in a short tract, entitled, The Modest Plea continued, or a brief and distinct Answer to Dr. Waterland's Queries relating to the Doctrine of the Trinity. 1720a.

66

In the Preface to this tract, Dr. C. complains, that Dr. Waterland had "wholly neglected the only just method of refuting his work, by shewing that "he had mistaken or misinterpreted the Scriptures, "or by disproving the truth of his propositions;” and that he had grounded his defence either upon the metaphysical opinions of the Fathers, or upon the supposed mistakes of Dr. C. in his translation of some few passages of their writings, not at all affecting the merits of the cause. Yet is it remarkable, that of Dr. W.'s thirty-one Queries, twenty

a The Modest Plea, of which this professes to be a continuation, has already been mentioned as the production of Dr. Sykes, under the designation of a Country Clergyman. Its professed object was to compare Dr. Clarke's and Dr. Bennet's notions of the Trinity, in refutation of the latter; and no notice is taken in it of Dr. Waterland's work. The reason, therefore, of Dr. Clarke's publishing his own tract as a sequel, or continuation of Dr. Sykes's, is not, at first, apparent. But from a passage in Disney's Life of Sykes, p. 88, and another from the Memoirs of Jackson, p. 55, it appears probable that Dr. C. himself had some share in the Modest Plea; since, in a letter from him to Mr. Jackson, he says, "The Country Clergyman" (meaning the author of the Modest Plea) "is really a person who was convinced just in "the manner you were, and I have just the same relation to his "performances as to yours." What that relationship was, has already been noticed, in speaking of Jackson's Answer to the Queries. The publication of The Modest Plea, together with the two letters by Dr. Clarke, strengthens the probability that it was, in some measure, a joint concern between him and Dr. Sykes.

four are exclusively grounded on Scripture, or on Dr. Clarke's own propositions; and that almost the whole of Dr. Clarke's Answer consists of endeavours to refute Dr. Waterland's expositions of Scripture.

Dr. Clarke's replies to each Query are ingenious, subtle, and acute. But the great and (as it seems) insuperable difficulty he had to contend with, was that of allowing to our Lord the title of GOD, in any legitimate acceptation of the term. It is a vain attempt, to disguise the absurdity, upon the Arian principle, of ascribing real Divinity to the Son. Whenever Dr. C. finds this express term given to him, he is evidently perplexed and troubled how to evade its force. Generally he is under the necessity of either adding to the text some expository word or phrase, or of expressing it by some mode of circumlocution, which may confine it to the particular signification his system requires. Where he conceives the term God to denote the Father, he inserts supreme before it, that the Divinity of the Son may appear to be inferior: where it is predicated of the Son, some qualifying terms are introduced from other texts of Scripture, to give it a dependent and subordinate meaning: and again, when it is used absolutely, denoting the essence or being of the Deity, the personal pronouns, I and me, he and him, are insisted upon as proofs that it relates individually and exclusively to the Father ;thus assuming the very points in question. Dr. Clarke's system, indeed, necessarily supposes a supreme God and a subordinate God; and upon this principle rests his interpretation of every text which cannot otherwise be made to accord with his views.

66

66

Dr. W.'s Queries, and the arguments grounded upon them, tend to shew, on the other hand, that this is neither consistent with the true Scripture-notion of the divine Unity, nor with that of the Trinity, as understood by the Church, or even as professed to be received by Dr. Clarke himself. "I do not charge you," says Dr. W. " with asserting two su'preme Gods: but I do charge you with holding "two Gods, one supreme, another inferior; two "real and true Gods, according to the Scripture-no"tion of the word God, as explained by yourself"." To this charge The Modest Plea gives no specific answer. The author contents himself with recriminating, that his opponent also asserts two supreme Gods.

