 1'he fuhje5f farther extended : with quotations from fever al authors, to prove the danger and ahfurdity of abandoning Reafon, in religious inquiries ; one of them from Mr. Burgh, Nay, why even of yourfelves, judge ye not what is right ? Jesus Christ. IF Reafon be put under difqualification, and at the fame time the Church relinquiflies all pre- tenfions to infallibility, to what quarter fhall we apply, to guard us againft the moft formidable errors in the world — Infidelity, Paganifm, Maho- metanifm, and Popery. The ultimate preference is no fuch inconfiderable a concern, as oyr future falvation depends upon it. There is a chain of reafoning, a feries of arguments, connected with tkefe, which have been fufficient to fatisfy many learned and ingenious men : how fhall I be able to extradl the bullion from the drofs, the fterling from the counterfeit coin ? If there is a faculty in man, or any refource in nature, adequate to the important choice, other than the Human Under- ft^nding, let the Church give it a name, as bi ing I accuftomed [ 130 ] accuflomed to baptize -, afcertaln Its credentials, fpecify its office, and exactly appoint the hitherto /halt thou go and no farther. If the Church, after our repeated calls upon her, and from a fenfe of her duty to man, and accountablenefs to God, proves herfelf unqualified to give us the fatisfac- tion our neceflities require, and we have an un- doubted right to demand ; then is fhe, in the per- fons of her members, thofe very Scribes, Phari- fees. Hypocrites, mentioned by the fon of God, as having taken away the key of knowledge j as fJmtting tip the kingdom of Heaven againfi men ; neither going in themfehes, neither fuffering thofe that would enter to go in ; binding heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, but not touching them themfelves with one of their fingers. Our Saviour forefaw the fpirit of modern Chriftianity, and left his prefentment of it upon record ; to vindicate his own honour, by prefiguring that very clafs of men by whom of- fences fhould come, but at the fame time to awaken all by the preadmonltory woe denounced agalnft them, by whom the offence cometh. The dedudion from the above is obvious; viz. that whatever has authority to reftrain Reafon now, ought to have reftrained it before the Refor- mation, and left us in a ftate of fubjeftion to the See of Rome. In other words, the facerdotal fpi- rit of reftraining Reafon, if it is not itfelf put un- der C '31 ] der reftraint by civil government, would, in the long run, as effedlually reconduct us to the foot- ftool of Papal Antichrift, as <^the fame reftraint operated, before the Reformation, to prevent us from being Proteftants. The above argument cannot be anfwered by any of the avowed incapacitators of Reafon, how- ever learned and ingenious, unlefs by their pro- ving that our venerable Reformers had a fpecial revelation from Heaven, an unerring degree of light ; and that they left all matters as clear and intelligible as they can poflibly be made. Till they can prove this, to the convidion of every Chri-ftian, endued with common fenfe and com- mon honefty, • the argument {lands everlaftingly good. — The piteous fituation of the Clergy here, and of thofe that ftep forward to defend them, can- not be concealed. They patronize a fyftem which heretofore made a reformation neceflary, and fub- jeded a whole people to the imputation of fchiim from the then eftablifhed Church ; and what, if not over-ruled by a power more benign and au- fpicious than itfelf, would render the Reformation to all intents and purpofes null and void: that glo- rious reformation in the Church of Chrift, by which we became rational Chriftians, and, in fomc mea- fure, free as the Son of God left us, when he ut- tered thefe happy words, Whom the Son makes frcc^ I 2 thev [ 132 ] thiy are free indeed: which is finely illuftrated by one of the Apoftles, Where the fpirit of the Lord isy there is liberty. Or as another exprefles it» IVhofo looketkinto the perfect law of Liberty (the Gofpel of Chrift) that man is bleffed in his deed. What has led crouds of worthy Chriftians into miftake on this fubjeft, is their underftanding the Apoftle Paul, who ufes the moft difparaging ex- preflions of human wifdom and philofophy, as al- luding to future times ; whereas he evidently al^ ludes to the times which were paft at the time of his writing, when the Jews, as he exprefles it, required a fign^ worldly glory and grandeur in their MefTiah ; and the Greeks fought after wif- dom^ metaphyfics, and fcholaftic learning. The beginning of his firft Epiftle to the Corinthians, is particularly levelled againft thefe. ISlot many wife 'men after the flejfi, not many mighty., not many noble^ are called : but God hath chofen the foolifJinefs cf this worldy to confound the wife •, and God hath chofen the weak things of the world, to confound the things which are mighty. But we f peak the word of God in a myjlery, even the hidden wifdom wliich God ordained before the world unto our glory. FOR had they known it they would not have crucified tlie Lord of Glory.* With • I Corinth, ii. iS. See alfo Cortfideration* ■on Religious Li- berty, pait II. page 34. and onwards. C J33 ] With regard to times pofterior to the Apojflle, the pofition he lays down by no means holds good ; for we have had many wife men, many mighty, many noble, that have been the fupporters as well as ornaments of the Gofpel ; in confe^ quence of whofe learned labours, Chriftianity now refts upon the folid pillsw of evidence, and refifts unbroken and unyielding the boldeft attacks of fcepticifm and infidelity. The whole purport of Paul's argument is this, that human wifdom and fagacity, the united efforts of philofophers and poets, never could have afforded us that degree of light, knowledge, and certainty, with refpedt to another world, which we have in the Chriftian Revelation ; becaufe none but a meflenger from the invifible Father, crucified before men's eyes, ^ead, buried, and rifing again, at the time he him- felf appointed, could have convinced us of a Re- furr^dtion; and nothing fhort of an immediate di- vine commiflion, or power of working miracles, co-operating with the morality of the Son of God, could have eilablifhed his charader. But, notwithftanding human. Reafon, in its beJfi: condition, was altogether impotent to perfect any thing like the Revelation we have by Jefus Chrift; yet, after that Revelation adually became ours, by the mod authentic title-deed and conveyance, every man had a perfonal right to judge of it, of I 3 its [ 134 ] its nature, extent, and peculiar requifitions, ac- cording to the light of his own mind. Man was confefledly the objedl of it, and it was accommo- dated to the prefent circumftances of man. Doubt- lefs, then, man was cotifidered, by its gracious do- nor, every way qualified to comprehend and turn it to account, fo far as he is concerned in or an- fwerable for it. Were it otherwife, that is, if Re- velation is to be credited and believed farther than it is comprehenfible and explainable, it cannot be confidered as adapted to man, more than to any other order of beings in the creation, rational or irrational, intelligent or non-intelligent. The ul- timate point of infcrutibility being common to all, an afs may bray, an ox bellow forth the glories and wonders of Revelation. Thus, by extinguifh- ing the Ump of Reafon in the foul of man, and incapacitating its powers, we are diredly led into the wildeft imaginations. If the Bible cannot be comprehended, it may as decently inhabit our {ta- bles and cow-houfes, as our Churches and ftudies. If we alledge, in the latter fituation, that man is totally incompetent to conceive and demonftrate its divine dod:rines, even when he does his ut- moft ; furely we cannot go beyond this, when we eftimate them in connexion with the very beaft that carries us on his back, or the very beaft that prefents us with its milk. The belief of myftery, therefore, or incomprehenfibility in Revelation, at once [ '35 ] once breaks down the partition-wall between the rational and belluine creations ; renders it a mat- ter of accident or ufage, whether a horfe fhall in- ftrudl his rider, or the rider inftrucfl his horfe. Instead of the Scriptures fetting afide Reafon, the truth is, the former rejoiced in the capacity of the latter to fupport and illuftrate their origi- nal and excellence. The fadl is as demonftrable as any propofition of Euclid. After the expira- tion of miracles, the vifible interference of the Almighty, I would afk, what it was that preferred Revelation ? preferved it from the open malignity of declared foes, and the fecret malignity of falfe brethren. If it be replied, the unfeen Providence of God, I would farther beg leave to know, by what medium did that unfeen Providence a6l ? By the Underftanding doubtlefs : no other medium can be fuppofed. Revelation was left in a ftate of moral perfedion and certitude, by fupernatu- ral caufes firft afting in its favour, which were too numerous to be overlooked, and too irrefifti- ble to be denied: afterwards, however, it was fub- mittcd to folemn, accurate examination, under the diredion of the Underftanding j as' there was no other power in nature capable of being intrufted with the tafk. How could it otherwife have fur- vived the pointed, penetrating wit of ingenious Heathens, the Romans in particular, mafters of I 4 philofophy. C 136 ] jjhilofojjhy, eloquence, erudition, irony, and ri- dicule ? How could it have furvi\eJ the moti- ftrous doctrines built upon it-, by this, that, and the other bold herefiarch in the hrft ages of thfe Chriftian Church ? — Whoever examines the mat- ter with candour, will immediately acknowledge, that the primitive fathers in defence of the Gofpel only triumphed over their alert and formidable opponents, in fo far as they intruded their caufe to the teft of moral evidence, the energy of argu- ihent, and pathos of perfuafion. In thofe early times, had the Underftanding been put under the reftri(5lions and incapacitations it now difhonour*- ably fubmits to, had it been laid afide in defending ftnd illuftrating the Gofpel of Chrift, as now it is fyftematically laid afide in Articles and Confef- fions J our Redeemer had fuffered on the Crofs in vain, and in vain had fimjhed the work ivhich his Father gave him to do. We fhould have been 'Pa«. gans and Heathens at this very day, woriliipping the fun i or, perhaps, like Egyptians, worlhipping the baboons we now laugh at, or the onions we devour as an article of food. If We contemplate this fubje6l lower down in the ages of Chriftianity, We /hall find the fame fpecific advantages derived to Revelation from the Human Underftanding: its divine origination, in- ternal proofs of validity, intrinfic excellence, and admirable [ M7 J admirable maxims of wifdom and prudence, fet in the moft inexpug!iab!eiites of defence, \v. the h.ap- pieft Loloujs of p:nhetic and defcriptive eloquence; repelb'ng all oppofition, every effort of niifapplied genius, wit, learning, fophiftry, cafuiftry, fcepti- cifm, and metaphyfics. In the diftinguiihed lift of its advocates and defenders, might be reckoned many of the brighteft and moft eftimable cha- racters, for knowledge and virtue, that have thrown a luftre on the annals of mankind, or ever filled the glittering departments cf biographical immortality. Would bigots, enthufiafts, or fana- tics, whofe rcafoning powers became voluntari^ extinct, and whofe degrees of intelligence were not half fo bright as the glimmer of the lamp before them, (like whom we have but too many, at this day, within the environs of our religious efta- blifhments) would they, I fay, have been equal to the noble, the mighty, the arduous tafk ? They would, as a grafshopper to ta'ke a giant 07i its back, to defend him in the day of battle; or feme half-witted wight, who ftiould pluck out his eyes, in order to furvey the fun, and defcribe the colo- rific effeft of his rays. — Alas ! they were bigcyts, fanatics, and enthufiafts, in the very bofom of the Church, not lefs than Pagans and Heathens, that brought on the diftreffmg neccjfity of fupporting the charafter and honour of the Bible ; Vv'ho by their pitiful glofies, wretched commentaries, forced explications. [ 138 3 explications, and impious additions to infpiration, had almoft turned that precious vohime, that de- pofit of divine wifdom and benevolence, into a ftanding jell j whetting the farcaftic jeer of the fclf-applauded infidel, as well as damping the be- lief of the ingenuous bofom, and well-conditioned heart. Shall we then ungratefully do all we can to in- capacitate that Power, the vicegerent of God upon earth, by which fuch wonders have been wrought, fuch prodigies atchieved, and fuch vidlories ob- tained over men and devils ! over worfe than de- vils— bigots and fanatics ? By whofe all-conquer- ing prowefs, as the immortal ranger — the lion has been deprived of his paw, the bear of his hug, the boar of his tulk, the tyger of his jaw, the fnake of his poifon, the fcorpion of his lafh, the vulture of his beak, the crocodile of his cunning, and the fox of his deceit! — Let a man incapacitate Reafon in his own bofom, if he pleafes, as he has the right of willing for himfelf, let Mr. Burgh do it; but let him not prefume to incapacitate Reafon in the bofom of his neighbour; or like the defigning and treacherous Dalilah, lull the ftrong man afleep, in order to dcfpoil him of that wherein his ftrength lies. God has made us men, and wiflies us to be Chriftians, by the light which is within us, as his own Son finely exprefles it — fo that, if we make ourfelves [ ^29 ] ourfelves no better than flocks and ftones, we only render perfonal our Saviour's remark. If then that light which is within you be darknefs, how great is that darknefs ! A BLISSFUL refurrecfUon from the dead is the common objed of our expe»5tritions, the glorious fupport of our hopes ; becaufe, when we die, we /hall die by the hands of our Maker, and look joyfully forward to be raifed by his Almighty Power : but he who inflids artificial extindion on his mind, extinguifhes the light of Heaven within him, to hang up the dark, gloomy lanthorn of fyftem in its place, and deafens the voice of God — confclence — in his foul •, every man, I fay, that would thus intelledually die, a fen timental/^/66 ] tending thefc fenftble deities is, that we may carry them about with us, as the Jews carried the ark, and the Roman people their penates. Moreover, if modern exigencies do indeed re« quire fenfible objefts of worfhip, no other fhall fuffice me, than one to which all others are eflen- tially indebted, even for their viiibility, not to ' mention their proportions, elegance, and grace ; and this object fhall be nothing fubordinate to the fun himfclf, the all-glorious, living light of Crea- tion ; whofc every fmile gives animal and vege- table life, and whofe every glance beautifies and illuftrates the works of God. True, I cannot carry him about with me in my pocket. No — he gene- roufly faves me the trouble: he follows me where- ever I go ; or, to fpeak more juftly, he goes be- fore me like a God indeed, making every place a paradife for my reception, and welcomes me with the vivacity of his countenance. While I behold him with my enamoured eye, I feel him at my ex- panded and exhilerated heart. — There can be no deception here: if there is, I wifh to be deceived, I am willingly deceived, rather than wear away my cxillence in poring over a Creed ; feeing the God whom I adore, without feeling him, otherwife than as I feel the ball of wax in my hand, or the block under my foot. If I am to have a Deity externally to ftrike on my perceptions, let it be one fuperior C >67 3 fuperior tamyfelf; one unmade by myfelf; with- out whofe vivifying influence unceafingly difpen- fed, I can neither live nor move; nay, fliould foon make a prefent of my exiftence to the firft gravel-pit or precipice : without which the briar would entangle me in its prickles, and the ruin overwhelm me in its fall; the favage find me ago- nizing in his paw, or the bull gored on his horns. This be my Deity, the quickner of the dead, the renovator of annual creations, the admiration of a thoufand worlds, and the brightefl fplendor in the galaxy of Heaven. — But the Athanafian Pagod, atrar/ientalized on paper, I can handle with my hand, blow away with my breath, fold into any fantaftic fhape, or tear it in pieces, when I pleafe. Shall I call this unknown fchedule, this enigmati- cal fcrap of paper, addrefling it, O glorious and bleiTed Trinity, my God ? my Revealed God ? my Saviour God ? And why may I not as difcreetly call the pidure of Chrifl riding on an afs's colt, or crucified on the crofs between two thieves, in my clofet or ftudy, my God ? my Revealed God ? my Saviour God ? What difference is there between the ink that prints, and the paint that colours ? between the pen that writes, and the pencil that draws ? between a back-ground of a paper, and a back-ground of canvas ? If I adore one, 1 ought to adore the other ; and If I adore both, I do not commit a greater crime than by adoring one. I L 4 cannot C '68 ] cannot juftify myfelf by faying, that when I read, I do not worfhip the Athanafian Creed : for this is all finefle, feeing I only afFeft to worihip the in- vifible Deity, as identified and circumflantiated in THAT Creed ; confequently as God, who is a fpi- rit indivifible and omniprefent, cannot be locally identified or circumflantiated, I in fad wprlhip the refcript of Athanafius : nor fhould I incur greater guilt by falling down in adoration to Athanafius himfelf, were he bodily inftead of fymbolically prefent before me. — The fame remark which fer- ved to introduce this chapter, may alfo with pro- priety end it. The foregoing crudities and ab- furdities never could have had a place in human imagination, much lefs have been methodized in a volume publifhed to the world, by a Senator of the "Nation ;* had not the facred authority of Reafon been firft difabled and trodden under foot. The admirable Chillingworth's remark is this, which can never too often recur to memory. It IS A CERTAIN SIGN THAT ReaSON IS AGAINST A MAN, WHEN HE DECLARES HIMSELF AGAINST REA- SON. * Written in Ireland, the latter end of the year 1775; at which time Mr. Burgh was a member of the Houfc of Commons of that kingdom. CHAP. C 1% 3 CHAP. V. Mr. Burch'j inconjijlency laid before the reader in making tife of that very power he would difavow and difcredit j and his unhappinefs pointed out in mojl of his jlri5lures and animadverfions on Mr. LiNDSEY, many of which are retorted on himfelf.. TT is an happy circumftance that the reign of -*• Priefts and Prieftcraft feems near an end, with all the endlefs corruptions connecT:ed with them. The reign of the Underftanding begins where that of the Clergy ends -, otherwife the writer would not have folicited the reader's attention fo much to the latter. "Whatever ftands in the way of Reafon, and the common fenfe of mankind, is an objeA that muft be removed, like a mafs of rock, before we come to the folid bullion, or ftarry diamond. — Nor has Mr. Burgh been unattended to, in the preceding detail, as fome may imagine, from his name not being mentioned for fo long a time. Every advantage the writer has over the Priefthood, if he be allowed any, is an advantage gained over him, feeing he concludes his perform- ance as an avowed champion for the Church, and- that, throughout the whole of ir, we find him a willing C 17^ ] willing advocate in fupport of her fyilematic doc- trines, efpecially that fundamentum fundamentorum Ecclefi£^ the Athanafian Trinity. In fadl, Mr. Burgh's book alone never fhould have tempted me abroad as a polemical writer, had it not afforded me a fair opportunity of fupporting the honour of Re- velation, in the only way it can be fupported. As Revelation is folely addrefled to the mind of man, it becomes the fole property of that mind j but, like all other property, before v.'e can convert it to ufe, or fulfil the gracious intentions of the donor, we mufl accurately know what it is ; otherwife, in- ftead of turning it to account, we are likely to re- verfe all order, by turning it to no account, or to bad account. Mr. Burgh may as well infifl that we fhould clap padlocks on the mind, as padlocks on Revelation. The mind is certainly adequate to Revelation, or God mufl have miflaken the na- ture of thofe beings to whom he fent it ; fuppo- ling them rational and immortal agents, capable of knowing him as far as he can pofTibly be known, when in reality we are nothing fuperior to man- monkeys, or beavers, thofe untaught architedls. Revelation is a feries of fadls, all tranfaded within the fphere of human knowledge, and hanging to- gether by human teftimony ; if in their very ex- iflence they lean upon the evidence of man, which they mofl certainly do, they lean alfo upon man for their meaning and elucidation. In C '7' ] In any other way all religions would be alike ; Jewifh, Popiih, Mahometan, Calvinillic, Luthe- ran, Mcthodiftical, Moravian, &c. though totally incompatible with each other. It is Reafon alone that draws the line of diftin£lion. This line is not more neceflary to be drawn between Popery and Proteftantifm, which we are continually doing, than between this and that fed among Proteftants. If Reafon has fupreme authority in the one cafe, llie indifputably has it in the other ; and if fhe has indeed none in either cafe, why then are we Proteftants ? rather, why are we not Papifts at this very moment ? — I, as well as many others, anxious for information on this important occa- fion, will be much indebted to Mr. Burgh for a folution of thefe queftions. I will venture to af- firm, that except in words, the mere flourifh of party and flippery of profeflion, when thefubjeft is honeftly ftated, there is no difference between the dodlrines of the Romifti and Anglican Churches 9 they are a fingular inftance of the whimfical figure, the Palindrome^ Suhi dura a rudibus. — They are both fungufes in the Chriftian Eden, hurried into vegetation by artificial calenture j which 82 ] Our Lord has exprefled the whole in the moft fatlsfadory manner. Be ye therefore perfe^l^ even as your Father which is in Heaven is ■perfect. Matth. V. 48. And this is life eternal^ that they might know thee the only true God -, and Jefus Chriji ivhom thou hafi fent. John xvii. 8. It would feem little to the honour of a Chriftian writer, to put together his thoughts in fuch a man- ner as equally to ferve the purpofe of Papifts as Proteftants, The dodlrine of myftery, and the in- capacitation of Reafon, are the very foundation of Popery. No wonder our author ftumbles without ceafmg, when he laid violent hands on his gene- rous guide ; facrificing her on the altar of fuper- ftition and prieftcraft. Were the fun to be dark- ened at noon-day, in what a forlorn fituation fliould mortals be ! — falling foul of one another's paths ! — dafhing their heads againft blocks and ftone-walls! — tumbling over precipices, and plun- ging into bogs and gravel-pits ! — As the fun is the material, fo Reafon is the immaterial light of the world : the fame confufion that would attend the extinftion of the one, would attend the extinc- tion of the other. Ecclesiastical hlfl-ory reprefents this truth in ftrong colours ; fufficlent, one might fuppofe, to roufe the ambition of all Chriftian<^, to acknow- ledge C iS3 ] ledge the only interpreter the Deity has upon earth, Keafon, or the Human Underftanding. Man is juftly called a rational beings to r'iftin- guifh him from the dog that barks at the moon, and the owl that hoots from the ruin : but this Gentleman, as it would appear, is apprehenfive the diftindion may be carried too far, and man may become too rational. If not, why would he reftrain the operations of Reafon in any cafe what- foever? If Revelation be not reafonable, it would be better we had no Revelation : and if Religion be not a reafonable fervice, it is worfe than no fer- vice : inanimate nature cannot offend God. Can the Supreme Being fuffer injury by being known.? — no ! — but he is treated injurioufly by not being known. — Is there any danger of rivalling God in knowledge, and of becoming gods paramount our- felves .? Our ihacklers of the Underftanding would feem to infinuate as much ; not confiderino- that all degrees whatfoever, the ken of an arch- angel, as well as of God's little creature^ Mr. Burgh (as he is difpofed to ftyle himfelf) are alike infinitely fhort of him. Yet no man is a little creature in the fight of God, but he who be- comes fo by his vices. With regard to his capa- city for intelledual attainments, his fufceptibility of increafmg moral excellence, man is the nobleft being, and beft beloved, under the angelic order. M 4 Whoever C 184 ] Whoever is not fo, makes hlmfelf not fo ; princi- pally by laying an embargo on his mind. In con- fequence of this, men become imperceptibly the dupes of deceitful inward feelings, mechanical fer- vours, and vain defultory imaginations. How true, though hyperbolical, the declaration of our Saviour ! aU things are pojjible to him that believes. That is, to him that knows God, a6ls as if he knew him, and thus becomes intitled, as the heir of promife, to all that God can do for him. AH things are your* s, for ye are Chrijl^s, and Chriji is God's. The defence of Reafon is fo inexhauftlble, fo de- lightful a fubject, that it is with difficulty I can re- ftrain my pen. In truth, it is the only fubjeft worth toil of thought, expenditure of time, or energy of language. By leaving it undetermined, nothing remains to comfort and eftablilh us in divine ethicks, but the word of the bigot, the enthufiaft, or the myftagogue. To difqualify Reafon, amid the turmoils, diftradtions, ftrifes, and animofities of modern fe(5ls and parties, is the fame ad of abandoning one's-felf, as, in a boifterous fea, where the danger of being dalhed to pieces appears in- evitable, to take our faithful needle off its axis, cut away our rudder, and lafh ourfelves to the maft, in ill-timed, cowardly defpair, — It would be doing C i85 ] doing Mr. Burgh no credit to quote many paf- fages from his chapter on, or, as it more properly ought to be ftiled, againjl Reafon. — The whole proceeds on a miftake -, that becaufe God in the abftrad is incomprehenfible, therefore, in the re- lative idea, or as connedled with us, we fhould. not attempt to comprehend him : a pofition in- congruous in itfelf, and difproved by the word of God. Should we ceafe to appropriate the relative qualities of light and air^ which are fo immediately neceffary to our exiftence and happinefs, till we could precifely tell what light is, and what air is ; I am afraid we fhould every day make a compli- ment of our lives to the firft hard body, or fuffo- cating damp, we chanced to meet. Becaufe we cannot comprehend the whole of an objeft, is that any reafon why we fhould not endeavour to com- prehend a part ? It is a reafon indeed that may pafs with the mole under ground, the martlet in its crevice •, but ought not to pafs among men, who fhould never open their eyes, but to fee farther and farther -, never exercife thought, but to know more and more. Even with regard to God, he is certainly comprehenfible by man, if we take in, as we ought to do, the future along with the prefent condition of man ; otherwife Heaven muft be a flate of ignorance, inflead of light and beatitude. Our prefent is an incipient condition of know- ledge, which is only carried on and perfedled in another C "86 ] another world -, but if not begun here, how can it be continued, how augmented in Heaven ? The whole of Mr. Burgh's fentimcnts on this fubjed, he himfelf has epitomized in the follow- ing words : " The infinite and incomprehenfible majefty of God then is an objeft beyond the li- mits of reafon i we are incapable of forming any idea of him, and confequently, from whatfoever ultimate maxims Reafon may proceed with relation to fcripture truth, fhe is debarred of any appeal to God himfelf, or to any imagination fhe may con- ceive htrfelf able to entertain of him."* Here we have two propofitions, though, 'tis plain, the author intended but one : the firft cannot be con- troverted •, the laft undoubtedly may. We fcarcely required this Gentleman's information, that infi- nite is not finite, and that incomprehenfibility cannot be comprehended, which is the amount of his firft propofition : but he would feem to require our information, that we certainly may form feme idea of him, contrary to his afTertion that " we are incapable of forming any." Surely we have the diftinft idea that he is wife, good, and power- ful, in the moft abfolute fenfe ; and notwithftand- ing we cannot comprehend the extent of his omni- fcience or his omnipotence, we have it in our power, from ocular and perfonal experience, to make a direct * Scriptural Confutation, page 23. direct appeal to God, that he is omnifcient and omnipotent. Every elevation of the eye to the material world, as well as every honeft pcrufal of the facred page, infpires us with numberltfs ideas of God ; and though, it is confefled, thcfc ideas bear no proportion to the boundlefTnefs of the ob- jeA, yet they conftitute fuch a reality, fuch a pro- cefs to authenticate themfelves, as cannot be mil- taken. I mean, by creating thofe aiFecflions, dif- pofitions, and habitudes in the foul, which, thro' the medium of adlions or moral conduft, become even demonftrable to the fenfes. The apoftle Paul's teftimony, to mention no other, is decifive in this matter: The invifible things of God from the creation of the world are clearly feen^ {being underjiood by the things that are made) even his eternal -power and godhead: fo that they are with- out exciife i becaiife when they knew God, they glori- fied him not as God. It is furprifmg Mr. Burgh overlooked this paflage, and indeed the whole chapter which contains it ; as it would have faved him much ufelefs lucubration, about certain Ima- ginary dlftindlions between an intimated and un- intlmated, a revealed and unrevealed God ; as if the immutable, all-perfedt Deity could, at any pofiible period, put on a renovation of nature. Suppofing him any thing now eflentlally, which he was not from eternity, is fuppofing him to have C i88 ] have been once like the very chaos which he fpoke inro order, without form and void-, or like the au- relia, before it hath cloathed itfelf in its velvet and down. — To admit that God, in his mode of beirg, can become what he was not always, is to admit a monftrous abfurdity indeed — that God might have created himfelf ! Tslo being can ef- fentially alter his nature, without being adequate to the exti::c5lion of it, as, likewife, to its firft cre- ation. Though we allowably fay God is felf-ex- iftent, utterly to exclude the remoteft idea of in- ftrumentality ; yet we cannot fay he made him- felf, for that would imply he had a being prior to his having it : to vary the expreflion, that he ex- ifted and did not exift at the fame timej an abfurd conclufion following abfurd premifes. With regard to the heathen world, the Apcftle Paul declares, God was known, in oppofition to Mr. Burgh, who fays he cannot be known ; and that the guilt of the Heathens was their not ading up to their knowledge ; in confequence of which they unavoidably abandoned themfelves to the moft deteftable vices. The Apoftle phrafes it, God gave them up j that is, did not interpofe mira- culoufly to prevent them. — I would afk Mr. Burgh, was it his threefold God, his dei virile idol, his in- timated, revealed fo?newhat, which the Heathens knew, but did not glorify ? The Heathens in- deed C >89 ] deed had their Trinities as well as Mr. Burgh ; but I fuppofe, he would not wifh to bring thcir's into comparifon with his. I am alfo as confident, that the Heathens the Apoftle alludes to would have been as little inclined to bring his (had it been then invented) into comparifon with their's. And with the utmoft propriety. All difcindions of the one fupreme God, other than merely rela- tive, and modal, are equally abfurd. Chrift's de- finition of his God and Father (which cannot be brought too often to the reader's remembrance) takes off every appearance of boldnefs from this affertion. God is a spirit j that is, the Father, as he is thrice named in the verfes preceding. Mr. Burgh, after Athanafius, ftiles the third Per- fon of the Trinity the Holy Spirit orGhoft: there then mufl be either two fupreme beings, each of them a Spirit, or the firft Perfon of the Trinity muft vacate himfelf, in order to become the third Perfon. Our author has his alternative, and may chufe accordingly. At this crifis of one Supreme abdicating himfelf, to become another, where fliall we look for the fecond Perfon of the Trinity ? — Whoever finds him out, m.y go and find out the Longitude, or the Philofopher's Stone. The fe- cond Perfon cannot be — A Spirit^ fuch as the Jew- ifh nation believed God to be, and Chrift wanted the woman of Samaria to believe him, unlefs the other two, the Father and Holy Ghoft, did fiift va- cate [ 190 ] cate themfelves, that is, become extindl. As the Son of God has reftri(51^^d the integral godhead, in other words, the condition of being pre-eminently A Spirit^ to the Father alone -, we cannot but be certain that, while we proteft agairift the Athana- fian idol, we obey our Saviour's command, by ivor- Jhipping God in fpirit and in truths that is, with fin- glenefs and (implicity of fentiment •, the very in- ference he draws from the premifes laid down. God is a fpirit ; and they that worjliip him^ miifi wor- JJiip him in fpirit and in truth : for the Father seek- ETH fuch to worfhip him. Modern eftablifhed wor- fhip however (which Mr. Burgh would defend) inftead of being performed in — fpirit and in truth — is one entire work of art and mechanifm, run- ning through the intricacies of language, the de- lufion of founds, and the fubtilties of a vain me- taphyfic. Churchmen met in councils, and afting within religious eftablifhments, have much to anfwer for: the common people are led aftray in the grand ar- ticle of worfhipping God, Suppofing they can bring themfelves off by their nice diflindions and artful refervations ; what fhall bring off the com- f mon people, to whom thefe are unknown ? — no- thing, but the excufe that they followed their tea- chers j an excufe