Defense of the Report, Part 2 · Section 6
VI. Why ſo many Orthodox Terms, and Phraſes, which were in the Firſt Paper, are left out of the third?
Altho' I have already ſuggeſted what my Brother has ſaid of the Reaſon; yet, it being a Matter of great Importance, I will, in this place, be more full, in ſetting before you what he ſaith of the Mature Deliberation, and Just Reaſons, upon which they have Rejected thoſe Phraſes; and then ſhow who are herein imitated, and what are the moſt likely Conſequences of ſuch a Practice.
As to what my Brother ſaith of the Brethrens Rejecting theſe Phraſes, with deliberation and for juſt Reaſons, take his own Words.
Faithful Rebuke.
5. Thoſe Brethren, who had their Heads, their Hands, and Hearts too, in Drawing, Dreſſing, and ſigning the former Paper, when they had heard the Reaſon, and Arguments of the whole Body; where all Matters were managed, not in a haſty and praecipitate way, but with the greateſt calmneſs, by ſlow paces, with great liberty and freedom of debate, and being now diſ-incumbred from the Counterpoize of Oppoſitions, or Inſinuations; might, and did ſee Just Reaſons to alter the Phraſes, and new-model ſome Expreſſions.
6. And hereof you may be fuller Aſſured, inaſmuch, as thoſe individual Nine Brethren, who for, and in hopes of Peace, had ſigned the former Paper, had their Hands, and Heads, and Hearts too, in the Forming, Wording, and Aſſenting to this third: Nor did they herein alter their Judgments, or vary in the leaſt from their Zealous Deſires of Peace and Ʋnion; only they now ſaw this last Paper was in all things the ſame with the former, ſaving in ſome few Paſſages, and Expreſſions, which carryed a Face of ſome dangerous Tendencies; which, however they might eſcape the Notice of Private Brethren, could not eſcape the Obſervation of the many Diſcerning Heads, who with utmost Application, ſet themſelves to prevent any Inconvenience, that might ariſe to the Truths of the Goſpel.— The Brethren did unanimouſly agree to grant as much as the Sound Senſe could bear; and modeſtly to wave and paſs by the other, which was lyable to be Interpreted to a Senſe and Sound of Malignity to the whole of the Goſpel: pag. 29, 30.
Reply.
I. My Brother here gives a Character of ſuch as did Sign the firſt Paper; and of them, who Formed, Worded and Aſſented unto the Third: The former are Private Brethren, who, it's like, were ſo haſty in what they did, that ſome Paſſages of a dangerous Aſpect eſcaped their Notice: The other are the whole Body, many Diſcerning Heads, whoſe obſervation, the dangerous Paſſages could not Paſs; who gave ſuch Reaſons and Arguments to their Private Brethren, as convinced them, that there were Juſt Reaſons to Alter the Phraſes and new Model ſome Expreſſions. Now, that you may the more rightly Judge of this Matter, I will give you the Names of theſe Private Brethren; who were ſo Hasty and Inconſiderate, tho' when with the Body, ſo thoughtful as to receive much light from the ſtrong Reaſons of the many Diſcerning Heads: They were, Dr. Bates, Mr. Howe, Mr. Stretton, Mr. Alſop, Mr. Shower, Mr. Burgeſs, Mr. Slauter, Mr. Quick, Mr. Evans, Mr. Veal, Mr. Hill of Roterdam, Mr. Glaſcock, and three or four more. The Names of the many Diſcerning Heads, I need not give, and therefore I will leave the Reader to Pauſe a while on the Repreſentation my Brother hath given of this Matter, and go on to conſider what he further ſaith of them.
II. The Private Brethren, ſuch as Dr. Bates, Mr. Howe, &c. received ſo much light from the many Diſcerning Heads, that as they might, ſo they did ſee Juſt Reaſons to alter the Phraſes, and New Model ſome Expreſſions, ay, to wave, and paſs by ſome Phraſes, as what could not bear a ſound ſenſe, but were liable to be Interpreted to a ſenſe and ſound of Malignity to the Goſpel.
