consistent with the principal design of religion, if not too nicely debated and imposed.*

And thus it is in other points relating to Almighty God. The holy Scriptures require no accurate philosophical notions of God's eternity, omnipresence, immensity, &c; they are content to give us only popular easy accounts of these matters, viz. that God was before the earth was formed; and that he fills heaven and earth with his presence, that he sees all things, and can exert his power everywhere; which are far from being accurate notions of eternity and immensity. They trouble not men with the niceties of eternal successions, or an eternal cò vvv without succession, or with infinite spaces, or of God's being present in part, or in whole, and the like metaphysical difficulties. No, if these things offer themselves to natural light in men of capacity and fine speculation, and they can fancy they have accurate notions about them, it is well and good; let them enjoy their own acquisitions; but this is not owing to Christianity, but philosophy; and so is not incumbent on every good Christian, nor required as matter of a virtuous religious belief; our religion imposes no such difficulties on us of believing with the understanding, what we cannot so much as perceive by it; it only requires us to believe what it reveals to us, that is, to our understanding and apprehension. Let the wise men, let the Scribes, let the disputers of this world,

* Euseb. Life of Constant. 1. 2. c. 71.

busy and tire themselves as much as they please in such disquisitions; the Christian is happy enough in the easy popular notions of such divine perfections, when so powerfully received, as to form his mind into a holy admiration, reverence, and love of God; and his life to a serious obedient conformity to his will and laws. Let who will damn or reject him for not understanding their long critical philosophical creeds, their modes and subsistencies, or personalities; or for not professing them without understanding; the christian religion threatens him with no harm from God himself.

And men must not think, that like other arbitrary societies, they may appoint what terms of union and communion they please in the churches; and then cry, They who like them not, may go elsewhere; and that their ministers, when they no longer fancy them, shall be cast off at will and humour, for different sentiments about unscriptural words or notions; for a christian church has its terms and laws settled by Christ; it is his church, and the table is the Lord's table, and the ministers are Christ's ministers; and it is the highest usurpation in us to make inclosures, when he has left it open; and to turn out members, or pastors from their office, if they walk and act according to the design of their christian station. And men had need be sure, that the denying their unscriptural tests and shibboleths is such a crime as will justify these proceedings; otherwise, though it may signify little what

has been done to me, the unworthiest of many; yet, in general, he whose name was in the book of life, Phil. iv. 3. has told us, ou μxça àμagría, &c. It is no small sin, to turn out from their office those, who have unblamably attended their ministry.*

I know very well, that men of an uncharitable complexion think they may justify their severity and bitter zeal, from the Apostle's counsel, to reject and avoid heretics; but they would do well to consider seriously these few things, lest they abuse and pervert this counsel.

1. Whether all such heresies were not attended with immoral doctrines or practices, in a plain and uncontested opposition to the Apostle's doctrine? And therefore those heresies are "works of the flesh;" vicious, and immoral, and wilful acts, as drunkenness, adultery, &c. And the heretics were selfcondemned, without the decision of a synod; accordingly one may see their foul characters, in 2 Pet. ii. and St Jude's Epistle. This made Augustine say, Hæreticus esse nolo; because he could answer for his willt; but when serious convictions and real strugglings of conscience force a man to own doctrines, which he takes to be the truths of Christ, against all the interests of the flesh and his worldly comfort, which he had rather lose than offend God; how is it possible, if this man

*Clem. Ep. c. 44.

+ See Hales of Eaton in his Tract of Schism; "Heresy," says he, "is an act of the will, not of reason; and is indeed a lie, not a mistake."

should be mistaken, that yet he should be such a heretic? Nunquam errari tutius existimo, quam cum in nimio amore veritatis erratur.* It is his great love of truth that makes him err, and such error cannot be dangerous. "And certain it is, that he who after a pious attentive consideration falls into error, is more worthy, if not of praise, yet of pardon, than he that blindly assents to truth itself;" says Bishop Rust.

2. Whether in the ecclesiastical sense of the word

Heresy, (as noting a fundamental error about the christian faith,) any, in the truly primitive church, were accounted Heretics, who received the primitive ancient creed, before any council presumed to frame new ones? This was wont to be the sufficient test of christianity and church communion, which I willingly assent to in its plain and fair sense. No subtle intricate interpretations were then obtruded as necessarily to be received; and indeed all sides tell us, when they please, that the fundamentals of christianity are plain and easy to be seen; and make this the great commendation of our religion. But where should they be plain, if not in the Creed? The express words of Bishop Davenant, so venerable and judicious in the sense of all parties, cited by Mr Howe in his Sermon of Union among Protestants, are thus; "He that believes the things contained in the Apostles' Creed, and endeavours to live a life agreeable to the precepts of Christ, ought not to be expunged from

* Aug. de Mendacio.

the roll of Christians, nor be driven from communion with the members of any church whatever."

But

3. Whether, at least, it be not extremely difficult for any to know, (if bare speculative error must be heresy,) what is heresy, and who are heretics now in these distant distracted ages, when Christians are so perplexed and divided in their interpretations and explications of many articles? In the Apostles' times, it was easy to know certainly who were in the wrong, by their open opposition to them, whom all the churches allowed to be right, and to be the infallible directors of their faith, and who contradicted such errors; but now each party appeals to their writings,. and think they embrace their true meaning. bishops and councils are not Christ and his Apostles. Here let me use the late Dr Sherlock's words against. the Papists, for in controversy with them one may hear what they will not tell us in disputing against others. "While nothing," says he, "was heresy, but the denial of a plain acknowledged article of the christian faith, and there was no dispute, who were heretics, the power of deposing heretics was sacred and venerable, and had its just authority and effects; but since the controversy is what is heresy, and the world is divided about it, (what if he had said so of schism too?) though the power remains, yet the exercise of it becomes contemptible, when a church first coins new articles of faith, and then censures and deposes