which will equally avail Roman Catholics. God, no doubt, will make allowances for [ 191 ] for the ignorance, fituatlon, and long habits of the common people : but what pity can be ex- tended to thofe who impofe on their credulity and want of learning, by teaching them doflrines con- tradi<51:ory of each other, and repugnant to right reafon ? — Thefe abfurdities in the faith of modem Chriftians proceed from the notion, that Reafon ought not to judge of Revelation •, though, if it does not, all Revelations, whether of Mahomet or Jefus Chrift, are upon a par It is Reafon that points out the difference, and eftablifhcs the divi- nity of the one above the other : but if we exert not this power, why are we Chriffians, Mr. Burgh, and not Mahometans ? Our Lord all along treated the Jews as a people pofiefled of Reafon, a faculty adequate to the greateft and noblcft of all tafks, even finally to decide on himfelf and his pretenfions from the proofs laid before them. Nay, fo infinitely candid was his condud, that he would not allow them to be biafled even by the teftimony of John in his favour. / have greater witnefs than that of John: the works that I do, bear ivitnefs of me, that the Father hath fent me. And fo fupreme docs he allow Reafon to be in its judg- ment of the Jewifh and Chriflian difpenfations, Mofes at the head of the one, and He at the head of the other, that he thus expoftuiates with the Jews. Had ye believed Mofes, ye would have believed me, for he wrote of me : but if ye believe not his wri- tings^ C 192 ] tings^ how Jjiall ye believe my words ? — This is a moft extraordinary inllance of our Lord's humi- lity, always indeed a fhlning part of his charader. He does not demand fo much attention from the Jews on account of what he declares of himfelf, as he fuppofes they ought to have beftowed on the writings of Mofes \ and the only additional con- vi(5lion he profefled to excite in their minds, was in confequence of fomething foreign to hirnfelf, the works which I do ; which works he explicitly afcribes to his Father. The Father that dwelleth in me, he doth the works. I HAVE often thought it a misfortune, in our re- ligious difputes, that we fo feldom appeal toChrift, who alone has authority in his kingdom, to efta- blifh dodrincs and decide controverfies of faith. I will venture to affirm, becaufe I have materials in my hands to demonftrate it, that there has not been a fubjedl litigated in the Chriftian Church, but what may be proved or difproved from fome of his excellent difcourfes and apologues. Origi- nal Sin — Predejlination — Vicarious Puni/Iiment — In- finite Satisfaction — Imputed Right eoufnefs — Ineffici- ency of good works or perfonal virtue — The Do^rine of the Athanafian Trinity — A perpetuated lineal Priefthood — Political Religious Eftablifhments— inter alia memorabilia — are clearly and pofitively difcountenanced by the Son of God. But we have many C '93 3 many fpiritual Fathers, Mafters, and Doctors, in- ftead of the one Father, the one Mafter, and the one Rabbi. There is no profpedl of its being other- wife, till every Chriftian refolves to think for himfelf, and to believe nothing but what appears true to his Underftanding: fully convinced that if he has not his teft from thefe, he can never know truth from falfehood, unlefs he take the word of a fellow mortal, who never had better means of knowing it than himfelf If he take the final refult of Religion from his own mind, he cannot miftake, nor ever become accountable at the bar of Chrift, becaufe it is the laft teft his God has allowed him, and becaufe from it he di- reaiy appeals to God. Should he take it from the information of others, from Creed-s Cate- chifms, and ConfefTions, ratified and inforccd by human laws, or from blind veneration for ancef- tors, parents, or fuperiors ; he wilfully negledls the laft teft his Maker has given him, his own mind, and makes his appeal to man, and not to God. Agreeable to the foregoing ftatc of the argu- ment, which I hope my reader will acknowledge a juft one, ,t appears Mr. Burgh has an undoubted right to lay his own mind under whatever reftric- tions he pleafes; add a thoufand dead weight of lead to every pinion that would elevate hisReafon ^ above [ ' 194 ] above the mole-hillock or fnail's-fhell of a Creed, or a Prayer-book, as he has confefledly a right alfo to cut off a right hand, to pluck out a right eye, if he pleafes : but let him not ufe fuch liber- ties with his neighbour's mind, as to incapacitate it, confidering that, in the eye of God, he may as lawfully ufe them with his perfon. He may pro- nounce how far and no farther his own Reafon fhall go, but he has no authority to pronounce this of his neighbour's : yet the dodrine of his book implies it; and if he had wielded a fceptre at the time that he wielded his pen, what the latter had declared to be truth, the former would probably have COMMANDED to be truth. Mr. Burgh exprefTes much refped for Dr. Beat- tie's Eflay on the Nature and Immutability of Truth, by calling it manly and convincing* 1 would beg leave to recommend to Mr. Burgh a fecond rea'^ing of the Do6lor's Eflay, fuppofing he has given it a firfl-, as I have for once rhc pleafure of agree-'ng with him. Dr. Beattie's fcheme is to bring all things to firfl: principles, to make them pafs in review before the general unaffedcd fenfe of mankind ; leaving the fchools in full poflefTion of a delufive metaphyfic, depending on an artful arrangement of compofition, an unwarranted ufe of terms. The fcheme was as generous in idea, a9 * Scrip. Confut. page 2+4, InJfx, C 195 ] as it is allowed by many to be mafterly in the ex- ecution.— I have only one thing to regret, that Dr. Beattie did not extend his plan, and compre- hend Revelation as well as JPhilofophy, in his Ef- fay on the Nature and Immutability of Truth, in oppofition to Sophiftry and Scepticifm. Surely, if philofophical truth can be feated on her throne of immutability, and there Dr. Beattie has feated her in ferene dignity. Religious Truth, the truth as it is in Jefus^ would feem entitled at leail to equal elevation. Philofophical, as well as religious truth, is a Revelation from Heaven ; the firft prior to the laft, and in confequence of the one being abu- fed and corrupted, the other became neceflary. Language is equally the medium of both; with- out which we never had known either the former or the latter. To keep this medium clear and un- difturbed, therefore, would appear no Icfs necef- fary with regard to the Gofpel of Chrift, than with regard to Ethicks or Moral Philofophy. — Suppo- fing a perpetual fog, in vain fhould we elevate our telefcopes to the heavenly bodies. The fu- perb fyftem of Copernicus and Newton would be one univerfal black. In like manner if Language, the medium of communication between God and man, be not defecated from the dregs of the fchools, the rubbifh of fyftem, and the refiduum of a folemn logamachy, we fhall never know whe- ther it be Jesus Christ, the Pope of Rome, the N 2 Pope L '96 1 Pope of England, or the Pope of Scotland, that is fpeaking to us. — Dr. Beattie therefore, as it ap- pears to me, has only done half his work : if he would compleat it, let him reduce Revelation to the fame degree of perfpicuity to which he has reduced Philofophy. Let him be perfuaded, if he leaves the one obfcured and embarrafled, he can never make atonement by throwing fecondary light and evidence on the other. To eftabliih the immutability of philofophical truth, is only to keep a farthing candle fnuffed, while the Sun, the lamp of Creation, is left deeply merged in mifts and vapours. — I know he is equal to the undertaking in either cafe ; fo that if he hefifate, it muft proceed from his want of will, not of power. — My proof is at hand, and from his own pen immediately—" Revelation itfelf muft be at- tended with evidence to fatisfy confcioufnefs or common fenfe, otherwife it can never be rationally believed. By the evidence of the Gofpcl the ra« tlonal Chriftian is perfuaded that it comes from God. He acquiefces in it as truth, not becaufe it is recommended by others, but becaufe it Jati^fies his own Underjianding."* This pofition of the learned and ingenious author totally overthrows Mr. Burgh's chapter on Reafon; therefore, if Dr. Beattie's * Effay on the Nature and Immutability of Truth, &c. page 409. Edin. Edit. [ ^^1 ] Beattie*s EfTay deferves the eulogy of being— manly and convincing^ the culogift, v. ho beftowed it, certainly adled againft himfelf. With refpedl to our author's ftridlure on Mr, Hume, I believe he will neither think himfelf ag- grieved or injured by it.*' David Plume, as this Gentleman familiarly ftiles him, has had other fort of arrows fliot at h»im, than thofe from Mr. Burgh's quiver. They refounded on his armour and re- coiled: they proved, what they were not meant to prove, its temper and impenetrability. Mr. Hume, prior to the authorfhip of the Scriptural Confuter^ has been, in confequence of the orthodox licenfe of fpeech, over and over dignified with the titles of — infidel, deift, unbeliever, fceptic, atheift, &c. &c. But who, that glows with the divine ambi- tion of Philosophy, would not be all of thefe, rather than what is termed an orthodox believer. — A man who pins his underftanding to the fieeve of a fellow-mortal ! — A man who fets down no- thing in his diary of belief, but what he can nei- ther comprehend nor explain ! — that is, fees an objed: not vifible — feels an objedt not tangible — hears an objed not audible ! — A man who mif- takes the caufe for the effed, and the ihadow for N 3 the * This immortal hiftorian, and incomparable philofopher, Hncc writing this, has paid that debt which ail muft pay — the monarch, and the clowa— the i'ublime philofopher, and the groveling bigot ! C '9» ] the fubftance ! — A man who learned his Religioe by rehearfal when he was a boy, and knew not his Creed or Catechifm, but as he knew his top and his marbles, hy feeing B.nd handling ! — Than be an orthodox believer therefore, carrying his pockets ftuffed with catechetical Chriftianity, and his mind a vacuum about with him, who would not rather, with Mr. Hume, feel himfelf entitled to the implicated praife of Mr. Burgh's cenfure ? By praife foroe cenfure, and by cens'ring praife. By railing lower, and by low'ring raife. The hideous pi<5lure exhibited of the Gofpel, it) Articles and Confefllons, is more than enough to turn away every true Chriftian Philofopher from beholding it! So far from adling an offenfive part, by averting his face, he a£ls with candour and de- licacy, rather than to difguft people with thofe ftrong marks of loathing, which his countenance could not conceal. Articular and Confeflional Chriftianity force men to be unbelievers; while a fet of men in black are paid to raife the hue and cry after them, and load them with nick-names, for being fo. That Priefts (hould fet a-going, and keep up the halloOy Is nothing more furprifing than that the (ilver- fmiths long ago about the fhrine of Diana, for the fpacc [ 199 ] Tpace of two hours cried out. Great is Diana of tJie Epheftansl That Laymen however, inftead of hal- looing after their hounds, fhould adopt a cant term in a far other chace, appears to me exqui- fitely ridiculous !— I talk not of Mr. Hume as a philofopher, but as an Unbeliever ; and oppofmg him as fuch to eftablifhed fyftems of Chriftianity. I think a remark of Mr. Addifon's brings him off, if not with vidory, furely with no marks of defeat about him. " An ignorant devotee affronts the Divinity more than an Atheift : for it is better to dijbelieve a Deity entirely, than to form any notions of him, unworthy of the infinite perfedions of his nature." Before our defenders of ortho- doxy go on railing againft fceptics and fcepticifm, miftaking the language of a fcold for the lan- guage of the Gofpel -, they ought to confider with the confcioufnefs of the beam in their oivn eye, that there never would have been a fceptic in the world, had there not been a bigot firft. With true refpeft, however, for Mr Hume's acknowledged and admired talents, I think in one inftance he was to blame—his having forgot Hilarfs admi- rable rule — Non cvcditur Phiiofophis : cteditur Pi/catoriius, After fo full a difcufllon of the rights common to all Chriftian people, it remains to make a more direct [ 200 ] dlrecft attack on the Athanafian fortrefs, in which Mr. Burgh has fhut himfelf up, and no doubt, thinks himfelf fecure. Many of the redoubts being carried, it is apprehended, by fair aflault, the ge- neral fcalade fucceeds of courfe. Not to extend the metaphor, the amazing doftrine of one being three, and three being one, fhall be examined by the common fenfe of mankind, as well as the com- mon fenfe of the Bible. Revelation was defigned for the common clafies of the people, thefe in all kingdoms forming a notable majority ; but to af- fert it was defigned for their ufe, and at the fame time not accommodated to their ufe, is to afTert a contradi(5lion, and implies fuch a defedl in divine adminiftration, as would be fufficient to throw bur- lefque upon human. Were an Adt of Parliament to be fo worded, as to be unintelligible, notwith- ftanding it was meant to define and inculcate the out-lines of allegiance and general police, on the due underftanding of which, life, property, and fecurity, were made to depend, what fhould we think of our legiflators .'' — Why, that they were unworthy of their feats, and unintitled to public credit. Jefus Chrift muft not be fufFered to lie under an imputation, in confequence of which even mortals like ourfelves ought to be difmified frorr^ truft and confidence. The [ 201 ] The Saviour of mank"nd gives us this general idea of Religion, lake my yoke tifon you-, for my yoke is eafy^ and my burden is light. It may be faid, this declaration regards moral behaviour. Surely- then it regards the moil difficult part of Chriftian duty, as a regulated behaviour pre-fuppofes the conqueft of our ftrongeft paffions and propenfities. — It may be faid it refers to the cumbrous and perplexing Ritual of the Jews. Then does it re- fer to a mode of duty infinitely nice and compli- cated, to which the mod critical exadlitude of hu- man attention was fcarcely ever adequate, even with the affiftances of an occafional theocracy. — Upon the very face of it therefore, every thing is excluded from the idea Chrift has given us of his Religion, not implied in the unaffeded terms — a yoke which is eafy^ and a burden which is light. — But Chriftianity, as now taught by Adls of Par- liament, has elaborated a ta{k, which, inftead of being eajy and lights weighs down with the weight of a mill-ftone ; I mean, its docHrrinal credenda, which are as well underftood at the end of a man's life, as at any other period, that is, they are not underftood at all. Two hundred years have been labouring to explain them, but to no purpofe. Their fenfe was as well afcertained many genera- tions backward, as it is at this very moment, when Chriftians are wrangling about it — bifhop againft bifhop, and dodtor againft dodlor. Modern Chriftianity [ 202 ] Chrlftlanlty is not the Gofpel of Chrlft, (which he aflures us is eafy and light) but a yoke and a burden intolerable to be borne, and which no one would undertake to bear, but on account of the pecuniary recompence annexed ; which alike re- conciles drudgery to the clerk in office, the me- chanic to his anvil, and the ruftic to the plough. CHAP. [ 203 ] CHAP. VI. An Explanation of the following Terms, left unex- plained by Mr. Burgh ; — 'Trinity— Unity — God — Nature — Perfon — Subftance — JVorfhip, — one with ^^eq^ual with, &c. TT has already been obferved, that when an au- -*■ thor fteps forth to teach mankind with regard to any important dodlrine, he ought firft to ex- plain his terms, and let his readers know what he means by them. If he negleft this, he not only fets forward in darknefs himfelf, but leads his rea- ders into darknefs. Human knowledge depends on a few Umple firft principles, which, being rightly underftood, will render our future progrefs eafy and expeditious; In human knowledge I would reckon Revelation, as it comes to us through the medium of language, which is as truly human as any thing appertaining to man. Revelation ex- ifts in language, never could have exifted without it, and by it alone has any acceffibility to the mind. Till we firft become accurately acquainted with the language, how ftiall we become acquainted with the meaning of Revelation ? The letter is the interpreter C 204 ] interpreter of the fplrit, nor does the fpirit fpeak, in thefe our latter days, by any other. The myf- tagogue, fanatic, and enthufiaft, may tell us in- deed a different ftory, but thefe deferve that com- paffion due to people befide themjehes, not that cre- dit and confidence claimable by the grave, fedate difciple of the Lord Jefus. — Mr. Burgh, in fhort, by leaving certain favourite terms unexplained, has left his fuijjed unexplained ; m that ftate of confufion and doubt rn which the Council of Nice left it fourteen hundred years ago ; the primeval ftate of all things before the Spirit of God moved on the face of the waters. The terms I mean are, trinity — Unity — God — Nature — Perfon — Subfiance — WcrfJiip-^one with — e^ual with, &c. Now, thefe have no other meaning, in reference to the fcriptures, than in reference to any other book. If they have, it behoves Mr. Burgh, as the Lay-myfteriarch of our day, by approved and well-known documents, to inform us what that meaning is. If impotent or unwilling to fatisfy his readers in a requell fo fair, he leaves his fub- je<5t as he found it, overfpread with thick dark- nefs, and involved eternally in hypothefis. The entities, occult qualities, quiddities, quoddities, effences, and quintefiences, of Ariftotle and his difciples, are not more unintelligible, than the jargonry and caballiftic trafh of our Athanafian fchools. C 205 ] fchools. As it Is the honour of the times that the former have loft all refpedl, fo it is the oppro- brium of the times, that the latter have not been univerfally held in contempt and derifion. What- ever tingles on the ear with the hackneyed mono- tony of found, without exciting one diftindl idea in the mind — what is it ? — nothing better than the toll of a church-bell, or the dafh of a water-fall. Nay, thefe compofe the foul to tranquility and flumber, but thofe have kept the world in a fer- ment for a thoufand years ! — I fhall confider the above terms one by one, but fhall pay them no other compliment than what is due to plain Eng- lifh words in general. As language is of human conftru(5lion, nothing can confecrate one word a- bove another, but the importance of the idea con- ne9:ed with it : but if it has no idea, it fhould be treated like detached vowels or confonants written on cards to divert children. Trinity — If we confult Johnfon's DIdlionary, (which fhall be our authority throughout) we fhall find it called. The incomprehenfible union of the three Perfons in the Godhead. But here the lexi- cographer is loft in the orthodox man, for the pri- mary fignification of it is, the number three, as it comes from the Latin word trmitas. Dr. John- fon confulted Athanafius here, inftead of Ainf- worth. Juftly does he ftile it, the incomprehen- fible [ 2o6 ] /ibie union, that is, no union at all, for incompr^- henfibility is non-entity. Befide, a union incom- prehenfible is a folecifm. Every union prefup- pofes a reparation once having taken place. If we knew the parties in their disjun6live ftate, we may certainly comprehend how they became join- ed-, and if we did not know them feparately, we have no liberty to fay they ever were joined. Se- paration may end in union, but union always pre- fuppofes feparation. Thus we cannot fay a union between a man and himfelf, though we are at full liberty to fay, a union between man and wife, not- withftanding they are eflentially diftinft. The union between foul and body will not bring Dr. Johnfon off, becaufe this union is an objeft of confcioufnefs and perception, therefore, can have no analogy whatever with the hypoftatic. The Latin tongue exifted prior to the do6lrine of the Trinity, fo that it was abfurd to omit the primary fignification, and give us a mere metaphyftcal no- tion in its place. The celebrated lexicographer would feem as tenacious of fchool-conceits in the- ology, as he is of reverence for old Church ruins dnd relicks :* not confidering that the fame fort of hands which reared up epifcopal fanes in Scotland, had alfo reared up far other fanes, thofe of Pagan and Papal idolatry •, and that epifcopal archite(5ls and priefts can no more render ftone and mortar holy, • See his ingenious Travels through Scotland. [ 207 ] holy, than Pagan and Papal archite(5ls and priefts could of old. The do6lor, to be of a piece with himfelf, in the fentiment of veneration for cathe- dral remains, has not, it is to be prefumed, for- given a certain Perfonage for uttering thefe pro- phetic words, efpecially, as he was likewife the im- mediate occafion of their being fulfilled. Seefi thou thefe great buildings? —there fliall not he left one Jione upon another^ that fJiall not be thrown down. — But this by-the-bye: return we to Mr. Burgh's trinity. " The Godhead of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghofl-, is a dodlrine which I de- duce from the facred writings, and to thefe three Pcrfons I am furely at liberty to give a name that fhall at once comprehend them all, and ferve the purpofe of more expeditioufly conveying my mind on the fubjed, whenfoever I fhall fall upon it, without levity.*'* — Why not } — Thank God ! no one has authority in our happy day to reftrainMr. Burgh from either forming names or fentiments to himfelf in Religion; but it muft be only for himfelf. The fame God that has beftowed the privilege upon him, hath beftowed it on every other individual ; confequently, that fame autho- rity which allows him to exercife it for himfelf, forbids him to exercife it for another, Mr. Burgh^ if * Spiritual Confutation, page 9. L 208 3 if he chufes, may call light darknefs, and darknefs light-, heat cold, and cold heat; ftraight crooked, and crooked ftraight : but by what rule would he infift on others thus reverfing the names and na- ture of things ? Yet not one of the above ap- pears to me a more glaring abufe of fcnfe and lan- guage, than trinity in unity, and unity in trinity. If the godhead be one, it cannot be three, and if it be three, it cannot be one only. If it is argued, it may be three as well as one, and one as well as three, in a myfterious izw^t-, I may alfo argue that light is darknefs, and darknefs light, in a myfte- rious fenfe, and bring my proof accordingly. And God made two great lights : the greater light to rule the day, and the lejfer light to rule the night. Surely then, if both day and night are lit up, there can be no darknefs, or that light is darknefs, and dark- nefs is light, in a myfterious fenfe. It may be re- joined, that our fenfes determine in the one cafe, but not in the other. How fo? — Surely light and darknefs are not more diftind objedls, than the numerical diftindions of one, two, three, in what- ever fenfe you take them. As to the Deity's be- ing invifible, therefore no objedt of external de- monftration, it matters not in the prefent argu- ment ; for our own fpirits are invifible ; yet may we with the fame truth aflert, one human fpirit is not three, that we behold one human body is not three. I hope, the modern dodrine of myfteri- oufnefs C 209 3 oufnefs does not amount to the' total abolition of our fenfes. To injoin belief in any one inftance, and forbid examination into the obje6t of it, is to injoin belief in all inftances, and forbid examina- tion into the nature of every objed. If man has -a right to forbid in one cafe, he undoubtedly has it in all: fo that belief and ignorance will go hand in hand through the world, mankind believing every things or nothings juft as Myftery rings her hand-bell. " To thefe three Perfons I am furely at liberty to give a name that fhall at once comprehend them all.** — A marvellous liberty indeed! — The human fpecies, not to mention horfes, cats, and dogs, from time immemorial, have had names beftowed on them J but I believe Mr. Burgh is the firft per- fon that ever thought himfelf at liberty to bap- tize the Deity ! The authority and form of bap- tifm we know well : — by what authority or form did Mr. Burgh baptize his Maker and his God? — Surely, by the authority of Mr. Burgh, and in the name of Mr. Burgh, thus — " I baptize thee Trinity in Unity, and Unity in Trinity.'*— But another caufe of demur, altogether unfur- mountable, meets us here. What bifhop or pref- byter put his hands on Mr. Burgh*s head, faying, receive thou the Holy Ghoji? Surely, nothing (hort •f ordination and prieft's orders, could authorize O him [ 210 ] him fo become a baptizer. Befides, confeiTion has always been wont to precede baptifm, either in propria perfona, or by a fubftitute : when did the Deity make a confeffion of his faith to Mr. Burgh, ■as a qualifying act previous to the rite being per- formed ? If God did not himfelf fulfil this requi- fite (as hrcifibiltty is by no means eafily feen) who ftood his proxy or godfather ? If without either of thofe being fulfilled, Mr. Burgh performed the baptifmal office, Mr. Burgh broke through one .of the articles of the Church, and ftands explicitly loaded with t\\Qfcarcely pardonable guilt of fchifm ! 1 am fure, if ever he be pardoned, it will not be in this world. Perhaps, his jixige in another 'fhall not have his hands fo ftriftly tied up. As a bro- ther Layman I wifh him joy of the perhaps^ being myfelf fomewhat concerned in the blefled difiylla- ble-, having been long marked by the felf-entitled. orthodox, in a certain quarter, as a heretic and fchifmatic. That two Laymen, differing widely in opinion on a momentous article of religion. As far as language e'er expreft. As call is diftant from the weft ; Should both of them be fchifmatlcs and heretics—; what fhall we fay ? To laugh were want of goodnefs and of grace. And to be grave exceeds all power of face. « What C 2.1 ] *' What fliall preclude my giving a name where the Scriptures have given the fubftance ?" Here Mr. Burgh takes for granted what remains to be proved. In the beginning of his book he confi- ders a portion cfLabiifhcd, which the whole of his book taken together was deemed neceflary to efta- blifh ;. over and above the abfurdity of hunting after proofs fo^ a rnere name. Doubtlefs, if the Scriptures have given the fuhftance, the Chriftian world ought not to be difturbcd, convulfed, rent, and torn, about a paltry defignation, the afcer- talning and regil^ering of v/hich fhould rather feein fuited to a parifh" clerk, or the herald's officer, than to wife and learned men. The truth how- ever is, if the Scriptures have given any thing, they have given three substances. Three per- fons muft be three fubftances, or each muft be a fedion or part of a fubftance. Thus the great God divided into his perfonalltics, has his unity eitiier entirely deftroyed, or he becomes no more refpedable than a polypus cut into three divifions, each cut a diftinft, living reptile. Plain language muft be ufed at this time of day, to refcue com- mon fenfe and common decency from fcholaftic abufe, and orthodox violation. Subftance and per- fon muft either be fynonymoiis, or the diftinc- tions of Father, Son, and Holy Ghoft, merely ti- tular and modal. To thefe Mr. Burgh, or any other perfon, is, np doubt, at full liberty to give O 2 • whatever' whatever name he pleafes, but this name he ought to fet down in his p/cket-book for his own ufe, (if ufe it can have) not prefume to impofe it on others, who can neither fee propriety, aptitude, or decorum in the name. To me, however, it ap- pears demonftrable, that we may as well pay God fupreme adoration through the medium of a pic- ture, buft, or ftatue, as through the medium of a name or title. Whatever is not eflential to God can never be entitled to worfhip in the higheft fenfe j but if his perfonalities are efTential to him, then is he one, two, three — what ? — diftin6l con- fcious beings, fubftances or fpirits; confequently, three Gods, unlefs we deftroy the common accep- tation of language. If we throw off human dia- led, we may next throw off humanity itfelf, and herd and graze, like Nebuchadnezzar, with the beafts of the field. It is remarkable, that God, when applied to by Mofes, refrains^giving himfelf any abftrad name, and only defires Mofes to tell the Children of If- rael that — I am hath fent me unto you. Afterwards indeed he gives a more fpecial defignation of him- felf, but then it is only in his relative capacity, or in connedion with his creatures, by which alone he can ever become definable. God f aid moreover unto Mofes, thus /halt thou fay unto the children of Ifraely the Lord God of your Fathers^ the God of Abraham^ C 213 ] Abraham^ the God of Ifaac, and the God of Jacoh^ hath fent me unto you: this is my name for ever, AND THIS IS MY MEMORIAL UNTO ALL GENERA- TIONS.* Had not God's prefcience failed him in anticipating his future baptifmal appellation, we fhould have had this command, inftead of the above given to Mofes. Thus fhalt thou fay unto the Children of Ifrael^ Trinity in Unity, and Unity in Trinity, hath fent me unto you: this is my name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations. Shall we believe man rather than God ? the fchools rather than the Bible ? — Our Saviour's words come in here with infinite force and convidion. If ye believe not his (Mofes's) writings, how fJiall ye believe my zvordsF-f God him- felf has likewife folemnly told us what his name is for ever, and what his memorial is to all genera- tions. This, methinks, fhould be fufficient to fi- Jence our modern baptizers of the Deity; as if mere appendages of name and title could add dif- tindion to the Creator of the world ; the Lord of heaven and earth ; " the bleffed and only poten- tate, who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto, whom no man hath feen or can fee." Becaufe, after fuch diftindlions we, poor futile mortals, hunt and pant with ignoble ambition, we would pay God the compliment of being like ourfelves in this refped! O 2 — Upon * Ex. iii. 15. -j. John v. ij.7. [ 214 ] Upon the whole, Mr. Linclfey's objedllons to the word Trinity, independent of Luther and Calvin, as they appear to nie, are folid and conclufive, as it is none of the Scriptural names of God, confe- quently fpurious and unwarrantable. All innova- tions in Religion are fo, that lean on human au- thority, and are impofed on men's confciences as matters of belief. In Scripture it is faid, God is Light — God is Love. In right of thefe I may call my God a Duality, and worfhip him accordingly Did I endeavour to propagate the dodlrine of a Duality, and inilft upon it that all Chriftians fhould adore it as — their intimated God^ their revealed God, I fhould have as much truth on my fide, as Mr, Burgh can have in adopting and propagating the dodrine of a Trinity. Nay, my apology furpafles any this Gentleman can make for himfelf. Light and Love in their very nature, and in their moft abfolute (tn(^^ are co-eternal with God : but the fecond Person of the Trinity produced by the Father, and the third proceeding, from the Fa- ther and the Son, can never be admitted co-eternal with God •, otherwife the Father, may be confi- dered as having been produced by the Son, or having proceeded from the Son and Holy Ghoft. If the Perfons be co-eternal and co-equal with one another, notliing can be predicated of the one f 215 ] one Pcrfon, but what may be predicated of the other, without adding a pofiefTive quality or per- fection to one, which the other two muft necefia- rily want : now, wherever there fubfifts a want, an imperfedion, there infinity and fupremacy end, and a true and proper fubordination takes place. I offer this, and will undertake to defend it, as an objedion, not only to the name but the dodrine of the Trinity, impoffible to be overturned. — In another refpedt alfo, I may lay claim to an advan- tage over Mr. Burgh, v/ithout expofing myfelf to any charge of prefumptlon. Notwithftanding I prefer, without fcruple, my Duality to the Trinity of the fchools, yet I would by no means thruft it down the throat of other people's belief, or infifl- on their fubfcribing their aflent and confent to my idol. But Mr. Burgh, and other Athanafians, are not content to worfhip the Trinity at home, as their penates, their houfehold god, but they iffue cut their ordinance and decrees, that is, the Church whom they implicitly obey, does it for them, that at what time ye hear the found of the cornet, Jlute^ harp, fackbut, pfaltery, dulcimer, and all kinds of mufic, ye fall dcivn and ii-orfhip the golden image that Nebuchadnezzar the king hath fet up. The only difference between the Image of the Babylonifli monarch, fet up in the plain of Dura, and the image of modern orthodox monarchs, fet up in Rome, England, and Scotland, is, that the former O 4 was C 21^ ] was made of gold, and the latter of paper. As the materials of the one were incomparably more valuable than thofe of the other, of courfe tht pa- per image ought not to be preferred.— 'It may be worth while to compare the penalty denounced againfl: the non-worfhippers of each image. The king of Babylon's decree runs thus : Whofo falleth net down and worjhippeth^ Jhall the fame hour he cafi into the midji of a burning fiery furnace. Exadly fimilar in kind, but dreadfully greater in degree, is that of our Most Christian kings. He there- fore, that would be faved, muft thus think of the 'Trinity. That is, he who would not perifh ever- laftingly, be thruft into hell, where the worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched, muft fwallow all the abfurdities and contradidions enumerated in the Athanafian Creed, which begins with damna* tion, and ends with damnation ; notwithftanding the Gofpel of Chrift begins and ends with peace and good-will unto all men ; and notwithftanding we are pofitively commanded in Scripture, to bless AND CURSE NOT. — But what of all this ! The Tri- nity is a Parliamentary God, a Right and Moft Reverend God, a fafliionable God j and around whofe dazzling ftirine a tenth of the whole trea- sures of Chriftendom are officially diftributed a- ynong Pricfts and Levltes without number. After C 217 ] After all, why (hould not Mr. Burgh have liis Trinity, as well as antient times ? The Platonic Trinity, Ariftotelian Trinity^ Ciceronian Trinity^ Cre- teftan Trinity^ were all once in fafhion. The world itfelf has been efteemed a Trinity^ Earthy Sea, Airy with which were connected another Trinity, as re- fpe6lively prefiding in thefe, Jupiter, Neptune, Plu- to. Mankind have alfo had their threefold He- cate, that is, one Being afting in three capacities, Luna in the heavens, Diana on the earth, and Pro- ferpine in the regions below ; have had a trinity of Fates, trinity of Furies, trinity of Acherontic Judges, trinity of Gorgons, trinity of Cyclopfes, trinity of Graces, &c. Befides, the Supreme Being, with regard to the interior oeconomy of himfelf, has often been dubbed a trinity. — A trinity in right of Wifdom, Power, Goodnefs .