Having1 thus notably harangued upon the occasion of my saying, " Would any one blame my prudence? " and thereby make me a " socinian, a Jesuit, and a betrayer of " Christianity itself," he has in that answered all that such a miscreant as I do, or can say; and so passes by all the reasons I gave for what I did; without any other notice or answer, but only denying- a matter of fact, which I only can know, and he cannot, viz. my design in printing my " Reasonableness of Christianity/' In the next paragraph, p. 45, in answer to the words of St. Paul, Rom. xiv. 1, " Him that is weak in the " faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations; " which I brought as a reason why I mentioned not satis faction amongst the benefits received by the coming of our Saviour; because, as I tell him in my Vindication, p. 164, " my reasonableness of Christianity,5' as the title shows, " was designed chiefly for those who were " not yet thoroughly or firmly Christians." He replies, and I desire him to prove it, 272 A Second Vindication of the XX. " That I pretend a design of my book, which " was never so much as thought of, until I was " solicited by my brethren to vindicate it."
All the rest in this paragraph, being either nothing to this place of the Romans, or what I have answered elsewhere, needs no farther answer.
The riext two paragraphs, p. 46 — 49, are meant for an answer to something I had said concerning the apos tles creed, upon the occasion of his charging my book with socinianism. They begin thus: This " author of the new Christianity " [Answ. This new Christianity is as old as the preaching of our Saviour and his apostles, and a little older than the unmasker's system] " wisely objects, that the apostles creed hath " none of those articles which I mention," p. 591, &c. Answ. If that author wisely objects, the unmasker would have done well to have replied wisely. But for a man wisely to reply, it is in the first place requisite that the objection be truly and fairly set down in its full force, and not represented short, and as will best serve the answerer's turn to repJy to. This is neither wise nor honest: and this first part of a wise reply the unmasker has failed in. This will appear from my words, and the occasion of them. The unmasker had accused my book of socinianism, for omitting some points, which he urged as necessary articles of faith. To which I answered, That he had done so only, " to give it an ill " name, not because it was socinian; for he had no " more reason to charge it with socinianism, for the " omissions he mentions, than the apostles creed." These are my words, which he should have either set down out of p. 67? which he quotes, or at least given the objection, as I put it, if he had meant to have cleared it by a fair answer. But he, instead thereof, contents himself that " I object that the apostles creed hath " none of those articles and doctrines which the im- " masker mentioned." Answ. This at best is but a part of my objection, and not to the purpose which I there meant, without the rest joined to it; which it has Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c. 273 pleased the un masker, according to his laudable Way, to conceal. My objection, therefore, stands thus: That the same articles, for the omission whereof the unmasker charges my book with socinianism, being also omitted in the apostles creed, he has no more reason to charge my book with socinianism, for the omissions mentioned, than he hath to charge the apostles creed with socinianism.
To this objection of mine, let us now see how he an- swers, p. 47.
" Nor does any considerate man wonder at it," [i. e. that the apostles creed had none of those articles and doctrines which he had mentioned,] " for the creed " is a form of outward profession, which is chiefly to be •" made in the public assemblies, when prayers are put " up in the church, and the holy scriptures are read: " then this abridgment of faith is properly used, or when " there is not time or opportunity to make any enlarge- " ment. But we are not to think it expressly con- " tains in it all the necessary and weighty points, all " the important doctrines of belief; it being only de- " signed to be an abstract."
Answ. Another indispensable requisite in a wise re ply is, that it should be pertinent. Now what can there be more impertinent, than to confess the matter of fact upon which the objection is grounded; but instead of destroying the inference drawn from that matter of fact, only amuse the reader with wrong reasons, why that matter of fact was so?
No considerate man, he says, doth wonder, that the articles and doctrines he mentioned, are omitted in the apostles creed: because " that creed is a form of out- " ward profession." Answ. A profession! of what, I beseech you? Is it a form to be used for form's sake? I thought it had been a profession of something, even of the Christian faith: and if it be so, any considerate man may wonder necessary articles of the Christian faith should be left out of it. For how it can be an outward T A Second Vindication of the profession of the Christian faith, without containing the Christian faith, I do not see; unless a man can out wardly profess the Christian faith in words, that do not contain or express it, i. e. profess the Christian faith, when he does not profess it. But he says, " It is a pro- " fession chiefly to be made use of in assemblies." Answ. Do those solemn assemblies privilege it from containing the necessary articles of the Christian reli gion? This proves not that it does not, or was not de signed to contain all the articles necessary to be believed to make a man a Christian; unless the un masker can prove that a " form of outward profession" of the Chris tian faith, that contains all such necessary articles, can not be made use of, in the public assemblies. " In the " public assemblies," says he, " when prayers are put " up by the church, and the holy scriptures are read, " then this abridgment of faith is properly used; or " when there is not generally time or opportunity to " make an enlargement." Answ. But that which con tains not what is absolutely necessary to be believed to make a man a Christian, can no-where be properly used as a form of outward profession of the. Christian faith, and least of all, in the solemn public assemblies. All the sense I can make of this is, that this abridgment of the Christian faith, i. e. imperfect collection (as the un- masker will have it) of some of the fundamental articles of Christianity in the apostles creed, which omits the greatest part of them, is made use of as a form of out ward profession of but part of the Christian faith in the public assemblies; when, by reason of reading of the scripture and prayers, there is not time or opportunity for a full and perfect profession of it.
