"those we account learned and judicious men" of the prefent day, is our standard?

A third clafs of Subfcribers may be mentioned, who wholly difapprove of this UNLIMITED LATITUDE of interpretation; but who, nevertheless, plead for liberty upon, what they call, the "mysterious and difficult doctrines;" talk of retrenchment and alteration, and by other means discover, that there are fome things in the Articles to which they do not cordially fubfcribe.

It is fuperfluous to observe, that the Divines already noticed, are unanimous in thus far expreffing their diffatisfaction with the Established Creed. The observation fhall, however, be fupported by a fingle paffage from Dr. Balguy. "The Articles, we will fay," this churchman obferves," are not exactly what we might wish them to be. Some of them are expreffed in doubtful terms: others are inaccurate, perhaps unphilofophical: others again may chance to mislead an ignorant reader into fome erroneous opinion h." He is perfuaded, however, that "there is not any one among them that leads to immorality."-But to proceed to evidence which includes thofe who are reputedly more orthodox.

Dr. Hey, treating on the Athanafian Creed, fays, that "feveral eminent men in our own church, have feemed to wish it removed *." A learned Bishop, the Dr. also informs us, who "would now be a leading man in any councils in which he would think proper to engage, feems inclined to retrench Articles about mysterious or difficult doctrines'."

The profeffor's evidence may not, however, appear, to fome perfons, wholly unfufpicious. We will next therefore adduce that of the learned, and reputedly more orthodox, Dr. Ridley. Speaking of thofe celebrated champions of our Church, and Expofitors of her Articles, the Doctors Nicholls, Bennet, Waterland, Stebbing, and others,' "It doth not appear," Dr. R fays to his opponent, "either

(h) Ch. 6. p. 293. Vol. II. p. 203.

(i) Ibid.

(k) Vol. 3. p. 114. (1) Ibid.

that they did not allow the expediency of a Reformation of the Articles, or that they would have oppofed it. I have already had occafion to show the contrary, with respect to Dr. Stebbing. And the Author of the Historical Effay on the Articles hath fhown it of Bennet. And probably every one of those you have mentioned, (the above Doctors and feveral others), would have owned, that fome of the Articles now are unnecessary, and others unhappily expressed. To what alterations they would have consented, or their fucceffors would confent now, you have no title to afk, till, &c.m" Again, "The conceffion, that a REFORMATION is expedient and defirable," he fays, "we have freely made you"."

But the Divine who seems in the highest repute with the Gentlemen in question, is the great Bishop Warburton. His "Doctrine of Grace" is at once, a kind of general magazine from whence almost every puny affailant of our fyftem borrows his weapons, and a supposed bulwark under which he fhelters himself. To the works of this Prelate we are referred for correction and inftruction in orthodoxy, by Mr. Ludlam, Mr. Polwhele P, Mr. Clapham, Dr. Croft, and nearly the whole host of our Antagonists. His fentiments therefore may properly be confidered as peculiarly deferving of attention. And they are briefly thefe; that it is owing to the multiplicity, the abstrufeness, and general fault of our Articles, that there are so many unhappy divifions among us; and that in order to remedy this evil, a great many of these Articles SHOULD BE RETRENCHED, and the reft fimplified and reformed. Thus in a fermon on "church communion," fpeaking immediately of our own affairs, and

explaining how the unity of the fpirit became violated,". "Some men," he fays, "... instead of stopping at the few general and fundamental principles of Christian faith, clearly delivered, and uniformly believed by all, went on, and

(m) 3d Letter to the Author of the Confeffional, p. 108.

(n) Ibid. p. 109. (0) 4 Effays, p. 68, 82, (p) 2d Letter to Dr, Hawker, title-page. (q) Sermon at Boroughbridge, p. 10, 25. (r) Thoughts, p. 13. Note.

brought into the church, as terms of communion, abftrufe questions relating to points obfcurely delivered; &c." "But fince," he proceeds, "through a neglect of these rules, this unity of the Spirit hath been unhappily violated, the next question is of restoring it. Which, what is here faid concerning the means of its prefervation, fhows us is to be done,

By RETRENCHING all unnecessary articles, to which the animofity of parties, the fuperftition of barbarous ages, and even the negligence of time, have given an imaginary importance: aud by reducing the formula of faith to the primitive fimplicity: Leaving ALL DISPUTAPLE POINTS, together with fuch other as no party deems necessary, to the free decifion of every man's private judgment."

W

Dr. Croft fays, "That the articles concerning Grace, Faith, and Good Works, lean towards the fide of enthusafmTM; and thinks our fuperiors might explain the nature of juftification by faith; and diffuade Chriftians from entering into the nature of predeftination and election; it being now," he adds, " clearly proved, both by Dr. Tucker and Dr. Paley, that these terms regard more an admiffion to the privileges of the gospel, than any determinate notion of the future deftination of Chriftians*."

