"Possibly this reverend gentleman would have had charity enough for a known writer of the brotherhood, to have found it by an innuendo in those words above quoted, of laying down his life for another. But every thing is to be strained here the other way. For the author of the Reasonableness of Christianity, &c. is of necessity to be represented as a Socinian; or else his book may be read, and the truths in it, which Mr. Edwards likes not, be received; and people put upon examining. Thus one, as full of happy conjectures and suspicions as this gentleman, might be apt to argue. But what if the author designed his treatise, as the title shows, chiefly for those who were not yet thoroughly or firmly Christians; proposing to work on those who either wholly disbelieved, or doubted of the truth of the Christian religion?"

To this he tells me, p. 43, that my "title says nothing for me," i. e. shows not that I designed my book for those that disbelieved, or doubted of the Christian religion.

Answ. I thought that a title that professed the reasonableness of any doctrine, showed it was intended for those that were not fully satisfied of the reasonableness of it; unless books are to be writ to convince those of any thing, who are convinced already. But possibly this may be the unmasker's way: and if one should judge by his manner of treating this subject, with declamation instead of argument, one would think, that he meant it for nobody but those who were of his mind already. I thought, therefore, the Reasonableness of Christianity, as delivered in the Scripture, a proper title to signify whom it was chiefly meant for: and, I thank God, I can with satisfaction say, it has not wanted its effect upon some of them. But the unmasker proves for all that, that I could not design it chiefly for disbelievers or doubters of the Christian religion. "For," says he, p. 43, "how those that wholly disregard and disbelieve the Scriptures of the New Testament, as Gentiles, Jews, Mahometans, and atheists do," (I crave leave to put in theists, instead of atheists, for a reason presently to be mentioned)" are like to attend to the

Reasonableness of Christianity, as delivered in the Scripture, is not to be conceived: and therefore we look upon this as all mere sham and sophistry." Answ. Though the unmasker teaches good breeding out of the Mishna, yet I thought he had been a minister of the Gospel, and had taught Christianity out of the Scripture. Why! good sir, would you teach Jews and Mahometans Christianity out of the Talmud and Alcoran ; because they are the books that at present they attend to, and believe? Or would you, laying by the authority of all books, preach religion to infidels, in your own name, and by your own authority, laying aside the Scripture? Is it not to be conceived," no not by a Christian divine, that the way to make unbelievers Christians, is to show them the reasonableness of the religion contained in the Scriptures? But it seems the unmasker has a peculiar way of preaching and propagating Christianity without the Scripture; as some men have a peculiar way of disputing without reason.

"Is

In the beginning of this paragraph, p. 43, the unmasker, that is always a fair interpreter of my meaning, and never fails to know it better than I do, tells me, That by those that wholly disbelieve, "I must mean atheists, Turks, Jews, and pagans; and by those that are not firmly Christians, a few weak Christians." But did our unmasker never hear of unbelievers, under a denomination distinct from that of atheists, Turks, Jews, and pagans? Whilst the pulpit and the press have so often had up the name of theists or Deists, has that name wholly escaped him? It was these I chiefly designed, and I believe nobody of all that read my Vindication but the unmasker mistook me, if he did. But there at least, p. 165, he might have found the name, as of a sort of unbelievers not unknown amongst us. But, whatever he thought, it was convenient, and a sort of prudence in him (when he would persuade others that I had not a design, which I say I had) to lessen as much as he could, and cover the need of any such design; and so make it, that I could not intend my book to work upon those that disbelieved or did not firmly believe;