In this place 'twill be Expedient that we compare the Two Papers, and ſee what are the Waved, and Altered Paſſages.
The Firſt Paper.
1. Bearing with One anothers Infirmities, and Different Sentiments about Logical, or Philoſophical Terms, or meerly Humane Forms of Speech, in matters of Leſſer weight.
The Third Paper.
1. Bearing with One anothers Infirmities, and Different Sentiments in matters of Leſſer weight, not contending about Logical, or Philoſophical Terms, or meer Humane Forms of Speech.
The Alteration in this place, how Inſignificant ſoever, it may ſeem to ſome, is in a point, that Affects the very Vitals of our Holy Religion; For, by this Change, the words [in matters of leſſer weight,] being transferr'd [from Logical Terms] unto [different ſentiments] a matter of another kind, with an addition of [not Contending about Logical, or Philoſophical Terms, &c.] without the Reſtriction [in matters of leſſer weight] a Liberty to contend about theſe Terms in matters of greater weight, is denied, and the Aſſenters unto the Third Paper are brought under an Obligation to ſit ſtill, as ſilent Spectators, whilſt the Epiſcopians, and Socinians are Expoſing to the greateſt Reproach the Logical, and Philoſophical Terms and Humane Forms of Speech, pitch'd upon by the Church of God to Explain the Foundation Points both of Revealed and Natural Religion.
To clear thus much, I deſire to Inculcate theſe following Particulars. 1. That it's an Unexpreſſible Grievance unto all ſorts of Hereticks to obſerve in the Church of God a ſtrict Adherence to thoſe Logical, or Philoſophical Terms that have been choſen, and ſettled, as what do moſt aptly and clearly explain thoſe glorious Truths, diſcovered unto us by the Light of Nature, and Scripture Revelation; and clearly diſtinguiſh theſe moſt Important Truths from Errour.
2. That it hath been the way of Heriticks to quarrel with theſe Terms, becauſe not found in the Letter of Scripture. Tho' the Controverſie is about the ſenſe of Scripture, ay, about the ſenſe of every Text is there a Controverſie with one Heretick or other; yet, will they have us to confine our ſelves to Scripture phraſes, in Explaining Scripture phraſes.
Tho' it's undoubtedly True, that there is no better way to Underſtand the genuine ſenſe of Scripture, than by comparing Scripture with Scripture, yet it's no leſs True, that it's not ſo eaſie to convey the True ſenſe unto others without the help of Humane Forms of Speech.
Amongſt many others it's well obſerved by the learned Mr. Norton of New-England, that the moſt Peſtilent Doctrines have often times been communicated in the Language of Scripture; which was the reaſon, why St. Hierome ſpeaking againſt the Hereſies of Ebion, Photinus, Marcion, and Baſilides, did ſay, Think not the Goſpel to be in the words of the Scripture, but in the ſenſe. And Mr. Norton adds, who is Ignorant, that the Arians ſpeak Hereſie by that Text, The Father is greater than I, Joh. 14.28.
But Biddles Scripture Catechiſm is an illuſtrious Evincement of this Truth, for there he hath in Scripture words, delivered very groſs Errours, for inſtance, that God hath a ſimilitude, or ſhape whoſe Eſſence is confined to the Heavens, and the like; as alſo, that God is not Omniſcient, for he knows not what will be hereafter; Whereas, in Truth, God is Omniſcient, and Incomprehenſible too. And though theſe Terms are not in the Letter of Scripture; yet the things contained in theſe Terms and Phraſes, are Expreſly in the Scriptures. And as the learned Biſhop of Worceſter affirms. It is the Wiſer and Safer Courſe to keep in the ſame Way, which the Chriſtian Church hath uſed, ever ſince ſhe hath agreed to expreſs her ſenſe in ſuch Terms, which were thought moſt proper for the purpoſe. — And ſince no other can be found more ſignificant and proper for that End, it looks like yielding too Great Advantage to our Adverſaries, to give up the Boundaries of our Faith. Pref. to the Vindie, of the Prin. p. 2, 3. But I do alſo Obſerve,
3. That the firſt Attempts made by them, who forſake the Faith, are on theſe Terms and Phraſes. Thus the Socinians, (as I have ſhewn in my Growth of Errour) did about the year 1562. labour to engage the Miniſters in ſome parts of Poland to Abſtain from the uſe of Philoſophical Terms, or Humane Forms of Speech, and as Stonius Obſerves, it was this year concluded in a Synod at Pin…zow, that the Miniſters ſhould not uſe any Philoſophical Modes of Speech, ſuch as the Trinity, Eſſence &c. but that every one ſhould confine himſelf to the Terms uſed in the Writings of the Prophets and Apoſtles, and in the Apoſtles Creed. p. 175.