But it is wholly unneceffary thus to multiply particular evidence on the point. It is established by the most confpicuous marks of violence and diftortion, which certain of thefe poor Articles almoft conftantly exhibit, and by all the labour and ingenuity which have been displayed to show, that it is only to their GENERAL MEANING, and to ANY grammatical fenfe of which the words are capable, to which fubfcription is required. To evade, or to extenuate, some of the visible doctrines of the articles, is the end of the whole business; and we challenge our opponents to produce a fingle Commentator, ftrictly of their description, who does

(s) Sermons at Lincoln's Inn, Vol. II. p. 177. (t) Ibid. p. 178, 179. (w) Bampton Lect. p. 110. (x) Strictures on Paley and Gisborne, C

p. 63, 61.

not, upon feveral of these articles, endeavour to establish a meaning below that of the plain, natural, and obvious fignification of the words.

Onwhatever grounds then these various modes of treating the established confeffions are built; fuch a procedure certainly does not resemble the conduct of those who adhere to the exprefs and obvious doctrines of these formularies. Will they pretend to believe and teach the doctrines contained in the articles, who do not confider them as propofitions to be believed, but articles only not to be publicly contradicted; mere proferiptions of Papifts, Anabaptists, and Puritans? Can they be fuppofed to preach according to the primitive fignification of thefe articles, who tell us expressly that they have a new and acquired fenfe, in which they may be honestly fubfcribed? Is it credible that they should "teach them as they were first delivered by our Reformers," who lament, that in confequence of the errors of those times, the articles contain fo many things which are objectionable, and which want reforming? These are all methods of viewing and reprefenting the fubject for which they find no sort of occafion, who really adhere to the plain and natural meaning of the articles, as they are illuftrated by the known fentiments and other writings of the Reformers.

3. But let us attend a little more particularly to the cON. CESSIONS of these Gentlemen. "A refutation," the British Critic fays, "drawn from the 'admiffions of the author himfelf, is a refutation drawn from the most fatisfactory of all fources." We will begin then with the admiffions of this Critic himself, in favour of our argument. "If," faith he, "a defection from the church is widely extended, and a furrender of its orthodox principles called for even by its own Jons, we fpeak from knowledge when we fay, Hoc Ithacus velit, et magno mercentur Atrida." To the fame effect, but more distinctly and at large, he speaks in another paffage which we have quoted below.

(y) October, 1797. p. 380. (2) Jan. 1796. p. 71. (q) Ch. 9. § 1.

Dr. Hey" fufpects, that many of those who are fo impatient about the Athanafian Creed, fecretly favour a change in the doctrines of the church .""It is not," he fays in another place," a thing to be neglected, that many are defirous, at this time, to make a CHANGE in the doctrine of the National Church: Some of these are philofophers and fcholars; fome even Ministers of the Church." "The English Divines,” he also observes, "have been supposed to favour the tenets of the Semipelagians, though the Liturgy of our church implies, in feveral places, that we hold the doctrine of preventing grace;" and though, it may be added, the articles were intended againft Semipelagians. Yet the Dr. thinks "they feem likely to continue and be popular.”He clearly admits too, adopting the fentiments, and nearly the words, of Bishop Warburton, that fince the Restoration Divines have gotten into the extreme which is oppofite to the doctrine of Juftification by faith. Having mentioned the "great firefs laid on" this doctrine previous to that event,... "Men did not," he says, "fairly get into the oppofite extreme until the beginning of the 18th Century. The stiff zeal of the fectaries was first softened by those eminent men, who were called Latitudinarian Divines. . . . Ere long, Faith came to be refined away into nothing: nay, at length, an attempt was made, by a Clergyman, an eminent orthodox Divine, to prove the perfect coincidence between ChriStianity and Reafon, by fhowing, that our religion was only a republication of the law of nature."—" At length," Bishop W. fays, "the great GOSPEL-PRINCIPLES OF FAITH.... on which PROTESTANTISM was founded.... came to be held by many for FANATICAL."-" Morality was advanced fo high, and Faith fo frittered into nonfenfe, that a new Definition of our religion, (namely, that it was only this republication of the law of nature,) in oppofition to its Founders, and unknown to its early Followers, was

(b) Vol. III. p. 116.

(c) Ibid. Vol. II. p. 199. (d) Ibid. Vol. III. p. 203. (e) See Nor. Lect. Vol. II. p. 209. Note. (f) Ibid. Vol. III. p.265, and "Divine Legation," B. 3.