— A trinity in right of Light, Council, Life. — A trinity in right of Bounty^ Unity, Unchangeablenefs. — A trinity in right of Love^ Underjlatiding, IVill. In ihort, we have as many trinities in unities, as there can be invented modi- fications of the perfecftions and attributes of God. Mr. Burgh, perhaps, will think me profane for placing his trinity in fuch company : But I would urge my apology, and alledge, that he himfelf has placed his trinity there. All divifions and fub- divifioris of one pure, infinite, felf-exiftent Spirit, mufl ever range on the fame fcale of veneration and refpcit, being merely human. Juvenal, in a ■"■ ■ ' fine C 2lS ] fine vein of farcartic raillery, introduces mount AtlaSy (who was alledged to bear up, the heavens on his fhoulders) complaining that he was like to fink under the burden of the new-created gods and goddefles continually admitted into the celef- tial manfions — Chriftians fhould have taken a dif- creet hint from the Ro^nan fatirift, and not ex- pofed themfelves to like banter by their apotheofn of the man Chrirc Jefus. In doing {o^ they fliould have been fufficiently kept in countenance by our Saviour himfelf, had they felt any compunction for abandoning the mythology of the antients. He in no one place whatever denominates himfelf God; but in feveral places a man, by implication, and in one pofitively. But now ye feek to kill me ^ A Man tJiat hath told you the truths "which I have heard of God. John viii. 40. — So much for the term trinity : now for the term unity,, left unex- plained by Mr. Burgh. Dr. Johnfon informs us that Unity fignifies the ftate of being one, as coming from the Latin word unit as : now, we have already found that trinity or trin'tas is the flate of being three: the quef, tion then is, how can one be three, or three be one ? — According to the plain ufe of language, they never can imply each other. Their recipro- cation is an impofiibility in the firft inftance. No given objed: can be greater or lefs than itfelf. Trinitarians C 219 ] Trinitarians therefore had no right to flep for- ward one inch on theographic ground till they had rendered this impofiibility poflible. It is of no confcqucnce what they intend as the nouns fub- ftantive to one being three, and three being one. Whether fubftance, eflence, nature, fpirit, god- head, perfon ; they are all alike. One fubftance can never be three fubftances ; one eflence three eflences; one nature three natures-, one fpirit three fpirits ; one godhead three godheads ; one perfon three perfons : neither can fubftance, efl^ence, na- ture, fpirit, godhead, conne6led with intelligence, volition, free agency, be accounted any thing till it become a perfon. — God or the Godhead can only be one perfon, becaufe as fuch he fubfifts a whole perfed principle of adion. To admit two or more whole perfedt principles of adion, is to admit two or more Gods. Athanafianifm there- fore is polytheifm, and all Athanafians idolaters. The inference neceflarily follov/sthe premifes, un- lefs the three Perfons in the Trinity are allowed to be only three modal diftinclions, charafters, or relations, which was the opinion of Dr. South, in the controverfy carried on betv/een him and Dr. Sherlock. The latter maintained, in oppofition to Dr. South, that the three Perfons were three diftind intelligent minds. But three diftindl in- telligent minds, each of them infinite, and each fupreme, are neither more nor lefs' than three Gods J C 220 ] Gods : Dr. Sherlock*s dodrine, therefore, ends in tretheifm. When God declared he was one, and his name one, Mofes delivered the declaration in common language, generally underftood, and never miftaken j had no double meaning, • becaufe he fpoke to the illiterate multitude, who were menial labourers, hewers of wood, drawers of water, and makers of brick, the loweft fervants and flaves of Pharaoh. God meant by eftablifhing his Unity to diftinguifh himfelf for ever from the gods of the nations around, the entire work of mens hands : but all metaphyseal notions of God, operating upon himfelf proceeding from himfelf begetting and being hegotten by and on himfelf^ under the equivocal doc- trine of Perfons, tend to deftroy this diftinftion, and to countcraifl the obvious intention of the Creator. Befide, it leads us into the doedal land of mythological romance, to the birth of Minerva, who, we are toli, was conceived in Jupiter's brain, and brought forth by the obftetric aid of Vulcan's hatchet. Mankind as reftlefsly lull after Idola- try now, as the Jews did in the days of Mofes : therefore, the Mofaical precept, furely, in the utmoft (implicity of the term, requires to be as ftridly inculcated in Britain now, as it was of old m the land of the Ifraelites.* All fpeculations about * It may be worth while to refiify a mifiake here, which many Chriftians have fallen into. They fuppofe that the fin againft the HQly [ 221 3 about God, that regard communications or modi- fications of his Godhead, either ferve to plunge- us into Heathenifli fables, or deteftable idolatry. God, as an unoriginated, infinite, perfedl Principle of adlion, can be but oyie : if he is admitted more than one, in any fenfe whatfoever, he may as well confift of three thoufand Perfons as three.— —So much for the term unity : now for the term God. The didlionary tells us, that God fignifies the Supreme Being. This indeed is a Ihort but com- prehenfive Holy Ghoft IS denying the Divinity of our Saviour, than which no- thing can be a greater mifapprehenfion of the text. The Jews could not pofllbly confider Jeflis Chrift as God, without a breach of the two firft commandments. The firft prohibits having any God befide Jehovah. The fecond ftriftly commands that God fliall not be wor- ftiipped under any fimllitude whatfoever. The fimilitude of a man is perhaps the moft forbidden of any. The fin agalnfl the Holy Ghoft, or Holy Spirit, is attributing the power of working miracles, the primary attiibute of God, to Satan, or Beelzebub, who is filled prince of the devils. This, no doubt, is the higheft of all poflible offences, as it amounts to un-making God. and placing an evil fpirit, capable of working miracles, in his flead, which is deflroying all religion at once, and turning Chriftianity into lying fables. Nothing but a mi- racle-work/ng power firft evinced the being of a God, and nothing could have fupported and cflablifhed Chrlflianity but this fupernatu- ral Power; therefore, if we deny the exlflence of this Power, we deny the being of a God, and the truth of Revelation. This fm caa never be pardoned (if perfifted in) till God allows himfelf to be no God, and acknowledges another equal to himfelf, or his fuperior. This would feem the fimple mcaninjof the text, v/hich indeed, after- ^'ards^.expkins itfelf. C 222 ] prehenfive definition of him. There can be but one Supreme Being, and he muft neceffarily be a Perfon, otherwife he is nothing more than a mode, accident, orquality. One,, two, three infinite, and fupremePerfons, therefore, muft be one, two, three Supreme Beings. Abfoiute fupremacy always im- plies abfolute unity. A fupreme imperium in im- perii? no one ever heard of, except in the acft of embafiy, when the deputy is authorifed to perfo- nate the principal. : No word in the Bible has been fo hackneyed by theologians and controver- tifl:s ; fo proftituted to the mean defigns of a par- ty, as EI, Elokim, 0eo^, or God. They have all along unaccountably miftaken it for a proper name; •whereas it is a mere relative title, in connedHon with pov/er, authority, dominion. The vulgar ought to be excufcd for taking it wherever it oc- curs in the Old and New Teftament, as implying the felf-exiftent Jehovah, becaufe their ignorance is their excufe ; but fliall our Clergy be excufed, who are fuppofed to have got a learned education, for adopting the term, and profeffing to believe it, in the fame fenfe with the illiterate crowd ? It appears to me, that the concealed, though not the avowed ufe of the Clergy, is to cherifh and per- petuate want of knowledge among the people ! — It may as juftly be faid of Britons, as it was of the Ifraelites long ago, My people are lofi for want of knoivledge : their Jhep herds have caufed them to ga fjlraj.'^ t 223 ] ajiray. — Let language be reftored to Its native fim- plicity and obvioufnefs, deprived of which it is an engine of tyranny and mifchief in the hands of defigning men: let a few technical terms and cant phrafes, in the mouth of orthodoxy, be bani/lied from the Gofpel of Chrift, and the Clergy fliall have no more to do than. a fct of fcholiafls, who, %t this time of day, fhould take out a patent fromGb- vernment to teach Ariftotle's quiddities and quod- dities, the whirJigigg of Des Cartes, or the conun- drums of the Hutchefonian philofophy. Vfith refped: to all — In pace feinpeterna re^iiiefcafH 1 If we confider God as a praper-^name, and de- fine him an infinite,, eternal, all-perfe^l being, ftill he-is no objeft of worfhip in right of his perfec- Vions, eternity, and infinity, but only to be con- templated fpeculatiyely. It is in confequence of his having fovereign dominion, that he is wOr- 'fhipped. Mankind never would think of vowing allegiance to a being that had no dominion over them. The term God therefore muft comprehend a right .to govern fubjeds or fervants : it can ne- ver <:kim appropriate homage- otherwife. The idea of worfhip involves a reciprocal relation be- tween the objed worfliipping and worfhipped : it is an expreflion of duty and obedience, He??ce, C 224 ] Hence, while we fay my Elohim, and my Ado- nai, my God, and my Lord, with great pro- priety, we cannot fay, my Perfedtion, my Eter- nity, my Infinity. The term God then, it appears, is only an ap- pellative, a general defignation, applicable to any clafs of beings pofTefTed of dominion, whether fpi- ritual or temporal. Legitimate dominion confti- tutes a legitimate God ; fuppofititious dominion, a fuppofititious God j and fupreme dominion the Supreme God. Examples of thefe we have both on facred and profane record. Among the Heathens, the DH majorum and DH minorum gentium^ are our exam- ple; from Jupiter their fupreme, to the fouls of their emperors, legiflators, and heroes, deified and adored as gods after their deceafe. Among the Jews alfo,, the adopted nation, befide the fupreme felf-exiftent Jehovah, we find that kings, rulers, magiftrates, and judges of the people, had the ap- pellation of Gods beftowed on them by Jehovah himfelf, as being intrufted with jurifdidion and government, the proper attribute and fymbol of Divinity. To put this matter beyond a doubt, I beg leave to lay a few fcriptural proofs before the reader. I'hon C 225 ] ^houjhalt not revile the Gods, nor curfe the ruler of thy people. Ex. xxii. 28. Godjlandeth in the con- gregation of the mighty : he judge th among the Gods. Pf. Ixxxii. I. I have faid ye ^the judges) ^r^GoDS; . and all of you are children of the Moji High. Ibid. He (Aaron) y7/<3// be to thee injiead of a mouth : and thou (Mofes) fhalt be to him infiead of God. Ex. iv. 1 6. The Lord faid unto Mofes ^ fee^ I have made thee a God unto Pharaoh •, And Aaron thy brother fhall be thy prophet. Ex. vii. i. Conformable to this idea, our Saviour declares (alluding to thefe very paflages) that the Scrip- ture calls them gods to whom the word of God came : and the Apoftle Paul tells us there ai-Q Gods many, and Lords many. It is one of the pre-eminent titles of Jehovah, often occurring in the Old Teftament, that he is God of gods, and Lord of lords : this is fuppofing both gods and lords inferior to himfelf, on account of fovereignty either real or imaginary.— Our cham- pions of orthodoxy fall into the utmoft confufion on this very plain fubjed:, as if the word God in Scripture always meant the only one true God, or felf-exiftent Jehovah ; whereas from the above title it appears, that there were many gods, and many lords, on account of fomething not e/Tential to them — their being inverted with rule or domi- P nion [ 226 ] nlon over others. To talk of the felf-exlftent God and Lord, being God and Lord of other felf-ex- iftent gods and lords, Is to talk abfurdly and un- intelligibly, which nothing can excufe ; yet Mr. Burgh perpetually falls into this blunder, when at. the tale of his fcripture pafTages he lays down his reiterated pofition that " Jefus Chrift is one with the Father God." If he would be underftood to mean, that Jefus Chrift is God by the appoint- ment of his Father, as having received from hiq;i all power In heaven and in earth, confequently one with him in will and fpiritual dominion ; no Chrif- tian would difturb his pofition, as Jefus Chrift is more emphatically God in this fenfe^ than any that ever bore the title under the Supreme and Invifi- ble Jehovah. On the contrary, if he would be underftood to mean that Jefus Chrift is one with the Father self-existent God, he muft either mean that there are two felf-exiftent Gods, or that the one felf-exiftent God, inftead of his Old Tefta- ment name Jehovah, has, in thefe our latter days, taken to himfelf the name of Jefus Chrift. His felf-exiftent nature or godhead could not poffibly have been communicated to another. Mr. Burgh' has his choice. Should he maintain the former, then does he falfify the words of Jefus Chrift, who reftridls the prerogative of Jelf-exijlence to his Fa- ther, in exclufion of himfelf and all beings what- foever. And this is eternal life that they may know thee [ 227 ] thee the only true God, and Jefus Chrijl whom thou hafi fent. John xvii. 3. In right of technical legerdemain, the " very hocus pocus of orthodoxy," it has been alledged that the Father here comprehends all the Perfona- lities of the Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy Ghoft. This is a bold effort at a dead lift, like that of the difputant, whom his antagonift had left without argument, declaring, " I tell you, Sir, that it is fo, it muft be fo, and it fhall be fo." Three in- fuperable difficulties are complicated with this ftrange fuppofitiqn. If any one of the Perfons of the Trinity reciprocally involves the other two, where is the occafion far a diftindlion of Perfons ? If one, in a fmgle inftance, comprehends the other two, why not in all ? The Creed forbids the Per- fons to be confounded; but here is a manifeft con- fufion of the Perfons, confequently the catholic faith is deftroyed, and the damnatory curfe incur- red. The two other difficulties are no lefs infu- perable. In that folemn prayer which Chrift puts up to his Father, wherein he recognizes him per- fonally as the only true God, God muft either be a different perfon from Chrift, or Chrift is all the while only praying to himfelf ; that is, as a de- pendant or fuffragan, the fecond Perfon of the Trinity is putting up a petition to the firft. The former, if admitted, overturns one of the Articles P 2 of C 228 ] of the Church of England, which declares ihat *' the godhead and manhood are joined together in one Perfon, nez'er to be divided^ whereof is one Chrift :" and the latter, if admitted, deftroys the dcdrine of a Trinity altogether, as it fuppofes a fubordination in the godhead -, that j, one of the Perfons the fupreme hearer of prayer, and the other under the necejftty of praying. Mr. Burgh may lay his finger on the alternative. We are told that God will give his holy fpirit to them that afk it. Is the fpirit of God the third Perfon of the Trinity .'' Then does every one re- ceive, who afks, the third Perfon of the Trinity. Moreover, being a man, ayd at the fame time ha- ving a portion of the godhead imparted to him, the petitioner who has his prayer anfwered, be- comes both God and man. In other words, he becomes the fame as Chrift, the fecond Perfon of the Trinity, who is ftiled God-man. How abfurd the premifes, which renders fuch a conclufion un- avoidable ! Nay, there is another abfurdity here : the third Perfon of the Trinity, by being com- municated in this way, produces thcfecond Per- fon, or the Son, though we are told the Holy Ghoft is a proceflion from the Father and the Son. How do men err, when they leave the finiple path of truth, and ftrike afidc into the wilds of fuper- ftltion and myftery ! The C 229 ] The grand miftake therefore of all trinltarians is their taking the words God and Jehovah in the fame fenfe, whereas they are as different as pofli- ble. Many are called gods in Scripture, but none but one Is ever called Jehovah. Jehovah always implies the term God, a fpiritual governor or ru- ter ; but the title God often occurs, without ne- ceflarily implying that of Jehovah, nay, in dired exclufion of it. A real angel, indeed, in the Old Teftament is ftiled Jehovah, becaufe he fpeaks in Jehovah's name, and perfonates his authority •, in which knk Chrift is called, Jehovah our righteouf- nefs^ as his angel or meflenger of falvation to man- kind : fo that Thomas's exclamation, My Lord, and My God, my Adonaiy and my Elohim^ was per- tinent and defcriptive, without confounding the abfolute and relative terms God and Lord, befidc making nonfenfe of what follows — I ajcend to my Father and your Father i to my God and your God. Other expreffions in Scripture preferve the fame idea of diftindion between God abfolutely, felf- exiftently, and God relatively, or in right in repre- fentation. '^he Lord rained upon Sodom and Go- morrah^ hrimftone and fire from the Lord out of hea- ven. Gen. XXX. 24. 1'he Lord faid unto my Lord, fit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footfiool. Pf. ex. I. Worjhip him allyeGods. Idem xcvii. 7. The Lord your God, is God of Gods, and Lord of Lords. Deut. x. 7. p 3 In C 230 3 In thefe pafTages, it is plain, the fenfe refers not to felf-exiftence, but to ru'e and fovereignty alone. And Jacob njowed a vow, frying, if Ccd (Jehovah) will be with me, and will keep me in this way that I go, and will give me bread to eat and raiment to put on-, fo that I come to my bather* s houfe in peace, then Jhall the Lord (Jehovah) be my God (or Elohim) Gen. xxviii. 20, 21. That is, Jehovah (hall be my ruler or governor. So far from the word God being peculiar to any of the Perfons conftituting the Trinity, or Jehovah himfelf, that it is even be- llowed on the Heathen idols. Wilt not thou pojfefs that Chemoch thy God giveth thee to pojfefs ? fo whom- foever the Lord our God (Jehovah our Elohim j fliall drive out from befort us, them will we pojfefs. Judg. XI. 24. In another place it is faid. He that facri- ficeth unto any God (Elohim) fave unto the Lord (Jehovah; only-, he fhall he utterly deflroyed. In fine, to fhew that dominion, whether real or affu- med, is alone fufficient to confer the title of God, we find the Apoftle Paul perfonifying the love of this world and calling it God. In whom the God of this world hath blinded the minds of them that be- lieve not. Elfewhere defcribing certain reprobate Chriftians, he concludes, whofe God is their belly. — Nothing farther need be added to make it obvi- ous to the intelligent reader, that the winding up of Mr. Burgh's Scripture proofs, is altogether ar- bitrary and inconclufive; and that he has been led aftrav C 231 ] aftray by taking advantage of a loofe, ambiguous term. Chiift being one with the Father God, muft either mean that the Father and the Son are two fupreme felf-exiftent Gods, or that the latter has only the title of God, on account of his being the prophet, mefTenger, or mefliah of God Jehovah. To fay that the felf-exiftent Jehovah is one with himfelf, Jehovah, is to hallucinate and trifle. — So much for the term God: now for the term Nature-, which, together with the other terms, fhall be re- ferved for another chapter. P 4 CHAP, [ 232 ] CHAP. VII. ^he remaining terms^ Nature — Perfon — Suhftance-^ Worjhip — one with — equal with, explained \-^~^ whereby it will appear how unhappy Mr. Burgh has been in his f crip tural pojitions. Tr\R. Johnfon's firfl explanation, of the word •*"^ Nature is, an imaginary being, fuppofed to prefide over the material and animal world. His fecond this, " the native ftate or properties of any- thing.*' Now, theologians muft neceflarily, as well as univerfally underftand it in one or other of thefe fenfes. I take it for granted they will with one voice explode the iirft explanation, when ap- plied to God, and confequently will adopt the laft. When they talk of the divine nature, they muft mean, if they know what they mean, the native ftate or properties of the Divine Being, for we cannot fay the ftate or properties of a thing either wills or chufes. Farther, man partakes of the native ftate or properties of the divine nature, as conflfting of an immaterial, invifible, indiviflble, immortal fpirit, and as being a free agent, willing and chuftng for himfelfj but we cannot, in the ab- folute C 233 ] folute meaning of the word, call man God, though we may in the relative, as having independent do- minion over his ratiocinative pov;ers, motives, and deliberations, as well as, in many cafes, over thofe of others, in the aft of magiftracy and govern- ment. In the above particulars, likevvife, God may be faid to partake of the native ftate and pro- perties of man ; but who on this account would call the Supreme Being man ? Our Athanafian clprgy, indeed, do fo, and Mr. Burgh attempts to defend them. In what manner ? — by the abufe of language j never taking time to confider, that by the fame adl of power the felf-exlftent Jehovah becomes man, or a/Tumes the nature of man, he may caufe to be efFeded, that man fhall become the felf-exiftent Jehovah. The abfurdity is not greater than finite fhould become infinite, that that infinite fhould become finite. Moreover, as the corporeal nature of Jefus Chrifl (having been born of a woman, and fubjedl to the ufual wants and infirmities of the flefh, excepting fin, from which he was preferved by having the fpirit given him without meafure by his Father) was in no way different from that of other men ; if God could io aflimilate himfelf with the human nature of Jefus Chrifl, as to become one perfon, he may afi^ed the fame afiimilation with every man, in confequence of which we fhould have as many perfons in the godhead as there have been men in the world : a fingular C 234 ] a fingukr but unavoidable fpecies of pantheifm, refulting from Athanafian principles. Mr. Burgh will, no doubt, be ready to reply, that the conjundion of the infinite godhead with the finite nature of the man Jefus, took place after a manner totally incomprehenfible and inexplicable by fuch little creatures as we are. But the queftion relates not to the manner^ but the matter of faSl it- fclf. Mr. Burgh aflerts, by authority of a Creed, unknown to the fpirit of the Gofpel, that it is foj and I have as good a right to aflert, if it is really fo in one inftance, it may be fo in a thoufand. To limit God in any cafe whatfoevcr, is to limit him in every cafe. What is poflible for God to do at any time, is never impoffible for him to do; and what is impoflible for God to do at all times, can at no given time become pofiible. — The dedudion is plain : The nature of God is the attributes, per* fedions, faculties, properties, qualities, inclina- tions, difpofitions, or affe6lions of God. Thefe in the aggregate conftitute that being or perfon we call fuprenie and felf-exijient. None but one can be that being or perfon, becaufe none but one can be fupreme and felf-exiftent. Moreover, being and perfon, when applied to God, are fynonymous. Being, without perfonality, is only a mode or qua- lity. Many beings or perfons may participate of the divine nature, in certain degrees and propor- tions, [ 235 J tions, as angels and all virtuous and good men undoubtedly do, and thus be called fons of God and children of the Higheft, than which our Lord never took upon him an higher title-, but no being or perfon, except one^ can appropriate the whole of the divine nature to himfelf. To fay, as Mr. Burgh all along wifhes it to be underftood, that God became man, or that the manhood was taken into the Godhead, fo as to make one felf-exiftent intelligent agent, is faying, in fadl:, that Jehovah, the Lord God Almighty, can be greater as well as lefs than himfelf. "This monftrous abfurdity muft either be ingurgitated down the throat of orthodoxy, or we will be under the neceffity of granting, that the conjunftion and reciprocation of the divine and human natures between the J^'a- ther and the Son, are onlv modal, relative, official, or ceconomical. In this fenfe, refpedling the an- tient prophets or men of God, a3 well as the dif- ciples and apoftles of our Lord, the divine and human natures may be faid to have been conjoined and reciprocated. Nothing can have a whole na- ture fuperadded to its own whole nature without difcontinuing to be what it was, or becoming ano- ther thing. To vary the expreflion : if it has two whole and perfect natures, it is no longer one be- ing or perfon, but two beings or perfons, elfe a fuperfetation, a monfter, like two heads to one body, or two bodies to one head. This [ 236 ] This fundamental miftake confounds and per- plexes Mr. Burgh throughout his v;hole book, and is the fource of all his ftrange inferences and de- dudlions. He finds Jefus Chrift mentioned in the New Teftament under very high titles, charaders, relations, and capacities, many of them peculiar to God, as being a prophet and teacher fent from Go:^, diftinguifhed from all others that had ever been fent before •, therefore he muft needs confi- der him as the very and eternal Jehovah ; not re- fleiling that he afcribes all to the love, affedlion, and liberality of his God and Father, and acknow- ledges them all to have been given him, and con- ferred upon him. All things are DtLiVERED UNTO ME OF MY Father. Matth. xi. 27, This includes every thing that has been faid of him, how great or lofty foever, whether in the Old or New Teftament. It does not fay, delivered to me of God, but delivered to me of my Father; ' which at once deftroys the equality of perfons, as the fovereign prerogative of giving is reftri6led to the perfon of the Father, as he is immediately be- fore intitled. Lord of heaven and earth ; that is, abfolute fupreme Lord, for Chrift folemnly thanks him as fuch. Joh^n likewife fays, 'The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into his HAND. ch. iii. ^K. An expreflion of our Lord's is fimilar to thefe, and limits fupreme agency to the [ 237 ] the Father alone. 'The words that I /peak unto you^ I /peak not of myfelf: the Father, that dwelleth in me. He doth the works. John xlv. lo. Now the itn(t. here muft either be, that Chrift confidered hlmfelf as a deputed being, the mefienger of God, or that the firft perfon of the trinity dwelt in the other two perfons and perfdVmed their works ; in confequence of which, one perfon, the perfon of the Father, either became three perfons, or the firft perfon of the trinity rendered the other two unneceflary. — Upon the whole, Jefus Chrift par- took of the divine nature as far as it was pofliblc for finite to become infinite ; but all degrees be- low God are infinite, therefore Jefus Chrift, in his higheft ftate of exaltation and glory, muft be con- fidered as infinitely fubordinate to the Almighty Father, according to his own words. / can of mine ownfelf do nothing. I of mine own felf—tht ftrongeft expreffion imaginable of total identity, or integral nature. If we have any mental doubt here, we cannot avoid having it likewife when the fame Perfonage declares, Jll things are delivered unto me of my Father. Nay, the term here is not fo forci- ble, being fimply me-, whereas in the other we find it triplicated, I mine own f elf . — A part of a per- fon's nature, except by a figure of fpeech, cannot be called the perfon himfelfj neither can the total of one intelligent nature conftitute more than the total of one intelligent perfon. A body and a li- C 238 ] ving principle conftltute man : but not a body feparately, or a living principle feparately. Self- exiftence, v.'ith ail poffible perfe61:ions, in an infinite degree, conftitute that being we call God, but not any one of his perfedlions taken feparately. Om- nipotence is part of the divine nature; but we can- not call omnipotence, y>/)^r^//;;?, God: if we could, then fhould we have as many Gods as there are attributes in the divine nature. By the fame un- deceiving analogy, we fay, Jefus Chrift was in the form of God, the brightnefs of his Father's glory, and the cxprefs image of his per f on \ that in him dweUeth all the fulnefs of the Godhead bodily ; that he is Je- hovah our right eoufnefs, and Emmanuel God with us : but we cannot fay, Jefus Chrift is the one only felf-exiftent God, becaufe we fhould then be au- thorized to fay, that God was in the form of him- felf ; the brightnefs of his ciim glory, the exprefs image of his oijun perfon ; that in God dwelleth all the fulnefs of the Godhead bodily ; that God acquired an addition to himfelf by being called Jehovah our righteoufnefs, and Emmanuel, God with us-, though his peculiar name had always been Jehovah, and he never could have been any thing elfe effentially than God with us, that is, ubi- quious and omniprefent. This procefs may be carried on v;ith reference to all the grand titles, characters, and defignations of Chrift in the Scrip- tures. They are all introduced as coming from another. C 239 3 another, being beftowed, having a beginning; which fuppofe a time when they were not, confe- quently muft be impotent to prove him the felf- exiftcnt Jehovah. To a/Tert therefore that the divine nature is parcelled out to the three perfons in the Trinity, or is equally poflefled by all the three, which is modern orthodoxy, has either the fame meaning as to affert that human nature was parcelled out to Paul, ApoUos, and Cephas, three diftinft men ; or elfe that one perfon, that of the Father, was not fufficient to contain the whole of the divine nature. Perfonal infufficiency, how- ever, is imperfedion j imperfedtion incompatible with the Deity ; of courfe, if we credit creeds and catechifms, the Father is not God. — To fuch di- lemmas are we reduced by quibbling and blun- dering about nature and perfon ! — So much for the term nature : now, for the term pcrfcn. The diredlory of cur language gives us feveral iignifications of Perfon, viz. An individual, or particular man or woman. A general loofe term for a human being. Exterior appearance, charac- ter j charader of office. The quality, ftate, or condition, whereby a man diiTers from a brute, or one ma!i from another. A falfe face, vizard, or mafk, a difgulfe, an a6lor. Thefe are the com- mon acceptations of the word in ufe. None of them, I am certain, will anfwer the purpofe of the orthodox; C 240 ] orthodox ; for if they be applied to the Trinity, they either make the three perfons, three felf-ex- iftent agents, fpirits, or gods, or three official modes, or charadleriftic diftindlions only. Similar to thefe were the three offices fuftalned by Cicero. Sujiino unus tres perfonas : meam^ adverfarii jiidicis. What is to be done in this cafe ? Why, a modern catholic fpirit is never at a lofs. Perfon, when applied to the Trinity, muft be ufed in a myftical, ineffable fenfe. But if it be fo myfterious that no words can be found to explain it, why was it cho- fen at all ? what was the authority for chufing it ? — Anfwers to thefe queftlons are ready. — It was chofen on account of its myfterioufnefs and inex- plicability. In confequence of whatever explana- tion It had received, we fhould have had God, who is one Lord, reduced to a figure of fpeech -, or have had one, two, three Gods, in oppofitlon to the one God, the Father, the only true God. Two celebrated leaders evinced this in a controverfy that not only divided them, but the whole An- glican Church : I mean the dodlors South and Sherlock. The former makes the three perfons three internal capacities or relations of the Deity to himfclf •, which Is at once Socinianlfm and Sa- bellianirm, every man being a trinity in this fenfe, as confiftlng of paver, underjiandijig, and 'will. The latter ridicules this notion, as herefy and nonfenfe, and fays that " the Father, Son, and Holy Ghoft are f 241 3 are as really diftind: perfons, as Peter, James, and John.* This, again, is diredl tretheifm, and was accordingly condemned [anno 1695) by the uni- verfity of Oxford, " as falfe, impious, and here- tical."