Epiſcopius, and his Followers took the ſame Method, when they Attempted to ſubvert the commonly received Doctrine about Chriſt's Satisfaction. In a Letter to Schotlerus, he confeſſes, 'twas charged upon him, that he uſed other phraſes, than thoſe received by the Church, and ſuch as ſeemed to Favour the Socinian Cauſe, and the Truth of the charge againſt him he does not deny. Curcellaeus doth the ſame, and has a Diſſertation againſt Mareſius, wherein he defends the laying by of ſundry phraſes, uſed by the Church of God, becauſe not found in the Letter of Scripture, but both Epiſcopius and Curcellaeus, did not content themſelves in the laying aſide the Uſe of theſe phraſes, but went on to oppoſe the Truths Explained by 'em, and at laſt lodged themſelves in the Socinian Tents, and are Juſtly, by Sandius, placed in the Anti-Trinitarian Bibliothec.
4. As it has been the Practice of Hereticks to make their firſt Attempts on Orthodox phraſes, that they may the more effectually Introduce their Errour; in like manner, it has been the care of them, who are ſound in the Faith, to keep up thoſe Banks or Barriers, and to Defend theſe phraſes, as the Boundaries of the Truth. When Gregorius Pauli, and many others of the Socinian Faction ſtruggled for the Diſuſe of all phraſes, not expreſly delivered in Scripture, and Sarnicius with Divers others ſo earneſtly contended for their Uſe, as they did moſt clearly expreſs the Truth, and diſtinguiſh it from Errour, that Gregories party found it moſt Prudent to admit of their Uſe. And the Orthodox in all Ages, would by no means part with theſe phraſes.
5. In Imitation of our Fore-fathers, and according to the conſtant Practice of the Church, before and ſince the Reformation, the Reverend Brethren, who ſent the firſt Paper unto the Congregational, Obſerving the Charge to be, that the Doctrine of Chriſt's Satisfaction was corrupted, did in the ſaid Paper, ſingle out, and pitch'd upon thoſe Terms, Expreſſions and Phraſes, which have been Uſed by Proteſtants, to Explain this Doctrine. Such as a Change of Perſons between Chriſt and Us; Chriſts taking on him our Perſon; and coming into our … and Stead, to anſwer for us the Obligatio… of the V…red Law of Works; the laying the … our iniquities on Chriſt; and that Chriſt … as our Surety, did feel, and …ſure of God, and the Weight of his Wrath … as men found in the Faith, they … matter of Offence to their … Brethren But
6. How … theſe phraſes are, how apt to explain the Truth, and how Neceſſary ſoever to diſtinguiſh it from Errour, it cannot be admitted by others, for the …, and ſecret Influences of that very man, who …quiſhed the commonly Received Doctrine of Protestants, in this Inſtance, are ſo powerful, that theſe phraſes muſt be rejected; and what cannot but aſtoniſh our Brethren in the Country, the Orthodox in the Church of England, Scotland and the Reformed abroad, they are rejected, as phraſes, that cannot be ſafely retain'd; that can't bear a ſound ſenſe; but are liable to be Interpreted to a ſenſe of Malignity to the whole of the Goſpel, which is ſuch a bold ſtroke, ſo deep a wound given the Doctrine commonly paſſing in regard to Christs Satisfaction, as hath not been given it by any but by ſuch as Epiſcopius, Socinus, and their Admirers; and it's carried on with ſo High a Hand, that whoever dares Appear to Detect their Attempt, tho' with the greateſt ſoftneſs of Expreſſion, muſt be cried down as a Fire-brand and a Diſturber of our Peace, and the very Man, who once Pleaded for the Faith, is turn'd with much ſeverity againſt his Orthodox Brethren, and as if this had been the time to follow the Blow, and ſtrike at all, it is Inſerted as a Term of Peace, in the Paper, ſent from Little St. Hellens, that there muſt be,
7. No Contending about Logical, or Philoſophical Terms; or meerly humane Forms of Speech; tho' about Matters of the greateſt Importance, as appears by their removing from this Place the limitation which in the first Paper, was [in matters of Leſſer Weight.]
