Writers could not forbear expreffing fo clearly and diftinctly, even frequently when at the fame time they were about to affirm, and endeavouring to prove, fomething not very confiftent with it. The greatest part of the Writers before and at the time of the Council of Nice, were (I think) really of That Opinion, (though they do not always speak very clearly and confiftently,) which I have endeavoured to fet forth in thofe Propofitions. But as to the Writers after that Time, the Reader must not wonder, if many Passages not confiftent with (nay, perhaps contrary to) thofe which are here cited, fhall by any One be alleged out of the fame Authors. For I do not cite places out of these Authors, fo much to fhow what was the Opinion of the Writers themselves, as to fhow how naturally Truth fometimes prevails by its own native clearness and evidence, even againft the strongest and most fettled prejudices: According to that

of Bafil: I am perfwaded (faith he)

that the Strength of

νήγε

Όντως δίμαι τὸ does ique òv, ?πολλάκις τὰς ἄνε

the Doctrine deli

Tois dinelors τοῖς οικείοις

vered down to us,

has often compelled

yew.

De Spiritu

men to contradict fancto, cap. 29.

their own Affertions.

In the Third Part there is, firft, brought together a great number of Paffages out of the Liturgy of the Church of England, wherein the Doctrine set forth in the former Parts is exprefly affirmed; And then in the next place are collected the principal Paffages, which may feem: at firft fight to differ from That Doctrine: And these latter I have indeavoured to reconcile with the former, by fhowing how. they may be understood in a Senfe confistent both with the Doctrine of Scripture, and with the other before-cited Expreffions of the Liturgy. And This is absolutely neceffary to be done by every one, who when he prays with his Mouth, defires to pray with his Understanding also.

It is a thing very deftructive of Religion, and the Cause of almost all Divifions among Christians; when young perfons at their firft entring upon the Study of Divinity, look upon Humane and perhaps Modern Forms of fpeaking, as the Rule of their Faith; understanding These also according to the accidental Sound of the Words, or according to the Notions which happen at any particular Time to prevail among the Vulgar; and then picking out (as Proofs) fome few fingle Texts of Scripture, which to minds already ftrongly prejudiced muft needs feem to found, or may easily be accommodated,

the

the fame way; while they attend not impartially to the whole Scope and general Tenour of Scripture. Whereas on the contrary, were the Scriptures first thoroughly ftudied, and ferioufly confidered, as the Rule and Only Rule of Truth in matters of Religion; and the Senfe of all humane Forms and Expreffions, deduced from thence; the greatest part of Errors, at least the greatest part of the uncharitable Divifions that have happened among Chriftians, might in all probability have been prevented. The different States, which the Controverfies concerning Predeftination, Original Sin, Freewill, Faith and good Works, and the do Arine of the ever-blessed Trinity, have at different Times gone through, are a fufficient Evidence of this Truth.

The Church of Rome indeed requires men to receive her particular Doctrines (or Explications of Doctrines) and Traditions, as part of the Rule it felf of their Faith And therefore with Them no good Christian can poffibly comply. But the Proteftant Churches, utterly disclaiming all fuch Authority; and requiring men to comply with their Forms, merely upon Account of their being agreeable to Scripture; and confequently in fuch Senfe only, wherein they are agreeable to Scripture 'tis plain that every person

may

may reasonably agree to fuch Forms, whenever he can in any fense at all reconcile them with Scripture.

The first Reformers, when they had laid afide what to Them feemed intolerable in the Doctrines of the Church of Rome, in other matters chose to retain the words they found; yet declaring that they meant thereby to exprefs only the Senfe of Scripture, and not that of Tradition or of the Schools. If Tradition or Custom, if Carelesness or Mistake, either in the Compiler or Receiver, happen at any time to put a Sense upon any humane Forms, different from that of the Scripture, which thofe very Forms were intended to explain, and which is at the fame time declared to be the only Rule of Truth; 'tis evident no man can be bound to understand thofe Forms in fuch Sense nay, on the contrary, he is indifpenfably bound not to understand or receive them in fuch Senfe. For (as the learned Mr Thorndike rightly obferves,) That which once was not Matter of Faith, can never by process of Time, or any Act the Church can do, [or by any Interpretation of Words, that Cuftom or Carelesness or Contentioufness may have introduced,] become Matter of Faith. Epilog. Part II. pag. 155.

As

As in reading a Comment upon any Book whatfoever, he that would thence understand the true meaning of the Text, muft not barely confider what the words of the Comment may of themselves poffibly happen to fignify; but how they may be fo understood, as to be a consistent Interpretation of the Text they are to explain: So in confidering all Forms of Humane Compofition in matters of Religion, it is not of importance what the words may in themselves poffibly moft obviously fignify, or what they may vulgarly and carelefly be understood to mean; (for there is in almost all words, fome Ambiguity;) but in what Senfe they can be confiftent Expofitions of thofe Texts of Scripture, which they were intended and are profeffed to interpret. Otherwise it may easily happen, that a Comment may in effect come into the place of the Text, and another Interpretation afterwards into the place of That Comment; till in procefs of Time, men by infenfible degrees depart entirely from the Meaning of the Text, and Human Authority fwallows up that which is Divine. Which Evil can no otherwise be prevented, than by having recourse perpetually to the Original itself; and allowing no Authority to any Interpretation, any further than 'tis evidently agreeable to the Text it self.

Not