It is strange the Christian church should not find time nor opportunity, in sixteen hundred years, to make, in any of her public assemblies, a profession of so much of her faith, as is necessary to make a man a Christian. But pray tell me, has the church any such full and complete form of faith, that hath in it all those propositions, you have given us for necessary articles, (not to say any thing of those which you have reserved to yourself, in your own breast, and will not communicate,) of which Reasonableness of Christianity, $c.
the apostles creed is only a scanty form, a brief imper fect abstract, used only to save time in the crowd of other pressing occasions, that are always in haste to be dispatched? If she has, the unmasker will do well to produce it. If the church has no such complete form, besides the apostles creed, any-where, of fundamental articles; he will do well to leave talking idly of this ab stract, as he goes on to do in the following words: " But," says he, " we are not to think that it expressly " contains in it all the necessary and weighty points, " all the important doctrines of our belief; it being only " designed to be an abstract." Answ. Of what, I be seech you, is it an abstract? For here the unmasker stops short, and, as one that knows not well what to say, speaks not out what it is an abstract of; but provides himself a subterfuge in the generality of the preceding terms, of " necessary and weighty points, and impor- " tant doctrines," jumbled together; which can be there of no other use, but to cover his ignorance or so phistry. But the question being only about necessary points, to what purpose are weighty and important doc trines joined to them; unless he will say, that there is no difference between necessary and weighty points, fundamental and important doctrines; and if so, then the distinction of points into necessary and not neces sary, will be foolish and impertinent; and all the doc trines contained in the bible, will be absolutely neces sary to be explicitly believed by every man to make him a Christian. But taking it for granted, that the distinc tion of truths contained in the gospel, into points abso lutely necessary, and not absolutely necessary, to be believed to make a man a Christian, is good; I desire the unmasker to tell us, what the apostles creed is an abstract of? He will, perhaps, answer, that he has told us already in this very page, where he says,, it is an abridgment of faith: and he has said true in words, but saying those words by rote, after others, without under standing them, he has said so in a sense that is not true. For he supposes it an abridgment of faith, by containing only a few of the necessary articles of faith, and leaving out the far greater part of them; and so takes a part of a 276 A Second Vindication of the thing- for an abridgment of it; whereas an abridgment or abstract of any thing, is the whole in little; and if it be of a science or doctrine, the abridgment consists in the essential or necessary parts of it contracted into a narrower compass than where it lies diffused in the or dinary way of delivery, amongst a great number of tran sitions, explanations, illustrations, proofs, reasonings, corollaries, &c. All which, though they make a part of the discourse, wherein that doctrine is delivered, are left out in the abridgment of it, wherein all the necessary parts of it are drawn together into a less room. But though an abridgment need to contain none but the essential and necessary parts, yet all those it ought to contain; or else it will not be an abridgment or abstract of that thing, but an abridgment only of a part of it. I think it could not be said to be an abridgment of the law contained in an act of parliament, wherein any of the things required by that act were omitted; which yet commonly may be reduced into a very narrow compass, Avhen stripped of all the motives, ends, enacting forms, &c. expressed in the act itself. If this does not satisfy the unmasker what is properly an abridgment, I shall refer him to Mr. Chillingworth, who, I think, will be allowed to- understand sense, and to speak it properly, at least as well as the unmasker. And what he says hap pens to be in the very same question, between Knot, the Jesuit, and him, that is here between the unmasker and me: it is but putting the unmasker in the Jesuit's place, and myself (if it may be allowed me, without vanity) in Mr. Chillingworth, the protestant's; and Mr. Chilling- worth's very words, chap. iv. § 65, will exactly serve for my answer: " You trifle affectedly, confounding the " apostles belief of the whole religion of Christ, as it " comprehends both what we are to do, and what we " are to believe, with that part of it which contains not " duties of obedience, but only the necessary articles of " simple faith. Now, though the apostles belief be, in " the former sense, a larger thing than that which we " call the apostles creed: yet, in the latter sense of the " word, the creed (I say) is a full comprehension of *' their belief, which you yourself have formerly con- Reasonableness of Christianity, &$C. 