That I may, in this place, diſcharge my Conſcience with the greateſt Impartiality, I do declare, 1. That I Charge not the Brethren at Little St. Hellens, as a Body, for I am Perſwaded the greateſt Part of them are not aware of the Deſign, or Tendency of this Alteration; and that the Chief Contriver doth gaudere ſinu, to Obſerve, how he impoſes on them; and how he has Tooled my Rebuker, who, I would hope, has his Heart as yet untainted with the Errours, delivered in his Rebuke. However▪
2. It is moſt evident to me, that as they will Anſwer it in the great Day of the Lord, they are under the ſtrongeſt Bonds of doing their utermoſt to put a Check to thoſe Invaſions made on the Truth by the Methods, uſed by the Contriver of the third Paper. I ſpeak of them, who are convinced of the truth of the Commonly received Doctrine of Proteſtants, for by Countenancing this Paper, they in Fact Renounce what they Believe to be True; and by approving of this Alteration, which will by no means allow of our contending about Logical or Philoſophical Phraſes, tho' in Matters of greateſt Weight, they open a gap for the letting in all manner of errour; For
8. They, by Aſſenting to this Paper, have put in a Bar againſt their contending for any Logical Phraſes, and when the Socinians ſhall expoſe to Contempt and Ridicule ſome Phraſes, which expreſs, what is Eſſential to the Principles of Natural as well as of Revealed Religion, they muſt break their Promiſe, or be ſilent; ſuffering the very Deiſt to carry all before him.
To clear thus much 'twill be ſufficient to mention what Biddle ſays on this Topick; I'le give you his own Words, Examine therefore the Expreſſions of God's being Infinite, and Incomprehenſible; of his being a ſimple Act; of his ſubſiſting in three Perſons; of a Divine Circuminceſſion; of an eternal Generation; of an eternal Proceſſion of an Incarnation; of an Hypoſtatical Ʋnion, — of Original Sin; of Chriſts making ſatisfaction to God for our Sins, both past, preſent and to come; of Christs fulfilling the Law for us; of Chriſts being puniſhed of God for us; of Christs merits, his meritorious Obedience, both Active and Paſſive, — of Christs enduring the wrath of God for us,— of Apprehending and Applying Christs Righteouſneſs to our ſelves by Faith; of Christs being a Surety; of Christs paying our Debts; of our Sins imputed unto Christ; of Chriſts dying to appeaſe the wrath of God— of infuſed Grace, — of irreſiſtible workings of the Spirit in bringing men to believe — of ſpiritual Deſertions, &c. — And thou ſhalt find that as theſe Forms of Speech are not owned by the Scripture, ſo neither the things contained in them. So far Biddle in his Preface to his Catechiſm.
That the things contained in theſe Forms of Speech are moſt plainly and expreſly revealed in Scripture, and that God is Infinite and Incomprehenſible, made known by the Light of Nature, is certain; But that the Phraſes themſelves are not Literally in the Scriptures muſt be acknowledged, and if we muſt not contend about the above-mentioned Phraſes, will not the Followers of Biddle and the Engliſh Ʋnitarians Triumph over us? And ſhould this Paper paſs as the Senſe of the Diſſenters, would they not provoke unto it, to the great grief of many ſound and godly Divines in the Church of England, as well as of our Country Brethren?