-f The above was occafioned by introdu- cing a term unknown and undefined; a term which we of the prefent age have as good a right to re- je£f, as any fct of men formerly to impofs it -, a term which mufi be reje6^ed, if we v/ould either un- derftand ourfelves, or make others underftand us. The theographical parentage of the term perfon IS fomewhat curious. The Grecian fathers made the Trinity to confift of, mia oujia, one effence, and treis hypofiafeis^ three fubftances. The Latins tranf- plantcd the terms into their language, tranflating them, una ejfentia^ et tres fiihjlantia ; but in procefs of time, having fagacity enough to find out that they might as well fay, una fubjiantia^ et tres ejfen- tia^ as una ejfentia^ et tres fuhfiantide^ they intro- duced the notable emendation, una fuhfiantia^ et tres PERSONS. They might as intelligibly have faid, una perfona^ et tres fubftanti^. The word perfon is either nothing at all eflentially, or it muft imply a total principle of aftion. If a total principle of adion, then is it a whole fubftance, Q^ confe- * Sherlock's Vindication of the Doflrine of the Bleflcd Trinity, •?age 105. t Unit. Traa. Vol.' iv. 5. C ^42 J confequently, as- nothing can be greater than the whole, perfon and fubftance are convertible terms; three perfons are three fubftances, and three fub- ftances are three perfons. It muft be owned, how- ever, as perfon is a fort of ambodexteral term, Signifying both the character abftrafted from the agent, and the agent abftrafted from the charac- ter, modern controverfialiils, on the fide of ortho- doxy, have found their advantage in it. Eripitur perfona, manet res : ^ripitur res, manei perfona. If they are hard preffed with the abfurdity, of three intelligent agents in one, or three divine minds in one, they have recourfe to the term perfons or chara6lers, fujlineat unus tres perfonas. When the abfurdity altogether as great flares them in the face, of hereby reducing the Deity to three modi- fications or faculties, they recur to the three co- effentialities or confubftantialities : like the wea- ther-cock circumverting on its fpire, if the north wind blov>/s, it looks fouth— -and if the fouth wind blows, it looks north. In fhort, we may as well fix the winds and the weathercock to a particular point, as fix any writer on the Trinity to a parti- cular fenfe or meaning. Thro' ev'ry Proteuan form and fhape he ihifts. The oyfter moves not tho' its fhcll it lifts. But C 243 ] But terms cannot alter things; nor can fafKion- able variations in cant and phrafe, even in the mouths or from the pens of clergymen, alter thought and fentiment. Let fchool-men adopt what favourite technicifms they pleafe, and have them ftamped with Parliamentary currency, whe- ther eflences, fubftances, or perfons, ftill God is but one •, he cannot be more than himfelf, and to be lefs is likewife impoilible. To fay that God is eflentially and felf-exiftently both Father, and Son, is to fay that God is both father to himfelf, and fon of himfelf ; after which, any thing or every thing may be faid. To fay that Chrift is very God and very man, God of the fubftance of the father, and man of the fubftance of his mother, is to fay that the fubftance of God and that of a woman are the fame fort of fubftance, aiid may be kneaded and aflimilated together like dough or pafte. Tranfubftantiation or the real prefence, that is, the very and eternal and immutable God, converted into flour and water, is not a more monftrous dodtrine 1 One difference indeed there is. Proteftants but fwallovv the firft down their orthodox throats, whereas Papifts are obliged to fwallow the laft down their real throats. In truth, both were incorporated in one common kneading trough, the fchool of the Platonifts, or of the Pa- pifts. Thefe began that apoftacy in the Chriftian Church, which not only deftroyed the Unity of 0^2 God, C ^44 ] God, but the Unity of foclety, and which, at this unfortunate day, is cherifhed and fupported even among the protefling Tons of Reformation ! — The Popifh Eucharift, or the amalgamation of flour and water with the godhead, is a great myftery, and muft not be enquired into : the conjunction and union of the infinite Jehovah with the flefh and blood of the man Jefus, is likewife a myftery, argues Mr. Burgh, which reafon cannot and Ihould not attempt to comprehend : frgo, it follows as fure as a fhadow the fubftance, feeing both are myfteries, and not to be comprehended or en- quired into, that both may be either true or falfe for any thing we can fay to the contrary. Pa- pifts aflert, their myftery is true : Proteftants that their^s only is fo. — As men uninfpired, Papifts and Proteftants are intitled to equal credit; fo that the dodrines of the Trinity and of Tranfub- ftantiation reft entirely on the point of perfonal honour between a Papift and a Proteftant ; in plain Englifli, reft on the proof, which of the two is not the liar ? Unfortunately alfo for clergymen, by comparing the doflrines, we doubtlefs enquire into the dodrines, and therefore confefs them to be no longer myfteries. Common Senfe, as well as common Honefty% Can fee no difference between the union of God and bread, and the union of God and flefti. Flefti originates C 245 ] originates by accretion from bread •, and Turely bread has not more materiality in it than flefn, nor is more particularly Implied in the prohibition of the fecond commandment. Confonant with this, one Apoftle faith, Ai.h fleJJi is grafs : and another, flejii and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of heaven. In every view of the fubjei5t therefore, the Incar- nation OF God would feem no lefs imploufly ab- furd and ridiculous, than the Impanation of God. Nay, the Scripture proofs are Incomparably flronger for the lafl than the firft. I have often been aftonlflied how Proteftant divines could give up the doctrine of God made bread, and yet retain the dodrine of God made Jie/h. No language can poffibly exceed what follows in literal energy. / dm the living bread which came dozvn from heaven : if any man eat of this bread, he fJiall live for ever: md the bread that I will give, is my flefli, which I will give for the life of the world. Except ye eat the flefh of the Son of m.an, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you : whofo eateth my flefJi and drinketh my blood hath eternal life, and I will raife him up at the laft day : for my fiefli is meat indeed, and my blood is ^rink indeed. He that eateth my fiefli, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him. T'his is that bread which came down from heaven : not as your fa- thers did eat manna, and are dead : he that eateth of this bread Jliall live for ever. John vi. 5 1 . ^/ infra. — Q^ o What C 246 3 What arc all the exprefTions of the New Tcfta- ment put together, which are ufually alledged to contain the doc5lrine of God becoming man, or pafling through the womb of a woman, but trifles in comparifon with this continued animation of the hyperbole ? Why fhould the one be confi- dered as a figure of fpeech, and not the other? In the flridl literal fenfe they are both equally im- poflible : and in the metaphorical, both equally true. Why then fhould the one be condemned and repudiated by Proteftants, and the other che- rifhed and idolized ? The reafon is at hand. By feparating the two natures in Chrift, and confider- ing them as diftinft, we fhould have had a quater- nity inflead of a trinity of perfons in the Deity : our egregious god-makers fuppofe the natures everlaflingly confolidated, fo to the conjundion they have affigned but one perfonality. Indeed, if the fubflance of God and the fub- flance of man could become one in the fame way that a body and foul become one human indivi- dual, we fhould allow them the unity of nature and of perfon, with refpeft to the Lord Jefus : but as the whole of the divine could never be joined to the human nature, without eternity be- ginning to be, and ubiquity becoming local, or the one nature vacating itfelf in order to become the other j fo Chrifl mufl either be confidered as a fpiritual C 247 ] a fpiritual agent once inhabiting a human body, or that he was really two diftinft perfons, inaf- much as the whole of the divine nature is cer- tainly a perfon, and the whole of the human na- ture a perfon likewife. Nothing but the old plea of myftery can bring ofr the orthodox with drums beating and colours flying — a plea that ferves orthodox Papifts, as well as orthodox Pro- teftants. It brings to my thoughts a noted ex- preffion of Dr. South's, with regard to our Savi- our's defcent into hell, " Were it not to be adored as a myjiery^ it would be exploded as a contradic- tion.***— So much for the term perfon : now for the term fubjlance. Dr. Johnfon affords us fome good definitions of the word Subftance. " Being ; fomething ex- ifting J fomething of which we can fay that it is. That which fupports accidents. Something real, not imaginary; fomething folid, not empty." — Now, by applying fubilance to the Deity, and at the fame time fuperadding felf-exiftence and infinity, we fhall certainly find, when we find the bottom of our thoughts, that it cannot be fhared or imparted without admitting two of the grofleft fuppofitions imaginable, either that God's abfolute attributes, felf-exiftence and infinity, may be fhared and imparted, or that the fubftance of the Gcd- 0^4 ■ head * .Jouth's Sermons, vol. TIT. page 316. [ 24S 3 head may be divided into diftind portions or Tec- tions. The concluiion mud follow the premifes, till language Ihall be laid afide, and myftical fuf- tian be ufed in its ftead. — We know very well that man is both a (imple and a compound fubftance ; iimple in his aggre ate nature, as he appears to ■will and adl to thofe around him; and compound, as confifting of a foul and a body, each of which is diftindl. We do not fay, becaufe we fhould be afhamed of the abfurdity, that a man's fpirit is confubftantial with itfelf, or that one man's fpirit is of the fame fubftance with another man's fpirit; yet notwithftanding we hefitate to talk in this way refpedling man, we neither blufh nor tremble when we talk of the great and eternal Jehovah in like manner! If the Son be con-fubftantial with the Father, that is, of one and the fame fubftance, he muft be a mere nominal Son, and the Father a mere nominal Father, for eternal felf-fubfifting Deity could not be imparted or fhared ; and as to the third Perfon of the Trinity, proceeding from the Father and the Son, he muft be a proceiTion from himfclf, or the Father and the Son muft have fuftained, in producing him, a feparation and lofs of fubftance. But it is utterly impoftible that the fubftance of the Deity could either admit of fepa- ration or lofs, fo as to conftitute three diftindl, perfec% intelligent agents : therefore, no offices, charaders, or appropriations, can be afcribed to one C 249 1 •ne co-partner of the Trinity, more than to ano- ther; confequently the Son is the Father, the Fa- ther the Son, and the Holy Ghoft both Father and Son ! ! ! The Creed affirms this, " Such as the Father is, fuch is the Son : and fuch is the Holy Ghoft."* So that when the Scripture Tays, the God and Fa- ther of our Lord Jefus Chrift, we with the trini- tarian phalanx at our back may fay, the Lord Je- fus Chrift, God and Father of himfclf, or the God and Father of God: and whereas, Jefus Chrift returns thanks to the Father as the only true God j we may return thanks to the Son, as the only true God. — More need not be faid with regard to Subftance, as every thing mentioned relative to the word Perfon applies to it, and as the phrafe^ ology, three perfons in the godhead, by the faga- city of poft-apoftolic times, was fubftituted in the place of three fubftances. — WorJJiip comes next under conftderation, "We are inftru£led by the diflionary in the true meaning of the term Worfhip, and that it not only implies " adoration or religious ads of reverence,'* but alfo in general, " honour, refped, civil defe- rence." Confequently, a mere relative, accommo- dable term, having had man occafionally for its ©bjeft, as well as God. AU fuch paflages in Holy- Writ, [ 250 ] Writ, as mention worfhip paid to Chrift, may cafily be explained' on true Christian principles, without the extravagant fuppofition of Chrift be- ing the fupreme felf-exiftent God j the fuppofition of Mr. Burgh, of our Subfcribing clergy, and of Athanafians in general. For inftance, where the angels are commanded to worfhip him : where the man that had been blind wor/Iiips him in the Gofpel : and where the difciples are faid to ivcr/Iiip him, upon his vanifh- ing out of their fight. To fuppofe that the an- gels of heaven required a command to worfhip God, whom they had never for a moment ceafed worfhipping, or that the great Jehovah could at any imaginable time acquire an additional right and privilege to be worjfhipped, is too wild and indecent a pofition to merit a fober hearing. Farther, the command comes from God.— What — to have himfelf worfhipped? — ridiculous! — This would have been acknowledging he never had been worfhipped before. Indeed, on account of fome diftinguifhed manifeflation of his glory, or declaration of his good will to mankind, new afcriptions of praife and thankfgiving are eafily fup- pofable; but then he is the fame God both before and after thefe : no difpenfation effected by him, v.'hoever were the inflruments, could pofTibly ren- der C 25' ] der him more or lefs God than he always had been : his abfolute immenfity, fuprcmacy, and felf-exiftence, throw extreme contempt and bur- lefque on fuch notions ! Yet, undoubtedly, it is involved in the belief of trinitarians, that he had, by a fort of hypoftatic accretion, fomething added to himfelf, by the a6l of filiation, and the procef- fion of the Floly Ghoft. Either this muft be the cafe, or the unutterable Jehovah, at the crifis of the Incarnation, became only more nominally fig- nificant, more titularly honourable; as princes and grandees grow greater and mightier, in confe* quence of new acceflions of name and title. Worship is an exprefTion of honour, refpecft, duty, deference, and veneration to a fuperior, ge- nerally accompanied with outward figns and gefti- cular movem.ent : the nature of it therefore muft differ according to the objedl. The fame word, tranflated worfhip in feme places, in others is tranflated honour ; fo that they ought to be con- fidered as fynonymous terms. Supreme honour or worfhip is alone due to the Supreme, our Cre- ator, Father, God, and Lord, in the higheft fenfe, ^hcu JJialt wor/kip no other God : for tJie Lord, ivhofi name is jealous, is a jealous God, Ex. xxxiv. 14. Subordinate worfhip, however, has been al- lowed to various beings, agreeable to their ranlc is C 252 3 in creation, fociety, and government. Indeed, It could not have been with-held from them, without defrauding them of their right and property. — Power, wifdom, goodnefs, and dominion, in the fupcrlatlve degree, render God the ohjed of our worfhip : and in proportion to the mcafure of thefe pofleffed by orders of intelligence fubordi- nate to him, in proportion ought we to worfhip them, that is, to pay them obeifance and honour. All power, wifdom, goodnefs, and dominion, arc derived from God : God is therefore ultimately honoured by and through every declaration of re^ verence made to beings poiTeffing th&fe.- <■ In the latter cafe, the mode often becomes In- temperate and faulty, degenerating into flattery and falfehood : nor does It lefs frequently happen in the former, by degenerating into fulfome fu- perftition, enthufiafm, and fuper-fervlce. There is a fimplicity, a chaftity, a purity, a graceful dif- fidence, and dignified referve. In worfhip, beyond Vi^hirh \vc miftake the objefl, as well as ourfelves. Both with regard to divine and human excellence, our expreffion ought not to exceed our fenfibility; cur external figns, the genuine emotion of our hearts. If they do, we are guilty of decepti-orv towards ourfi-lves, as well as towards the objeft. l» C 253 ] In truth, (o arbitrary is the term Worfhip, that there is fcarcely one epithet of diftindion, one form of honour and veneration, but what we find, in fomc part of the world, expended on mortal men like ourfelves, fo far from being folely ap- propriated to the Deity. Moft Sacred ! Moft Excellent! Moft High! Moft Mighty! Moft Se- rene I Moft Sublime ! Moft Worftiipful ! Moft: Holy ! Moft Reverend ! Thefe are fome of the many glorious titles that form the etiquette of ci- vil worftiip. With thefe alfo are connefted the moft humble and debafing poftureS ; proftration; covering the face j refting on one knee, or on both ; inflexion of the knee ; bowing profoundly with the head, or bending forward with one half of the body. These, it is plain, in the firft inftance, only be- long to the Majefty of Heaven, the Father of Spi- rits, and the God and Father of our Lord Jefus Chrift. He is only Moft Sacred! Moft High! Moft Mighty ! Moft Worftiipful ! Moft Holy ! Moft Reverend! Moft Excellent! &c.— Without doubt, in the indifcriminate ufe of thefe high de- fignations to God and man, we cannot but be ftruck with the extreme audacity and prefumption of the latter, in giving them to one another: thofe giving them, who perverted the decency of language by ihe gift, and thofe receiving them who, hereby, inftead C 254 '] Inftead of referving them as the hallowed and un- alienable appropriation of the Deity, abandoned the idea of their nature, poor and miferable, and blind and naked ! The chaftity and plainnefs of antient times, efpecially among the Hebrews, in this refped, form a contraft with modern very re- markable. In proportion as ihefe excel ihofe, in polifli and refinement, in proportion they fall be- hind them in truth and fentiment. Civil gover- nors and kings, among the Jews, had no higher title than My Lord, My Lord the king, or the Lord's anointed: and fpiritual rulers were content with being called, men of God, meflengers of God, and fervants of God.* However, the difference is eafily accounted for. Kin^s and Priefts, in the Jewifli theocracy, were appointed by God , himfelf j whereas kings and priefts * Among the fins of modern nations, next to the higher fpecies of idolatrj", worfhipping God in the fonn of a man, bread and wine, Src. &c. I would reckon tlic application of di-vine titles (fuch as thofe enumerated) to thofe of our oivn fpecies, and, refpefling magif- tratical dignity, of our o^vii creation, to be not the leaft confiderable. With regard to Great-Britain, on thefe accounts chiefly, Ihe feeni* to be puniflied in a moft awful manner, by the difmemberment of her empire, and the threatened diflblution of her greatnefs as a ftate. Her bifliops, in particular, who patronize both ff>ecies of idolatry, ought to refledl with mortification, that with the deftruftion or diminution of the civil power, their order muft fall of courfe, never to be again revived. America will ever regard // as the deadly foe of liberty, and genuine Chnftianity. I 255 1 prlefts in all nations now fublifting, are appointed by themfelves, or by the people. Whatever man beftows, is calculated to catch the eye of man, and tingle on the mechanifm of his ear. Nor does the mere multiplying names of refpecn the unaf- fedled term the word, in the exordium of St. John's Gofpel, they could not let pafs without perfonify- ing it, and pronouncing it God. In the Greek it has only the energy of a neutral pronoun j but our latter Iranjlalions have exalted it to the perfonal nouns he and him. Latter translations, I fay, be- caufe the tranflation of the New Teftament autho- rized by Edward VI. has the paflage as follows : In the beginning was the zvord, and the word was with God, and God was the word — all things were made by vv, and without rr was made 710 thing that was made. This undoubtedly refers to the Mo- faic Creation, when we are told, God /aid, let there be light, and there was light: i. e. God by his word commanded light out of darknefs. 0 Xoyog might have [ 286 ] have been rendered into Engllfh, the fpeech, as well as the word. Neither the one nor the other implies any thing clfe than the vehicle or utter- ance of a comniand : i'o that the fword of the Lord, the eye of the Lord, the finger of God, all fcriptural metaphors denoting the omnipotence and omnifcience of God, might with as true a li- cenfe have been tranflated he and him, as o Xoyog the word. " The word was made fiefh," — figni- . lies no more than that the fecond Revelation (the Chriftian) was communicated by the man Chrifl Jefus, who was born among men, lived among men, fuffered, died, and rofe from the grave among men; inftead of being delivered immediately from heaven, by the Lord Jehovah himfelf. Confider- ing the fubjecSl in any other light, we muft plunge fo deep in abfurdity that we fhall never rife again. "We are inrtru(5led by our Creeds that the Word of God is God himfelf; confequently, God muft be the word of himfelf. In other words, God is the Father, the firft Perfon of the Trinity, when he is filent, and doing nothing ; and becomes the Son, the fecond Perfon of the Trinity, when he fpeaks, a(5ls, and executes. Contemplating this monftrous dilemma, who can confider our teachers but with fcorn and contempt ! They force us ei- ther to be infidels downright, or to meditate upon our God, our Creator and Heavenly Father, as a SOMEWHAT sOiMEWHAT not any way more rcfpe^^table than one of the monfters of fable ! Not content with elevating the m^n Jcfus cf 'Nazareth to the one fupreme God, in right ot a few figurative expreflions fcattered up and duwn the New Teftament, our Reverend god-makers have raifed the divine power, agency, or energy, to the rank of perfonal deity -, by which the one only living and true God, the Father, is left a mere refidual analyfis, a caput mortuum^ a God of clouts. Doubtlefs, if the fecond of the triad makes, orders, fuperintends, and ultimately de- termines every thing, and the third communicates all wifdom, knowledge, and illumination, little elfc remains for the frji but indolently to contemplate his having nothing to do, and to admire his own inefficiency and exinanition. An aged king, or maftcr of a family, fitting nobody in his elbow chair, after having given the reins of govern- ment, or the title-deeds of his cftate, into the hands of his Son ! — To compenfate for this hu- miliating fl:ate of inertion and infignifit ance, we mufl: acknowledge, in juftice to creed-makers and creed-mongers, that they have ftuck up God the Father in their firft ftation of confefiionary prece- dence ! Perhaps too they meant doing him a kind- nefs (being fond, as all the world knows, of re- laxation themfelves) by taking the tafk oflegifla- tion [ 288 ] tlon and governing the world, gracioufly off his hands J like poor Atlas of old, quite fatigued with fuftaining the heavens on his ihoulders ! It is too ferious a circumftance not to be re- marked here, that it was one fhining part of our Lord's folicitude, during his whole miniftry, to honour and glorify the Father, that is, God, to whom he never gives any other title. On no one occafion does he ever mention himfelf as God, or the Holy Ghoft as God. It was the firft adl of his life, and it was the laft. JVift ye not that I muft he about my Father's hufinefs. And he was 'withdrawn from them' about a fi one's cafi-^ and kneeled down and frayed: Father^ if thou be willing^ remove this cup from me : jieverthelefs, not my will, but thine be done. But modern times exhibit a procedure oppofite to this, by which the example of our Lord is rejedled and defpifed. The whole folicitude of hodiernal Chriftians, who have baptized themfelves the or- thodox, is about the Son, the fupreme Deity of the blefied Redeemer; the coequal godhead of Em- manuel •, the theandric myftery of Chrift ! Yet our Saviour afTures us, that whofoever doeth the will tf his Father which is in heaven, the fame is his mo- ther, his fijler, and his brother: that is, by follow- ing his example in doing the will of the Father, fhall be entitled to all his perfonal glory and ho- nour. His own words to this purpofe ftand un- controvertible. C 289 3 controvertible. Te are they which have continued •with me in my temptations ; and I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me : that ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and Jit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Ifrael. Luke xxii. 28, 29, 30, Here Chrift puts his difciples on an equality with himfelf in another world ; infinitely far fhort of fupreme deification, unlefs his difciples and all true Chriflians are to be deified along with hini. — It is a melancholy confideration, that we fcarcely hear a word of the Father in pulpits and printed fermons j but all {training and abufing language in order to fettle the Godfhip of the Son and Holy Ghofl ; as if they were two {Grange novel gods, whofe credentials and certificates required to .b.e cleared up and confirmed j or as if the only true God (the Father) could be any thing either more or lefs than the only true God, by the addition of names, or the acceflion of titles.-— O difgrace to fcience, wifdom, and common fenfe !- — Surely, as the acknowledgment of the one only true God, the Father, was fufBcient for Patriarchs, Prophets, Evangelists, and Apoftles, it ought to be fufficient for us i efpecially, as the Lord Jefus Chrift, who was in the bofom of the Father, and who only could reveal him, acknowledged and worfliipped NOOTHER. If the Son be the only true God, then T is C 290 ] is the Son the Father, and the Father the Son j and if the Holy Ghoft be the only true God, then is he both Father and Son, and proceeds from himfelf : and if the Father be the only true God, the Son the only true God, and the Holy Ghoft the only true God, then are there three only true Gods ! To exprefs the whole in a few words : — All Scripture, both the Old and New Teftament, uniformly and with energy atteft, there is but one Goa, and, at the fame time, that the Father /^r/b- nally is He; confequently, neither the Son nor the Holy Ghoft can be the only true God. The af- ferters therefore of the fupreme Godhead of Jefus Chrift, and the Holy Ghoft, are felf-made idola- ters. Notwithftanding this conclufion, as evident as that the moons of Jupiter are not Jupiter's felf, or that a ray of the fun is not the fun himfelf, fuch is the infatuation of the times, that almoft the whole of modern religion, thundered from pul- pits and the prefs, efpecially with reference to the feftivals of Chriftmas and Trinity Sunday, con- fifts in dodlrines and pofitions founded on the fu- preme Godhead of Jefus Chrift and the Holy Ghoft ! — Our Clergy never once refieft (indeed their pleafures and amufements allow them little time for refledion) that they rob the Father of his incommunicable felf-exiftence, his peerlefs mo- narchical all-fufficiency, in proportion as they ex- alt, into perfonal independence, the Son and Spirit of C 291 J God. Thefe are only glorious means and injlru- ments of the Father's appointment and nomination, to carry forward his eminent work of univerfal righteoufnefs, falvation, and happinefs.* God chufes his own inftruments ; and thofe he chufes are only great and effimable, according to the commiffion they bear, and the propinquity they ftand in to him. No being in the abftrad is of any confequcnce to God. The being of a gnat, and that of an arch-angel, are equally bejiozved by the Creator of all. T 2 Mr. * The condu61 of The Jie-veroidjohn Wejley cannot be overlooked here, (though it is an inftance of tlic batkos to defcend fo low at pre- fent.) In a late excurfion through Ireland, in all the places he vi- fited, he left a printed fermon behind him, proving Jefus Chrift the only true God ; fpreading polythcifm and idolatry along with the Gof- pel. — Had John Wcjley ftaid at home, and by the virtue, piety, felf- denial, meeknefs, and humility oi private exainplc, endeavoured to recommend the Gofpel (the only way by which it can he recom- mended) he would at leaftr have laid up treafures in Hea-ven, hov.^- cver his treafures on earth might have fufFered diminution. This man has don* more harm, by fetting on foot a Pharifaical prctcnfion to holinefs, an affecled tcft of inward perfuafion, than people gene- rally imagine. And not content with leading men aftray from the purity and fimplicity^ of the Gofpel, he has ftepped abroad in poli- tics, under the molt pitiful finefle of cabnncfs, when every one ought to be roufed, animated, and determined. What a wretched fiouie iaaWJohn Wr/ley cut in future hiltory, fhould hiftory be at a lofs for fuch a character ! Alas ! fuch charafters are too numerous ! [ 29- ] Mr. Burgh talks of his amiaBle dnta'gohilVs ''degrading the God of our falv^tion, and fnatch- ing from us the obje6l of our religion."* One might conclude, from fo bold a declaration, that Mr. Lindfey is a profefled atheift, and that his Scriptural Confuter means the only true God the Father, when he mentions the God of our falvatloii and the obje6l of our Religion. No fuch thing ; he only means Jefus Chrift, as if Jefus Chrift were our Saviour in the abfolute fenfe, and as iF Mr. Lindfey were an athei|l becaufe he protefts againft any, but the Father, being the only true God. — God (the Father, for his Son is the fpeaker) fo loved the world that he fent his only begotten Son into the world, that whofoever believeth on him Jliould not peri/li but have everlafiing life, — Surely the fen- der, and not the fent, is originally our Saviour. Even under the Jewifh difpenfation, God has the charaderiftic of Saviour. They (the Ifraelites)/(7r- gat God their Saviour, which had done great things in Egypt. Pf. cvi. 21. I am the Lord thy God, the Holy one of Ifrael, thy Saviour. Ifa. xliii. 3. /, even I am the Lord, and befide me there is iio Saviour. Ibid II. There is no God elfe befide me, a jujl God and a Saviour. Idem xlv. 21. Thou flialt know no God but me: for there is no Saviour but me. Hofea xiii. 4. I SUPPOSE ** Scrip. Confut. page i. C 293 ] I SUPPOSE Mr. Burgh was fo prodigicufly bufied in colledling texts for the Trinity, that he forgot thefe altogether. Notwithftanding, however, that God appropriates this diftinguiihing title to him- {clf, yet many of his fervants, particularly Mofes, are called faviours, deliverers, and redeemers, in the Old Teftament, merely as they were the in- ftruments of falvation, deliverance, and redemp- tion, employed by God. In like manner, though Chrift is ftiled in the New Teftament our Saviour, yet fuch a designation, as already fhewn, does by no means conftitute him the God of our Salvation (as Mr. Burgh flourifhingly Hiles him) but merely the vehicle or meiTenger. Thus Mary magnifies God her Saviour : My foul doth magnify the Lord, and my fpirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour. Luke i. 46, 47. And Paul fays, Therefore we both labour and fuffer reproach, becaufe ive trufi in the Living God, zvho is the Saviour of all men. 1 Tim. iv. 10. In what fenfe Chrift is our Saviour, and how ex- tremely improper Mr. Burgh's phrafe, " the God of our falvation," will appear from the texts fol- lowing : The love of God our Saviour, through Je- jufi Chrifl our Sa^viour. Titus iii. 4, 6. Him Jmth God EXALTED with his right hand, to be a Prince and a Saviour. ACis v. 3 1 . JVe have feen and do tefiify, that the Father hath fent the Son to be the Saviour of the ivorld, i John iv. 14. T 3 This [ 294 ] This circumftance of our author's miftaking the efFe(5l for the caufe, — the fent for the fender, — the type for the prototype, — the deputy for the deputer, — the anointed for the anointer, — runs a line of obfcurity and contradi6lion through his whole book, and invalidates all his Scriptural po- rtions, leaving Mr. Lindfcy, whom he would wil- lingly depreciate, entire mafter of the controver- fial field. Until he proves that the word God in Scripture always means the only true God, or felf- exijlent Jehovah ; and that the name Saviour or Redeemer is never applied to any but the man Jefus of Nazareth, he does nothing but trifle with his readers, and fupport a ufelefs monofyllabical parade of argument. The Apoftle Paul fays, very candidly and per- tinently, / would rather fpeakfive words with the underjianding, and fo as to infiruci others, than ten thoufand in an unknown tongue. Paul's example is worth Mr. Burgh's imitation. It is remarkable, he confiders fpeaking without the underftanding, and in an unknown tongue, as an impropriety of the fame kind. Indeed, it is eafy for good-nature to form an apology for Mr. Burgh. He acknow- ledges his ignorance of authors, previous to Mr. Lindfey, on the trinitarian controverfy, and that he had but fo many months to revolve the fub- je6l in his thoughts •, a fubjed, as it is now cir- cumftanced. C 295 ] circumftanced, of moft intricate fl-iidy, and labo- rious detail. But to do Mr. Burgh a piece of juf- tice, which perhaps will moft delicioufly flatter his ambition, had the Primate of Lambeth, the Pri- mate of York, or his Lordfhip of Litchfield and Coventry, written on the fubjeft, not one of them could have evinced himfelf a more genuine fon of the Church, a more thorough-paced orthodox man, than Mr. Burgh has done (I had almoft faid from infpiration, as he difclaims all human affiftance) in his Scriptural Confutation. Farther, there is fuch a fympathetic exadtnefs of thought and manner between Mr. Burgh's work and that of the renowned William Jones, of Pluck- ley in Kent, that one might be tempted to take his bible-oath they are — alter et idem. One diffe- rence indeed there is. Mr. Jones's three-fold Deity is made up of an hundred texts or argu- ments ; neither more nor lefs, quite trim and fpruce : whereas Mr. Burgh's has, I believe, not lefs than two or three hundred in his compofition, confequently muft be a more compleat and accom- plifhed God than Mr. Jones's. The former tells us, it is true, that were all his Scriptural proofs reduced to one, ftill his grand pofition would hold good, that — one is two, and two is three. He has not indeed juft put his finger on this omnipo- tent refiduary text. I defy him ever to do it, wir.h, T 4 the C 296 ] the whole bench of BIfhops in his train, and Ed- mund Burke, Efq-,* to afTift them, till he has firft expunged * Mr. Burgh, to the third edition of his book, prefents us with a dedication to Edmund Burke, Efqj and retails his favourable opinion of it to his readers. We have heard of the royal 'nnpriinatur ■, the Star-chamber imprimatur, the Lord Chamberlain's imprimatur, but Edmund Burke, Efq\s imprimatur, I believe, never was heard of be- foj-e. Who, pray, is Edmund Burke ? A Gentleman of clafTical erudition, refined tafte in the belles lettres, and pofiefled of the nation's firft chair of fenatorial oratory, we allow. But what have thefe ac- complifhments to do with the Athanafian Symbol, more than with the Philofopher's ftone, or the perpetual motion ? Nay, I would as foon offer Mr. Burke Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progrefs, or Mother Goofe's Tales, as the Athanafian Creed, for his approbation.