fhould have Récourfe to fuch Guides as the Fathers to fettle my Opinion concerning the "Doctrine of the Trinity, thinking, I fuppofe, "that the Study of the Scriptures might render "all other Helps unneceflary. Now I have more "than once given my Reasons for this Conduct.' It is in fhort this. Chriflians are not agreed "in the Interpretation of Scripture Language; "but as all Men are agreed with refpect to the "Nature of Hiftorical Evidence, I thought that

$6

66

we might perhaps better determine by History, "what was the Faith of Chriftians in early "Times, independently of any Aid from the Scriptures; and it appeared to be no unna"tural Prefumption, that whatever that should appear to be, fuch was the Doctrine of the Apoftles, from whom their Faith was derived; "and that by this Means we fhould be poffeffedof a pretty good Guide for difcovering the true Senfe of Scripture.'

66

64

It appears therefore that, in the Doctor's Opi-" nion, though the Apostles exhort us to ftrive together for the Faith of the Gospel, and to contend earneftly for the Faith once delivered to the Saints; and though they wrote many Epiftles defignedly to tell us what that Faith was, yet that thefe Epif tles are fo unintelligible, that if we with for information concerning this Faith, we must not have Recourse to them, though written in a Language perfectly underftood, but to the Histories and other Writings of Persons who lived fome Centuries after. According to this Hypothefis, if fome Ages hence any one fhould be wifhfut to know what the Faith of that great Philofopher and Divine Dr. Priestley was, he must not ap

ply

ply to the Doctor's own Writings for Information, though thofe Writings fhould happen to be extant and fhould be preferved entire, but muft recur to Hiftories of England, Memoirs of the Lives and Writings of eminent Men, and other Books composed aud published fome Ages after the Doctor's Death, and by Men, perhaps, either ill-informed on the one Hand, or preju diced on the other! According to the fame Plan the Faith of the old Puritans might be learned from the Books of the prefent Presbyterians, that is the Socinians, their Succeffors, and the Faith of our Reformers from the Sermons and other Publications of the prefent Clergy of the Church of England! On the fame Principle too, it may be learned from fome fu ture Socinian Hiftorian, how the Bishop of St. David's managed the Controversy with Dr. Priestley, and how juft and Scriptural his Lordfhip's Sentiments were on the important Subjeft debated between them!

I would not be understood as infinuating here, either that the ancient Fathers of the Church or the Members of it, in general, in the firft Ages, departed from the Faith, held by the Apostles and firft Chriftians. I am perfuaded they did not; and that their holding the Doctrine contended for in these Sheets is capable of as clear and fatisfactory Proof as any Subject of Hiftory whatever. But be this as it will, it appears to me that any Man's Faith is beft learned from thofe Difcourfes and Writings of his own in which he profefedly declares that Faith, unlefs, indeed, on the one Hand there be Reason to queftion his Sincerity, or on the other to suppose

him

him deficient in Common Senfe, or at least in Ability to make himself underflood. Accordingly, I think, without intending to detract at all from the Character or Writings of thofe holy_and eminent Men, the ancient Fathers, that the Faith of the Apoftles, is beft learned from what they themselves have delivered concerning it. And Dr. Prielley may ufe what Arguments he pleases, I am fatisfied he never will be able to convince any of the contrary, but thofe whom he has first perfuaded that thefe facred Penman were deficient in Integrity or in Understanding; that they either would not or could not, give a just and intelligible Account of their Sentiments.

The Doctor has already carried his Researches very far, not only in Philofophy, but also in Divinity: He has greatly outstripped all his Predeceflors. In Philofophy he has discovered, to the utter Confufion of the Wisdom of former · Ages, that Man has no Soul, no rational and * immortal Spirit; that he is a mere Piece of organized Matter, and that of Confequence all his Motions are purely mechanical, all his Tempers, Words and Works, previoufly fixed, necessary and unavoidable; a Doctrine this published to the World fome years ago, and fill openly avowed, as appears by his late Letters to the Reverend John Hawkins, in which he declares himself to be "profeffedly an Unitarian, a Neceffarian, and. a Materialift.' In Divinity he has not only adopted and confirmed the Discoveries (or Te nets, as I should rather call them) of Socinus, refpecting the mere Humanity of Chrift, with all the Train of Confequences which that Doctrine draws after it; but he questions the Authenticity

of

of the Account, given in the beginning of the Gofpels of St. Matthew, and St. Luke, respecting the miraculous Conception of the Child Jefus. Of Course he has inferred that Jefus Chrift, fent indeed of GOD and a great Prophet, yet was weak, fallible and peccable, like other Men; that as to the Evangelifts and Apostles, whatever might be the Cafe with them as Speakers, concerning which I think he has not pronounced pofitively, yet that as Writers, they certainly were not in fpired; that as to St. Paul, in particular, he often Reasons very inconclusively and both mifunderstands and misapplies fundry Passages quoted from the Old Teftament.

But, it will be impoffible for the Doctor to ftop here. He muft of Neceffity either advance further or come quite back.-As to Philofophy, indeed, the Philofophy, I mean, that concerns the nature of Man, he seems to be arrived at the Ne plus Ultra. It being a plain, undeniable Fa&t that we do move, it would be in vain to endea vour to perfuade us that we do not. All that can` poffibly be done in this Cafe is, what he has effected long ago, that is, to prove, that we move mechanically. But in Divinity-unlefs, as I' hinted, he should think proper to make a Retreat and return into the Paths of Orthodoxy, which at his Time of Life, and after the Attention and Admiration he has excited for a Number of Years by the Singularity of his Discoveries, he is well aware he could not do with Credit to himself;-in' Divinity (I fay) he will be under a Neceffity of going much further. Added to what he has demonftrated refpecting St. Paul's reasoning inconclusively, and all the Apostles and Evangelists writ

ing

ing without Infpiration, he must make it evident that they all in general, and St. Paul, in particular, wrote without Common Senfe. This, on the one Hand, would be going through with the Bufinefs, and would for ever free him and all other great and learned Philofophers and Divines, from what has long been found to be a prodigious Clog upon the Feet of those who are in Hafte to make Discoveries, I mean that obfolete Book the Bible. And, on the other, it will be found abfolutely neceffary to gain Credit to the Discoveries already made, and especially to procure them a firm and lafting Establishment. And then neither the Doctor, nor any of his Brethren of the School of Socinus, need give themselves any further Trouble, in fruitlefs Endeavours to reconcile their Sentiments with the antiquated Doctrines taught by St. Paul, St, John, or any other of the New Teftament Writers, any more than they would to reconcile them with the Reveries of a Mad-man, or the Dreams of an Enthufiaft.

As a Specimen of what might be done in this Way, and because it is reasonable to think that the Doctor has not Time, in the Midst of his his many and fevere Studies, and voluminous Publications, to fearch the Scriptures for the Examples which feem neceffary to be produced, in Proof of fo important a Point; I have taken the Pains to look over the New Testament, and especially the Epiftles of St. Paul, and have put down many Inftances of this Kind. I will not fay they are all of them the most remarkable that could be found, but they are fuch as ftruck me most in the Perufal, and I here take the Liberty

of