But, I will ſay it again, for I believe it to be true, that there are not five of the Brethren who meet at Little St. Hellens, who are aware of this and that, on a review, they will never bring themſelves under the Obligation of not contending for the above-mentioned Phraſes, tho' but humane Forms of Speech, ſuited to explain the neceſſary Articles of Religion, ſo far is my Brother from the Truth, when he ſaith, that the third Paper was with that deliberation, ſlow paces, &c. Compoſed.
The Firſt Paper.
2. Altho' Regeneration, Repentance towards God, Faith in our Lord Jeſus Chriſt, and holy Converſation, are by Gods expreſs word manifestly neceſſary to the Salvation of a Sinner, yet that none of theſe, &c.
The Third.
2. That altho' the expreſs word of God do Aſſert the neceſſity of Regeneration to our entring into the Kingdom of God, and Requires Repentance, that our ſins may be blotted out, and Faith in Chriſt, that we may be juſtified, and holineſs of heart and life, without which we cannot ſee God; Yet that none of theſe, &c.
It will be expedient, that I do in this place obſerve,
1. That according to what my Brother declares again and again, it muſt be ſuppoſed that this Paſſage in the firſt Paper can't be ſafely retained, that it can't bear a Sound Senſe, but is lyable to be interpreted to a Senſe and Sound of Malignity to the whole of the Gospel, and therefore upon mature deliberation waved, and another Paſſage put into its place; whereas, in my Opinion, no one, that is not of the worſer ſort of Antinomians, even a Libertine, who denys Regeneration, Repentance towards God, Faith in our Lord Jeſus Chriſt, and Holy Converſation, to be neceſſary to the Salvation of Sinners, dares ſay, that this Paſſage can't bear a Sound Senſe, &c. and therefore must be Altered.
That my Brother has out-run himſelf, and all his old avowed Principles, in this way of Writing, is enough to awaken us all to take heed, how we do in the leaſt Point, turn aſide from the Truth, nothing being more manifeſt than that uno abſurdo dato mille ſequuntur.
But tho' my Brothers Writings are in this Particular ſo extravagantly Erroneous, I would willingly hope, 1. Better things of him, and in Charity will place this Miſtake amongſt his Incogitancies, concluding that when he ſaid, what alterations were made, were upon Juſt Reaſons, and what was waved could not Bear a Sound Senſe, he did not think on the paſſing by this Paſſage, it being very common for Men in a heat to forget themſelves.
2. My Brother doth perhaps look on this Paſſage, in the firſt Paper, not to contain in it, ſo full a Teſtimony againſt Antinomianiſm, as he could wiſh, and thinks needful, which I ſhould have more firmly believed, in caſe he had not delivered himſelf ſo poſitively as above: However, I think it not amiſs to ſhow what fell under Conſideration, when this Point was to be ſtated.
1. It was thought moſt conducive to the great end, to avoid as much as poſſible, a running into the Diſcuſſion, and Determination of Differences of leſſer moment, which were agitated amongſt the godly Orthodox themſelves, and therefore to keep to thoſe Matters which did more nearly concern the Eſſential Articles of Faith.
2. There being a Controverſie amongſt the Reformed themſelves about the order, between Faith and Repentance, as which hath the Antecedence and Priority; and whether Repentance was a neceſſary praerequiſite to pardon, the Compoſers of the Firſt Paper waved the determination thereof; which was no more than was done in the Compoſing the Seven Propoſitions which were renounced to the end we might expreſs our abhorrence of Antinomian Errours; a brief account of which will be needful, not only to detect my Brothers miſtakes touching matter of Fact in this one point, but to Inlighten others in this Affair.
It muſt then be carefully minded, 1. That the Renunciation of Antinomianiſm, of which my Brother ſpeaks, pag. 23. was drawn up by ſome Brethren of both Perſuaſions; of which number the very Perſon, my Brother takes to be the Reporter, was One, who faithfully tranſcribed the ſeven Propoſitions agreed unto, and by Direction carried 'em unto the B… thren at Little St. Hellens, where he Read them, and expreſſed his great ſatisfaction of the Renunciation, as ſeveral of them, who do now ordinarily meet there can Teſtifie.