277 " fessed, though somewhat fearfully and inconsistently. " And here again, unwillingness to speak the truth " makes you speak that which is hardly sense, and call " it an abridgment of some articles of faith. For I " demand, those some articles which you speak of, " which are they? Those that are out of the creed, or " those that are in it? Those that are in it, it compre- " hends at large, and therefore it is not an abridgment " of them. Those that are out of it, it comprehends " not at all, and therefore it is not an abridgment of " them. If you would call it now an abridgment of " faith; this would be sense; and signify thus much, " that all the necessary articles of the Christian faith are " comprized in it. For this is the proper duty of " abridgments, to leave out nothing necessary." So that in Mr. Chilling worth's judgment of an abridg ment, it is not sense to say, as you do, p. 47, That " we are not to think, that the apostles creed expressly " contains in it all the necessary points of our belief, it " being only designed to be an abstract, or an abridg- " mcnt of faith:" but on the contrary, we must con clude, it contains in it all the necessary articles of faith, for that very reason; because it is an abridgment of faith, as the unmasker calls it. But whether this that Mr. Chillingworth has given us here, be the nature of an abridgment or no; this is certain, that the apostles creed cannot be a form of profession of the Christian faith, if any part of the faith necessary to make a man a Christian, be left out of it: and yet such a profession of faith would the unmasker have this abridgment of faith to be. For a little lower, in the 47th page, he says in express terms, That " if a man believe no more " than is, in express terms, in the apostles creed, his " faith will not be the faith of a Christian." Where in he does great honour to the primitive church, and particularly to the church of England. The primi tive church admitted converted heathens to baptism, upon the faith contained in the apostles creed: a bare profession of that faith, and no more, was required of them to be received into the church, and made mem- 278 A Second Vindication of the bers of Christ's body. How little different the faith of the ancient church was, from the faith I have men tioned, may be seen in these words of Tertullian: " Regula fidei una omnino est, sola, immobilis, irre- " formabilis, credendi, scilicet, in unicimi Deum omni- " potentem, rnundi conditorem, & filium ejus Jesum " Christum, natum ex virgine, Maria, crucifixum sub " Pontio Pilato, tertia die resuscitatum a mortuis, re- " ceptum in coelis, sedentem nunc ad dextram Patris, " venturum judicare vivos & mortuos, per carnis etiam " resurrectioriem. Hac lege fidei manente, csetera jam " discipline & conversationis admittunt novitatein cor- " rectionis:" Tert. de virg. velan. in principio. This was the faith, that in Tertullian's time sufficed to make a Christian. And the church of England, as I have re marked already, only proposed the articles of the apostles creed to the convert to be baptized; and upon his pro fessing a belief of them, asks, Whether he will be bap tized in this faith; which (if we will believe the un- niasker) " is not the faith of a Christian/' However, the church, without any more ado, upon the profession of this faith, and no other, baptizes him into it. So that the ancient church, if the umnasker may be be lieved, baptized converts into that faith, which " is " not the faith of a Christian." And the church of England, when she baptizes any one, makes him not a Christian. For he that is baptized only into a faith, that " is not the faith of a Christian," I would fain know how he can thereby be made a Christian? So that if the omissions, which he so much blames in my book, make me a socinian, I see not how the church of Eng land will escape that censure; since those omissions are in that very confession of faith which she proposes, and upon a profession whereof, she baptizes those whom she designs to make Christians. But it seems that the un- inasker (who has made bold to unmask her too) reasons right, that the church of England is mistaken, and makes none but socinians Christians; or (as he is pleased now to declare) no Christians at all. Which, if true, the unmasker had best look to it, whether he himself be Reasonableness of Christianity, 8$c.
a Christian, or no; for it is to be feared, he was bap tized only into that faith, which he himself confesses " is not the faith of a Christian."
But he brings himself off, in these following words: " all matters of faith, in some manner, may be reduced " to this brief platform of belief." Answ. If that be enough to make him a true and an orthodox Christian, he does not consider whom, in this way, he brings off with him; for I think 'he cannot deny, that all matters of faith, in some manner, may be reduced to that ab stract of faith which I have given, as well as to that brief platform in the apostles creed. So that, for aught I see, by this rule, we are Christians or not Christians, ortho dox or not orthodox, equally together.