—— Surely it is enough to overfpread the moft Cynical face with a fmile, to hear of the Author of the Beautiful and Sublime, giving in his verdict: relative to the Trinity, which is the very oppofite of the beau- tiful and fublime. For inftance : The Church inftrufts us that God confifts of three Perfons in one fubftance. Again, that the fame one fubftance, God, in order to form the integral of Chrift, becomes two fubftances and but one Perfon : ergo, upon the whole, God muft either be THREE Subftances, and FOUR Perfons, or he murt at one and the fame time be one Subftance, and two Subftances, one Perfon and three Perfons. Moreover, the fame Catholic Church inftrufts us that Chrift went to heaven with his flelh, bones, and all things appertaining to the perfeflion of man's nature. Now, the ftomach is part of the perfeftion of man's nature, without which, recipient of meat and of drin'f, man's nature cannot fubfift : ergo, Chrift muft both eat and drink in heaven, in order to be fuftained. And have not the orthodox Scripture for this ? / appoint unto you a krngdcm, that ye may eat and drink at my table.'— li this Gentleman knows any more of the Trinity than what his Sunday^s relponfcs and invocations amount to, let him give us an effay on the beautiful and fublime of heavenly things, as he has already done with refpefl lo— * earthly things. C 297 ] Expunged thefe paflages out of our Bibles : The firfi commandment of all is^ hear^ 0 Ifrael, the Lord your God is one Lord. This is the declaration both of Mofes and of Chrift, and by the latter applied folely to the Father^ to whom he was ad- drefling his laft prayer at the expiration of his miniftry. And this is eternal life., that they might know thee (the Father) the only true God. — Ihere is none other God hut one (fays Paul)/(?r though there he that are called gods (let Mr. Jones and Mr. Burgh attend) whether in heaven or in earth., Lord^ many and Gods many: to us (all Chriftiansj there is hut one God, the Father. Now, the Integrity of fentiment and language will not permit us to call the Father any more than one Perfon, therefore, the one God is but one Perfon. Mr. Burgh mull fubmit to the neceffity of expunging thefe paflages altogether, elfe his numerous Scripmral proofs can fervc no other purpofe than to expofe the Scripture, and to fill a volume ; the former of which, I believe, he does not intend. Paul's confefllon of his faith, in the face of the world, ought to make our Trinitarians blufh. But this I confefs unto thee., that after the way they (falfe Jews and platonic Trinitarians) r^//A,rf/>',/.? wor- fhip I the God of my Fathers ; believing all things ivritten C 298 3 Written in the Law and the Prophets. NoWj the Law and the Prophets no more fuppofed the Mefliah (whom Mofes ftiled a prophet like untohim- Jelf) to be the eternal Jehovah, than they fuppofed the golden calf, or the brazen ferpent. The term Worfhip is one of the moft impor- tant of thofe left unexplained by Mr. Burgh, otherwife 1 would not have confidered it fo copi- oufly. From the obfervations now laid before the reader, it is evident, that fupreme worfhip belongs alone to the Supreme Being, and that he can only be fupreme as a Perfon. Being, without perfona- lity, is an abftrad idea. A Person felf-exiftent, felf- intelligent, and felf- all-fufficient, can be no other than God, and he no other than the Father, as the Father is one Perfon. To fay that the Father cannot aft perfonally with the infinite totality of the Godhead, is to fay he is collaterally dependent on two other Perfons befiide himfelf ; and thefe two perfons muft be felf-exift- ent and felf-all-fufficient, confequently two Gods equal to him ; or it muft be faid that God is col- laterally dependent on, equal to and one with him- felf. A wonderful difcovery truly ! — Notwithftand- ing, therefore, the intercommunication of titles be- tween the Father and the Son, which is the only foundation of modern idolatry, thofe of //;6 ] GuR infuked Lord fhall prove it; infulted by hi^ pretended minifters and difciples! — If we can pro- duce proof that Chrift executed the conimiflioil intrufted to him by God, p-eviotis to his deaths on the facrificial merit of which fuch myfterious ftrefs has been laid, and that he claimed his reward ac- cordingly, we fhall overturn that huge mafs of enthufiafm leaning on the alledged infinite fatis- faftion of Chrirt's death. If we difbejieve our Redeemer, fpeaking as follows, whom fhall we believe? — I have glorified thee upon earth: I have FINISHED the work which thou gaveft me to do : and no"Jo^ O Father ! glorify thou me with thine own felf. John xvii. 4, 5. Here, without any reference to his death, or the leafl hint of its all-meritorious efficacy, we have the Saviour of the world folemnly telling his Father he hd.dfimj^ied the work committed to his care : not only fo, but in right of his tafk being performed, he claims and folicits his reward, j^nd nov.\ O Father! glorify thou me. On the other hand, if we believe our Reverend teachers, his work was not even begun when he declared it was finifhed, as he had not then fuffered on the Crofs. The effeft and advantage of his death he himfelf acquaints us of: and furely in this matter his au- thority is fupreme. Neverthelefs^ 1 tell you the truth y it is espedient for you that I go away: for if I go [ ^^1 ] gft not away, the Comforter will not come unto yon : but if I depart, I will fend him unto ym.-]o\in xvi. 7. He hath declared in another plaoG, m anfwer to Peter's enquiry : Whither I go, thoncatif^MQi f^^- low me now : but thou flialt follo'jp^}i^t^tef^'ar4s. Idem, xiii, 36. . '^"'J'lii&jafi ♦•^ - .. The only purpofe then of oupr'Lurti'c deatb,* if he is allowed to fpeak for himfeif, was to receive his reward for faithfully executing his Father's Commiffion, to evidence the reality; df a Refurrec- tion from the dead, and to fendw'tHei Comforter,' the Spirit of truth, to ad in his ftead;^'^ as the en- Jightener and guide of his Apoftlesv " There is a fimplicity, unity, and confiftence of procedure here, which at once point out its genuinenefs, in oppofition to the myfterious, and what may be called lufcious fchool dodrine of infinite expiation^ and vicarious punifhment. Moreover, it cannot but be remarked here, as being beautifully of a piece, that without any pointed allufion to the merits of his death, the whole world. Gentiles as well as Jews, were aiTurcd of pardon and falvation, upon the fmgle article of repentance; and this fpirit of repentance was fpe- cified in a particular inftance, which demonftrates that the pardon of fin is padional, and purchafe- ^ble. If ye forgive men their trespasses, YOUR [ 3'8 ]■ .YOUR HEAVENLY FaTHER WILL ALSO FORGIVE YOU : BUT IF YE FORGIVE NOT MEN THEIR TRES- PASSES, NEITHER WILL YOUR FaTHER FORGIVE YOUR TRESPASSES. Matt. vi. 1 4, 1 5. This interefting fubjed has already come under notice in this work, but it was unavoidable to re- fume it on the prefent occafion. The fupreme Deity of the man Jefus, and the doftrine of an infinite equivalent for fir, fi:and and fall together; and as the latter, by our Saviour's authority, falls to the ground, the former falls of courfe. As a collateral confideration with the above, I am not intimidated to call on Mr. Burgh's utmofi: learn- ing and ingenuity to difprove the following afier- tion, that— BY the same act by which the su- preme God becomls man, man becomes the supreme God. To this it may be added, that as the unalterable lav/ o{ action and re-a£iion is no lefs abfolute in the fpiritual than the material world, IF ONE man can become THE SUPREME GoD, EVERY MAN MAY. It may be argued that the union is not fo per- peft as to warrant fuch an exprefilon, as very man being very God. Is it fo ? — Then neither can the exprefTion very God being very man be warranted. In proportion as the afiimilation takes place, God is monarchically degraded, and man monarchically exalted i C 3^9 ] exalted ; in other words, the latter muft become infinite in the fame degree that the former becomes finite ; theanthropy being a no lefs miraculous tranfelementation, than anthropotheifm ; that is, the God-manhood cannot be confidered in any re- fpe6l more pofiible than the man-godhead • con- fequently to limit the fupreme Being in the atl of allimilating himfelf with every man, as well as one man, is to limit his omnipotence, and vvhatever limits his omnipotence, annihih.tes him as God. The dilemma here is unfurmountable ; either athe- ifm, dire6t and avowed, or the belief, with refpecft to every Chriftian, that the Godhead and man- hood can and may be joined together in one Per- fon, never to be divided : an excellent alternative indeed, left us in legacy by our Creeds and Ca- techifms • We are certain from Scripture, that this junc- tion or onenefs takes place with true Chriftians in a fentimental (enCG : Neither pray I for thefe alone (his Difciples) but for them alfo which fhall believe on me through their word : that they all may be one^ as thou^ Father^ art in ?ne, and I in thee \ that they alfo may be one in us. John xvii. 20, 21. But this will not fatisfy our teachers, without taking into the inter. union, " flefh, bones, and all |:hings appertaining to the perfection of man's na- ture." [ 320 ] ture." Yet the flefh and bones of Jefus were no way different from the flefn and bones of other human beings ; and we have his own words for it, that the material part of man is held of no ac- count. It is the fpirit that quickeneth: the fiejli fro- fittth nothing : the words that I fpeak unto you, they are fpirit and they are life. John vi. 36. Moreover, if Chrift took his flefh and bones with him to Heaven (a circumftance altogether impoflible and unneceflary in itfelf) fo did Enoch and Elijah of old, who were even privileged be- yond our Lord, infomuch as they tafted not of death, but were immediately tranflated to the in- vifible world, without having palled through the grave, From the whole it feems uncontrovertible, that to conned: infinite fatisfadion with the fufFerings and death of Chrift, on account of a fuppofed perfonal union of the divine and human nature in him, is to fuppofe that God became more infinite in confequence of his junftion with the man Jefus, or that he was not adequate in himfelf to the ad of pardoning guilt and forgiving offences. If God fuffered and died (a monftrous thought indeed!) then it cannot be faid that man, made of a wo- man, the fon of Mary, fuffered and died : and if the man Jefus, made of a woman, the fon of Mary, fuffered [ 321 3 fliffered and died (which is the voice of Scripture and Common Senfe) then God did not fufFer and die : confequently, the dodrine of infinite fatif- fadlion turns out to be no more than the Deity adllng in his charadleriftic capacity of grace and favour, and commiffioning an p.mbaflador, under the defignation of his own Son, to make an offer of this grace and favour to all mankind, peniten- tially difpofed. God muft always a6l inftrumen- tally, through an external medium, as he'ftimfelf is invifible: agreeable to this affirmation — No mati fuitk feen God at any time : ye have neither heard his voice ^ nor feen his fhape. Therefore, as all iiiftruments and mediums are infinitely fubordinate to him, he might have qua- lified John the Baptift, in lieu of Chrift, had he chofen it, to fulfil the whole of his good plcafure, the mediatorial illumination and falvation of man- kind.— The infant body of Jefus, made and bora of the body of Mary, exclufive of its bting brought into exiftence by the power of the Higheft (in like manner as Adam*s was, and latterly John's) was nothing more excellent, in the fight of God, than the infant body of any of thofe our Saviour took up in his arms, and loaded with blefiings. It was the fingular commiflion Chrift bore, and the momentous office he was employed in, from X whence [ 322 ] whence he^evived his dignity and pre-eminence ; and God might have felecfted any other inftrument he pleafed, to. execute his gracious purpole, and have invtfted him with Chrift's high privileges and prerogatives, in the true fpirit of the text.-— J fay unto you that even of thefe Jiones God is able ~to raife up children unto Abraham. The Father^ dwel- ling in Chrijl^ he did the works. John xiv. lo. By dwelling in any other than the Perfon of Chrill, God cuald as eafily have done the fame works. In truth, our Lord never performed any thing but what his difciples alfo performed : I mean in kind, not in number and variety. Nay, in one inftance they exceeded him. Chritt, by being touched only, performed miracles, but his Difci- ple performed them by his very fhadow paffing by. Afts V. 13. All was a literal fulfilment of our Saviour*s promife. He that believeth on me, the works that I do he fhall do alfo^ and greater works fhall he do^ he- caufe I go to my Father. John xiv. 12. It was the Father, dwelling in them all, that performed their works, and without whom they could have done nothing. The word Father is almoft always ufed by our Lord, for God ; in ex- clufion of all other personal defignations. In [ 3^3 ] In (hort, the perfon, characfler, office, and me- rits of Chrift, are fufficiently afcertained in two forms of expreffion well known in civilized na- tions, and only mifunderftood by people that mif- underftand Creeds for the Bible, and the word of man for the word of God. The axioms are thefe : Qui facit per alium, facit PtR S£. Loquitur LEGATUS SiRMONE MITTENTIS EUM. There is fomething wonderful in this whole affair. — Divines invented the dodrine of imputed lin, and the infinite demerit attending it, with an affeded appearance of contrition, and a mortified fpirit ; and afrer having plunged humanity into this deplorable ftate, they thought themfelves called upon, in point of exoneration, to find out fome expedient to atone for the horrible ingenuity of their own thoughts. Common refources could not fupply an equiva* lent remedy, and God, the God of mercy and of love, was fanguinary as a Draco, and fullenly un- tradablc as a Nero. What was to be done ? Why God fomehow had a latent defire to fave his crea- tures of the human race, notwirhftanding their in- finite guilt, and the inexorable ftubbornnefs of his own mind, if he could but decently fave appear- ances with regard to his attribute of juftice. X 2 0ns C 324 ] One only poflible method prefented itfelf, and that was to materialize himfcif in the womb of the Virgin Mary •, be confined to a particular place, who could not a moment be abfent from any place, and beginning to be, who never had a beginning at all : then, at the period of an obfcure and af- flicted life, to fufFer a painful and a fhameful death, appropriate only to flaves, thieves, and murderers. In this way God did penance on him- felf, as if he himfelf had been the delinquent, and fo became propitious to his creatures ; who all the time, if Mr. Burgh be a faithful reporter, were imbruing their hands in the blood of their Maker, piercing his iinews, and fporting with his intolerable agonies ! ! ! The picture is by no means over coloured; and who does not fee, notwithftanding he may not con- fefs, that fuch doctrines are the grofs fuggeftions, at firfl: of beggarly humility, and next of Luci- ferian pride, the naufeous reliques of abandoned Popery. — Zealots and devotees firfl: bedaubed themfelves with the filthinefs of imaginary guilt, and next, forfooth, deemed no Being in the crea- tion great and glorious enough to undertake the delicate office of cleanfing them, but God him- felf! He who inhabits eternity and Infinite fpace, the heavens his throne, and the earth his footftool, firfl: puling in a manger, and then transfixed to a 2;allov\s ! — C 325 3 gallows!— For what?— To do what he might have done by commiffioning a zephyr to whifper, or a grafshopper to chirp— that he was merciful to the creatures he formed — merciful to the Tons and daughters of his creative and providential love! — How would it be thought of, did a monarch of England fubmit to be hanged at Tyburn (even fuppofing him to be brought to life again) to fave aconvidt under fentence of death, whom he could have faved by the fignature of his name under- neath the word, pardon. But enough of this dolorific fubjeit — enough to caufe the fluid of life to ftagnate in our veins, and to incruft us into ice. It is a pofition of Mr. Lindfey's, and well fup- ported throughout, that a difbelicf of the Trinity is no blameable herefy. In reply to which, at- tend to Mr. Burgh. " I muft fay, that I look upon difbelief of the Trinity, to be the fame with a difbelief in Jefus Chrift, as revealed to us in the holy fcriptures."* — And why not?— Mr. Burgh has a right to think fo, if he chufes it ; and fo has Mr. Lindfey, to think oppofitely. One honour- able man's word is as good as another's, provided the matter in difpute is to be determined by per- fonal aflertion. X 3 But, * Scriptural Confutation, page 194.. But, I would humbly afk, upon what grounds the former Gentleman believes In the Trinity? In another place he declares, " The truth, as fet forth in the Scriptures, I have all along acknowledged my rcafon incapable to comprehend."* Here then we have belief without knowledge, /*. e. fee- ing without fight, and fight without eyes. Mr. Burgh believes a thing is what he can neither con- ceive nor make appear it is. He may as well fay, he believes a thing becaufe — it is not, or becaufc it may happen to be the very reverfe of what it is. Knowledge and belief are infeparable. To fpeak more properly, the one is the caufe, and the other the effeft. You may as well fuppofe an efFe(5l without a caufe, as belief without knowledge. In the name of common honefty, what is it Mr. Burgh believes, when he believes the Trinity ? That three any things are only one any thing ? Three intelligent agents c«/y one agent? Three Spirits only one Spirit ? Three Perfons only one Perfon ? The Deity is declared to be only one Perfon, by Jefus Chrift. PF/ty calleji thou me good? there is none good but one^ that is, God. Matt. xix. 1 7. None good but one — one what? — Perfon undoubt- edly, for nothing can be an ading principle of goodnefs but a — Perfon. Now, • Scriptural Confutation, page 105. C 327 ] Now, who is it that is guilty of " diibelief ia Jefus Chrifti" Mr. Lindfey, who aflerts what his Redeemer aflerts, or iMr. Burgh, who aflerts the contrary ?— When a Papift defends his favourite tenet of Tranfubftantiation, he juft exprefles him- felf as Mr. Burgh has done. " I believe it as a truth fet forth in the Scriptures, notwithftanding I all along acknowledge my reafon incapable to com- prehend it.'* Mr. Burgh and the Papift fhould immediately interchange the fhake of orthodox fellowfhip. The Real Prefence is much more pofitively re- *uealed, than the Trinity, if we are to call the letter of Scripture Revelation, and not the Spirit. Tou muji EAT my fieJJi^ and drink my blood, elfe ye have no life in you : my flejh is meat indeed j my blood is drink INDEED. Therefore, if Common fenfe may diftinguifh truth from falfehood, the impanation of God, or God made bread, ought to be believed for the fame reafon that the Incarnation of God, or God made flefli, is to be believed. They are both of them doftrines literally revealed in Scripture, and both equally incomprehenfible ; confequently both equally orthodox, and both equally true. Both indeed are fafhionable at Rome: in England, it happens, that only one of them is faftiionablec X 4 M^' [ 328 ] Mr. Lindfey, in the 24th page of his Apology, maintains, that " all Chriftian people for upwards of 300 years after Chrift, till the Council of Nice, were generally Unitarians." This is an hiftorical fadl of fufficient notoriety ; fo much fo that Con- ftantine found matters going fo far counter to his wifhes, in that famous Convention, that he was obliged to pradice on the members, by threaten- ing fome and foothing others, before Trinitaria- nifm could have fuch a majority in its favour, as to give a decent fandlion to the royal decree. The exiftence and attributes of the Deity, pafTed thro' the ordeal of a ballot, as juries now-a-days, after hearing evidence and the judge's charge, deter- mine the identity of a robber or a murderer. Mr. Burgh calls the Apologift's remark, " A bold and unfupported aflertion."* Pray has not Mr. Lindfey an equal right to call Mr. Burgh's relative to the Apoftles, " a bold and unfupported afiertion?" He undoubtedly has, were he a friend to averment without argumentative proof. In faft, it is of no advantage to cither fide what any age has determined pofterior to the Apoftles. We have the faithful documents of the firft age from the beginning in our pofleflion ; in other words, we have our Lord and his Apoftles fpeak- ing * Scrip. Confut. page 193. C 329 ] ing to us in written authenticated evidence. How prepofterous then to confult authors, confefledly not under divine infpiration, refpedling what they did and faid ! — The reafon holds ftronger agaiaft believing authors that flourifhed long fubfequent to the Apoftle^. A perfon in council at St. James's would never think of writing to a corre- fpondent three or four hundred miles diftant, ,to be informed of what had been doing at St. James's. Moreover, people living near a great event, without having been witnefles of it, are apt to know too much ; as common fame has an hun- dred tongues for one eye or ear ; that is, they prefume more on their proximity than their know- ledge. Something ftrikes us here analagous to a mountain, which though nearer the fun, is always colder than the adjacent level : it is near the fun, but not near enough. Beside, the very idea of a human decree afting in favour of the Trinity, fuppofes that it could not have been fupported without it; confequently, that God needed the alTiftance and protection of men in behalf of his Godhead. An imperial 'mandamus fupporting the credit of the Trinity, was like a grafshopper popping from its brake to fupport the arch of heaven — I fiippofe oux C 330 ] our conventional theographers were diTpofcd to judge as Beza was afterwards. Ui quoquifque modo volat^ colat deum, eji dogma mere diabolicum,* — Men and Chriftians are here denied a privilege which even devils themfelves enjoy, ^he devils believey and tremble. James xi. 19, How ftrange to hear this Gentleman declare, that " not one of the Apoftles of our Lord was an Unitarian!" We may pardon Mr. Burgh, as being a young man^ and fcarcely having had time to read the Scriptures foberly and fedately, much lefs to digeft them, before he embarked in con- troverfy, for this and many other random affir- mations ; hoping that age and experience, and a more deliberate attention to books, will enable him to diftinguifh between the letter and fpirit of composition. I HOPE it will be deemed fufficient to adduce two diftinguifhed Perfonages of the New Tefta- ment, in order to throw difcredit on Mr. Burgh's affirmation •, efpecially, when one of thofe is the Son of God himfelf. His authority is eftablifhed by himfelf. All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son^ but the Father : neither knoweth any man the Father, fave the Son, and he to whomfoever the Son will reveal him. Matt. xi. 26. Now, * Bez. Epif. ad Dudithium, C 33^ ] Now, for the demonftration that Jefus Chriil was ftridly and literally a Unitarian, let Mr. Burgh attend to what follows. yf«J i/iis is eternal life^ that they might know thee (the Father to whom he was praying) the only true God^ and Jefus Chrift^ whom thou hafi Jent. John xvii. 3. The Father is one Perfon, allowed by all par- ties: He is here decltred to be' the only true God, trgo^ God is only one Perfon. The Father is here ftiled exclufively and abfolute'y (not in a generic fenfe, only true Gody which would admit the idea of participation) but in the higheft appropriate fenfe, the only true God, which admits not of com- munication or partition. I WOULD a/k Mr. Burgh (not demmd of him, in his fultanic ftyle, to the meek and gentle Mr. Lindfey) would he call Jefus Q\w\^ perfoially, or the Holy Ghoft, the only true God? U he would not, with the fame fentiment of integrity this title is applied to the Father, then has he the referve of inequality in his mind, however he would ex- plain it away, from a habit of complaifance to Creeds and Eftablifhments. The other Scriptural Perfonage is the Apoftle Paul, who declares himfelf an Unitarian in the terfeft E 332 ] terfeft fenfe of language. But to us (Chriftians) there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, I Cor. viii. 6. Contradistinguished to the Father, we have another Perfon mentioned, but he has not the ap- pellation of God, now that the Apoftle is fpecify- ing the felf-exiftent God, but only of Lord. And cue Lord Jefus Chriji., by whom are all things. The term one muft be ufed with the fame ho- neft fimplicity in the former as in the latter claufe of the text ; otherwifc we fhail have licenfe to fay^ « — three Lord Jefus Chrifts in the one Lord Jefus Chrift, as three Perfons in the one Perfon of the Father : for it is plain the Lord Jefus Chrift is here mentioned in his higheft capacity, from the expreffion — by whom are all things — fo that the or- thodox trick of the double nature will not bring off its votaries here; unlefs they outdo themfelves, by maintaining, that it is the humanity of Chrift which is underftood, when it is affirmed — by whom are all things. In either cafe, the felf-exiftent Deity of Jefus Chrift falls in alphabetical ruins about the Trinitarian's ears. Upon the whole, we have the Apoftle's judg- ment exprefted in two plain, concife propofitions : firft, there is but one God ^ and fecondly, that one God C 333 ] God Is the Father. Had any thing in Mr. Burgh's performance amounted to a demonftration half fo felf-evident, he would have had the appearance of an apology for his magnificent egotifm of difmif- fing Mr. Lindfey's book from exiftence. No one need be at the trouble of pronouncing a fimilar fate on his declaration of faith, " that not one of the Apoftles of our Lord was an Uni- tarian:" it falls, like time, on the edge of its own dagger, but not, like time, after having conquered all things. Had he fubftituted Trinitarian in the place of Unitarian, no perfon would have contra- dided him, who confiders that by the fame idiom of language that Jefus Chrift is one with the Fa- ther God, every believing Chriftian throughout the world is likewife one with the Father God. In proportion as Jefus Chrift is made the obje6t of accumulated titles, honours, and dignities, in proportion is every true Chriftian made partici- pant of them in kind, though not in degree. Neither pray I for thefe (my Difciples) alone^ but for them alfo which fiiall beliez-e on ms through their word: that they all may be one, as thou. Father, an in me, and I in thee: that they alfo may be one in us. Such repeated quotations of the fame text could not be avoided, in order to ftare men in the face with that honeft conviction, againft which they would C S34 ] would mod unaccountably fhut their eyes. Did any one deny the exiftence of a divine precept againft murder, againft theft; what ought to be done? Why, nothing elfe than to repeat, as often as he denied it,—" Thou fhalt not kill. Thou fhalt not fteal.** Likewife, in the face of Trinitarians, af- ferting that three is one, and one is three, little elfe fhould feem necefTary, but to reiterate in their ears — Hear^ 0 Ifrael^ the Lord thy God is one Lord. And as Chrift has adopted the expreflion, calling it the Jirjl of all the Commandments, we may take the liberty of varying it by faying — Hear, 0 ChriJiianSy the Lord our God is one Lord. Mark xii. 29. Christ includes himfelf, in the term our, as on a level with all mankind in acknowledging and worfhipping God as one Lord. This ftands di- re6lly oppofed to the three diftin6l, felf-fubfifting Perfons mentioned in the Athanafian Creed, each of whom is ftiled God, and Lord, in the higheft fenfe. Surely, three diftinft, felf-fubfifting 6"^- premes can be no other than three Gods, and three Lords ; giving the lie dired both to Mofes and to Chrift, who, in the plaineft and moft unaf- fected terms of language, aflure us that — The Lord 9ur God is 0N£ Lord. We hinted at Mr. Burgh's demanding the acqui- cfcence of the Unitarians. Perhaps the reader will C ZZ5 ] will be curious to know what mighty matter it is to which he demands acquiefcence. Here it is — They Jhall be Priejls of God and of Chrifi. Reve- lations XX. 6. In confequence of this aftonifhing difcovery, wc have thefe words of ungenerous triumph : " I have brought this verfe to eftablifh the Divinity of our bleffed Redeemer, upon a foundation which neg- ligence or blinded prejudice overlooked; but upon which I now demand the acquiefcence of the Unitarians to the Godhead of Jefus Chrift."' I acknowledge myfelf an Unitarian in the fuUeft fenfe of the word. What right has this Gentle- man to demand my acquiefcence ? Who or what is Mr. Burgh, more than any other private indi- vidual among the Chriftian people ? Jefus we know^ and Paul we know : but who art thou ? — Would Mr. Burgh, as a member of the Houfe of Com- mons, talk of demanding the acquiefcence of his brother Senators ? and what is the Houfe of Com- mons in comparifon with the auguft Houfe of the Living God, the glorious aggregate of Chriftians? In Senates Mr. Burgh would be held of no account farther than he fhould enlighten and convince, by the clearnefs of his didion, and the cogency of his arguments: thefe attrad and folicit, but never furely demand acquiefcence. Let us fee how he fupports * Scilptural Confutation, p. 167-8. C 336 ] fupports this demand: By a mere conceit of a\, cxpreilion. The fubordinate order of Levitical Priefts were Priefts of God and of Aaron, in the fame fenfe that Chriftians are faid to be Priefts of God and of Chrift : that is, Chrift is an High Prieft, as Aaron was of old among the Levites, and Chrif- tians an inferior order of Priefts miniftring to him, agreeable to the fenfe of Scripture. That Chrifi might be a merciful and faithful High Priefi. Heb. ii. 17. Chriji called of God an High Priefi after the crder of Melch'ifedeck. Heb. v. 10. Under him, however, we have all his difciples ftiled Priefts, — ye alfo as living jlcnes are built up a fpiritual hcufe^ iin holy Priefihood to offer up fpiritual facrifices. i Peter ii. 5. In the ninth verfe they are likewife dignified with the title of being a royal Priefihood. Alfo in the Revelations i. 6. it is faid, that Chrift hath made us kings and priefi s unto his God and Father. Thus, it is plain to Common Senfe, that Chrift is called an High Prieft, and Chriftians holy, royal Priefts, only in an allufive fenfe, as the reality of facrifices and offerings ended with the Mofaic Con- ftitution. And it is well worth remarking, that the facrifices in the Old Teftament looked forward to [ Z^l ] to nothing but — good works, the facrifice of a broken and contrite fpirit. That is ; to love God with all the hearty and with all ihe underjlanding, and with all the foul^ and with all the firength^ and to love our neighbours as ourfelves^ is more than all whole burnt-offerings and facrifices. Mark xii. 33. Having fettled this matter, it is hoped, upon rational ground, I fhall next do myfelf the honour of imitating Mr. Burgh's manner, but — haud paf- fibus aquis. And the Lord [aid unto Mofes, fee^ I have made thee a Gcd unto Pharaoh : and Aaron thy brother Piall be thy Prophet. Ex. vii. i. *' I HAVE brought this verfe to eftablifh the di- vinity of Mofes, upon a foundation which negli- gence or blinded prejudice overlooked j but upon which, I now demand the acquiefcence of the Uni- tarians in the Godhead of Mofes : we fee it al- lowed an argument if it can be brought, and here it is for them."* In fine, all Mr. Burgh's Scriptural allegations, which occupy no lefs than 140 pages of his book, may be retorted againft himfelf, only fubftituting Chriftian, inftead of Chrift. The world was not created for Chrift, but Chrift for the world. He Owes his exaltation to the merit and importance Y he * Vide Scrip. Confut. p. fupra cit. C 33* ] he derived from the office of reftoring mankind, debafed and corrupted by their vices, to the know- ledge and worfhip of the true God. Had not Adam and Eve fallen from the inno- cency of their ftate by adlual tranlgreffion, there had been no necefTity for the manifeftation of fuch a charader as that of Jefus Chrift. His own words are exprefs to this purpofe. 1 cams not to call the righteous, but /inner s to repentance. God fo loved the world that he Jent his only begotten Son into the world, that whofoever believeth on him JJiould not perijh, but have everlafiing life. It is befide fignally remarkable, and what ren- ders the truth of our argument unqueftionable, that after the completion of God's fcheme of mo- ral renovation and happinefs, by the miniftration of Chrift, we find he delivers up his commiffion and government into the hands of God, from whom he received them, and commences a private individual in the celeftial hierarchy. A private individual indeed infinitely refpedable and ho- nourable, but, after this crifis of renunciation, no longer the executive minifter of government. — Some weakly fuppofe that this furrender only re- fers to his medintorlal kingdom and office, with- out attending to the conclufion, where we are told the Son himjelf becomes perfonaliy fubjeft to the Father. [ 339 1 Father. Others alledge that this fubjecftion only extends to Chrift in his human capacity. But this is ftill weaker than the other : for the human nature is at ail times alike fubjed to God; and cannot be faid to be lefs (o at one period than another, without involving the idea of independ- ance upon God. Befide, it is not fpecified that the man Jefus fhall be fubjeft to God, but the perfe6l integral being, the Son himself. Let it be here alfo noted, that it is not declared he fhall deliver up the kingdom to God in a generic fenfe, which might have included the orthodox notion of three Perfons, but fo God^ even the Father. There remains but one falvo here, to the poflef- fion of which Mr. Burgh is heartily welcome, viz. that the fecond Pcrfon of the Trinity becomes fubjcd to the firft Perfon-, he that yields the fub- jedion being the fame God that receives it : or, in plain Englifh, that God becomes fubjed to himfelf. One thing is obfervable at this final ad- juftment of nature, this foiemn winding-up of rule and dominion ; we have not a fyllable recorded of the Holy Ghoft, the alledged third Perfon of the Trinity. Either Paul muft have confidered the Spirit of God as God himfelf, or, in the confufion and buf- tle of the fcene, have forgot him altogether. — Y 2 The C 340 ] The pafTage which authenticates the above criti- cifm is (o important, pointed, and decifive, that I beg leave to fubjoin it entire. Thc-n cometh the end (the end of thatSyftem, conneded with our world) when he /hall have delivered up the Kingdojn to God even the Father : when he /hall have put down all rule, and all authority and power : /or he mu/l reign till he hath put all enemies under his /eet. The la/l enemy that /hall be de/lroyed, is Death: /or he (Death) has put all things under his /eet. But when he /aith all things are put under him, it is mani/e/i that he (the Father, as mentioned at the beginning) is ex- cepted, which did put all things under him. And when all things /hall he /ubdued unto him, then /hall the Son al/o HIMSELF he /uhjeSi unto him that put all things under him : that God (the Father, as already men- tioned) may be all in all, i Cor. xv. 24. et in/ra. It has been obferved, in a preceding part of this work, how ferviceable the little particle //has been to Mr. Burgh. I fliall lay an example be- fore the reader, to illuftrate my meaning, which might be multiplied to an hundred, were not this work already grown too bulky. This i/ology (as it may be called) is a common trick with many modern authors, and gives a wonderful air of con- cluftvenefs to a variety of works, which, without it, would have been — vox clamantis in dc/erto. — Above all, in polemical argumentation, it has been of C 341 ] of fingular avail, e. g. " As all Scripture was written by infpiration, there is no aflertion for the truth of which God himfelf is not refponfible, and that which God has once faid requires no further confirmation : but if it be found that he has once declared the Godhead of Jefus Chrifl:, that fad is immutably eftablifhed; and being eftablifhed, may well be allowed a matter of fufRcient importance to be frequently referred to."