2. That whereas Mr. Williams inſiſted on the Aſſertion of the neceſſity of Repentance in order to Pardon, about which the Orthodox have different Sentiments, 'twas at laſt agreed to aſſert the neceſſity of Repentance, and leave this Controverſie undetermined, which was done by declaring againſt what was Oppoſite in this matter unto the Aſſembly, as you have it in the fourth Propoſition, where we renounce the Doctrine of them who hold [That any may expect Pardon without Repentance.] To return,
3. The only difference that I can ſee between the Firſt and Third Paper, in this particular, muſt be in theſe words, [That God requires Repentance that our ſins may be blotted out] which look as if the determining this Controverſie had been deſigned: The reaſon why I can ſee no other difference is, becauſe I know that the Congregational do hold, That the Expreſs Word of God doth Aſſert the neceſſity of Regeneration to our entring into the Kingdom of God; and Faith in Chriſt that we may be Juſtified, and Holineſs of Heart and Life, without which we cannot ſee God, for theſe things are all included in what is in the firſt Paper. And in caſe my Brethren, who glory in their confining themſelves unto Scripture Expreſſions, will take in the whole verſe, they refer unto, when they ſay [That God requires Repentance that our ſins may be blotted out,] which is [When the times of Refreſhing ſhall come from the Preſence of the Lord] I know not a Man among the Congregational, that will ſcruple to Expreſs his Aſſent unto this Clear and Full Teſtimony againſt Antinomians in the Fundamental Article of Juſtification: And, if any of them do agree with Polanus, and many more ſound Proteſtants in this Undecided Controverſie, it cannot advantage the Antinomians, eſpecially ſeeing they hold, That none may expect Pardon without Repentance.
Firſt Paper.
3. Yet that none of theſe, or any work done by men, or wrought by the Spirit of God in them, is under the Notion of Subordination, or under any Denomination whatſoever any Part of that Righteouſneſs, &c.
The Third.
3. Yet that none of theſe, or any work done by men, or wrought by the Spirit of God in them, is, under any Denomination whatſoever any Part of that Righteouſneſs, &c.
1. In this place the words [VnderUnder the Notion of Subordination] is waved, and as my Brother will have us believe, upon the weightiest Reaſons, as what can't bear a ſound ſenſe. And yet,
2. The following words which are left in [under any Denomination whatſoever] ſhould methinks be comprehenſive enough to take in under 'em [the Notion of Subordination] for a Subordinate Righteouſneſs falls within the circle [of any Denomination whatſoever.] But,
3. My Brother can't endure to ſwallow a Contradiction, which this muſt be, in caſe the phraſe [under the Notion of Subordination] cannot bear a ſound meaning, as it cannot in the Opinion of my Brother, becauſe it's waved; and yet is comprized under [any Denomination whatſoever] which muſt bear a ſound ſenſe becauſe not paſſed by, for which reaſon we muſt endeavour to ſave it from a Contradiction, which cannot be but by reſtraining this Univerſal Term [Ʋnder any Denomination whatſoever] thus, [under any Denomination whatſoever that can bear a ſound ſenſe,] but [the Notion of Subordination] not being able to bear a ſound ſenſe it's not to be taken within the verge of under any Denomination whatſoever.] Well then,
4. If this phraſe [under the Notion of Subordination] can't bear a ſound ſenſe, it muſt be becauſe they hold a Subordinate Righteouſneſs in our Juſtification, where it muſt be noted, that here is the mention only of one Iuſtification, which carrieth in it the Pardon of ſin, the accepting of ſinners, and an Entituling them to Eternal Life; and that this Juſtification is not only by Chriſts Righteouſneſs, but alſo by a Subordinate one, of our own, they both concurring to our Juſtification, the one Principally, the other Subordinately. This is the only way, that I can think on to fetch my Brother off from a Contradiction, and yet do I what I can I muſt at laſt lodge him under a Contradiction. For,
5. This Third Paper doth expreſly declare, that we are Pardoned, Accepted, and Entituled to Eternal Life only by the Righteouſneſs of Chriſt imputed unto us, and received by Faith alone. But to be Pardoned, Accepted, and Entituled unto Eternal Life only by Chriſts Righteouſneſs, and yet to be Pardoned, Accepted or Entituled to Eternal Life by a Subordinate Righteouſneſs of our own is an Implication. Being thus neceſſitated to leave my Brother in theſe dark ſhades, I will return to the private Brethren, ſuch as Dr. Bates, Mr. …, Mr. Alſop, and the reſt of this denomination, to ſee what Influence that light, which they received from the many diſcerning Heads hath had on them, which my Brother aſſures me was very great. For, he ſaith,
III. Thoſe Individual nine Brethren, who for, and in hopes of Peace had ſigned the former Paper, had their Hands, their Heads, and their Hearts too, in the forming, wording, and aſſenting to this Third— For they now ſaw in the former ſome few …aſſages and Expreſſions, which carried a F…e of ſome dangerous Tendencies; which, however they might eſcape the Notice of Private Brethren could not paſs the obſervation of many diſcerning Heads.
