A COPY of a LETTER WRITTEN BY T. M. In the Year, 1699.

My LORD,

WAS it ever known, that the Do­ctrine of a Persecuting Church was True? Did St. Paul order any Corporal Punishment meerly for Opinion in Religion? Did it ever destroy Truth? And doth it not rather establish an Error? A Fallen Brother, (at first at least) ought to be restor'd in the Spirit of Meekness: 'Tis World­ly interest and blind Zeal, brought in Perfe­ction.

I have receiv'd an Answer from Hicks's [...] to my Question of a Definition of a Sa­ [...]g Faith, which I propos'd to Mr. P—▪ Mr. Mr.—, whom, I am inform'd, you [...]er'd to Discourse me, but they flatly de­ [...]d to do it in Writing.

[Page 2]The Ignorance of Natural Men, (or Me­not taught of the Holy Ghost) have charged Three things against my Book, viz.

  • 1st. That it promotes Sin.
  • 2ly. That it is Seditious.
  • 3dly. That 'tis Blasphemy.

As to the first, or the Promotion of Sin.

THE very same Consequence that Natu­ral Men drew from St. Paul's Preaching in those days, you your selves draw now from my Doctrine; for when Paul said, As Sin had abounded, so Grace did super-abound, they retorted, Let us commit Sin, that Grace may abound; they not knowing the Mystery of these things: Whereby they made God's Mer­cy (ungratefully) the cause of Sin.

Doth not Paul also say, Let the Mercies of God, move you to please him the more. The greater the Mercy then, the greater the Love, and they to whom much is forgiven, they love much.

Hence the Doctrine of the Salvation of all Men, may be made a means to love God, which Love rooted in the Heart, is the Foun­tain of good Works: But the Doctrine of Hell-Fire can't be made a Means to love God; for threatning to Burn me, can't make me Love; and Hell-fire is often the means of hard thoughts of God, Despair and Self-Murder. But this might strike the World Dumb, if they did but seriously consider, that Means signify nothing in themselves, excep [...] Grace apply those Means.

[Page 3]Hence a good Consequence or an ill Conse­quence may be drawn from the same Doctrin, as from St. Paul's Doctrine of Mercy before.

Whereby we see ill Consequences drawn from a Doctrine, proves not the Doctrine to be Erroneous. And what then have I to do with the ill Consequences of this Doctrine? My Doctrin it self, ought to be prov'd from Scripture, True or False.

Vain then is that Expression of J. P—, viz. If all Men are Sav'd, we'll live as we please. Up­on that Consequence he judg'd my Merciful Doctrine Erronious and Seditious.

If Mr. P—or others, shall bring any Evidence, that my Doctrine is the promotion of Sin in some to whom Grace is not given, I question not (besides what I have said be­fore) but to ballance that with sufficient proof of such that have been drawn from De­spair and Murdering themselves; and not only so, but hate Sin through love to God, much more than when they were ignorant of my Book.

Certainly Self-Murder is accounted one of the worst of Sins; and in this Particular, that it can admit of no Repentance for it on this side the Grave; which is never the effect of a Merciful Doctrine.

But if I hold Free-will and Hell-fire, and yet by Experience, I find not a sufficient Free-will to save me, being of a tender Con­science, I fall into Despair, as Thousands, for ought I know, have done▪ And many Mini­sters [Page 4] of such a Doctrine have Destroy'd them­selves through Despair.

But we'll suppose▪ I deny Free-will (as doth the Common-Prayer Book and Articles of the Church of England) and yet own a Hell-fire, I am in as bad a condition; for this renders God to me Tyrannical: I don't say such a Doctrine is Blasphemous, yet it hath the same effects as the other, viz. Despair and Self-Murder.

Pray, My Lord, judge Impartially, whose Doctrine then promotes Sin the most, yours or mine? Or whose promotes the greatest Sins? Or whose Doctrine then is most Sedi­tious? When Men of my Judgment, al­so are as ready (not so much fearing Death) to venture their Lives cheerfully in his Ma­jesty's Service.

And the more there are of this Judgment▪ the more and better Subjects his Majesty will have, in that this Doctrine, as it doth not di­minish from Loyalty, so it adds to Valour.

Dr. Tillotson, late Arch-Bishop of Canter­bury, his Book comes very little short of mine, in this Saying, That Hell-fire may be Threatned, and not Intended. So that this Great Prelate being not sure of a Hell-fire, is a sufficient Argument for me to enquire, whether you, (my Lord)▪ are certain there is such a Place; which you ought to be sure of, otherwise, another cannot be safely Persecuted for dis­owning that which your Church Doubts of▪

The next Charge against my Book, is,

SEDITION.