* Again, it is im- mediately fubjoined, — " If then many texts in Scripture, upon inconteftible proof of Chrift*S Godhead from any one, admit of an eafy inter- pretation by referring them to that great truth, why fhould we hefitate to interpret them by it ?'* The whole ftrefs here leans upon the Plerculean fhoulders of—if: but in truth it is a Rhodean Coloflus leaning on a bulrufh. '& It is denied, in the firft inftance, that there is any one text of Scripture which eftablifhes the Godhead of Chrift, if Mr. Burgh means felf- exiftent Godhead: and as to Godhead, in another fenfe, that is, fubordinate Godhead, we know for certain, that kings, rulers, and governors, have been. allowed to claim it. Godhead is only a ge- neral term, like Nature, Divinity, Humanity. It has no fpecific meaning, till we know the Perfon to whom it is applied j for we cannot fay, O God- Y 3 head. Scrip. Confut. p. 185. [ ^42 ] head, O Divinity, O Humanity, except in right of the Profopopoeia. Mr. Burgh's miftakes arife from the ambiguity of words, and the arbitrary ufe of mere lexicogra- phical terms. Had he annexed the attribute /t*^- exiftent, felf all-fufficient, or only true, to the terms God, Godhead, Divinity, no reader would have miftaken Mr. Burgh, nor would Mr. Burgh have fo fepeatedly miftaken himfelf. It muft occur to Common Senfe, that God could not poflibly fup- pofe any Perfon to be poffefled of felf-exiftent Godhead, but himfelf. The very injunction from Another, that Chrift fhould be fo and fo con- fidered by believers, is a proof of his never ha- ving been fo confidered before. This author's argument, therefore, deftroys it- felf. " All Scripture being written by infpiration (Mr. Burgh's words) there is no aftertion for the truth of which God himfelf is not refponfible, and that which God has once faid, requires no farther confirmation." Now, this ftands at the head of all his declarations, and to which all others muft ad in fubferviency. Hear, O Ifrael, the Lord thy God is 07ie Lord. And this: I a^n Jehovah, that is my name, and my glory I will 7iot ,give to another. Another what ?— Another Perfon certainly; for Jehovah C 343 ] Jehovah was never efteemed any but one Perfon in the Old Teftament. God then, upon Mr. Burgh's own hypothefis, is refponfible for this in the firft inftance. He cannot alter the command without abrogating it, that is, without making himfelf more than Je- hovah : of courfe, this Gentleman's charge againft Unitarians falls heavy on his own head, " of wrefting texts of Scripture to fenfes they will not endure ; Procruftes-like, torturing them down to the diminutive bulk of their own imaginations, and thereby rendering the word of God, which alone is true and wife, inexplicable and inconfiftent with itfelf."* Suo fibi hunc jugulo gladio. Unitarians keep clofe to the archetypal fim- plicity of language, in maintaining that God can- not be more than one^ in any except a figurative fenfe : whereas Trinitarians, inftead of fimple, un- affeded language, take advantage of fcholaftic phrafes, technical terms, and arbitrary expreflions. They afiert, indeed, in words, that God is one, but maintain, in dodtrines, that he is likewife three : fkulking under the ambiguous term Per- fon, which by a licence of fpeech authorized by lexicographers, orators, and play-atftors, fignifies not only real identity, but ajftimed appearance. Y 4 Athanasians * Script. Confut. p. 185. r 344 3 Athanasians jump from one to the other with infinite dexterity, crying out, as the controverfial fhoe pinches them ; here we have God as a fub- ftance, and here again as a ihadow j till the doc- trine of the Trinity becomes a mere play of cups and balls. Mr. Burgh, in page 186 of his book, does ex- treme violence to the Apoftle Paul's meaning. The Gofpel of Chrift was to the Greeks foolifh- nefs, becaufe it was too plain and fimple, in op- pofition to their pompous philofophy, which con- fifted moftly of metaphyfical fpeculation, and nice diftindions. The Perfon, Charader, Life, Man- ners, and Death of Chrift alfo, had nothing glit- tering and oftentatious enough ; fo that he was efteemed by them as foolifli as his Gofpel. But Mr. Burgh fays, it was " A God crucified in the fleih" that offended the Greeks. A God— Does Mr. Burgh mean the one only true God, or felf- exiftent Jehovah ^ If not, he trifles with his rea- ders : and if he maintains that the felf-exiftent, Impaflible, immortal Jehovah, was crucified in the flefli, or in the fimilitude of a man, he trifles with his God, and deferves rather a fincere wifli of re- pentance from every humane reader, than a ferious refutation. Moreover, how could God crucified in the flefh be to the Greeks foolifhnefs, a prodigy they had never heard of. Thje [ 345 ] The Jews, when they crucified Chrlfl:, had no notion they were crucifying God ; neither did any of his own difciples then, or at any time after- wards, think fo : how then fhould the Greeks be informed of it ? — The anfwer is obvious. The Greeks knew nothing of any fuch horrid abfur- dity. It was left for a Chriftian writer, feventeen hundred years after the fuppofed Deicide hap- pened, to invent it, and charge it to their account. Men think no more of hanging up their God on a gallows, than of hanging up the carcafe of a dead bullock in the fhambles ! Think no more of fpilling the blood of God, than of fpilling the blood of a fheep or a turkey ! — O fhame, ever- lafting (hame, to the good (^lagics •ver written in behalf of a Jcwilh profclyte. [ 362 ] the Heathens, but to us it is no longer a myftery-, for unto us (all Chriftians, fays our Saviour) /'/ is given to know the myfieries of the Kingdom of Heaven : but unto them (unbelieving Jews) // is not given. Another caufe of Mr. Burgh's miftakes, is his confidering c&rtam forms of expreflion, as appro- priate to the Gofpel Difpenfation ; whereas they occur very early in the Old Teftament, and are only figures and metaphors, and as fuch are bor- rowed from thence and adopted by the writers of the New. I fliall here exemplify my meaning by a few inftances. Chofen — Ele5f — Bought — Purchafed — Redee'nied — Delivered — Saved — Called — Begotten — Sanctified — Wnfhed — Firfi- horn — Father — Chil- dren— Sons — Daughters — Hufband — l^ife — Efpou- fals — Well-beloved — Sheep — Shepherd — Flock — Vine — Vineyard — Hufbandmnn. Paflages of the Old Teftament corrcfponding with the above. 0 ye feed of Ifrael his fervant^ ye children of his chosen ones. I Chron. xvi. 13. For Jacob my Servant'* s fake, and Ifrael tnine elect. Ifa. xlv. 4. Do ye thus requite the Lord ? 0 foolifJi people and unwife ! is he not thy Father, that has BlGot thee? Deut. xxxi. 6. Fear and dread fliall fall upon them., till thy peo- ple pafs over., O Lord, ivhuh thcu hajt purchased. Exod. XV. 16. 11 hat one natiun in the earth is like thy people., even like Ifrael., whom Gcd went to ^z- TiZZM for a people unio h.mjelf'i' 2 Sam. vii. 23. / am C 363 ] nm come down to deliver ihem out of the hand «/ the Eyptians. Exod. iii. 8. 'Thus the Lord saved Ifrael that day^ out of the hand of the Egyptians, Exod. xiv. 30. When Ifrael ivas a child^ thrn I loved him, and called my fon out of Ezypt. Hof. xi. I. Have I conceived all this people ? have I be- GOTTEN thetn? Numb. xi. 12. And ye fliall keep . ray Jlatutes and do them : for I am the Lord uliich SANCTIFY JOK. LcV. XX. 8. ThCH WASHED I thCB with water, and I anointed thee with oil. Ezek. xvi. 9. For I am a Father to Ifrael, and Ephraim is my FIRST-BORN. Jer. xxxi. 9. Have we not all one Father ? hath not otie God created us ? Mai. ii. 10. Te are the children nf the Lord your God. Deut. xi. 6. Thou flialt fay unto Pharaoh, thus faith the Lord, Ifrael is my son, even my fir fi -horn. Exod. iv. 22. And when the Lord fazv it, he abhorred them, becaufe of the provoking of his sons, and his daugh- ters. Deut. xxxii. 19. My covenant they broke^ although I was an husband unto them, fi.it h the Lord. Jer. xxxi. 32. Plead with your mother, plead for Pie is not my wife, neither am I her huf- hand. Hof. ii. 2. Go and cry in the ears of Jerufa- lem, faying, thus faith the Lord, I remember thee, the kindnefs of thy youth, the love of thine espousals. Jer. ii. 2. Turn, 0 back-aiding children, for I am MARRIED unto you. Ibid. iii. 14. Now I will fing to w_y WELL- beloved a fong touching his vineyard: my well-beloved hath a vineyard in a very fruitful hill. Ifa. [ 3^4 ] Ifa. V. I. Why hafi thou cajl us off f or iver? Why doth thine anger fmoke againjl the sheep of thy pa f- ture? Pf. Ixxiv. :2. Give ear^ 0 shepherd »f If- rael. Pf. Ixxx. i. He fiiall feed his flock like a /hepherd, Ifa. xl. ii. Q return^ we befeech tJiee^ 0 Lord of Hofls ! look down from heaven^ behold^ and vijii thy vine. Pf. Ixxx. 14. For the vineyard ef the Lord is the houfe of Ifrael. If. v. 7. Many have grofsly mifapplled fuch exjweffioiw as thefe, occurring in tke New Teftament, as if they denoted a peculiarity in the Gofpel Difpen- fation; whereas it is q;uite the reverfe, having been firft appropriated to one nation and people, but now appropriated to all nations and people. They are fome of the happieft efforts of language to re- prefcnt the perfedlion of that union which the great God wiUs and intends fhould take place between himfelf and his creatures of the human race. The Jews, the original objedls of them, are now n«- vcrthelefs in a Hate of exilement from the favour and protedion of God : nor will the application of them to ourfelves avail us any thing, if we lack thofe efientials of charad:er and conduA which the Jews lacked, genuine belief in Jefus Chrift, ge- nuine virtue, and a genuine felf-denied holinefs. The Jews were ftiled the fons and daughters of the Almighty, his ek^^firfi-born^ called^ begotten^ height, faved^ redeemed^ wajhed, fanSlified^ &c. Yet now C 365 3 nt>w they are the hifs and banter of the nations^ and only accounted the fcum and fcourings of the earth. AH this happened in confequence of their prefun^ing too much upon the above titles of re- lationfliip between God and them, and their mif- apprehending the charadler of Jefus Chrift, and reje6ling him as their mafter and teacher. And what is very remarkable, their mifapprehenfion of him confifted in their conne(5ling too high a de- gree of greatnefs with his perfon and government j that is, fuppofing and expefting him to be a mighty temporal prince and conqueror. On ac- count of this they were rejcfted as a people by God, and fcattered in a vagabond ftate over the face of the earth. Chriftians, who are not the na- tural ftock, but a wild ingrafted branch, fhould be forewarned by the judgment pafled upon them. Inftead of fuppofing Chrift to be a mighty tem- poral prince, as the Jews did, Chriftians have MADE him one in the perfon of kings and empe- rors, and from hence derive their fole powers and commlftions to preach the Gofpel. This is cither the cafe, or they have annihilated him in their vwn perfons^ as members of eftabliftimcnts ruled by their own laws and ftatutcs. — This is a moft folemn and affefting matter ! — The Jews have a degree of fairnefs and candour in their condud: towards the Mefliah : they rejed him altogether, without any hypocritical profeflion of refped for him. C 366 ] him. Chriftians will not formally rejeft him, be- caufe they could not then mock and infult him with the burjefque of authority, as Herod's fol- diers did of old : nor could they make ufe of this plea at the Laft Day, Lord^ Lord, have we not pro-, phefied in thy name, and in thy name done many won- derful works. Farther: Chriftians have not only annihilated Chrift's jurifdidion, by throwing his Gofpel into an eftablifhment, and transferring his perfonal au- thority to that eftablifhmtnt : but they liave alfo annihilated his true identity, by worfhipping him as the very and eternal God. If Chrift be God, he cannot pofTibly have any other being fuperad- ded to Deity •, and of courfe, as already obferved, there is no fuch perfon as Chrift the Meffiah and Mediator. This is dire6l Deifm, or rather Judaifm, the rejedion of Chrift. Moreover, God could not become man, without ceafing to be God, any more than man can become God, without ceafing to be man; as infinite felf-exiftence that moment ceafes, when it becomes contingent and temporal. The doclrine of a Trinity, therefore, notwithftanding all its orthodox foftenings, varnifti, and gilding, leads diredly to Atheifm. This C 367 ] Hear the voice of Reafon, and of Scripture. That voice fhould not be taught to utter falfe and artificial founds. No man haih feen God at any time : fle/h and blood canmt inherit the kingdom of God. i. e. God cannot put on a vifible appearance or fimilitude ; and what is material and bodily cannot inhabit the regions of immateriality and fpirit : this is the voice of Scripture. No objeft or being can be greater or lefs than itfelf. God cannot become man, without being lefs than him- felf; nor can man become God, without being greater than himfelf. This is the voice of Rea- fon : and to borrow an expreffion of Mr. Burgh's, " I do not remember in my life to have met a man in whom the excellencies of head and heart had united, who did not fubmit his own under- ftanding to the word of his Maker." Let me add to this Gentleman's remark, that the voice of Reafon is the word of our Maker, as well as the voice of the Old and New Teftament. Indeed, the latter voice only fpeaks to us by the former-, agreeable to two remarks of our Saviour — IF/iy even of your [elves ^ judge ye not ivhat is right ? Luke xii. 57. No man can come to me^ except the Father^ which hath fent me^ draw him. John vi. 44. Teach, inftru'd him, by his own talents being put into ex- ertion: by the exercife of the underftanding ; rea- fon judging of fads by comparing; the confe- quences of v/hich are illumination and convidion.. Our [ 368 ] Our Saviour is the beft commentator on his own words. Bo not th'.nk I ijoijl accufe you tG the Fathr : there is one that accttfeth yoH, even Mcfes in whom ye trufi : for had ye helieved Mofes^ y-e liwidd have be- lieved me, for he wrote of me. But if ye believe not his writings^ hsw fliall ye believe my words ? John V. 45» 46, 47- Th E phrafe then, draw him, meant no more when it was fpoken, than the Jews exercifing com- mon fenfc, in comparing the prophefies concerning Chrift with their fulfilment in his perfon and cha- ra(5ter who addrejfed them as Chrifl : by which it appeared, he was the very Perlon which Mofes had defcribed him to be. The paflage referred to by our Saviour, in the writings of Mofes, is this,' ^he Lord thy God will raife up unto thee a Prophet, from the midfi of thee, OF THY BRETHREN, LIKE UNTO Me ; ItntO him ye Jliall hearken. Deut. xviii. 15. It is thus confirm- ed by God himfelf : And the Lord fc'd unto me (Mofes) they (the children of Ifrael) have well fpo- ken that which they have fpoken : I will raife them up a Prophet, from among their brethren, LIKE unto thee, and I wHl put my words in his mouth, and he fliall fpeak unto them all that I fliall command him. Ibid. 1^, 18. This [ 3^9 ] This famous prophefy not only affedls the Jews, but all Trinitarians who rejed the Saviour of man- kind, on account of his refemblance to Mofes. The Jews ftill expert him in the fun-clad charac- teriftics of temporal conqueft and dominion j and Trinitarians have converted him into the fupreme God : fo that the great predidted Prophet, raifed up from among his own brethren, like unto Mofes, with refpe6l to the Jews and Trinitarians, has not yet made his appearance in our world. We have here a chain of evidence that cannot be unlinked. Jefus Chrift declares himfelf to be the identical Perfon mentioned by Mofes : Mofes fpecifies him as a Prophet, in a national fenfe al- lied as a brother to the Jews, and like unto him- felf: and almighty God recognizes and promifes to raife him up, in the fulnefs of time, as this very perfon. Now this conclufion neceflarily follows : either that Mofes miftook the perfonal identity of the Prophet he foretold, additional to the ftrange circumftance of Chrift miftaking himfcif, or Jews and Trinitarians have egrcgioufly miftaken his perfon, charadler, and commiflion. The Chriftian world ftigmatizes the miftake of the Jews, though it is by no means fo extravagant a one as that of Trinitarian theifts, who miftake A a a man [ v^ ] a man for the very and eternal God ; whereas the Jews only miftake one man for another. The latter are now fufferlng, in all nations, the heavy and exemplary punifhment of their unbe- lief: nor Ihould the former deem themfelves fe- cure from punifhment, at fome extraordinary pe- riod or another, while they ferioufly refle6i (which I believe few do) upon the words fubjoined to the Mofaic prophefy : And it Jliall come to fafs, that who fo ever will not hearken unto my words ^ which he (Chrift) /hall /peak in my name^ I will require it of him. Deut. xviii. 19.* Nor can I help thinking, that this denial of Jefus as a prophet and teacher, like unto Mofes^ is the great fin of Apoftacy, marked with fuch ftrong outlines by the Apoflle Paul, the abettors of which he * It would fcem that Great-Britain is now puniflied for fome ca- pital error either in her civil or religious conftilution ; perhaps both. Unexampled misfortunes have overwhelmed her. The difmember- ment of her empire, by her Colonics becoming independent ftates, is probably only a prelude to her diflblution. Shall all thcfe happen without a caufe ? No ! Impoflible ? Let other writers afiign their refpeftive caufcs : the tovo following I would lay my finger on as alone adequate to the effeft. Firft, Spiritual Idolatry., worfliipping God in the fimilitude of a man. Second, Ci-vil Liolatry, beftowing on a mortal many of ihc names and titles of God, and acknowledging his jurifdiftion in matters of confcicnce, whereby he takes place uf Chrift, and/// in tkc temfle of God as Cod. [ 2.1^ 3 he tells us, the Lord will confume ivith the fpirit of his mouth, and will dejiroy with the brightnefs of his coming. 2 ThefT. ii. 8. It is indeed the fource of all other apoftacies, as it turns the Gofpel Revelation into fable and romance. If Jefus Chrift be the eternal God, fo Jikewife was Mofes, as the likenefs between them was general and charafteriftic, the perfonal terms thee, me, him, being only ufed. If him, applied to Chrift, only meant a part of his nature, the hu- man J the terms thee, me, applied to Mofes, muft be confidered as meaning a part of Mofes's nature likewifc : the reftricflion or refer ve is abfolute in both cafes, or in neither. Add to this, that Mofes, by the nomination of Jehovah himfelf, was made a God to the Egyp- tians, with Aaron to attend him as his prophet ; whereas Chrift is no where direftly named God from Heaven, but only my beloved Son. The fame vicious metaphyfic that would afiimi- late the Godhead and Manhood in Chrift, would have aflimilated the Godhead and Manhood in Mofes, had fuch metaphyfic been then ftarted. — Modern orthodoxy terminates in a general aflimi- lation of the Godhead and Manhood. How per- tinent and well-timed then was Paul's admonition ! A a 2 Beware . C 372 ] Beware left any man fpoil you through philofophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men^ after the rudi- ments of the world, and not after Chrift, Col. ii. 8, 9. Philosophy and vain deceit were the parents of a Trinity, departing from the fimplicity of the Gofpel, and fuppofing that the Deity was defina- ble, and one part of him comparable with another, fo as to conftitute, upon the whole, a perfed equa- lity in his parts or perfons. It has ever fince been fupported, after the tra- ditions of men (the dogmas and diftindions of the fchools) after the rudiments of this world (with the compulfive authority, emoluments, and corrup- tions of this world at its back) and not after Chrift. He, inoppofition to it, all. along afierted the ab- folute onenefs of God, or that his Father was the only true God, and he himfelf the Chrift, or that Prophet, foretold by Mofes, refpeding whom it was declared by the Almighty, And I will put my words in his mouth, and he fhall fpeak unto them all that I fhall command him. A CONSIDERABLE portion of Mr. Burgh's la- bours has been to prove God incomprehenfible, and to guard his readers againft every attempt to comprehend him; by which, in fadt, he demolifhes the whole fabrick of a Trinity, as the eftablifh- ment ment of that furprifing dodrlne proceeded In the belief, that he was diftinguiihable and definable in his fubftance, confequently comprehenfible ; at Jeaft, that two parts of him were fo, the Son, and the Holy Ghoft; for to fay the truth, we have not one attempt on canonical record to inform us what the Father, the firfl of the triad, is. Pofitively, not one. Yet we are perpetually told, as often as t\iz cathedral bell tolls, that two other Perfons are like him, equal to him, and one with him; which is juft faying, that the Son and the Holy Ghoft are like — we know not wliat : equal to— we know not what : — and one with — we know not what. It has been faid, that whatever the Father is, that is the Son, and that is the Holy Ghoft. Is It fo ? Then the Son is the Father; the Holy Ghoft, Fa- ther. In other words, the Perfon of the Father is the Perfon of the Son, and the Perfon of the Holy Ghoft. Moreover, whatever eflentially be- longs to God, muft be an effential perfedion. Now, the kyzvvKa-ioc, or ftate of being unhe^^otten belongs to the Father, as his fpecial, incommuni- cable prerogative : the T^vvka-iq, the ftate of being begotten, to the Son, as his : and the E^cTropsuo-;^, the ftate of proceeding from, to the Holy Ghoft, as his. A a 3 Here [ 374 3 Here then, each of the Perfons has a perfec- tion peculiar to itfelf, and without which it could not fubfift, and which, by being communicated, would deftroy the perfonal identity of each o- ther : confequently, the three Perfons fubfift by inequality. All inequality in God is imperfedion, therefore God is a threefold compound of imper- fedion. — To the honour of Chriftian Divines, neither Hobbes nor Spinoza ever difcharged fo hoftile a fliot from the battery of Atheifm. On the whole, it is manifeft, that the dodrine of a Trinity was firft put together by means of a falfe philofophy, againft which the Apoftle Paul admonifhes all Chriftians, and from an audacious confidence that God was comprehenfible and de- finable. To break to pieces therefore the meta- phyfical idol, is the becoming province o^ true phi- lofophy. Surely, when Trinitarians prefumed to bring the Deity within the afligned limits of defi- nition and perfonality, telling us, to the nicety of a fraftion, what and how many he is j Unita- rians may be fairly allowed the ufe of Reafon, to aflert and demonftrate what he is not •, or that the infinite, eternal, felf-exiftent, immutable Je- hovah, can never be defined beyond fimple perfo- nal unity. Unitarians [ Z1S 3 Unitarians worfhip God on account of his being all-wife, all-powerful, all-good, and having fupreme dominion over them : not on account of this, that, and the other defignation beftowed on him by his own creatures j confequently, they can- not be one moment wrong in their devotion. Tri- nitarians, however, worfhip God on account of metaphyfical relations to them, artificial modes of fubfiftence in his nature, and order of precedence in his perfonalities : confequently, they worfhip him within limits, fenfible appearances and refem- blances. With what unaffuming truth then may the former adopt our Saviour's words, in reply to the woman of Samaria ! Ye ivorJJiip ye know not what : We know what we zvorJJiip. John iv. 22. We are led here to the abfurdity of one man writing a book in order to anfwer another man*s convidions. Mr. Lindfey objured the Athanafian do6lrine, and authenticated his convidions by giv- ing up his profeiTion and livelihood, the enjoy- ment of which the Law accounts incompatible with the belief of one God being only one Perfon. — The attempt was like calling a perfon to account, for the oiFence of being an honeft man, a man of principle. Mr. Burgh may alledge, that he wrote and publifhed his book to prevent the alarming in- A a 4 fedtion [ 376 ] fedion from fpreading. He tells his readers To, page 225. But the apology amounts to the fame folecifm as the former, viz. to prevent men's convi6lions in confequence of the light and evidence laid be- fore them. If Mr. Lindfey makes profelytes (and many to my knowledge he has made) it muft be by transfufing his convidions into the breaft of his reader, by a faithful detail of thofe proofs and documents that produced them in himfelf : to pre- judge thefe convidions, or counter-operate them by anticipation, is forcibly to fhut the bodily eyes of our neighbour, againft the benign influence of the fun. To lay embarraflments and difficulties in the way of a man's convidions, upon a momentous point of belief, is taking an undue advantage of him, unlefs infallibility be on the fide of him who lays them. To fend an antidote abroad againft an alledged poifon, is not only taking it for granted that a thing is a poifon v/hich may not be fo, but it is putting the alternative in the power of the world, of proving even the antidote itfelf a poifon. Mr. Burgh, by the attempt of counterading one poi- fon, may have thrown another in his reader's way, and [ zn ] and perhaps a much more malignant one. — If his reader thinks fo, it certainly is fo, on as juft a foundation as Mr. Burgh calls the Reverend Apo- logift's book a poifon. Mr. Burgh's words there- fore are adoptable by every writer, in oppofition to any antagonift, being emanative from one com- mon principle of felf-fufficiency. " A deadly poi- fon (fays Mr. Burgh) has been adminiftered to the public — I have hafted to prepare the antidote, and have not paufed to fugar over the brim of the veflel in which I offer it to their lips : he muft love the poifon who rejeds the antidote that is not feafoned to his palate." (P. 225.) Such language as this may be compared to a conwion^ which every one may occupy at liberty, but no one claim as a property. Unfuccefsful and difappointed muft every writer defervedly be, who fteps forward to fix a ftandard for the human mind, refpeding objects in themfelves immenfe and boundlefs, and which grow more and more fo, the oftener they are revolved, and the nearer men approach the invifible world. Mr. Burgh indeed has a different idea : " No- thing can be more abfurd than the Idea of a pro- greffive religion." (P. 220.) What [ 378 ] What does this Gentleman mean by Religioft? Is it that cooped up (in durance) in Articles and Confeflions? — This fort of religion, it is granted, has no progrefs, more than an oyfter from its bed, or a reptile from its flime. But is this Religion ? — alas ! it is no more than the fkeleton, the dried bones and finews of reli- gion, hung up in Churches and Univerfity-halls, to prove — that the fpirit is fled, and animation is no more. Of fuch a Religion, in its unprogreflive ftate, I wiih Mr. Burgh much joy. Mine be the religion of an Apoftle. Add to your faith (fays Peter) vir- tue j and to virtue knowledge ; and to knowledge, tem- perance ; and to temperance, patience j and to patience^ godlinefs j and to godlinefs, brotherly kindnefs ; and to brotherly kindnefs, charity ! — Mine be the religion of a Redeemer. As the lightning cometh out of the eafi, and fJiineth even unto the wejl ; fo fhall alfo tlie coming of the Son of Man be. — The coming of the Son of Man : — the progrefs of religion, the pro- pagation of the Gofpel, the diffufion and increafe of divine knowledge. Religion is a divine sci- EiJCE, always opening new and aftoniihing won* ders to our view. But •■sS'V C 379 ] But this wllli and endeavour of the orthodox to impound Religion, is natural enough. It would ceafe otherwife to be a corporational property ; a pecuniary means of fubfiftence among the Clergy, No perfon would give money annually to be taught what was fufficiently obvious without teaching. Hence, falfe Religion is all profound myftery, obftrufe hieroglyphics. To decypher thefe, we muft keep a fet of Reverend men in pay. Yet, all the while, pure religion and undcfiled befot God the Father, is this — to viftt the fcitherlefs and widows in their affii£lion, and to keep our/elves unfpotted from the world. This fort of religion requires no oth'Cr teaching than to know where the fatherlefs and widows refide, and to turn our backs upon the temptations of a flattering world. Take Religion out of the hands of the Clergy, let it not be brought to the Procruftean teft of Creeds and Confefiions, and every pofition of the Bible falls into fenfe, the tenor of it becomes a courfe of argument. In its prefent fituation, " there is not on earth a book fo fraught with contradic- tion and irreconcileable abfurdities, as that which is acknowledged to be the word of the God of truth,"* TlIESZ * Scriptural Confutation, pjjr 49. [ 38o 3 These words, it is true, are applied to a diffe- rent fubjed by Mr. Burgh ; but only in the way of afTertion, which is a privilege claimable by every mouth, and every pen. Seated in this Gentleman*s eafy-cufhioned chair, I would do myfelf the honour of adopting his conclufions, at the fame time that I think my- felf authorized to rejedt his premifes. — Writers may affert, and alTert, and aflert — till their goofe- quills are worn to the flumps, and their ftandifhes become as dry as their manner of dogmatizing. "What then ? — if they offer nothing to fatisfy the common fenfe, and excite the genuine conviflions of mankind, they only realize fo many buoys as their emblems, in two refpe6ls not very gratifying to human pride •, firll, with refpedl to refilejfnefsy and fecondly, with rcfped to their being always on the jur face, — The world is made up of affer- tions ; of foap-bubbles floating in the air, that may be blown into nothing by a breath of the mouth. Every thing, in Religion, is carried with fo much Articular and Confeffional didatorfhip, in modern times, that the Bible is become a mere dead letter^ a caput mortuum. Thus have I, with a freedom and independence of fentiment becoming a difciple of Chrift, ani- madverted on the avowed principles and apparent tendency C 38> ] tendency of Mr. Burgh's Scriptural Confutation. 1 have endeavoured to afcertain the right of private judgment, and to prove that it belongs to every individual without dillindlion; that no man ought to believe beyond illumination •, and that in pro- portion as a man is felf-denied, virtuous, and holy, he is illuminated to difcern religious truths. Thefe confift not in fpeculative opinions, but moral max- ims ; not in fafhionable dodrines, ftamped with parliamentary or convocational authority, but in pradical rules of condudl and behaviour in pri- vate life. — A few more paflages fhall end our tafk. Mr. Burgh's concluding argument is too ex- traordinary to efcape obfcrvation. Indeed his whole book is a tiflue of extraordinaries. " Either Jefus Chrift is one with the Father, God, or he is not ; either the Holy Ghoft is one with the Fa- ther and the Son, God, or he is not — on fuppo- fing the negative, a confequence enfues horrible to thought. The God of peace becomes a fire- brand of contention : ten-fold confufion proceeds from God, who is not the author of confufion : the fpirit of truth is a liar : the fimple and guilt- lefs zeal of the Apoftles, crafty and defigning du- plicity : the wifdom of God, folly, beneath the foolifhnefs of men : I fhudder while I write."