The reputation which Dr. Waterland obtained by this important work did not fail to attract the notice of persons eminent in the Church. Dr. Robinson, Bishop of London, had recently expressed his disapprobation of an innovation which some of the Arian party were endeavouring to introduce into his diocese, in substituting for the accustomed form of doxology in the singing psalms, another more conformable to their own persuasions. Mr. Whiston, in his Memoirs of Dr. Clarke, states, that "Dr. "Clarke attempted this small alteration for his pa"rish of St. James's." Dr. Disney, in his Memoirs of Dr. Sykes, mentions the same circumstance. The Bishop deemed it necessary to address a letter of caution to his Clergy, admonishing them to discountenance these irregular practices. The letter

b Defence. Query v. vol. i. p. 57. See also, more at large, his arguments in defence of Query xxiii. pp. 243-262.

brought upon him some rude attacks from Whiston, Sykes, and others; but it gave occasion also to a more full investigation of the primitive doxologies, as bearing testimony to our Lord's Divinity; and thus became a seasonable and useful topic of discussionc.

Soon after Dr. Waterland had published his Defence of the Queries, the Bishop took the opportunity of testifying his high opinion of the author, by appointing him to preach the Lady Moyer's lecture, then recently foundedd. Lady Moyer's will bears

<The two ablest tracts in this short controversy were supposed to be written by Dr. Wm. Berriman, and were entitled, 1. A seasonable Review of Mr. Whiston's Account of primitive Doxologies. 2. A second Review in answer to Mr. Whiston's second Letter. 1719.

d The following is an extract from the will of the Lady Moyer, or, as she is therein styled, "Dame Rebecca Moyer, late "of the parish of St. Andrew Holborn, in the county of Mid"dlesex, widow.

66

66

My now dwelling house in Bedford row or Jockey field I give to my dear child Eliza Moyer, that out of it may be paid

twenty guineas a year to an able Minister of God's word, to "preach eight sermons every year on the Trinity, and Divinity of "our ever blessed Saviour, beginning with the first Thursday in "November, and so the first Thursday in the seven sequel "months, in St. Paul's, if permitted there, or, if not, elsewhere, according to the discretion of my executrix, who will not think "it any incumbrance to her house. I am sure it will bring a "blessing on it, if that work be well and carefully carried on, "which in this profligate age is so neglected. If my said daughter "should leave no children alive at her death, or they should die " before they come to age, then I give my said house to my niece "Lydia Moyer, now wife to Peter Hartop, Esq. and to her heirs "after her, she always providing for that sermon, as I have begun, twenty guineas every year."

VOL. I.

f

date, Dec. 16, 1722, and was proved, Feb. 21, 1723. It appears, therefore, that she had endowed this lecture about three or four years before her death, Dr. Waterland being the first who was appointed to it; and as his sermons were published in

There is a list of the preachers of this lecture at the end of Mr. John Berriman's Critical Dissertation on 1 Tim. iii. 16. (which is the substance of the lectures he preached) down to the year 1740-1; and in a copy of that book in Sion college library, there is a continuation of the list, in MS. by Mr. John Berriman, to the year 1748. In the year 1757, they were preached by Mr. Wm. Clements, librarian of Sion college, but he did not publish them till 1797. In the year 1764, or thereabouts, the preacher was Benjamin Dawson, LL. D. who printed them under the title of, An Illustration of several Texts of Scripture, particularly wherein the Logos occurs. 1765. Dr. Thomas Morell, author of the Thesaurus Græca Poesews, is supposed to have been the last. Mr. Watts, the present librarian of Sion college, (to whom the reader is indebted for the information here given,) heard him preach one of them in January 1773. One of these lectures Dr. M. published, without his name, in April 1774. It was written against Lindsey, and entitled, The Scripture Doctrine of the Trinity justified.

In the Gentleman's Magazine for 1804, p. 187, mention is made of a Mrs. Moyer, who "died at Low Layton, Feb. 1804, "the widow of Benjamin Moyer, Esq. son of Lawrence Moyer, "merchant, who succeeded as heir of his uncle, Sir Samuel

66

Moyer, a rich Turkey merchant, Sheriff of Essex, in 1698, "Bart. 1701. died 1716. His widow Rebecca, sister of Sir Wm. "Jolliffe, Knt. founded the lecture, for a limited number of

years." This does not however appear to have been the case; no limitation being mentioned in Lady Moyer's will. But since there is no compulsory obligation in the will to perpetuate the lecture, the probability is, that in course of time (perhaps immediately after Dr. Morell's turn expired) the property fell into other hands, and the lecture was no longer continued.