But yet he says, in the next words; when he calls it an " abstract, or abbreviature, it is implied, that there are " more truths to be known and assented to by a Christian, " in order to making him really so, than what we meet " with here." The quite contrary whereof (as has been shown) is implied, by its being called an abstract. But what is that to the purpose? It is not fit abstracts and abbreviatures should stand in an unmasker's way. They are sounds men have used for what they pleased; and why may not the unmasker do so too, and use them in a sense, that may make the apostles creed be only a broken scrap of the Christian faith? However, in great conde^ scension, being willing to do the apostles creed what honour he could, he says, That " all matters of faith, " in some manner, may be reduced to this brief plat- " form of belief." But yet, when it is set in competi tion with the creed, which he himself is making, (for it is not yet finished,) it is by no means to be allowed as sufficient to make a man a Christian: " There are more " truths to be known and assented to, in order to make " a man really a Christian." Which, what they are, the church of England shall know, when this new re former thinks fit; and then she may be able to propose to those who are not yet so, a collection of articles of belief, and baptize them a-new into a faith, which will really make them Christians: but hitherto, if the un masker may be credited, she has failed in it.
280 A Second Vindication of the (i Yet he craves leave to tell me," in the following words, p. 48, " That the apostles creed hath more in it " than I, or my brethren, will subscribe to." Were it not the undoubted privilege of the unmasker to know me better than I do myself, (for he is always telling me something of myself, which I did not know,) I would, in my turn, crave leave to tell him, that this is the faith I was baptized into, no one tittle whereof I have re nounced, that I know; and that I heretofore thought, that gave me title to be a Christian. But the unmasker hath otherwise determined: and I know not now where to find a Christian. For the belief of the apostles creed will not, it seems, make a man one: and what other belief will, it does not yet please the unmasker to tell us. But yet, as to the subscribing to the apostles creed, I must take leave to say, however the unmasker may be right in the faith, he is out in the morals of a Christian; it being against the charity of one, that is really so, to pronounce, as he does, peremptorily in a thing that he cannot know; and to affirm positively what I know to be a downright falsehood. But what others will do, it is not my talent to determine; that belongs to the un masker; though, as to all that are my brethren in the Christian faith, I may answer for them too, that they will also with me, do that, without which, in that sense, they cannot be my brethren.
Page 49, The unmasker smartly convinces me of no small blunder, in these words: " But was it not judi- " ciously said by this writer, that, " it is well for the " compilers of the creed, that they lived not in my " days?" P. 12, " I tell you, friend, it was impossible " they should; for the learned Usher and Vossius, and " others have proved, that that symbol was drawn up, " not at once, but that some articles of it were adjoined " many years after, far beyond the extent of any man's " life; and therefore the compilers of the creed could " not live in my days, nor could I live in theirs." Answ. But it seems that, had they lived all together, you could have lived in their days. " But/' says he, " I let this " pass, as one of the blunders of our thoughtful and " musing author." Answ. And I tell you, friend, that Reasonableness of Christianity, fyc.
unless it were to show your reading in Usher and Vossius, you had better have let this blunder of mine alone. Does not the unmasker here give a clear proof, that he is no changeling? Whatever argument he takes in hand, weighty or trivial, material or not material to the thing in question, he brings it to the same sort of sense and force. He would show me guilty of an absurdity, in saying, " It is well for the compilers of the creed, that " they lived not in his days." This he proves to be a blunder, because they all lived not in one another's days; therefore it was an absurdity to suppose, they might all live in his days. As if there were any greater absurdity to bring the compilers, who lived, possibly, within a few centuries of one another, by a supposition, into one time; than it is to bring the unmasker, and any one of them who lived a thousand years distant one from another, by a supposition, to be contemporaries; for it is by reason of the compilers living at a distance one from another, that he proves it impossible for him to be their contemporary. As if it were not as im possible in fact, for him who was not born until above a thousand years after, to live in any of their days, as it is for any one of them to live in either of those compilers days, that died before him. The supposition of their liv ing together, is as easy of one as the other, at what dis tance soever they lived, and how many soever there were of them. This being so, I think it had been better for the unmasker to have let alone the blunder, and showed (which was his business) that he does not accuse the compilers of the creed of being all over socinianized, as well as he does me, since they were as guilty as I, of the omission of those articles, (viz. " that Christ is the " word of God: that Christ was God incarnate: the " eternal and ineffable generation of the Son of God: " that the Son is in the Father, and the Father in the " Son, which expresses their unity;") for the omission whereof, the unmasker laid socinianism to my charge. So that it remains still upon his score to show, XXI. " Why these omissions in the apostles creed do " not as well make that abstract, as my abridgment " of faith, to be socinian?"
A Second Vindication of the Page 57, The unmasker " desires the reader to ob- " serve, that this lank faith of mine is in a manner no " other than the faith of a Turk." And I desire the reader to observe, that this faith of mine was all that our Saviour and his apostles preached to the unbelieving world. And this our unmasker cannot deny, as I think, will appear to any one, who observes what he says, p. 76, 77, of his Socinianism unmasked. And that they preach ed nothing but " a faith, that was in a manner no other " than the faitli of a Turk," I think none amongst chris- tians, but this bold unmasker, will have the irreverancc profanely to say.