* But * Scrip. Conf. p. 229. The remainder of tlic paragraph is fo en- tangled in its conftruflion, that I have oinitted tranfcribing it. / [ 382 ] But why did Mr. Burgh drefs out a raw head and bloody bones, a monjtrwn horrendum ingens^ at which he himfelf turned pale and took fright ? I may venture to affirm, not a man in Chriftendom would fhudder at it, but himfelf. If our fcriptural confuter be not refolved to fhudder on, without the indifpofition of an ague, I v/ould advife him to difarray the hobgobblin of its fheet, and fend it to its place. Independent of that unfettlednefs of flefh, called J}iuddertng^ let me take the freedom to ob- ferve, that the major and minor here, the premifes and conclufion, bear no proportion to each other; and Mr. Burgh is, it may be prefumed, too good a logician, not to draw the proper inference. How eafily may Mr. Burgh's artillery be turned againft himfelf! Either God is but one perfon, as being one fpirit or whole principle of adlion, or he is not : either the Father alone is that one God, or he is not : on fuppofing the negative, a confe- quence enfues horrible to thought ! — the God of peace becomes a firebrand of contention ! — the fpirit of truth is a liar ! — the fimple and guiltlefs zeal of the Apoftles, defigning duplicity ! — the wifdom of God folly, beyond the foolifhnefs of men ! — Nihil tarn prope^ tarn proculque. All C 383 ] All our author's folemn dogmatifms (and they are nearly as numerous as his pages) may be thus feized on as contraband property •, rather as the property of every one, and converted to a ufe quite the reverfe of what he intended. His utmoft addrefs feems to have been exerted to furnifh in- ftruments of attack to his adverfaries, though, I make no doubt of it, with the full merit of non- intention on his part. His laft paragraph but one, alfo, is curious enough. He allows equal difficulty on both the affirmative and negative fide of a proportion, yet adds, one of the two we are under an abfolute neceffity of adopting. The fad is, in fuch a cafe, that the negative becomes an affirmative, and the affirmative a negative; while his readers are placed in a fituation fomewhat fimilar to that of the ani- mal between the bundles of hay. The refult of Mr, Burgh's labours in the Athanafian theory, is this — vje muji believe the do^rine of a trinity^ be- caufe of thofe infuperable difficulties that attend it, on account of which we ought not to believe it, and in complaifance to which we ought to believe every thing flfe^ however difficult. Mr, Burgh's attempts to be confequential, are without end. " The whole extent of created na- ure bears to God but a like proportion as an atom." C 384 ] atom." But how can this be, without the whole extent of created nature being a(5lually diminifhed to an atom ? Objeds have the fame proportion in the eye of God, as in the eye of man ; other- wife the diftinflion of objedls is imaginary, not real. A mountain is eflentially bigger than a mole-hill, and vice verfa^ even to that eye which takes an infinity at a glance. The contrary idea degrades the Almighty, as if a particle of fand, which a fnail may carry on its back, required the fame degree of divine energy to preferve it in being, as the magnificent and ftupendous glories of the ftarry heavens ! In point of independence on the power of God, and refift- ance to his will, every thing in univerfal nature dwindles alike into infignificance and nothingnefs. But the fon of God, while he bids us confider the ravens^ thai neither jo'U} nor reap, neither have ft or e- houfe nor barn, yet Godfeedeth them ; admonifhes us likewife to keep in mind — how much better we are than the fowls. Luke xii. 24. Mr. Burgh farther compliments God with a mi- crofcopic eye, as if he required, like his creatures, to have objccls artificially magnified and dimini- fhed before him, to know their properties and di- menfions. With this fame microfcopic eye, God may " as accurately fee and mark the fall of a fp arrow. C 385 ] fparrow,.as the crufh of v/orlds :" but furely they are obje(5ts of confideration in the divine mind in- comparably different. The authority of our Lord, I hope, Mr. Burgh will allow to be paramount to all. Fear ye not therefore^ ye (every, even the meaneft difciple of Ghrift) are of more value thnrk many fparrows. Matt. x. 31. This gentleman's fyftem is a ftrange higgledy- piggledy of human greatnefs and littlenefs, pride and humility. " God's love is infinite, (fays he) and we have been the objed; of it, an obje<51: as ob- fervable by him as all worlds-, for little as we are, we bear the fame proportion to him." Yet notwith- ftanding this hyperbolical elogium on mankind, he immediately fubjoins : " let us then lay afide that pride, which, in the pretence of humility, withdraws mankind from the eye of his Maker ; from that microfcopic eye, &c." But how is it pofTible for man to relinquifh the highefc fenti- ment of pride, when he contemplates himfelf as bearing the fame proportion to his Creator, as all v;orlds ? — Thus Mr. Burgh, after he has filled the goblet of gold with the nedlar and ambrofia of flattery, and prefented it to our longing lips, dafhes it with wormwood, and throws our (lo- machs into a flate of violent kicking. B b Moreover, [ 386 ] Moreover, he affures us that the love of God is infinite, and that we are the objefts of it : yet be- fore he ends the paragraph, he coldly obferves — " we fliall fee that we may possibly be within his contemplation, the objeds of his favour ?" Here certainty becomes a thing merely pofTible, and the infinite love of God fubfides into dry contempla- tion and favour ! Mr. Burgh fires and cools, freezes and thaws us with the fame breath. It is plain he wants to reduce us to the condition of the Laodicean church, neither cold nor hot, and only fit to be — fpewed out of the mouth. — To throw the whole into a fyl- logifm, " The whole extent of created nature bears the proportion of an atom only to God ; man bears the fame proportion to him as all worlds : ergo, an atom is man, and man is an atom." If this be the appropriate fenfe in which we are to acknowledge the myjiery of God, and of the Father, and of Chriji, felicitated be Mr. Burgh in the pofiefTion of his orthodox myftery. To be ferious. The acknowledgment of this myf- tery, if we believe the writer to the Coloffians, confifted, in their hearts being comforted, knit toge- ther in love, and unto all riches of the full ajfurance of underjlanding. Coloff. ii. 2. Paul C 387 ] Paul wanted the Coloffians to acknowledge the myllery in confequence of underftanding it, as no- thing can be acknowledged to be what it really is, but (o far as we can conceive it to be what it really is ; whereas, if we credit Mr. Burgh, we ought to acknowledge it, becaufe we cannot underftand it. ^lid feqiiimiir aut quern ? St. Paul, or the com- mentator on St. Paul ? In truth, it is owing to the moft grofs mifcon- ception that any thing in the Christian fyftem is accounted a myftery. The Apoftles, particularly St. Paul, made ufe of it in reference to the igno- rant ftate of the heathen world •, but to Gofpel converts, the inftrudled difciples of Jefus Chrift, nothing remained myfterious, conformable to the declaration of our Lord. I am come a light unto the worlds that whofoever believeth in me Jliould not abide in darknefs. But the myftagogues of the age would treat us, in their writings, as if we were ftill in darknefs, notwithftanding the light of the world came pur- pofely to expel that darknefs, and ordered his dif- ciples, through all nations, to fet their candles on the moft commanding elevations, in order to fhew light all around, and not under bufhels and fea- ther-beds. They treat us, in confequence of the moft perverfc anachronifm, as if we were Romans^ B b 2 Corin- C 388 ] Corinthians^ Galatians^ Ephejians, P/nlippians, ColoJ- fians^ and T'heffalomans^ to whom the Apoftle Paul wrote his Epiftles, in the infancy of their conver- fion from Pasjan darknefs. If il's are ignorant of Chriftianity, fo were the Apoftles i nay, our Lord himfelf. We certainly know all that they knew. / have given unto them (his difciples) the words which thou gaveji me, and they have received them. As thou haji fent nie into the world, even fo have I alfo fent them into the world, O righteous Father, the world hath not known thee : but I have known thee, and thefe have known that thou haft fent me. And I have declared unto them thy name, and will declare it : that the love where- with thou hafi loved me, may he in them, and I /» them. John xvii. PaJJim. Numberless other improprieties might be poin- ted out, in Mr. Burgh's Scriptural Confutation, but as the fubjedl requires no more, from motives of delicacy to our author, no more fhall become the fubjeft of animadveriion, unlefs the Layman be re-fummoned at a future period. — It muft occur, methinks, to the moft thoughtlefs, that thofe who have proclaimed the merit of Mr. Burgh's book, did certainly never read it with attention. In mo- dern times, fame blows the clarion of literary tri- umph more from complaifance to rulers, and the popularity C 389 ] popularity of a party, than from regard to honeft defert. Before the Scriptural Confutation was read in Ireland, the Irifh clergy fpoke of it in all com- panies as a performance altogether unanfwerable. To my knowledge, many wanted to force its fale in country towns, afluring the bookfellers of a fpeedy and extenfive demand. The event, I be- lieve, difappointed them, as the art of the clergy, in modern times, is pretty generally feen through. I AM perfuaded, did Satan himfelf write in be- half of the Athanafian Trinity, he would be coun- ted orthodox, at leaft, by our black-coated fervants of the ftate. Nor have I the fmalleft doubt, if Parliament thought proper to enjoin the worfhip of the four Seafons, as four Perfons, or the twelve, figns of the Zodiac, as twelve Perfons, in con- jundlion with the Godhead, that there would be found Priefis enow, for pay, to fall down and adore the unutterable myftery. Parliaments, before now, have done no lefs aftonifhing things than to appoint the Seafons and Zodiac-figns to be worfhipped. Previous to the Vlllth Henry, they adlually eftabliihed the adora- tion of the Mafs-god: /. e. the flour and water god, which in cafes of weaknefs and indigeftion, might be ejefted either upwards or downwards, quite per- B b 3 fe<5t [ 390 ] fed and entire, fo as to be carefully cleaned ^nd fwallowed over again, for adoration afrefh. All nature may be ranfacked to furnifli fo {hocking a fpecimen of vile devotion.- — Yet a Bri- tifh parliament countenanced and recommended it, and a whole national body of Britifh Clergy were found blafphemous enough to cherifh and fondle it. Nay, at this enlightened day, in the Communion Service, we have much remaining of this abominable, this deteftable fuperftition. For inftance, " the body of our Lord Jefus Chrift, which was given for thee, preferve thy body and foul unto everlafting life," " The blood of our Lord Jefus Chrift, which was ftied for thee, preferve thy body and foul unto everlafting life." Here the flefti and blood of one Perfon is confi- dered as preferving the flefti and blood of another Perfon, though all flefti and blood are perfe6lly alike — duji thou art, and unto dujl JJialt thou return. "We are exprefsly told befide, that — fle/Ji and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God. — Again, " If any of the confccrated bread and wine remain, it fliall not be carried out of the Church, but the Prieft and fuch other of the communicants as he fliall then call unto him fliall, immediately after the blefling, reverently eat and drink the fame." Here, ;n confequence of confecrati'on, we have fomething MORE [ 391 ] MORE than bread and wine, notwlthftandlng both the bread and wine are infinitely purer, in them- felves, than the hands of the idolatrous Priefl:, who prefumes to confecrate them : and we have the phrafe, " reverently eating and drinking," left Proteftants ihould forget they were once Papifts, and had reverently ate and drunk their God. Such are the unavoidable confequences of in- dulging the idea of fenfible objedls of devotion, which a proteftant writer, and a late fenator of this nation,* has avowedly and explicitly laboured to eftabliih.f On this account his book is extolled by our high-church clergy, who without fuperftition, and worfhip adapted to the fenfes, would have nothing to do, more than the Heathen priefts of old, after their temples and images had been deftroyed. With regard to the generous part of the Cler- gy, they acquiefce in opinion with their brethren, without reading the Scriptural Confutation at all : wifhing to enjoy the emoluments of their profef, iion in peace and quiet, letting all matters ftand as they ftood two hundred years ago, when Pro- teftants firft began to awake from the trance of Popery. Every flaw found in legal religion, did B b 4 they * Ireland, f Script. Conf. p. 150, and ellewhere. [ 392 ] they fufFer themfelv^s to reflect upon it, would turn out a thorn in the fleHi, a fmite of confcience to them i therefore they ftifle reflexion, and plunge into the world. If people are afraid to have their inward fenfi- billties and convidions alarmed, let them hold their tongues, and not officioufly draw the atten- tion of mankind. Their avoiding all opportunities of fearching to the bottom of a fubjeft, proves there is fome- thing lying concealed below, that would difgrace them, if brought on the furface. Truth and ho- nefty are like a fair, open landfkip, that cannot be examined by too full a light : whereas falfehood and difhonefty may be compared to the den of a favage, which no fun-beam can enter, without dif- covering the hideous remains of rapine and blood, Religious and civil liberty are exquifitely coht neded. No man can be obfequious to religious thraldom, and at the fame time genuine in his feeling of political independence. The holy vef- tal flame mufl burn pure and fteady in both lamps, enlivening each other ; otherwife they are no bet- ter than thofe of the fQoliJh virgins. Whoever. C S93 ] Whoever avows the fentiment of political free- dom, yet all the while evinces himfelf a Chriftian of a narrow bigotted turn, glued as it were to a particular Church, that man fuftains a double and contradictory charafter. « Rigid orthodoxy and patriotifm are as repug- nant ideas, as light and darknefs, a dungeon and the open air. The principle that fupports ortho- doxy is a vile fubmiffion to ufurped authority in religious matters. Patriotifm is a manly, vigo- rous fpirit, exerted againft a like ufurped autho- rity in civil : of courfe, they are non-eledlricks, felf-repellants. A flave to religious Creeds can- not, at the bottom, be elfe than a flave to political Creeds, however he may affume a different ap- pearance, from motives of ambition, or luft of popularity. The only teft, whether of Patriotifm or Chrif- tianity, is virtue and moral integrity in private life. No ChrilHan whatever can fulfil his engage- ments to God, v»ho leaves his engagements of humanity and charity to his neighbour and his fellow unfilled : neither can any Patriot faithfully difcharge his duty in a public Ration, who makes it no point of confcience fcrupuloufly to difcharge it in private. Noify pretenfion, in cither cafe, ferves to render the characler fufpicious. Real Chriftianity, C 394 ] Chrlftl^nlty, as well as real Patriotifm, is unoften- tatious and unafluming. One accurate rule of judging may be laid down. It is this : he who would over-rule the under- ftanding and convidions of another, in any cafe whatfoever, by authority, would do it in all cafes, when prompted by intereft. For example, if with one ftrong hand, contrary to the evidence of com- mon fenfe, he would thruft down our throats the doftrine of a Trinity, he would with the other, contrary to all ideas of right and juftice, thrufl down our throats the dodlrines (fo dear to kings, and the fatraps of kings) of Divine indefeafible rights and non-reftjlance. Political tyranny and fpiritual thraldom, are fentiments that took their rife at the fame time in the Luciferian bosom, and, in all kingdoms, have carried on, in conjunc- tion, the fame nefarious fcheme. Therefore, Mr. Lindfey ftiles Human Authority, in fpi- ritual matters, a — monftrum^ horrendum, ingens, in- forme. It is indeed no lefs than man making him- felf God i fitting in the chair of infallibility, and holding fupreme dominion over human fouls. — The pretence of reformation was, Human Autho- rity adling to excefs in the perfon of the Pope : the fcandal of reformation is, the fame Human Authority a(5ling to excefs in theperfons of Bifhops. Tq C 395 ] To proteft sgaind the latter Is as much the ■duty of every Chriftian, as it was to proteft againft the former : and a reform from Anglican Protejlant Popery is equally incumbent on us now, as a re- form from Italian Catholic Popery was confefledly incumbent on our forefathers. A MONSTER in Italy is a monfter In England. The mere adt of tranfporting a bear or a tyger from the wilds of Africa Into Great- Britain, alters not their nature. The idea of a monfter is fome- thing fierce and untameable. Human authority, in fplrltual matters, is this fierce, untameable mon- fter J only fatlsfied with the prey langulftiing un- der its paw. Its being confined to its den, and not fuffered to hurt any one, is a convincing proof that it is confidered as a monfter. Jt is the fame monfter that was let loofe in the days of our Charles's and James's, fporting in havock and blood; but now it only growls, grins, and champs on his chain, like his ftiaggy brethren of the Tower. Another idea of a monfter is, fomething dlf- torted and disfigured : human authority is this diftorted and disfigured objcdl. A few particu- lars need only be mentioned to afcertain it: A WRETCHED C 39<^ ] A WRETCHED body of mortals, pretending to dlfcern, and judge the fpirits of men, which is one of the primary prerogatives of God. The infpiration of Scripture made to pafs through Creeds or ConfefTions, like the mighty ocean hud- dled up in a mill-dam, or the glory of the fun confined to the wick of a candle. The body of men, that decree and aft, as if thefe were prafti- cable, confift of monfters, human monfters^ how- ever outwardly they may fill our eye as part of our own fpecies. The epithet, therefore, which Mr. Lindfey be- ftows on Political Eftablifliments of Chriftianity, is unanfwerably pertinent, notwithftanding Mr. Burgh's attempt to invalidate it by a fneer. This Gentleman tells us, " it is not his office to ftand forth the panegyrifl of the Liturgy of the Efta- blifhed Church," (p. 215) why then did he make it his office.? He fays " fome of the wifeft men, that have ever adorned our ifland, have conceived it one of the fined: comppfitions that have ever flowed from the pen of man." But who prithee were thefc wifeft men .'' — no other than the very perfons that were sworn to defend it, and paid for extolling it. The Koran of Mahomet deferves a like elogium. It is ef- tcemed by Mufielmen as '•' one of the fineft com- pofitions C 397 3 pofitions that has flowed from the pen of man,'* Whether fhall we believe Turkifh or Engllfh biihops, PRAISING THEMSELVES ? — The Mafs-book of Popery alfo is efteemed " one of the fineft compofitions that has flowed from the pen of man." And is not a Roman Catholic, as a man, equally intitled to credit with an Englifh Catholic? — I may think my book, and Mr. Burgh his Scriptural Confutation^ " one of the finefl: compofitions that has flowed from the pen of man." But who would believe either of us ? yet have we as good a claim to belief, as Mr. Burgh's " wifefl: men that have ever adorned our iflands," when they bedaubed the Common-prayer-book with panegyric and flat^ tery. The Scriptures themfelves can never be fpoken of in too high a fl:rain of eulogy-, whereas, every thing elfe, that would prefume to teach what the Scriptures can alone teach, whether a Parlia- ment, or a Convocation, ought to be marked vvitk the moft: depreciating terms of language. The fentiment on the v/hole amounts to con- fefling, or not confefTmg, the Lord Jefas. Who- ever confefles the authority of a Liturgy before men, denies the Lord Jefus before men : and whoever rejeds human compofitions, as fr-.ndards of belief, and only acknowledges the Scriptures, confefles the Lord Jefus before men. Had C 398 ] Had any of the difciples, inftead of their Maf- ter, llftened to a Scribe or a Pharifee, and become his difciple •, they had done the fame thing which many do in our day, by fubfcribing to a Liturgy. It is true, fuch a religion as the Church of England could not be conduded without a Li- turgy. Men would be quite difgufted to hear only the word of God read in Church, or moral duties paraphrafed, with nothing of their own in- fpiration and revelation intermixed. It is a Reli- gion of their own inventing and putting together, that they are jealous of: any other may be left to the wide world for them. This fort of fabrick, which Mr. Burgh calls OUR Church, it is confcfTed, Dr. Clarke, Bifhop Hoadley, Mr. Lindfey, and many other eminent perfons, have endeavoured to fhake ab imo, nor endeavoured in vain. With regard to the devo- tees conneded with this artificial temple, no doubt, the attempt amounted to Mr. Burgh's full idea of — defperaie dilapidation : and in the fame (enCe Chrift himfelf was a desperate dilapidator, when he foretold (what he himfelf was the occa- fion of) the dilapidation of the Jewifh Temple. Mr. Burgh (p. 217) takes the liberty of tranf- grefling the limits of his own appointment, in or- der C ^99 ] der to defend Articles of Religion : but, in be- half of himfelf, his attempt had been better let alone, as his remarks are nothing beyond common place, the hacknied language of a party, and dif- cover a total unacquaintance with fome of the moft capital produdlions of the prefent age, on that fubjed.* Human Articles of Religion is a paralogical conceit. Religion came from God, and could only come from God. Human articles of religion, therefore, is the fame thing as if we fhould fay, divine articles of ftate-policy, tithe-farming, or /hoe-making. How does Mr. Burgh defend his articles ? In the very way Papifts defend theirs. " It was thought necefiary to aflift the weak, in forming their conclufions upon the whole, and to fum up in brief thofe dodrines which lie diffufed in the facred writings." (p. ■iiy.) The fentiment here avowed is the central pillar of Antichrift's throne. Who are they whom Mr. Burgh lliles the weak? With regard to Chrift's articles of faith, none are weak : a ruftic at the plough is as compleatly * The ConfefTiona) 5 Letters to Judge Blackftone ; Letters to Dr. Rutherfonh ; Letters to the Prelates ; the Diflenting Gentleman's Letters to Mr. White ; Dr. Prieftley's Inftitutes of Natural and Revealed Religion ; and the Theological Repofitory, conduijted by the laft-mentior.ed great: Chriftian Philcfcpher and Divine, C 400 ] compleatly competent to judge of them, as a Mr. Burgh, or an Archbifhop of Canterbury. Our Saviour thought fo, for he almoft always preached to ruftics. Let the Apoftle Paul call Mr. Burgh, and our reforming bifhops, to account. Him that is weak in the faith receive ye — but not to doubtful disputa- tions. JVh& art thou that jiidgeth another man's fervant ? to his own Mofier he flandeth or falleth ; yea, he fJ-iall he holden up ; for God is able to make himfland. Let eveiy man be fully perfuaded in his own mind. But why doji thou judge thy brother; or why doji thou fet at nought thy brother f fir we fhall all fiand before the judgment f^at of Chriji. Let us not therefore judge one another any tnore, but judge this rather — that no man put a jiumbling block, or an occafton to fall, in his brother* s way : for he that in thefe things ferveth Chrijiy is acceptable to God, and approved of by meit. Let us therefore follow after the things which make for peace, and things where- with they may edify another. Had this Apoilolical expoftulation been at- tended to, we never had known any thing fo ab- furd as human articles of religion. The firft fug- geftion of them was forbidden. — It was leading men into doubtful difputations •, judging other men's fervants, fetting at nought our brother, and putting I [ 401 ] putting ftumbling blocks in his way. Nothing jcan more ftrikingly examplify the efFe(5l3 of na- tional eftablifhments, than the above pafi'age ! — The melancholy experience of a thoufand years has iniprefled the ftamp of truth on it. Not- withftanding, hear Mr. Burgh. " It appears to me abfolutely neceflary that certain articles of faith fhould be fubfcribed by the pallors in our church, otherwife we muft ceafe to be a church." (p. 217.) Strange enough, to hear of an abfolute neceflity to break the precepts of Scripture !- We muft ceafe to be a Church, /. e, to be the Church of England. But what is the Church of England more than other Churches ? She may appear of confequcnce to fuch as enjoy her revenues, and fuck in her dodrines with their nurfe's milk, as the Churches of Rome and Constantinople appear to Turks and Romanifts: but here her confequence ends. Were England fvvallowed up by an earthquake, ftill we fhould have the Church of Scotland, and the nu- merous Proteftant Churches abroad, efpecially thofe in the vaft continent of America. Above all, ftill we fhould have the word of God, the Bi- ble, the original charter right of all Churches.-^ Thus, inftead of one bigotted, interefted Church, we Ihouldhave (what Mr. Burgh dreads fo much) C c as C 402 3 as many Churches as parifli minifters. This was the ftate of the Apoftolic age. What is ftill a more important confideration, bigotry, difTention, ftrife, and covetoufnefs, would thus totally ceafe, as the pojfejfton of all would be the jealoufy of none.-^ Such a ftate of Religion would feem infinitely pre- ferable to that wherein " Articles fumming up in a few words the efTential doftrines diffufed in the Scriptures, ought to be prefcribed to thofe who are authorized to teach; and thefe alone fhould they be permitted to promulgate, whatever they MIGHT PRIVATELY THINK." (p. 2 1 8.) For it Can- not be denied that the religion of Pekin, Indoftan, Conftantinople, or of Rome, would anfwer Mr. Burgh's paftors, as well as the Proteftant religion. Any of the former would happily hit off their /r/- 'vate faith, while the bare profeflion of Chriftianity would evince their puhlic faith. This Gentleman talks (p. 219) of " puritani- cal abfurdity," and the " whimfical interpretation of weak teachers ;" — but what puritanical abfur- dity was ever half yi? ahfurd, or what whimfical in- terpretation of weak teachers, half fo iveak and whimfical^ as the above pofition '^, It turns Chrif- tianity into an engine of the ftate, a corporational manoeuvre, a political tub to the whale. I WILL I [ 403 ] I WILL not exprefs any doubt of Mr. Burgh's being an excellent politician, an accomplilhed rea- foner, in matters of civil deliberation j but I am quite convinced, and humbly think the foregoing pages have proved it, that he is a ftranger to the true police of Chrift's kingdom, "ujkich is net of this world i that he has moft obftinately miftaken the figurative parts of Scripture, for plain didaftic writing ; and hence has drawn the moft abfurd conclufions, to fupport a favourite hypothefis, in right of which any thing or every thing may be proved. That his fcheme of articulr.r belief, 2in(i fiibf crip tional (onndntk in the faith, tends to overturn the truth and integrity of devotion, to debafe the fentimental value of Chriftianity, ob- ftruft the diffufion of Gofpel light and knowledge, and enervate the energy of Reformation. These confequences, I prefume, he faw not; but they are inftantly deducible from his prcmi- fes. When we conftitute any fet of men our fpi- ritual mafters, we that moment fet afide Chriji, as our mafter, and the fufficiency of Scripture to teach us the way of falvation. I THINK moreover, that by negleding to con- fult authors of approved and diftinguiflied repu- tation, on the reverfe of the fubject he handles, he h.z.s forced his readers to rejed him, in point of C c 2 authority, [ 404 3 authority, as forming a contraft with them difpa- ragingly inferior. That by exhibiting proofs (fuch as they are) on his own fide only, keeping back from the eye of the reader thofe that have been repeatedly and unanfwerabiy urged on the other, he has left his readers no alternative, but to con- clude, that he was adually afraid of them. Be- fide, he has left it a matter of incidental choice, by difqualifying Reafon, whether the Religion of Great-Britain be indeed more excellent, more wor- thy the attention of mankind, than the Religion of the Vatican, or the Seraglio. I WOULD not be thought fevere on this Gentle- man, now made a learned Do5ior^ in reward of his orthodoxy. I am told he has liberal notions in politics, and that he condemns the prefent fatal reigning jy ft em. I refped and honour him for it. But 1 would have him to be confiftent on the whole. He may as well pin his -political faith to Lord North's fleeve, as his religious faith to the fleeve of a bifhop •, fuppofe him, for inftance, the Archbilhop of York. Nay, I would go farther and obferve, that the people of the prefent age might, with the fame confiftency and decorum, take their -political articles of belief frorh the ftatefman of the Reformation, as they have taken their religious articles of belief from the hijfiops of the Reformation. CONCLUSION. C 403 ] CONCLUSION, Addreffed io all liberal readers of their Bible, all intel- ligent, diftnterefted Chrijlians, all affe^ionale Dif- ciples of She great Friend and Saviour of Mankind. Rara temporum feJicitas, ubi fentire quse velis, et qiis ftntias dicexe licet. IT is not a little humiliating to the mind of a Chriftian Philofopher, that it fhould yet be a matter undetermined among us, whether we ought to woriliip one or three Gods. This miferable di- lemma, this demur of fenfe, has been eftablifhed by the aftonifhing conduft of divines, in whofe hands, it might reafonably have been expefted, this primary tenet of religion, the divine unity, would have remained facred and immaculate, how- ever all men befide had been lefs happily difpofed. The Scriptures, both Mofaical and Evangelical, loudly proclaim, there is but one God, and that the Father, perfonally,. is that one God. On the C c 3 other r 406 ] Other hand, our three eftablifhments of Chriftia- nity, the Prefbyterian, Epifcopalian, and Papal, as loudly maintain that — in unity of the Godhead there are three Perfons equal in power and glory. — Now the alternative is this : are Chriftians to believe thefe Churches (felf-made and felf-taught) implicitly, in a concern of fuch infinite moment, or to believe their own fenfes, which cannot err, when they read the word of God ? These feveral Churches a<5t under the imme- diate operation of bribes, of temptations afting upon appetite; appetite, therefore, being thus fub- orned, kept in durance by the wages of corrup- tion, they themfelves cannot be admitted as evi- dences : of courfe, agreeable to the di(5lates of right reafon, whatever a man conceives to be truth, after a full and impartial enquiry, to him it is truth, and whatever a man conceives to be falfehood, after the fame full and impartial enquiry, to him it is falfehood. All national Churches fvvearing to one another, and fuborning one another, in the perfons of their members, in defiance of full and impartial enquiry, at the bar of the public, and in the court of confcience, ought to be fet afide as witneffes of the truth, agreeable to the conftant procedure of civil judicatures, where interejied evi- dence is for ever rejeded. The C 407 ] The ipatter then Is brought to this fhort iflue : common fenfe and common language are our only- judges of what is facred, as well as what is pro- phane •, of what is revealed, as well as what is not revealed. It is certain then, my Chriftian brethren and friends, that God cannot be more than one perfon, without being more than one fpirit ; for a fpirit without perfonality is nothing beyond an abftract idea, like nature, e/Tence, conftitution, &c. A perfon likewife, without being an integral fpirit, can be nothing beyond a mode, quality, attribute, or relation. In plain Englifh, God muft be one in every refped, or he cannot be one in any re- fped; : whatever pluralizes him in the manner or oeconomy of his exiftence, pluralizes him alfo in his exiftence or beingr. '&• For inftance, a king ads in and by the perfon of as many of his minifters as he chufes to em- ploy i but ftill the King is one perfon, and fupe- rior to all. — To render it ftill more intelligible. George, the Britifti monarch, adts in the perfon of the Houfe of Lords, and in the perfon of the Houfe of Commons. Again, the Houfe of Lords and the Houfe of Commons a6l in the perfon of George. But would ?ir\y political Trinitarian go the length of faying, that the Houfe of Lords, or the C c 4 Houfe C 408 ] Houfe of Commons, was one with George the Britifh monarch, king ? — Farther, we may fay, that in unity of the kinghood there are three perfons, the perfon of the Sovereign, the perfon of the Upper houfe, and the perfon of the Lower houfe: but yet, with rcfpedl to the perfecflion of being, each is diftinft in itfelf, is independent, and is felf-operative. The King is but one perfon, yet he fits and keeps in motion the fprings and wheels that regulate the whole machine of government ; Whoever he be that is appointed the inftrument, the envoy, embaffador, or reprefentative under him, ftill it is the king that potentially wills and adls. This matter is never miftaken j nor does the multiform and complicated bufinefs of the ftate, carried on by commiffion from him, ever lead us aftray from the flmple idea of the King's being one perfon only. But this accurate rule we confine to a mortal on the throne. When we contemplate God the Father, at the head of univerfal monarchy, we give him two co-adjutors equal in power and glory to himfelf •, we conlider him, either as impotent or unwilling to hold the reins in his own hand ; therefore, we have generoufly created for him, in our imaginations, two other almighty perfons, to j-id him of the trouble. But [ 409 ] But here extreme folly ftares us In the face. If the two co-adjutors, the Son and the Holy Ghoft, be very and eternal God j then would the Son and the Holy Ghoft need another Son, another Holy Ghoft, for the fame reafon that the Father needed them. Moreover, felf-exiftence and felf-all-fuffi- ciency need nothing; fo that if God the Father needed the co-adminiftratlon of two other perfons befide himfelf, then was he neither felf-exiftent nor felf-all-fufflcient, contrary to the whole tenor of Scripture concerning him : confequently, he whom the Scriptures reprefent as God the Father, and who is defcribed every where with all poftible magnificence, majefty, and glory, cannot be the fame God the Father who ftands firft on record in the Athanafian triad, exifting in dumb raree-ftiew: the popular dodrine therefore of Creeds and Ca- techifms, my Chriftian brethren and friends, ends, unqueftionably, either in downright atheifm, or a plurality of Gods. — Be not deceived : the quib- bling of your pretended paftors and teachers, and their folemn Sunday's rehearfals and doxologies, tend to reduce you to the condition of the Athe- 7iians of old, who worftiipped an imknGzun God; or to that of the Samaritans, who worfliipped they knew not what. Such rehearfals and doxologies no more conftitute God, than the recapitulated armorial titles of empire, in the mouth of a play- a(5lor, conftitute the bufkined hero, an emperor. A FARC* C 410 ] A FARCE is ftlll a farce, whether exhibited at Drury-Iane, or in the cathedral of St. Paul's, in a pulpit or on the ftage : nor are lawn fleeves, fur- plices, or bands, in any refpeft more facred, than the theatric fock and bufkin. Fafliion reconciles us to the holinefs of the one above the other, as it reconciles Papifts to the fanftity of crucifixes, and ave-jnaria's ; reconciles a fine Lady to the ccconomy of her head-drefs, and a fine Gentleman to the cut of his cloaths. Hence the unhappinefs of our times. Every man, who reads his Bible with honeft fimplicity, reads that he is commanded to worfhip but one Gody one fupreme felf-exiftent^cryi/zz, the Father Almighty -, but if he joins any of our worftiipping afiemblies, he finds adoration paid to two other feif-exiftent almighty Perfons, one of them called God the Son, and the other God the Holy Ghoft. How is he to ad:? Shall he give up the autho- rity of his Bible, and acknowledge the authority of a prayer-book ? — renounce obedience to God his heavenly Father, and obey mortals like him- felf ? — Till the latter of both thefe become the af- firmatives of his duty, he is under a prohibition to enter any eftabliilied Church whatever, as a wor- shipper. In this fituation, indeed, every Chriftian has at lead one exquifite refource! — to retire within himfelf, the temple of his mind; that temple not made C 4>. ] made with hands, and which lafts eternal as the God who is adored in it. In other words, he has the refource of fulfilling his Saviour's precept. When thou p'ayeft (wor- fhippeft, for prayer and worfhip are the fame adl) enter thy clofet^ and fray to thy Father izihich is in fecret, and thy Father which feeth in fecret Jliall re- ward thee openly. It is confeffed, that worihip, as now carried on, is fomething different from praying : but the dif- ference is all human ; therefore unobligatory. — Praying in the temple, and worfhipping in the temple, are fcriptural terms of the fame meaning. So far as public worfhip differs from prayer, or perfonal addrefs to God, in which are included, invocation, acknowledgment of fins, petition, praife, thayikfgiving, afcription \ fo far, if the difference is enjoined by law, do frail mortals worfliip them- felves, and one another, " fitting as gods in the tem- ple of God, and fhewing that they are gods." — In the above flrifture, I only include the ordinary Sunday's fervice of the Church. The neceflity of renouncing her communion, if we would fulfil the Scriptures, becomes ftill more urgent, when we confider her high feflivals, where the mofl exprefs adoration of two others called God, befide the Fa- ther, the only true God, takes place ; and particu- larly. C 412 3 larly, when that difgrace of human compofition, that infult on common fenfe, the Athanaftan Creed^ is folemnly rehearfed to the gaping, ignorant mul- titude \ — that worft relid of Popifh impiety and nonfenfe ! the flaming record, the fanguinary char- ter-deed of Polytheifm ! From the Athanafiari fymbol being repeated fo ilatedly, it would feem as if a certain dafs of Chriilians were afraid idolatry would be baniihed ■off the earth, notwithftanding the defign of Chrift's miflion was to reftore mankind to the knowledge and worfhip of the one true Gcd. Why ^\(q is it retained in our Churches, to the oiFence oi many, the illumination of none, and the fcandal of all ? — By what authority ? — That of the ftate ? 