ERRAT A. Age 31. marg. lin. 3. read of the Logos, or the Word. p. 32. lin. 22. r. feem generally to have stood. p. 49. marg. add John xv. 26. p. 78. lin. 7. r. Porto. AGAINST MR. WATTS'S SCHEME, T HERE is nothing more becoming a Chriftian, than a free impartial examination of the grounds of his faith, and the reasons of his hope: a faith that will not bear trial is very fufpicious; but then matters of faith muft not be tried by reafon only, but must be brought to a proper teft, the written word of God; to the Law, and to the Teftimony the Appeal must be made; and what meets with fupport from thence, must be firmly believed by us; tho' the manner of it may be far above our comprehenfion, who are creatures of yesterday, and know nothing. As the Doctrine of the Trinity has in it as much importance, as any one Scripture doctrine, a Chriftian cannot engage in a nobler employment, than in an enquiry into the true Scripture account of this adorable mystery. This is more especially needful, at a time when the doctrine is violently B at attack'd, and is, with intolerable boldness, charg'd with abfurdity, nonfenfe, and contradiction. At fuch a feason, every one, who is able, should put on the whole armour of light, and contend earneftly and manfully for the honour and majesty of that bleffed Saviour, by whom he is redeem'd, and of that holy Spirit, by whom he is fanctified. It is with pleasure, I have feen, and read the many defences which the late revival of the Arian herely has produc'd among us: and as I always receiv'd most fatisfaction, where leaft was faid to explain the modus of this mystery, I had great expectations from the reverend Mr. Watts's book, call'd, The Chriftian Doctrine of the Trinity; because I found the defign of it was given out to be, to vindicate the divine rights and honours of the three perfons, by plain evidence of Scripture, without the aid and incumberance of human schemes. Such a performance, had it answer'd the title, would have been exceeding pleafing to me. Upon perufing the book, I found the author had engag'd in a matter, of which he did not seem to me to have made himself thoroughly mafter: I found he treated fome things fuperficially, that had been fet in a much better light by others; but what most troubled me was, I faw he unwarily made too many, and too great conceffions to the adverfaries of the truth. When the book call'd, An Appeal to a Turk or Indian, came out, in oppofition to him, which was wrote with fome fubtilty and dexterity, I was in hopes it might have put him upon re-examining this matter; but I was disappointed, when I found him, inftead of that, foon publish three differtations, in which he rather chofe to lay down fome precarious and obfcure notions, about the perfonality of the Son and Spirit, and about 1 about the person of Chrift God-man: I could have wifh'd he had let alone giving his fancy fo much scope, in matters where a fertil working. invention has nothing to do: I could not help thinking that "a a man, who, thro' long weakness of body, is rendred incapable of applying himfelf above fix or feven hours in a week, to any peculiar ftudy, diftinct from his neceffary work," might have been not only well excus'd, "for being flow in the publication of any thing, in fuch a controverted doctrine," but might have been very well excus'd, from meddling with a controverly of fuch weight and moment at all. I had thoughts then, to take fome notice of his methods of explaining the Sonfhip of Chrift, and the conftitution of his perfon, which feem'd to me very exceptionable; but as he express'd himself in that piece pretty obfcurely, and as I faw he was going on to furnish new matter, I judg'd it might be beft to fee how he would explain his fcheme, and clear his thoughts, as he made farther advances. When the second part of his differtations came out, I found I was not mistaken in the judgment I had made of his fcheme, from what I faw in his first part. As in this he had, in a very fhocking manner, deny'd and explain'd away the real perfonality of the Son and Spirit, I expected, fome abler hand would have undertaken to clear the truth, from the confufion he had thrown upon it. Not finding any one appear against him, and knowing he had occafioned great offence, trouble, and concern to many ferious perfons, who have at heart the welfare of our common Christianity, I thought it was highly neceffary to take fome notice of his performance. I was afraid the truth might suffer from Mr. Watts's deferved reputation, in that many wellmeaning perfons, among ourfelves, might be drawn afide by fo great an authority; and I thought it would be very furprizing to thofe of the Establish'd Church, who have a zeal for the catholic doctrine of the Trinity, to fee fuch dangerous explications pafs, without animadverfion, among the Proteftant Diffenters. As it is my opinion, that religious disputes may be carried on, without heat or reviling, on the one hand, and without complimenting an adversary fo, as to give up any defenfible point, out of a falfe civility, on the other; I fhall be very careful of mifreprefenting Mr. Watts, or treating him in an unchristian manner, and shall make it my endeavour to treat him with all candour and mildness; however, his character for piety and seriousness fhall not make me afraid to lay open his mistakes, or to speak freely of the ill tendency of fome things he advances. In the mean time, I would hope from the character Mr. Watts bears, that he will be brought to fee the great inconveniencies, which neceffarily follow from the opinions he has advanced. It can hardly be expected that I fhould follow our author's confus'd method: had he rang'd his thoughts in a due order, it would have been fome ease to me; but as the matter is, I must take the best method I can: Because he has, in my opinion, fet out on a wrong bottom, in endeavouring to give an hypothefis of the doctrine of the Trinity, that might have clear ideas ànnex'd to it, I fhall premife fome thoughts on the nature of myfteries, and of the obligation we are under to believe many things, discovera ble |