by insinuating there were few or none such amongst us. Hence he says, that by those that are not thoroughly and firmly Christians, "I mean a few weak Christians; as well, as under those who wholly disbelieve, he left the theists out of my meaning. I am very glad to hear from the unmasker, that there are but few weak Christians, few that have doubts about the truth of Christianity amongst us. But if there be not a great number of Deists, and that the preventing their increase be not worth every true Christian's care and endeavours, those who have been so loud against them have been much to blame; and I wish to God there were no reason for their complaints. For these therefore, I take the liberty to say, as I did before, that I chiefly designed my book; and shall not be ashamed of this sophistry, as you call it, if it can be sophistry to allege a matter of fact that I know; until you have arguments to convince me, that you know my intention in publishing it better than I do myself. And I shall think it still no blamable prudence, however you exclaim against prudence, (as perhaps you have some reason) that "I mentioned only those advantages, that all Christians are agreed in; and that I observed that command of the apostle, Rom. xiv. 1, ' Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations;' without being a Socinian. I think I did not amiss, that I offered to the belief of those that stood off that, and only that, which our Saviour and his apostles preached for the reducing the unconverted world. And would any one think he in earnest went about to persuade men to be Christians, who should use that as an argument to recommend the Gospel, which he has observed men to lay hold on as an objection against it? To urge such points of controversy as necessary articles of faith, when we see our Saviour and the apostles urged them not as necessary to be believed to make men Christians, is (by our own authority) to add prejudices to prejudices, and to block up our own way to those men, whom we would have access to, and prevail upon."

I have repeated this again out of the 164th page of my Vindication, where there is more to the same pur

pose, that the reader may see how fully the unmasker has answered it.

Because I said, "Would any one blame my prudence, if I mentioned only those advantages, which all Christians are agreed in ?" the unmasker adds, p. 44, "Socinian Christians:" and then, as if the naming of that had gained him his point, he goes on victoriously thus: "He has bethought himself better, since he first published his notions, and (as the result of that) he now begins to resolve what he writ into prudence. I know whence he had this method, (and it is likely he has taken more than this from the same hands) viz. from the missionary Jesuits, that went to preach the Gospel to the people of China. We are told, that they instructed them in some matters relating to our Saviour; they let them know that Jesus was the Messias, the person promised to be sent into the world: but they concealed his sufferings and death, and they would not let them know any thing of his passion and crucifixion. So our author (their humble imitator) undertakes to instruct the world in Christianity, with an omission of its principal articles; and more especially that of the advantage we have by Christ's death, which was the prime thing designed in his coming into the world. This he calls prudence: so that to hide from the people the main articles of the Christian religion, to disguise the faith of the Gospel, to betray Christianity itself, is, according to this excellent writer, the cardinal virtue of prudence. May we be delivered then, say I, from a prudential Racovian!" And there ends the rattling for this time; not to be outdone by any piece of clockwork in the town. When he is once set a going, he runs on like an alarum, always in the same strain of noisy, empty declamation, (wherein every thing is supposed, and nothing proved) till his own weight has brought him to the ground; and then, being wound up with some new topic, takes another run, whether it makes for or against him, it matters not; he has laid about him with ill language, let it light where it will, and the vindicator is paid off.

That I may keep the due distance in our different

I

ways of writing, I shall show the reader, that I say not this at random; but that the place affords me occasion to say so. He begins this paragraph with these words, p. 42, "Let us hear farther, what this vindicator says to excuse his rejection of the doctrines contained in the epistles." This rejection of the doctrines contained in the epistles, was the not mentioning the satisfaction of Christ, amongst those advantages I showed that the world received by his coming. This appears by the words he here quotes, as my excuse for that omission. In which place, I also produced some passages in my book, which sounded like it, some words of Scripture that are used to prove it; but this will not content him: am, for all that, a "betrayer of Christianity, and con. temner of the epistles." Why? Because I did not, out of them, name satisfaction. If you will have the truth of it, sir, there is not any such word in any one of the epistles, or other books of the New Testament, in my Bible, as satisfying, or satisfaction made by our Saviour; and so I could not put it into my Christianity as delivered in the Scripture. If mine be not a true Bible, I desire you to furnish me with one that is more orthodox; or, if the translators have "hid that main article of the Christian religion," they are the "betrayers of Christianity, and contemners of the epistles," who did not put it there; and not I, who did not take a word from thence, which they did not put there. For truly I am not a maker of creeds; nor dare add either to the Scripture, or to the fundamental articles of the Christian religion.

But you will say, satisfaction, though not named in the epistles, yet may plainly be collected out of them. Answ. And so it may out of several places in my Reasonableness of Christianity, some whereof, which I took out of the Gospels, I mentioned in my Vindication, p. 163, 164, and others of them, which I took out of the epistles, I shall point out to you now as p. 41, I say, the design of our Saviour's coming was to be offered up; and p. 84, I speak of the work of our redemption; words, which in the epistles, are taken to imply satisfaction. And therefore if that be enough, I see not