1 jiave the higheft reverence for the civil ctmfiitution of my country, and believe it the moft excellent in the world r'but its authority has its hitherto Jhalt thou comCy and no farther. It has no dominion over confcience. Confcience is an independent power, fwaying -xw invijibk fceptre, on an invifihle throne, held immediately from God, and under him only amenable to Jefus Chrift. No fover:ign has any dominion over his peo- ple, half fo inherent, half fo divine, as Confcience [has over the individual. The C 413 ] The pretence therefore of our Clergy, for read- ing this idolatrous refcript, on account of obeying this higher powers, Bifhops and Magiftrates, is an idle one. The higher powers can exert no au- thority in the cafe, without oppofing the autho- rity of God, who has referved. all cognizance of fpiritual matters to Jefus Chrift, whom he has ap- pointed the univerfal judge, at the lajl day. Moreover, the precept, obh'gatory on the Clergy, is to read it fourteen times in the year; confequently, they have as good a defence for omitting it altogether, as any one of the pre- fcribed times ; and difobey the higher powers as virtually in the one cafe, as in the other. Add to this, that the higher powers have an equal privilege to injoin Mahomet's Creed, as Athanafius's. Refpec^ling the Gofpel of Chrifl, both are the bold forgeries of adark and barbarous age ; and both reft on the fame bafis, human pre- fumption and apojlacy. — Some, I know, have fpirit and confcience enough to perfevere in not reading it, nobly indifferent about the confequences, which indeed, I believe, in this generous and liberal age, are by no means threatening. Others, 1 have reafon to think, deteft the abominable fymbol in their hearts, but in compliment to fome dillln- guifhed bigot in their parifh (for we have Lay- bigots [ 414 3 bigots as well as Reverend ones) who happens to have a commanding fortune, or a feat in Parlia- ment, and whofe religion is that of the eye and ear^ never once negleft reading it. This fort of guilty complaifance to people aho've us, has done infinite injury to the caufe of Chrif- tianity. People in high life perform the fhowy parts of Religion with ftubborn punftuality, be- caufe it is the whole of their religion, and keeps them fomehow in countenance, after having dif- pofed of their confciences to courts and courtiers, and become the penfioned votaries of corruption : but why /hould others, Vvfho have an hereafter to think of, and look upon the independence of their mind in the fame light as keeping the temple of God holy and undefiled, why fhould they reft fatisfied with this papiftical mummery of worfhip, no better than the utterance of a parrot, the gef- ticulations of an harlequin ? Bells fummoning men to Church, on fuch an errand, is not only one of the grofleft mifconcep- tions of duty, but of God himfelf. 1'he kingdom cf God Cometh not with ohfervation : the kijigdom of God is within you. Had our prefent fticklers for reading the Atha- nafian Creed lived in the days of the Apoftles, they C 415 ] they would have been among the firft to aid and abet the high prieft and council, in bringing Pe- ter and the other apoftles before them, to anfwer for the horrid mifdemeanor of — obeying God ra- ther THAN MEN. A6ts V. 29. The high prieft and Jewifh council had as much authority to reftrain the Apoftles from teaching in the name of Jefus, as any of our law-courts or biftiop's-courts to interfere with our performance or non-performance of public worfliip : therefore, fo far as our Clergy read, or refrain from reading the Athanafian Creed, merely in compliance with the command of a biftiop, or a civil magiftrate, they ad a part contrary to that of St. Peter, and the other Apoftles — obeying men rather than God. Civil maglftrates, and ecclefiaftlcal courts, have no more authoritv in matters of relio-ion now^ than civil maglftrates, and ecclefiaftlcal courts, in the days of Peter and Paul : confequently, that fame fpirit of fubmlflion to the higher powers, vyhlch, in our times, flaviftily influence eftabllftied clergy- men, had it been exerted in the firft age of Chrif- tianlty, would have totally deftroyed its efficacy, by furrendering its rights into the hands of mer- cenary priefts among the Jews, and perfecuting governors among the Romans. Every C 416 3 Every Clergyman then, whether bifhop, arch- deacon, dean, re'dor, or curate, who reads the Athanafian Creed, which is an impious appendage to the Revelation of Jefus Chrift, as a ftated part of God's worfhip, in his own perfon keeps up that oppofition to the invifible kingdom of God, which the Jewifh rulers did of old ; and which, if not over-ruled by providence, would afluredly, in the end, radically deftroy Chriilianity. Clergymen, who are afraid of having their gowns ftripped off, in confequence of negleding to read the Athanafian Creed, from the fame prin- ciple of ignoble fear, would inculcate the do6lrine of Tranfubftantiation, were it the will of the higher powers : for the convcrfion of flefh and blood into bread and wine, is not a greater difficulty to be- lieve, than three Almighty fpirits metamorphofed into one Almighty fpirit — three incomprehenfibles into one incomprehenfible — three eternals into one eternal — three Gods into one God— and three Lords into one Lord ! If Popery then were the eftablifhed religion of this country, onr teachers, if congruous with themfelves, could not in confcience refift the higher powers, but thunder out damnation againft un- believers in the myftery of the real prefence, as they C 4>7 ] they now thunder out damnation againft unbelievers in the myftery of the Athanafian fymbol. Civil magiftracy and government in all kingdoms, whe- ther Chriftian or Antichriftian, are invefted with equal authority from God. In fhort, the kings of Spain and Portugal have as good a right to jnake a Papift COMPULSIVELY, as the King of Great-Britain has to make a Protectant. — Our Clergy, though men of education and letters, would feem lefs di- reded by the principles of Common Sense, in the grand outlines of their conduft, than any fet of men whatever : they are even afraid to talk of the common fitnefs of things, in Religion, fuch blinded dupes they are to their own Forms and Creeds. It is plain then, my Chriftian brethren and friends, that the worfhip of the eftabliflied Church, by and through trinitarian forms, is a worfhip of human device, and, of courfe, ftands on no higher authority than the worfhip of the hoft, of the Virgin Mary, and all Saints, not to mention bufts, images, and pidlures. Proteftant princes and ru- lers have no more title to injoin the worfhip of a trinity in unity (three Supreme Beings in one) than Roman Catholic princes and rulers have to injoin the worfhip of the hoft, the Virgin Mary, all Saints, &c. nor, while we retain the one, with obftinate devotion, can we rationally juftify our- felves in renouncing the other. Papifts, by re- D d taining [ 4>8 ] taining the worfhip of all, preferve a confiftency of charafter : whereas Proteftants, by pretending not to be Papifts in fome particulars, while they are ejfentiiaMy fo in others, con trad the vjrtual guilt of popery, but lack its ingenuous fpirit. Farther, if we examine this affair with proper attention, we fhall find that Proteftants, while they abftain in words from worfhipping the Virgin Mary, and all Saints, avow the fentiment, and eftablifh the do(5trine, on which the worfhip dulia and hyperdulia is built. In confequence of the apotheofis of the man Je- fus, and his having taken with him into Heaven all things appertaining to the perfeftion of man's nature, it cannot be doubted, he noijo retains the fame afteclion for his Mother, and his beloved difciple, which he fo tenderly expreffed on a dif- trefling and melancholy occafion; efpecially when it is confidered, that the generous, humane, focial feelings, are among the firil perfe<5tions of man's nature. In this fituation, how natural is the de- fire to put up interceflbry petitions to Mary the mother of Jefus, and John the beloved difciple of Jefus, for any thing wifhed from God, or the {on ai God ! Nay, if thefe two bleffed fpirits can be fuppofed to have peculiar intereft in the celeftiai refjions, others may be fuppofed to have intereft with them, according to certain degrees of friend- fhip C 419 ] ' fhip and intimacy that fubfifted upon earth ; fo that we fliall have the whole cumberfome fyftem of faint and image-worihip made out at once'. The whole is a lengthened and continuous chain, the head-link of which is the deification of ReCn and blood, in the perfon of Chrift, and the bot- tom-link the adoration of rufty nails, and fplin- ters of the holy crofs, on which the Saviour of mankind was crucified. It may be added, that whoever takes away the under-links, the nails and fplinters, takes away the upper-links alfo.— Moreover, with regard to the Virgin Mary, particular adoration feems to be couched in thefe words : Be/iold, from henceforth, all generations fiiall call me bleffed. Luke i. 48. No higher a degree of diftindlion is conferred even on her fon. Hofanna to the fon of David: blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord. xMatt. xxi. 9. Protestants, with a fingular degree of fquea- miih delicacy, refrain from fuch an cxprellion as, the blefj'ed Virgin, the IJeffcd Mary, although they have exprefs fcripture warrant for the contrary: yet they are for ever befiowing the epithet on the fruit of her womb (one of the alleged perfons par- ticipant of the Godhead) without any fcrJptural warrant whatfoever. [ 420 ] In this procedure, bigotry and ignorance are alike confpicuous. If the Son be intitled to ado- ration, the Mother is furely more intitled, inaf- much, as the one is but the gift, and the other the giver j the one the efFedt, the other the caufe. Without the inftrumentality of Mary, we never fhould have had Chrift at all ; confequently, the Trinity would have lacked one of its Perfons : in other words, if Mary, the blefled Virgin-mother, had not exifted, God, if Chrift be really God, would not have exifted. Farther, if Chrift be in his own perfon God, then was Mary the mother of God. In whatever light, therefore, the rubje<5b Is viewed, we are inevitably plunged in idolatry, and put under the neceflity, with Papifts, of worfhip- ping the goddefs-mother, by adopting the fenti- ment of worfhipping Jefus Chrift, as God the Son. In whatever fenfe we confider the Saviour of man- kind, how high, how great, how glorious foever, in that very fenfe, Mary was his mother : fo that if the whole Chrift confifted of very God and very man, in one perfon never to be divided, the whole virgin-mother likewife confifted of very God and very woman, in one perfon, never to be divided. The fame divine energy, efflatus, or overftia- dowing, that made Chrift a fon, made the Virgin Mary [ 421 ] Mary a mother. Therefore, till the flefh and blood of the man Jefus can be proved to have been eflentially different from the fiefh and blood of the woman Mary, that is, the former flefii and blood more fufceptible and retentive of the hypo- Jlatic jun£fion, than the flefh and blood of the lat- ter, Mary the mother of Jefus muft neceflarily be contemplated to have been equally co-ordinate and co-extended with the godhead, as her Son ; and if we adore the one, and put up petitions to him, we ought to adore the other alfo, and put up pe- titions to HER. But this defledion, my Chriftian brethren and friends, from the unaffe6led worfhip of the one God and Father of all, is not confined to the En- glifli church : the Scotch church (as well as moft of the diffenters from it) feems to be equally confu- fed and unfettled with refpe(5l to this primary objed. The Weftminfter Confcflion recognizes two fu- preme Perfons, befide the Almighty Father, which ConfefTion is in the hands of all Prefbyterians, and acknowledged to be the ftandard of their faith. Their epifcopal brethren, however, have the ad- vantage of them in point of confiftency. — While they acknowledge the Son very and eternal God, and the Holy Ghoft very and eternal God, they pray to them refpedlively as fuch : but Prefbyte- D d 3 rians [ 422 ] fiaiis at no time offer up petitions to either the one or the other : they would feem afraid to con- fefs in deeds, what they make no fcruplc to con- fefs in words ; either afliamed of the Perfons, each of whom they have conftituted God, or believing them impotent to anfvver their prayers. Presbyterian teachers, indeed, talk of Chrift's fupreme deity, and confole their hearers with the idea of his Omnipotence, to make good his pro- mifes and engagements to them ; as if the Al- mighty Father were not perfonally fufficient him- felf, to perfecfl and accomplifh all things rela- ting to the falvation of his creatures, without the intervention and co-operation of a fecond perfon. Whenever Chrift is fuppofed to ad abfolutely in, by, and of himfelf, then the Perfon of the eter- nal Father becomes extincl : fo that God the Fa- ther is annihilated, in order to make room for God the Son, unlefs we fuppofe that the latter ads only by the will and appointment of the former, which inftantly involves fubordination and inequa- lity. Prefbyterians, therefore, cannot be confi- dered in any light, other than that of idolaters. This matter is alfo noticed in the -Dedication. Connected with this apoftacy from the Chrif- tian faith, is the fentiment for ever prayed and preached in our ears, among old light Prefbyteri- ans. C 423 ] ans, of God doing this, that, and the other thing for the fake of Chrift ; as if the a6l done, for the fake of any other perfon, could be half fo indear- ing to the God and Father of all, as when done for the fake of himfelf. If, however, God the Father is propitious to his creatures, for the fake of God the Son ; then is the conclufion plain to demonftration, that God is propitious to us for the fake of himfelf : fo that, in fpite of words, Patripaffianifm is at the bottom of ail. Thus it appears, that no intelligent, diiinterefted reader of his bible, no unpenfioned, no unliveried Chriftian, can preferve the integrity of his alle- giance to his God and heavenly Father, and at the fame time continue a member of any efiabliffied church, whether of Rome, England, or Scotland. All of them are conftitutionally hoftile to, and de- ftrudiveof each other: ail of them are merely human in their conftruflion : ail of them have corrupted the worfhip of the Father, in fpirit and in truth : THEREFORE, all of them fhould be fet afidc, and fhould be held accurfed according to the Scrip- tures. If we, or an angel from Heaven, preach unto you any other Goffel, than that we have preached unt4> you, let him be acatrfed. D d 4. . The [ 424 ] The feveral members of eacheftablifliment may fight under the banners of their feveral chiefs, and all the while moft furprifingly think they do God fervice : but the true difciple of Chrift, the true worfhipper of the Father, mtiji always be a dis- senter from thefe. Our Lord and his Apoilles were literally dijfen' ters from the Jewifh eftablifhment : their miflion was to deftroy it, and all other eftablifhments, for ever : confequently, all fwearing and fubfcribing members of eflablifhments, whether of Rome, England, or Scotland, in efFed fet at nought their authority, and countera6l the influence of their example. When we refledt upon this fubje(5l with due at- tention, it is impoflible to fupprefs our indigna- tion at certain clergymen of the eftabliflied church, who, inftead of endeavouring to profelyte Papifts and Mahometans and Heathens to the Gofpel of Jefus, fpend their time and exert their influence to induce Proteftant Diflenters to conform : the fame thing as if any of the Scribes or Pharifees had endeavoured to profelyte the difciples of our Lord to the Mofaical obfervances and ceremonies. It would difgufl any man of fenfe or delicacy to be informed of the pitiful arguments y//f/; clergy- men ufe in their blind zeal of profelyting. Protestant C 425 3 Protestant DiiTenters, when they a6l up to the independence and fpirit of their principles, arc the only genuine converts from popery. The mere latitude of Rome does not make a Papift, becaufe tyranny, idolatry, and fuperftition, are the bloated poifonous weeds of all climates. Every rigid, bigotted, high-flying churchman, whether in Scotland or in England, is a rank Papift, con- cealed under the mafk of epifcopalianifm or pref- byterianifm : nor is a prefl^yterian or epifcopalian papift lefs odious in the fight of God, than a Ro- man-catholic papift. A TRUE Proteftant Diftenter is not a Papift in any fenfe, becaufe he worfhips but one God, the Father, and acknowledges but one fpiritual mafter, the Lord Jefus Chrift, agreeable to the requifition of Scripture. How ridiculous then every attempt to make a proteftant diflenter conform] — Conform to what ? — To creeds — that injoin the adoration of three Gods, under the equivocal appellation of three Perfons ! — To creeds — that have added to the fcriptural terms of acceptance and falvation, which our Saviour calls, JJiutting up the kingdom of heaven againjl men !— To creeds — that have dared to conftitute finful fallible men judges of their neighbours' faith and confcience, ufurping the pre- rogative of Chrift, and antidating the l^Ji Judg- ment! — In fuch a cafe, how meritorious difient! how C 426 ] how glorious non-conformity! — Wifdom fiandeth in ihe top of high places — by the ivay in the places of the paths — flie crieth at the gates^ at the entrance of the eityy at the coming in of the doors — Unto yoUy O men, I call, and my voice is to the fons of men — O yefunple, tmderftejid vsifdom^ and ye fools ^ be of an anderjlandifig heart. It cannot efcape the confideration of the fenfi- ble and ferious, that there are fome important re- volutions yet to happen in the Chriftian Church, Many confiderable prophefies, relating to. its ex- tenfion and future fuccefs, remain yet unfulfilled. Its prefent ftate is fo much the reverfe of purity and perfection, that a general renovation and re- form muft, fooner or later, unqueftionably take place. We are in no refpect changed for the better, but in many refpedls egregioufly for the worfe, fince the asra of Reformation from Popery. A dif- honourable tale ! A tale attefted by every cir- cumftance of our condition ! The laurels of Re- formation ought to wither on the brow of Britifh pride, upon attending to the degree of eftimation it was held in by two diftlnguifhed prelates, one of whom wrote the hiftory of our boafted Refor- mation, and the other nobly purchafed a crown of martyrdom in its caufe. " Our C 427 ] " Our Reformation, (fays BiHiop Burnet) To happy as we are hi what we enjoy of it, was never perfeded; neither can it be, till we all come openly to acknowledge it, and to adl upon that principle which was the only ground on which the Reformation did or could ftand; viz. that the Scriptures are the only rule of faith to ChriftianSi and that every Chriftian, as he is to anfwer toGod for his own anions, and not others for him ; (o he is to judge for himfelf, how he is to aA in matters of reliction. Where this principle doth not pre- vail, there popery {till remains, though it pafieth under the name of proteftantifm : and till this principle doth prevail, we can exped: no comple- tion of that Reformation, which as yet can only be {liid to have been happily begun among us." The fentiment contained in this very honeji paf- fage^ might have ferved me as a motto for the pre- fent work, which, notwithftanding its great bulk, I found altogether incompreflible, without doing in- juftice to fome part of my extenfive fubjeft. Let us next attend to the homely but poignant ftric- ture of the excellent Bifliop Latimer. " The Reformation is yet but a mingle-mangle and a hotch-potch : I cannot tell what — partly popery, and partly true religion, mingled together. They fay in my country, when they call their hogs; to [ 428 J to the trough — Come to thy mingle-mangle,.come, pur, come. Even (o do they make mingle-man- gle of the Gofpel ; they can clatter and prate of it, but when all cometh to all, fhey have joined popery fo with it, that they have marred it al- together." *' Rude as thefe words may feem to be, they arc rudely true. Notwithftanding the improved learn- ing, refinement, and accomplifhments of our pre- fent bifhops and clergy, the religion of our day fhould feem no better than the above mingle-man- gle and hotch-potch, partly popery, and partly true religion, affimilated together. How fhall matters mend ? What fet of men among us fhall be the inftruments of a reform ? Certainly not the members of eftablifhment, held in pay by the flate. They, to borrow a forenfic term, think in durefs, and a6l in vinculis ; confe- quently are not at liberty to look beyond their impoundment, their articles and fubfcriptions, which tie them as fail to one another, and to the anti-reforming flupefaflion of the times, as flaves are tied by fetters to the galley. The mole ne- ver performs any work above ground, but to ren- der its refldence more capacious and eafy under ground. — DifTenters, therefore, are the only peo- ple we have to depend upon, for thofe glorious changes [ 429 ] changes in the Chriftian Church, which undoubt- edly muft happen before the coming of our Lord. They were Bijfenters, who fir ft reformed from Jewifh rites and ceremonies, in obedience to the command and example of Chrift and his Apoftles. They were Dijfenters, who firft protefted againft Po- pifhfuperftition and idolatry, which had nearly gone the length of deftroying Chriftianity altogether. — They were Dijenters^ to whom the prefent con- ftitution of England, the envy and admiration of the world, owes its birth. And, at this very mo- ment, THEY ARE DissENTERs, among whom the hallowed lamp of divine liberty alone burns pure and bright: — who alone have accurate and unadul- terated fentiments of true religious and political independence, in the midft of a fuborned, merce- nary priefthood, and in the face of a penfioned, corrupt, and profligate adminiftration. Dissenters, therefore, in all nations, provided they ad up to the integrity and generofity of their principles, are the natural protecflors and defend- ers of the common rights of mankind. By means of Diflenters, the tyrannies now fubfifting on the earth, whether religious or civil, will, probably, fooner or later be overthrown, and through their hands the genuine bleflings and comforts of Chrif- tian freedom flow.— Every ProteJlaniDiJfenttr then, if C 430 3 if he a6ls up to the charter of his bible, fwears fealty to no fpiritual mailer whatever, and keeps himfelf mifpotted from the world, may reft fatisfied that, fome time or other, in the eventual courfe of things. Providence will feled hirn as an inftru- ment to bring about the excellent purpofes of farther Reformation, the glorious evolutions of God's moral government.* The * Ireland, all things confidercd, would appear to be the land of genuine DifTenters. In England, they are too near the feat of opu- lence, luxury, ami diffipation, to preferve the fimplicity and purity of their chara ] The Governor of the Univerfe has always feme favourite fpot, which he confecrates and fets apart for Minifters of Diflenting congregations are virtually Popes, as much [o as his Holinefs of Rome. They only want the crvil po^^-cr to co- operate with them, in order to extend their toes for adoration. In truth, it is the prefence or abf'ence oi ci-vil pozvcr, that eitlicr makes or unmakes Popes every where. Human -nature is the fame in Gi'eat- Britain and Ireland, as it is in Italy and Ponugal, Cliange the complexion of the goveraiKg foiven, and you tranfplant Popes from Italy into Great-Britain and Ireland, and ProteftaiU Diflenters from the Britifli ifles into Italy, Fraace, and Spain. I would take the liberty of admonifliing the DifTenters of Ireland, whom I conUder in a moft rcfpeftablc light, (as a great body of iu- dcpendent men fet apart by Providence to bring about confiderable revolutions both in Church and State) not to throw difcr'edit on the generous principles that induced them to leave the eftablifhnient, by rHabliJbmg (as I would call it) an hierarchy among themfelves, which only wants an a£V of parliament to keep it in countenance, judicially ta coudema, fine, and i/nfyrifon, like their epifccpal brethren of England, ns:he7i they ruled the fate. — Do not fufter yourlclves to be led in any town or parifli, by ajfuming individuals, who, in right of their purfe, not their undcrftanding or virtues, think themfelves qualified to dlc- tale, and over-rule. It is an eafy matter for induftry, and a well- managed confcience, to make a fortune from nothing, and to rife from the dung-hill into the pai-ade of faftiionable life: but it is not fo very eafy a matter to be the intelligait head of Freemen, Chriflians, and Proteftants ! — Neither give implicit fal:h to ftationary tead\erE, <;c/!> UP. Such men preaching up the finfulnefs of not attending on public worfhip, mufl either flatter themfelves, that it is finful not to attend upon them perfonally^ whenever they chufe to fummon us by the toll of their bells : or they muft in- dulge the flill flranger notion, that it is fmful not to attend on — fione and mortar^ in a particular form, and flanding on a particular fpot. It C 439 ] It is truly whimfical, to hear our Clergy decla- ring, that no perfon can be a fincere Chriftian, without liftening to them every Sunday. Ludicrous enough, that we cannot pray to God, or fing prai- fes to his moft excellent majefty, without all the bells of the town and country being fet a ringing! Covetoufnefs^ Hypocrif)\ and Uncharitablenefs, are three of the foulefi; fins any Chriftian can be guilty of. Thefe fins would feem infeparable from an endowed Miniflry, and the evil hence arifing an objeftion to religious eftablifhments unanfwerable. Publicans and harlots were received into the king- dom of God, while the Scribes and Pharifees (the leaders of high- church fm and orthodoxy among the Jews) were on all occafions condemned by the Sa- viour of the world. Preaching and praying in public, and much oflentatious profeflion in pri- vate, are little elfe in the hands of our modern faiiits ele5f, than the means of fcraping together fortunes from nothing, and raifing families from the dung- hill. In this fhameful bufinefs, the pimate of all England is not more anxious about his fide- boards and metropolitan veflments, than our dijfetithig teachers about their cheefes and crocks of butter ! Christianity is a feries of moral duties in per- petual exercife and advance: whatever does not E e 4 effeAually C 440 j effedually promote thefe, can be no part of Chrif- tianity. Placing religion in theory, in human fyf- tems and eftablifliments, is to divert the attention of mankind from the fubftance, in order to fix it on the contemplation of a fhadow. In other words, it is to hearken with liftlefs indolence to declamation on the ufefiilnefs of walking, inftead oirifing from our feats, and adually to walk, aided by thofe (inews and mufcles God hath given us. Hence, while an eftablifhed Clergy grow rich on the induftry and neceflities of the poor, rioting in luxury, and rolling in their painted carriages, as if, inftead of being the minifters of the meek and lowly Jefus^ they were indeed minifters of ftate : the people at large languifh in hopelefs ignorance, addidled to all the vices of the Heathen world, with a degree of cunning, diflimulation, and felf- iflinefs fuperadded, more than ever difgraced the worft of Pagan times ! When the Lord therefore of the vineyard cometh, what will he do unto those husband- MEN ? He WILL MISERABLY DESTROY THOSE WICKED MEN, AND WILL LET OUT HIS VINEYARD UNTO OTHER HUSBANDMEN, WHICH SHALL RENDER HIM THE FRUITS IN THEIR SEASONS. 1 SAY UNTO you, THE KINGDOM OF GoD SHALL BE TAKEN FROM YOU, [ 441 3 YOU, AND GIVEN TO A NATION BRINGING FORTH THE FRUITS THEREOF. These words would admit of much paraphrafe; but the writer has already exceeded his firft plan. Yet, as he may not have another opportunity to make his thoughts public on the fubjeds it at- tempts to difcufs, and which be holds of high im- portance, he is not without hope but the confi- derate reader will be rather pleafed, than other- wife, to have at the rate of one volume what, ac- cording to the modern art of book-making, might have made two. At all events, the writer, in the prefent work, has taken care faithfully to dif- charge his confcience towards God and towards man: that confcience, which could not reil fatisfied fhort of this publication. — If his reward is not ifi this world, and in this age, it is to be expedled in another and a better. With regard to flying in the face of a whole national church, as this work will, no doubt, be called, it may be truly obferved, that God knows no national church whatever, but " where two or three are gathered together in the name of Chrift, (that is, as Chriftians) there will he be in the midfl of them." To confine the Church of God to the cuftoms and policies of a particular kingdom, is to [ 442 ] to prevent // from becoming unlverfal, unleCs thefe cuftoms and policies fliould llkewife become univerfal, which can never happen. Moreover, whatever rettrids the Church of God, reftrids God himfelf, and controuls his operations. 'Till the government of England fliall become the uni- verfal government, the Church of England never can become univerfal ; confequently, is not the true Church of Chrift, which, in the courfe of prophefy, is to fpread through all the nations of the world. How ftrange, that our clergy are not ftruck with a pofition fo felf-evident! Flying then openly in the face of the Church of England, the Church of Scotland, and the mother of all ejia- bli/hmentSy the Church of Rome, is only endea- vouring to remove the mod formidable obftruc- tions to the Gofpe'i of Chrift. No one, with Creeds^ Articles^ and Confejfions in his hand, will agree with the writer , but let him throw thefe afide, and grafp his Bible, and our agreement in opinion will be certain. Finally, to clofe this work with a recapitula- tion of its contents, it is herein demonftrated; Firft, if Jefus Chrijl be indeed one with the Fa- ther, felf-exiftent and felf-all-fufficient God, as Mr. Burgh, and our Clergy in Creeds and Litanies, af- fure us, then have Mofes and the Prophets deceived the C 443 ] the 7^w//% ' nation, and through them the whole Gentile world. Secondly, either the people of Ifrael, a people taught from Heaven, worshipped an unknown God, with the barbarous nations around them, or all Athanasian worshippers, if there BE ANY FIXED MEANING TO HUMAN LANGUAGE, ARE AT THIS DAY IDOLATERS. tup: e n d. •■?>