Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

TRACT I.

THE

SUPREMACY

OF THE

FATHER

ASSERTED:

OR,

Eight arguments from fcripture to prove, that the Son is a Being inferiour and fubordinate to the Father, and that the Father alone is the fupreme God.

First printed in the Year 1715.

[merged small][ocr errors]

Reverend the CLERGY,

[ocr errors]

And in Particular to the Right Reverend

GILBERT Lord Bishop of

SARUM,

Our vigilant and laborious Diocesan.

B

My LORD,

EFORE I prefume to offer and com mend to the Clergy, and in particular to your lordship's confideration and protection, the annexed papers, I beg leave to obferve a few things, in order to obviate what may be urged againft me upon the account of this work, viz. first, my inability in general for fuch a performance; and in particular my not being read in the original languages. To the firft part, viz. my inability in general, I anfwêr, that I have done my beft. And as there are degrees of ufefulnefs, if this mean performance becomes ufeful in the leaft degrees (which I hope it will) towards the bringing home the banish'd truths of chriftianity; this, I think, will be fufficient apology for me, and a fufficient anfwer to the objection.

To the latter part of the objection, viz. my not being read in the original languages; I anfwer, first, what I have done in this affair, was not original intended for publick view, much lefs to engage in a controverfy with the

learn

learned world, a work which I am unqualified for, and therefore would not meddle with. all that I attended, being only to lay before my neighbours, who are otherwise minded, the grounds and reafons of my diffent from them, and to anfwer their objections, in order to prevent their uncharitable and thereby unchriftian cenfures and reproaches; and (if it might be) to bring them over to what appears to me to be the truth. But when these papers had been view'd by fome friends, it was judged they might be of more publick ufe; and fo requested that they might be printed. Wherefore, in fubmiffion both to the judgment and request of those friends, I have given way to their being offered to more publick confideration. But, fecondly, I anfwer, what I have attempted in this work, is to vindicate and reftore the first great article of primitive christian faith, viz. that there is but one fupreme God; and that the God and Father of our Lord Jefus Chrift, and he only, exclufive of all other beings, fubfiftances, perfon, and perfons whatsoever, is this one fupreme God. This is a controverfy which may be reduced into a very narrow compass, viz. the answering directly yes, or no, to this plain question: Is the God and Father of our Lord Jefus Chrift, really and truly the God and Father of our Lord Jefus Chrift? Here, if the anfwer be in the negative, then,he exprefs teftimony of Christ and his Apoftles is denyed: if in the affirmitive, then what I am pleading for is yielded up, viz. the fupremacy of the Father. This, and this only, is what I have principally defign'd to make good; and therefore whatever elfe I may have happened to touch upon, is only occafionally, and as it has a relation to this impor tant Point. And this being a thing fo level to the human understanding, and in which the fcriptures are fo full and plain, the criticifing upon an ori

[ocr errors]

t.

B 2

ginal

ginal word, would not make for or against me in the prefent cafe; and Confequently there was no great need of being read in the original languages in order to this performance. But farther,

It may, fecondly, be objected, that I am not of the clergy, but only a laymember of the christian church, to which I answer, first, that it is the duty of every chriftian, as well the laity, as the clergy, tocxamine the rule, the grounds, and reafons of their faith; and if they diffent from others, to publish the grounds and reafons of that diffent, in order to be reftored to the truth themselves, if they be in error; or if they be in the right to reftore thofe to the truth who are in the wrong. This, I fay, is not only the right, but the duty of every private chriftian, as far as it properly, and decently, comes within the compafs of his power; because every private chriftian, owes fo much to himself, to the truth, and to that chriftian fociety to which he ftands related. And this being all that I have done, I think my being only a lay-member of the christian church, is no juft exception to this performance. But,

Secondly, I aniwer, that the practice of the church, of Rome, in obliging her lay-members to fubmit themfelves blindly to the judgment of the church, without examining the rule, the grounds, and reafons of that faith, has been juftly efteem'd a gross corruption by the reformed churches; and that they have dealt very hardly by the laity in this, as well as in other refpects. But, alas, if the laity of the reformed churches, are alike obliged to fubmit their judgments to the judgment of the church, and to beleive and receive things, as the church beleives and receives the fame, without having the liberty to examine the rule, the grounds, and reafons of their faith,

and

and if the cafe require it, to diffent, and to pub. lifh the grounds of that diffent, then the reformed churches, in this refpect, are relapfed and gone back to that anti-chriftianifm, which they once were brought out of. And likewife the laity of the reformed churches, are in a much worfe cafe than the laity of the church of Rome. For tho their chriftian liberty is alike invaded, and tho' the yoke is the fame, which is put upon the neck of either; yet the church of Rome, has taken care to make it fit easy upon her members, whilst the reformed churches have left this yoke to gall the necks of their people, even unto bitterness. For,

First, the church of Rome, has taught her people to beleive, that infallibility is lodged in and with their church; and confequently all who are fatisfied of the truth of this point, can comfortably fubmit their judgments to the judgment of the church, without examaning the rule or grounds of their faith, because the church is infalliable, and therefore cannot err. Whereas on the other fide, the reformed churches have made no fuch provifion, but on the contrary have de clared that churches may err, and have erred; and if fo, what a galling yoak muft it be upon our neck to be obliged to fubmit (not blindly but with our eyes open), our judgments to the judgment of a fallible church, in thofe things wherein it plainly appears to us, that the church has departed from the truth? Again,

Secondly, the church of Rome has forbid her lay-members the use of the fcriptures, and in fo doing has rendered their fubmiffion to the judgment of the church more eafy, by taking that from them, which if they had the ufe of, would unavoidably lead them into temptation. That is, they would by a free ufe of the fcriptures, be tempted to diffent in their judgments from the

B 3:

judge

« AnteriorContinuar »