A N Hiftorical Preface. TH HE Affertions contain'd both in my Effay on the Apoftolical Conftitutions, and in my Account of the Primitive Faith, to fay nothing here concerning the Differtation, on the Epistles of Ignatius, are fo ftrange, and fo contrary to the general Belief of Chriftians in thefe latter Ages, that it will not be improper to give fome Account by what Methods, and on what Occafions the feveral Particulars were discover'd, and the whole brought to its prefent State. For tho' the One vindicates an Original. Divine and Sacred Book of our Religion; & the Other contains the Original Divine and Sacred Doctrines of the fame; both which univerfally obtain'd in the first and pureft Ages of the Gofpel; yet are thefe things now fo furprizing to the Ears of moft Chriftians, even of the most learned themselves, that they do not know how to believe the Former to be other than a fpurious or grofly interpolated Work, and fo not worthy of any great Value or Confideration among us; or the Latter to be any thing else than wild and dangerous Paradoxes, or rather bold and pernicious Herefies. Now, that the Reader may come a little better prepar'd to the Perufal of thefe Papers, and be at least fatisfy'd in my Care, Honefty, and Sincerity in this whole Management, I fhall here faithfully fet down the Hiftory and Occafion of thofe Writings, and ofthe feveral main Circumftances thereto belonging; fo far as my Memory, or the Original Papers now by me can enable me to do it. The (a) Reader 1 Reader therefore is to know,that about the Month of Febuary 170%. I was defired by a Friend or two to draw up fuch a Method, or Directions for the Study of Divinity, as I us'd in Converfation to propofe to them and others, as the only way for the Union of Chriftians, and the Reftoration of the Primitive Faith and Practice. This I confented to; and that the rather, because I was then at Liberty from thofe Lectures of Mr. Boyle's Foundation, which I had been engaged in the foregoing Year. When I was drawing up thofe Papers, I enlarg'd in my firft Draught more particularly upon one great Advantage of that Method I then propos'd, viz. That it would make us diftinguish between the Articles of the Chriftian Faith, efpecially that of the ever-bleffed Trinity, fo far as it was really a part of our Religion, and believ'd by the firft Chriftians, and fo far as later Inferences and Explications had been fince added to it. And in thofe firft Papers, I had given fome Account, how far I apprehended that Doctrine to be True andGenuine; and how far Modern,and of Men's devifing. In fhort, I therein plainly own'd that the Original Doctrine in that importantMattter was very different from the commonOpinion,and was moft certainly nearer that of the Arians, than of the Athanafians, and prefent Orthodox: Tho' I had not then examin'd the Matter fo exactly as to know whether the Doctrine of thatPart of the Church, which was call'd Arian in the Fourth Century, (for those I always mean by the Arians; not Arius himself only, with a few of his parti cular Followers,) was entirely the fame as to this Point, with that deliver'd and believ'd in the first times of the Gofpel, or not. When I had drawn up this Advice for the Study of Divinity, (which has been fince in part made publick ;) and began began to speak of it to fome Friends, and freely to declare my Thoughts about the Doctrine of the Trinity, I was immediately made fenfible what a nice Point I was engag'd in; and what a noife, and bustle, and odium, and perhaps Perfecution, I should raise against my felf, if I ventur'd to talk and print at that rate; and how I and my Family would probably be ruin'd by fuch a Procedure. As to my own worldly Intereft, and that of my Family, I very well knew the Duty of a Chriftian; and all along firmly refolv'd that fuch Arguments fhould have no Influence upon me, nor in the leaft difcourage me from Speaking and Writing the Truths of Chrift Jefus, when upon a through-Examination I found them to be fuch. However, the Confideration of the Importance of the Subject, of the deep Prejudices of the prefent Age, and of the great Care I ought to take, and fure Ground I ought to go upon in Points of this Nature; and withal the Consciousness that my prefent Thoughts were taken up, rather from my former gradual and occafional Obfervations in the Holy Scriptures, and in the most ancient. Writers, than from a direct and particular Examination of this diftinct Subject in both; made me refolve to fatisfy my felf ftill more authentickly, and on fer purpose to re-examine the whole Matter; not in the modern Books of Controversy, (that grand Method of Impofition on the Chriftian World); but as before, in the Books of the New Teftament, and in all the most ancient genuine Monuments of our Religion now extant; that fo afterwards I might either go on with Affurance, if I fhould find my former Opinions fully confirm'd; or elfe might meddle no farther, in cafe I fhould fee Reafon but to doubt concerning the Meaning of the original Do (a 2) trines arines of Chriftianity, as to thefe Matters; ftill, all the way, refolving with my felf not to make ufe of any vain Deductions or Philofophick Reasonings in fuch facred Points of reveal'd Religion, but exactly and fingly to be guided by the Original Teftimonies, and determin my Faith and Practice as a Chriftian by them, and them only; and at the fame time refolving, as much as poffible, to keep clear from the Modern Writers, and the darling Notions of any Church or Party whatsoever; that fo my Mind might not be at all prepoffefs'd or byafs'd by them. And all this I did as in a Point of great Confequence, with all poffible Honefty and Sincerity of Mind, and hearty Prayers to God, that I might not be deceiv'd my felf,nor become the Caufe of deceiving his Church in any thing, by my Enquiries or Opinions. In this manner, and with thefe Refolutions and Defigns, I ran over, on purpofe, the New Teftament, as now own'd' for Canonical among us, twice; to collect all the remarkable Texts belonging to this Matter. And in the fame manner did I again read over all the known Catholick Books and Fragments, till near the conclufion of the fecond Century, to collect all the next most ancient Testimonies relating to the fame Subject; having ftill, in a Paper by me, Heads for both fides of the feveral Queftions, pro and con, all the way. Nay, that I might be fecure of not omitting any Teftimonies for modern Orthodoxy, I fo far difpens'd with my propofed Method, as to run over Bifhop Bull's celebrated Work of this Nature; and to examine his Teftimonies by the Originals themfelves, for more compleat Satisfaction. But about the time of my entring on this last particular Examination, I light upon a very ftrange and furprizing Book, I mean the learned Mr. Brocklesby's 30 Sect. 4. brockleby's Gofpel Theifm: where cafting my Eye Lib. VI. on a certain Place, I met with this Affertion, Cap. 8. which was then to me very new and furprizing," viz. "That Chrift had no human or rational Soul "diftinct from the Logos; but that at the Incar"nation the Logos fupply'd the place of fuch a "Soul. This Arian or Apolinarian Notion, as I afterward found it to be, tho' rather hinted at by him, than fully purfu'd, appear'd to me exceeding confiderable, and of the utmoft confequence to the right Understanding thofe truly Chriftian Myfteries of the Incarnation and Sufferings of the Son of God: and I immediately perceiv'd that, if it prov'd true, it would. give the greateft Light poffible, not to thofe Points only, but to the intire Subject I was |