tude; the truths of the Gospel would not be lost for want of being looked into and examined; men would not be affrighted from seeing with their own eyes what is real unadulterated Christianity, and what are only the dreams of fanciful and bewildered enthusiasts, for fear of falling into heresy; but primitive Christianity would probably revive, and it is likely there would be a greater uniformity in judgement and opinion than there is at present; for Christianity, abstracted from the colouring and varnish which have been laid upon it, and separated from school divinity, one of the worst enemies it ever had, and by which it has been horribly perplexed and rendered involved and intricate, is a plain, intelligible religion. But if this were not obtained, there would be more of charity and mutual forbearance, and less of that turbulent, schismatical, imposing, tyrannical spirit, which has reflected so much dishonour upon the Christian cause, and made it the sport and derision of infidels.

I would draw this general conclusion from the premises, That no Christian who has the liberty of looking into his Bible, and uses that liberty, can err in Fundamentals. I take it for granted that such a one believes the being of a God, and a future state of rewards and punishments, (which I think are not fundamental articles of Christianity properly so called, but general maxims, upon which all religion, natural or revealed, is built,) for this is implied in his professing to be of any religion. And now, how is it possible for any honest man who reads his

Bible to miss of the knowledge of any essential part of Christian doctrine, when whatever doctrine is of this nature is clearly, and distinctly, and intelligibly revealed? Nay, how is it possible that any man, honest or dishonest, should mistake here, when all such necessary doctrines are made express conditions of salvation in the sacred writings, which he is supposed to be conversant with? It is possible, indeed, that men may be induced by some vicious lust, and to serve ill designs, to deny such grand truths, which is certainly a destructive and damnable error. But then the reason why such persons are heirs of damnation and wrath, is not an error in judgement, or the imperfection and deficiency of their faith, but it is because their wills are depraved and vicious. And, by the way, since it is plain that no Christian who uses his Bible can avoid knowing what doctrines are essential, and indispensably necessary parts of Christian faith, I think it fairly and naturally follows that no doctrines can be, as the word has been explained, fundamental, about which Christians using their Bibles are disagreed and divided into parties; and consequently, that none of those points which are at present debated by great numbers on all sides in the Protestant world, are of such vast and infinite consequence. To mention particulars, not the doctrines of the Trinity, original sin, absolute election, perseverance, and the like; for if any of these are necessary and fundamental doctrines, since doctrines of this sort cannot but be known to all Christians who

read the New Testament, (as being not only clearly revealed, but therein made in express words absolutely necessary to be believed,) we must suppose one of the contending parties to profess and maintain, to promote their temporal interests or serve some base designs, not only what they do not believe, but what they know to be false; which is a supposition so gross and shocking, so contrary to all the principles of natural justice and charity and to the probabilities of things, that it would be a reflection upon the Christianity and common sense of a civilized people to attempt to expose it.

And now, having stated the notion of a fundamental doctrine, and given the characters of it, I shall examine by the two general rules which I have laid down, whether the Trinitarian scheme be a Fundamental, or not.

1. Then, let us see whether this proposition, viz. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, are the one GOD, be so clearly and plainly revealed, as that no sincere man, serious in his inquiries, can miss of the knowledge of it. And it cannot be so much as pretended that the proposition itself is plainly delivered in Scripture. If it be, let the place or places be produced, and I will engage the world shall own themselves obliged for the discovery. It is only said to be a plain consequence of what the Scriptures assert concerning God, and concerning the Sacred Three, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. Now this is quite another thing from its being clearly, and distinctly, and expressly re

vealed; for it may be a clear consequence to one person from what the holy Scripture says, though another cannot see it; men having different educations, capacities, and ways of thinking. And, therefore, to make it equivalent to a clear and express revelation, it must be a necessary and unavoidable consequence of what the Scripture asserts; a consequence which every sincere and serious searcher after truth cannot help discerning. But this is not the case, because there are multitudes who declare that upon the most strict and impartial search they are capable of making they not only cannot see this to be a Scripture consequence, but discern the contrary to be plainly and evidently such, and, more than so, to be asserted, as they think, in direct terms in Revelation.

"

But you will say, perhaps, that they are influenced by some criminal depravity of mind, by pride, passion, or an affectation of novelty. This is constantly, by bigots and enthusiasts, by those who are in the wrong, as well as those who are in the right, set against the solemn and repeated declarations of their opponents to the contrary, and therefore ought only to be regarded as an effect of heat and frowardness of temper, or an overweening fondness for their own particular sentiments. It ever supposes a latent claim of infallibility, and is in plain English exactly the same with saying, We are absolutely certain that we are in the right, and therefore all who differ from us are partial, and prejudiced, and under the influence of some wrong bias or other,

else they would think and judge as we do. For, if men were firmly persuaded of the truth of that grand principle of the Protestant religion,-a principle that is founded on the very make and constitution of human nature,―that they are weak, shortsighted creatures, liable to error, they would never boast of absolute certainty in doubtful cases, or determine positively that the truth of a question lies on their side, when they are opposed by a great number of men of at least equal sense and learning, and in all other cases allowed of equal integrity.

Are you absolutely certain that the consequence you would draw from disputable passages of Scrip ture is just and natural, and that no other plausible and seemingly consistent sense can be fixed upon them? You cannot say you are, because you are fallible and may be mistaken; and if you are liable to error, is it not as possible that others may be in the right, in denying the consequence to be true and rational, as you are in affirming it? So that all the mighty noise which has been made about your explication of the doctrine of the Trinity's being as plain and evident as that the sun is up at noon-day, so that no one can fail of seeing as you do, who is not injured by some vicious prejudice, comes to this; it is not delivered in express terms in Scripture, but you think it naturally follows from what the Scripture asserts, though, as you are fallible beings, you cannot be absolutely certain that your conclusion is just, or that education, prepossession, and a regard