with a pretty sharp rebuke for his Christian Liberty asserted from a writer of great learning and ability, at that time anonymous, but known soon afterwards to be Mr. Horbery, of Magdalen college, Oxford; a writer, whose reputation has since been established by other theological writings of great excellence.

There is yet another controversy, in some degree connected with these, since it arose out of some passages in Dr. Clarke's Exposition of the Church Catechism, published soon after his decease, which appeared to Dr. Waterland to call for animadversion. But as this controversy turned chiefly upon a different subject, the relative importance of positive and moral duties, and the nature and obligation of the Christian sacraments, it may more conveniently be considered, in conjunction with our author's other writings upon the Eucharist, reserved for a future section.

SECTION V.

WATERLAND'S CONTROVERSIAL WRITINGS IN DEFENCE OF CHRISTIANITY AGAINST DEISTS.

THE period in which Dr. Waterland lived was strongly marked by a spirit of hostility, not only against some peculiar doctrines of Christianity, but against Christianity itself. Infidelity and heresy grew and flourished together, as if of kindred natures; and the soil congenial to the one, was found to be no less favourable to the other. Both, perhaps, owe their origin to that overweening pride of intellect, which disdains to receive, as necessary truth, any doctrine not discoverable by its own excogitative powers, or not, at least, in unison with its own preconceived notions of rectitude and fitness. In both also the process of reasoning is similar. The inquirer in each case usually assumes certain positions as the basis of his argument, for which he claims the privilege of indisputable axioms; and then proceeds to try the weight and credibility of Revelation, whether in whole or in part, by this criterion of his own devising. Physics, ethics, metaphysics, are, with him, paramount in authority to any thing which rests on faith; and independently of the testimonies by which that faith may be supported, an appeal is made to the arbitrary tribunal of human judgment. In the case of infidelity, this, for the most part, is unhesitatingly avowed. In that of heresy, though a certain degree of deference may be professed, and even sincerely entertained, for Revelation itself, and

for Scripture, its written voucher; yet the bias of a similar prepossession is almost always apparent. Faith is not absolutely discarded; but is brought into subjection to a domineering spirit, which will never rest until it has made every other authority bend to its decrees.

It appears to have been owing to the prevalence of this spirit, that the course of Deism in this country, for a considerable length of time, ran nearly parallel with that of heterodoxy. Lord Herbert of Cherbury, the philosopher of Malmesbury, and Toland, the follower of Spinosa, were contemporary with Biddle, Firmin, and the host of Anti-Trinitarians who poured forth their lucubrations as a counterpoise to the labours of Bishop Bull. In the next generation, Chubb, Morgan, Collins, and Tindal, united their forces against revealed religion; while Whiston, Emlyn, and Clarke were maintaining tenets at variance with some of its essential doctrines. Whoever is conversant with the Anti-Trinitarian writers of the former period will perceive that they wantonly, or inconsiderately, put weapons into the hands of the infidel party; who would hardly fail to render them available to their purpose. So little reverence did they sometimes shew for sacred writ, and so bold and unqualified were their assertions of the supremacy of human judgment in matters of religious belief, that scarcely could the most determined unbeliever desire to have principles conceded to him, better adapted to his own views. The same charge does not, indeed, apply, in an equal degree, to those of the succeeding generation, who controverted some of the received doctrines of the Church.

Whiston, with a strange obliquity of understanding, and some unaccountable prepossessions peculiar to himself, had a strong vein of piety within him, and a certain degree of reverence for Scripture and antiquity, which led him to think somewhat meanly of metaphysical and abstract reasonings upon theological subjects. Dr. Clarke, too, must not be reckoned among those who presumptuously opposed reason to faith, or intentionally undervalued the sacred writings. In the writings also of Emlyn, there is a cast of seriousness, sobriety, and modesty, which indicates a disposition abhorrent of profaneness or irreverence. Yet in all these, and still more in Dr. Clarke's supporters, Whitby, Sykes, and Jackson, the right of human reason to sit in judgment upon Articles of Faith, and to found their credibility or incredibility upon abstract metaphysical truths, is too often either virtually or expressly assumed. Of this, several instances have already been produced in the foregoing pages; and it is manifest, that a considerable part of Dr. Waterland's opposition to their tenets was grounded upon the danger to be apprehended from thus placing the doctrines of Christianity upon a footing which might endanger Christianity itself. He justly deprecated any arguments which might tend to weaken the authority of Scripture, upon points beyond the reach of human faculties, and on which the light of Revelation only could give us adequate information. These he maintained to be the distinct province of faith only; and not to be encroached upon by any pretensions of human wisdom.

Among the deistical writers above-mentioned,

there were several who affected not only great regard for natural religion, but so much good-will towards Christianity also, as to be desirous of rendering it conformable to that standard of perfection which human reason would prescribe. Lord Herbert of Cherbury led the way in these insidious professions. Morgan took infinite pains to confound Revelation with reason, and to reduce them both to the same standard. Yet he did not so openly avow his unbelief as some of his coadjutors; and he had taken a part with the Arians in the controversy against Waterland. Chubb, afterwards one of the coarsest and most virulent opponents of Christianity, began his career as a defender of Arianism, and was one of those who sought distinction by writing against Waterlando. For a while, he appears to have been much in favour with some of Dr. Clarke's friends; who could not, however, give him countenance in the part he subsequently undertook. But the most popular writer of this description was Tindal; who, to give the greater plausibility to his designs, called himself a Christian deist, and published his work, entitled, Christianity as old as the Creation, for the purpose of proving, that whatever had been revealed either in the Old or the New Testament, which had any pretensions to credibility,

• It is said, that his inclination leading him chiefly to theological inquiries, he formed a little society at Salisbury, under his own management and direction, for debating upon such subjects; and the controversy between Clarke and Waterland being brought under the cognizance of this theological assembly, he drew up, at the request of its members, his sentiments upon it, in a dissertation, entitled, The Supremacy of the Father asserted.