In Examining this Paſſage, it muſt be remark'd.
1. That theſe Private Brethren, every one of the Individual Nine, ſaw the Face of ſome dangerous Tendencies, in the Firſt Paper, which they had formerly Subſcribed, and therefore muſt be now ſuppoſed to Repent of that; but whether this be true or not, I appeal to their own Conſciences, for, till this Brother publiſhed his Rebuke, I could not hear one word to this purpoſe, ſome of 'em aſſuring me, that the Alterations between the two Papers were but very Minute, ſuch Tan…lla as were not worth a contending about, and not of ſuch things as were of dangerous Tendencies.
2. Several of the Nine have very lately declared their Approbation of the Firſt paper, and one of 'em in particular told me, that my Brother was guilty of a Notorious Falſhood in ſaying, that the Individual Nine had their Hands, their Heads, and Hearts in the forming, wording and aſſenting to the Third Paper, for he had neither Hand, nor Head, nor Heart in it.
3. If the Individual Nine had a Hand, a Head and a Heart in compoſing the third, and in Waving the Phraſes, rejected, becauſe they could not bear a ſound ſenſe, then muſt Dr. Bates, who is one of the Nine Private Brethren. be for a waving the Phraſes, of Chriſts ſuſtaining the Perſon of ſinners; and ſuffering the wrath of God as our Surety, as what could not bear a ſound ſenſe, and if it be ſo, I do humbly conclude that 'tis his Duty to anſwer that part of his Harmony, where theſe Phraſes are uſed, and the Doctrine they expreſs is Aſſerted and Defended.
But ſure I am, that I have heard him ſay, that the Harmony was the fruit of Fervent Prayer of his cloſeſt ſtudies, and moſt Impartial Examination, not only of the Orthodox, but of their Adverſaries, and that, tho' twas his reſolution to follow light, and if he could meet with good reaſons to convince him, he was in an Errour, he would fall under it, yet hitherto he has met with no reaſons to move him to change his mind, and to this purpoſe he has ſpoke ſince the compoſure of the Third Paper.
To cloſe my Anſwer to this Enquiry, it's manifeſt to me that my Brother and his Teacher are for rejecting the above mentioned Orthodox Terms and Phraſes, becauſe they have forſaken the Proteſtant Doctrine, as ordinarily conceived by them. Tho' I have put my Charity on the outmoſt ſtretch in favour of my Rebuking Brother, yet muſt I ſay, That, if he doth not ſee the Tendencies of a rejecting the aforeſaid Phraſes, upon the Reaſons he has aſſigned, to be deſtructive of the Proteſtant Faith in the Article of Chriſts Satisfaction, He is not the ſitteſt Man in the World to enter on a Controverſie of this kind; and yet I muſt at the ſame time acknowledge, that the more unmeet any one is to enter on this Controverſie, the more likely he is to be impoſed on by his more ſeeing guide, who doth, in the inſtance before us, as the nature of the thing ſpeaks, leave the Reformed; and nothing ſhort of this can be the import of my Brothers arguings in his Rebuke.
This Aſſertion I do confeſs leads me to the conſideration of the ſeventh Enquiry, which is,