some testimony to the services which Dr. W. had rendered by his labours in so important a causek.

The Queries printed at Exeter (to which Dr. W. published this Answer) were originally subjoined to a pamphlet, entitled, The Innocent vindicated, or

* Dr. Calamy's work is dedicated to the King; and he ventures to assure his Majesty, that "how much soever his subjects in the "southern part of this happy isle may in other respects differ in "their sentiments about religious matters, yet as to the great doc"trine of the TRINITY, they that are excluded the national esta"blishment do very generally agree with those that are under it, "and cannot be charged with an inclination to vary from the "common faith, without being greatly misrepresented." In his Preface, he says, "As to the Sermons here published, they were "delivered to as public an auditory as any among the Dissenters, "about the same time that Dr. Waterland was engaged upon the

same argument to so good purpose, as the Lecture supported by the generosity of the Lady Moyer, at St. Paul's; in which "Dr. Knight has since so worthily succeeded him. And though "the subject has been so much insisted on, as that it may seem "exhausted, yet I am in hope that these Discourses, together "with a good number of tracts lately published, may help to pre"vent its being hereafter said, that the Dissenters did not at that "time appear against Arianism, when it so much threatened us."

There is reason, however, to believe, that Dr. Clarke's opinions had taken deep root among several communities of Protestant Dissenters, and that to this cause may be traced some of the multifarious schisms into which they were subsequently divided. Hence, at least, appear to have arisen the several Unitarian congregations, which succeeded to the Arian, and which are now for the most part, become Socinian. In the West of England these opinions have ever since continued to have numerous abettors. The Arian Meeting-house at Exeter retained its appropriate designation long after other congregations of the kind had dispersed, and were forgotten. It has now, however, passed into other hands and the Unitarians of the present day, who still abound in that district, would probably be almost as reluctant to subscribe to Dr. Clarke's Creed, as to that of Dr. Waterland.

Arians defended, and formed an Appendix to it. They appear verbatim in Dr. W.'s tract, and are answered with perspicuity and brevity. Most of them turn upon points of metaphysical subtlety, particularly upon the assumed position that there can be no real difference between an intelligent being and a person; similar to the objections before raised by Clarke, Whitby, and Jackson, and afterwards examined and refuted in Dr. W.'s second Defence. But many readers may find it advantageous, to refer to the compendious answers in this little tract, which, together with the Queries, comprises the substance of much larger treatises on each side of the question.

Another small tract of a similar kind was published by our author in 1722, entitled, The Scriptures and the Arians compared, in their accounts of God the Father and God the Son: by way of rejoinder to a pamphlet, entitled, The Scripture and the Athanasians compared, &c. This pamphlet, like many others of that period, has long since sunk into oblivion. But Dr. Waterland's tract has reference also to several other publications of a similar tendency. In the first part is laid before the reader "the plain account of Scripture in one co"lumn, and the true account of what the modern "Arian scheme is in the other." The statement of the Arian scheme is drawn from the writings of Whiston, Clarke, Sykes, Whitby, Emlyn, Jackson, Peirce, Morgan, and some anonymous authors. In a series of short paragraphs, each relating to some main point in the controversy, the contrast is exhibited in very striking colours; and is so wrought as to con

vey a keen satire upon the opinions against which it is directed. The second part contains short remarks upon certain preliminary propositions in the pamphlet, with strictures upon the author's frequent misrepresentations of the sense of Scripture, and upon his attempts to oppose certain metaphysical subtleties to the express declarations of holy writ. This tract, therefore, derives additional importance from its being, in substance, directed against the whole phalanx of Arians of that day; though, in the form and mode of attack, it seemed to aim more particularly at one inconsiderable writer.

At a somewhat earlier period than the publication of these two short pieces, Dr. W. had been engaged in a private correspondence with a person of the name of Staunton on the subject of the Trinity; the occasion of which correspondence appears to have been as follows.

Mr. Staunton published, anonymously, in the year 1719, a tract entitled, The sincere Thoughts of a private Christian, touching the Faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the Doctrine of the Apostles, humbly offered in abatement of the Socinian and Trinitarian Controversies. The title-page bears the motto, An Christianus ero? An Christicola? -pretty clearly indicating the author's opinion, that divine worship is not due to Christ. This is, in truth, the main purpose of the tract; in which the author labours to prove, that the titles, Son of God, the Word, &c. are not expressive of his Divinity, and that there are no sufficient evidences in Scripture of his being the proper object of worship.

In the year 1721, this same author published another tract, entitled, A Packet of Letters to Dr. Waterland, being a Proposal of a fourth Scheme, supported by Scripture and Demonstration. Also a modest Inquiry touching the Doctrine of the Holy Trinity, and the manner of our blessed Saviour's Divinity, as they are held in the Catholic Church, and in the Church of England. In a long Preface to this publication, Mr. S. represents himself to have been very desirous of having his doubts and scruples, respecting what are called orthodox opinions of the Trinity, removed; and states that he had published his thoughts with that view: and he adds, that hearing of Dr. W.'s Defence of his Queries, and his Sermons at Lady Moyer's Lecture on our Lord's Divinity, he fully expected conviction; but being disappointed, he resolved to unbosom himself to Dr. W. upon the subject. He then commenced a correspondence with Dr. W. and this pamphlet contains the packet of letters sent by him to Dr. W. but not those which Dr. W. sent in return. The remainder of the tract consists of a delineation of the author's peculiar notions, differing, as he conceived, from most other systems.

In the following year, 1722, Mr. Staunton brought out another tract, entitled, Reason and Revelation stated, &c. by the same hand that wrote the Packet of Letters to Dr. Waterland. To which is added, a true Copy of Dr. Waterland's several Letters by him sent in Answer to the Packet of Letters wrote to him by W. S. and the printing whereof was at first forbidden by the Doctor, who now consents to the publication of them. This pamphlet is chiefly

levelled at Dr. Young, Dean of Sarum, animadverting on two sermons of his, entitled, The Wisdom of believing; and has but little bearing on the points in dispute between himself and Dr. Waterland.

66

It does not appear from any of these publications what was Mr. Staunton's profession, education, or habits of life. In his first letter to Dr. W. he says modestly of himself, "As to learning, I am a mere schoolboy, and a dull one too I was in 1673, and " am now in the 63d year of my age. I was bred "to the desk, and about six years ago quitted my ❝employment for want of breath to follow it: but "since, in my country retirement, not willing to be "idle, I spend some few hours, now and then, in "studying the Scriptures." He adds, "You see what "authors I converse with; neither Arians, nor So"cinians, nor any Dissenters from the Church of England: however it comes to pass that in this 66 point I do now dissent from it, I can at present only impute it to the voice of God, both of reason "and of Scripture, in answer to my daily prayers "that God would be pleased to teach me what He

66

66

66

is, and to give me a right judgment therein: "which if it be not yet obtained, may now be set right by your kind assistance."

These, with other expressions of humility and of personal respect towards Dr. W. probably induced this learned divine to enter into a discussion otherwise of very unpromising aspect, and hardly worthy of his labour. For it is evident that Mr. S. was not only a man of mean literary attainments, but that there was a sort of obliquity in his understanding which totally disqualified him for unravelling