IF the Author of this Discourse did real­ly design to Maintain the Profession of the CATHOLICK FAITH, how is it Possible that He should not speak one good Word of the Creed of St. ATHANASIUS, of the NICENE Creed? How is it Possible He should so Contemn the Ancient Fathers, [Page 2] if His Sentiments, touching the Faith, were the same with Theirs? I Appeal to any Man, that has the Fear of God before his Eyes, to Judge whether He do not plainly Deny the Eternity of the PERSON of Jesus Christ, in that He says, ‘That from the Humane and Divine Nature United there did Result the Person of the Messius, who was both GOD, and Man.’ Certainly That which Re­sults from the Union of the Humane Nature with the Divine is not Eternal, or From Everlasting. ‘We can Frame, says He, no di­stinct Idea of that Infinite Essence, and it were not Infinite if we could.’ Answ. But we may REFLECT upon that IDEA, which God Himself, the ONE BEING Ab­solutely Infinite, has Imprest upon all Ratio­nal Souls. To know God is to have a Distinct Idea of Him. He that Pretends to Frame to himself any Idea of God, Knows not God: For God is LIGHT, and we can have no Per­ceivance of Him, but by the Influence, or Impression we receive from Him. He says that ‘One Opinion concerning Christ is, That Christ was a Divine Person, miraculously Conceiv'd, &c. Tho' he had no Existence before he was Formed in the Virgins Womb.’ Here I desire that the Christian [Page 3] Reader would Observe the Subtlety of some Deceivers, who, by calling Our SAVIOUR a Divine Person, would Avoid the Abhorrence and Detestation they Deserve, because they will not Acknowledge that He has a Nature Truly Divine, or Eternal. He tells us ‘That some Philosophers thought that Souls were propagated from Souls; and the Figure by which this was explain'd, being that of one Candle's being lighted at another; this seems to have given the Rise to those words, Light of Light. It is certain many of the Fathers fell often into this Conceit, and in this way of explaining this Matter, they have said many things, which inti­mate that they believ'd an Inequality be­tween the Persons, and a Subordination of the Second and Third to the First: So that by the same Substance, or Essence, they do in many places express themselves, as if they only meant the same Being in a gene­ral Sense, as all Humane Souls are of the same Substance; that is, the same Order, or sort of Beings; and they seemed to en­title them to different Operations; not only in an Oeconomical way, but thought that one did that, which the other did not.’ Here He plainly endeavours to Perswade us [Page 2] [...] [Page 3] [...] [Page 4] to believe that Many of the Fathers were no True Christians, but had a Conceit that there were Three Gods: For most certainly if they thought that The Father, The Son, and The Holy Ghost, are of the same Sub­stance, no otherwise than As all Humane Souls are of the same Substance, and that they have different Operations, not only in an Oeconomical way, but so that one Does what the other Does not, they Thought (in Effect) that there are Three Gods. If He would name any One of those, who have Publisht such Monstrous Conceptions, we should give him a Punctual Answer. In the mean time we must Aver to all the World, that not one of the Holy Fathers, of the Four First Gene­ral Councils, were subject to any such De­lirium: And Every one of those, that De­serve the Name of Fathers, shall Rise up in Judgment against Him, for laying so foul an Imputation upon MANY Fathers, not Name­ing One of them; so that he might Insinuate a Contempt of them All into the Minds of Unwary Readers. ‘Others, says He, took another way of explaining this, making it their Foundation, that the Deity was one Numerical Being.’ Answ. The Ancient Fathers did not say that the Deity was One [Page 5] Numerical Being: what they said manifest­ly imports that the Deity is BEING Simply and Absolutely, viz. BEING Absolutely In­finite, so that it implies the most palpable Contradiction that the True, and Eternal. GOD should not be Absolutely ONE. I De­sire that the Learned Reader would be ever Mindful of these▪ Words of Saint BASIL, in his 141 Epistle: [...], He tells us that ‘Many have thought that the Term SON did not at all belong to the Blessed Three.’ If He would Name One of these Many, and shew us where we may find this Execrable Heresy in Writing, we should undertake, by the Help of GOD, to Manifest the Madness, and Folly of it. He Slights this Position of the Schoolmen, ‘That GOD being Infinite, every Offence against Him has an Infinite Guilt, and must be expiated either by Acts of Infinite Value, or of Infinite Duration; and that a Person of an Infinite Nature was only capable of Acts of an Infinite Value; that such a One was necessary for Expiating Sin. But in all this Gradation, [Page 6] there is one Defect, That the Scripture sets none of these Speculations before us.’

Answ. There's nothing more Evident in the Holy Scriptures than this, That those that are SAV'D are REDEEM'D with the Precious Bloud of CHRIST: And is not that Bloud of Infinite Value? Is not the Wrath of GOD against All Sin Infinite? Is not Infinite Wrath against All Sin as Fully Demonstrated in an Infinite Holy PERSON, Suffering For All the Sins of the Whole World in the Nature of Man, which He Assum'd that He might be Capable of Suffering, As that Wrath could ever have been Shewn, or Demonstrated to Men, and Angels in the Everlasting Destruction of All Sinners? As for those Scoptical Words, ‘those Subtle weighings of Infinities one against another,’ I shall make no other Re­flection on them, but only to declare that I Hope the Learned, and Pious Reader will joyn with Me in a just Abhorrence and De­testation of them. He uses this very Dan­gerous Expression: ‘The offering this to us on such easy terms, and the exacting only a Sincere Obedience as the Condition of it, without insisting on an Entire Obedience, is another part of the Grace of it.’ Answ. [Page 7] SINCERE Obedience is ENTIRE Obedience, or the having Respect to All the Command­ments of GOD. He Acknowledges that ‘GOD would Pardon Sin in such a manner, as should shew how much He Hated it, at the same time that He shew'd such Love, and Compassion to Sinners.’ But, say We, He had not Shewn how much He Hated Sin, and how much He Lov'd Sinners, if He had not Shewn this Hatred, and this Love to be Both INFINITE, which He shew'd with all Possible Evidence in the Sa­crifice of the Death of Christ, a PERSON In­finite in All Excellency, and Perfection. ‘Every Sin, says He, gives a wound, and re­quires Repentance to wash, and heal it, but every Sin does not shut us out from a right to the Blessings of the Covenant.’ Answ. Every Known Sin does not render us Unca­pable of Repentance; but Every Known Sin Exposes us to the Wrath of God, and the Sinner has no Grounds to hope for Pardon, unless he sincerely Repent, stedfastly Purpo­sing, by the Help of GOD, to lay down his Life, rather than be Guilty of any Known Sin by Commission or Omission. I pray GOD to Affect the Heart of this Man, and of Every other Learned Person, throughout the [Page 8] whole Christian World, with a due Regard to the Writings of the Ancient Fathers. Their Following of those Excellent Holy Men both in Life, and Doctrine, as they were Followers of Christ, and his Apostles, would most certainly Reduce this, and all other Nations, Professing Christianity, to a True State of Christian Peace, and Tranquillity.

[...].