A SUPPLEMENT

ΤΟ

THE CASE

OF

ARIAN SUBSCRIPTION

CONSIDERED.

WHEN I drew up the "Case of Arian Subscription," &c. I was apprehensive that so plain a charge, and so home pressed, might exasperate the persons concerned; though I took care to treat them with all the mildness and tenderness that the subject would bear; confining myself to the reasoning part, naming no particular men but such as I was obliged to quote, and candidly exempting the principal man of them, that the charge might be as general and inoffensive as possible; falling rather upon the thing itself, than upon this or that particular person. If the argument be provoking, I cannot help it: the same objection lies against the detecting or reproving any vice or immorality whatever. It is the proper business of a divine to state cases of conscience, and to remonstrate against any growing corruptions in practice, and especially in principles. If Arian subscription be really fraudulent and immoral, (which no considering man can doubt of,) it may concern those gentlemen rather to testify their sincere repentance, than to acquaint the world with their causeless resentments. I shall here say nothing to the abusive flirts of the nameless author, who has been pleased still to persist in the defence of Arian subscription; except it be to remind him, that those assuming strains very ill become either so weak a cause, or such a guilty practice. I was once inclinable

to take no notice of so mean a pamphlet; concluding that I had said enough, when I had said enough for men of sense and common ingenuity; and it is often not advisable to press things to the utmost. But since this is a cause of very great moment, wherein the very foundations of moral honesty, as well as of Christian sincerity, are deeply concerned; I think it incumbent upon me to proceed somewhat further in it: and if those gentlemen resolve to go on in maintaining an open fraud as long as it is possible to amuse or deceive, though only the weakest and most ignorant readers; I also must resolve (by God's assistance, and for God's glory) to go on in the defence of sincerity and probity, till the very meanest readers may sufficiently understand it. To come to the business.

The pamphlet lately published, is entitled, "The Case of Subscription to the XXXIX Articles considered; occasioned by Dr. Waterland's Case of Arian Subscription." The author is but just, as well as modest, in not calling it an answer to mine: for indeed he has left the most material points untouched, without so much as attempting any thing like an answer. If you will take his bare word for it, the Articles of our Church, so far as concerns the Trinity, are general, indefinite, undeterminate; not particular, special, or determinate. He takes this for granted, and reasons all the way upon that supposition; which is very unaccountable: unless it were because I had demonstrated the contrary, beyond all reasonable reply; and so there was no other way left but to stifle the evidence, to protest against fact, and to bear the reader down with a false presumption. Such a management as this is, in effect, little else but a more untoward way of giving up the cause; where a man does the thing, but loses all the grace and credit of it by his manner of doing it. But let us see how he goes on to give some colour, at least, to his pretences. I had pressed the Arian subscribers with the Athanasian Creed, the Liturgy, and the Articles, to prove that our Church was particular and determinate in the points disputed. Not a single word has this writer to shew, either that the Athanasian Creed or Liturgy is not determinate, as I represented: and as to the Articles, he seems to make no account of any but the first: of which he often intimates, that he has some way of evading it, but he does not care to tell us what, for fear he should be found faultering even there, and lie open to rebuke for it. The first Article alone, is, I am very

certain, more than he can fairly deal with: but I must remind him further, that the 2d and 5th Articles do also require his consideration; and then there is the eighth, which, unfortunately for him, carries all the three Creeds in the bowels of it: creeds which, as the Article says, (and as this writer says, if he subscribes to it,) "ought thoroughly to be received and believed; "for they may be proved by most certain warrants of holy "Scripture."

Well then, we have the Creeds wrapped up in the Articles; and the subscriber must be content to take in all or none: let us next see to the Liturgy. This gentleman thinks he has a fetch for that: he subscribes not to the truth of every particular, but to the use only, and that "it contains nothing contrary to "the word of God." Now, says he, "I must freely own that I see no contradiction, no necessary absurdity, in the use of what "a man may wish to have in some things correcteda." I would be as favourable to this writer as possible. I do allow of his distinction, and that it may be proper and pertinent in some cases; but I can never allow that a man may use a solemn formal lie in his prayers, and often repeat it, under pretence that we may admit the use of some things which might be corrected. This is arguing from gnats to camels, and widening the rule beyond all measure and proportion. This will best be understood in the sequel, when the reader comes to see what kind of things those are which this gentleman desires to use, without believing a syllable of them. I must observe further, that the subscriber is tied up to believe that the Liturgy" contains nothing contrary "to the word of God." Does not this pinch a little closer than this writer might wish? Has he nothing to object against any expressions in the Liturgy, but that they contain things seemingly contrary to natural reason? Have they nothing contrary to Scripture, to what he calls Scripture? I should be thankful to him for so obliging a concession. After all, I would advise this writer not to pretend to be wiser than Dr. Clarke. The Doctor had considered these matters much, and long: and I have not yet found any disciple of his that has endeavoured to refine upon him, but what has exposed himself in doing it. The wary Doctor was sensible that Articles, Creeds, and Liturgy, must all come into account, and all be reconciled (if possible) to his own hypothesis. He made no distinction between admitting ⚫ Case of Subscription, &c. p. 46.