I have said enough to this, in proving, that the ill Consequences Men draw from a Doc­trine, proves it not Erronious, and so not Seditious. The Doctrine then itself, ought to be Disputed by the union of the Scrip­tures.

All Doctrines, we find, are Seditious one to another, but may not be to the King and Government.

It was not the Doctrine of the Apostles that was Seditious, but the Ignorance of the People made it so, and said, If we suffer these things, the Romans will come and take our Land from us.

And, now, how can my Doctrine be prov'd Seditious, when Men of my Judgment, own it their Duty, to be obedient to the Powers that are, knowing All Power is of God. And the more there are of this Judgment, the more and better Subjects his Majesty will have; in that this Doctrine, as it doth not diminish from Loyalty, so it adds to Valour.

I know Men say, that many commit Sin the more freely because of my Book, but it may be in their Hearts (if not in Act) they have committed the same Sins, or at least loved those Sins before, which is Sin, and so cannot be said but to be guilty of those Sins before; as our Saviour said, He that lusteth after a Woman, commits Adultery in his Heart.

If for fear of Punishment only, (as every [...]n carries its own Punishment with it) they [Page 6] have avoided the committing in Act, those Sins, yet it they lov'd those Sins, and would commit them but only for fear of Punishment, may be, in the sight of God, as guilty of them, as he that actually commits them.

'Tis not from Love to God, but only from Self-love, that he acts them not, to avoid Punishment, and such Service is not worth accepting.

'Tis Love, or the Heart, the Lord delights in; and what Service proceeds from that, a­dopts us to the title of Sons, and not Slaves.

But whilst I thus Argue, my best Plea is, that Means, in themselves, signify nothing for the avoiding of Sin, except Grace apply the Means: Nor can any thing be made a Means for the commission of Sin, where Grace preserves; not forgetting my Doctrine ex­cells others in this, that it can't be made a means for Despair and Self-Murder, and its Service is the more acceptable as proceeding from Love.

Neither doth the ill Consequences Men draw from my Doctrine prove it Erroneous.

The Third Charge against my Doctrine, is,

BLASPHEMY.

IT is impossible to unite the Scriptures in Sense one with another, except we say Sin is Ordain'd, and that God is the Author of it, but to good Ends and Purposes; and he that cannot unite the Scriptures in Sense one with another, cannot be a Minister of them, be­cause [Page 7] besure then he doth not understand them.

They who charge another's Doctrine with Blasphemy, need look back to their own.

I do not say, my Lord, that you charge it with Blasphemy, but some have done it, and I am thereby oblig'd to clear it from that Aspersion. Predestination, which is Divinity, the Ministers, in their Pulpits, own they do not understand. Let that Doctrine be what it will, that shall from Sciptures, or other­wise endeavour to prove God Tyrannical, and the cause of Sin to bad Ends, is a Blasphe­mous Doctrine in my Judgment.

I say no more than what you say, that God is the cause of Sin, not to bad Ends, but to good Ends, as the Crucifixion of Christ, St. Peter's Denying him, &c.

And I make Sin Ordain'd, to set forth God's Hatred to it, (not loving Sin) by pu­nishing Men with Temporal Punishments for it; which not only sets forth his hatred to Sin, but also sets forth his other Attributes, and renders Man Satisfaction through Christ, for this, by Gloryfication: See my Second Addition, pag. 21. where you have the full Meaning, or Mystery of Sin Ordain'd.

Had I said, that God ordain'd Sin to bad Ends, and that he lov'd Sin, and delighted in the destruction of his Creatvres, then I had rendred him Tyrannical, or Unjust, Un­holy, Unmerciful to the highest.

[Page 8]Now, to pass by what I have said as to the Common-prayer-Book and Articles of the Church of England, I will examine a Doctrin that hold a certain number are ordain'd, (and that from all Eternity, as I have heard) to Hell-fire unavoidably, and do con­clude also, that God is Glorified by this.

But, for my part, I cannot think Tyranny and Injustice, Cruelty, and the worst of Cru­elties, can add Honour and Glory to any Being.

So that you see there are worse Doctrines than mine in the World: And this Doctrin, which is downright Blasphemy, in my Judg­ment, is taken little Notice of, when a Mer­cifull Doctrine is call'd into Question, which promotes Good, or at least never so ill Conse­quences as this hath done, viz. Despair and Self-Murder.

Can that be a Blasphemous Doctrine, where Grace can apply it as a means to love God and our Neighbour, on which Christ saith, Hang or depend, all the Law and Prophets, in that such a Doctrine is the foundation of all Good flowing from such Love?

Now, if (as I have prov'd) that my Mer­ciful Doctrine, through Grace applying it, promotes love to God, which none can deny; and if I deny Free-will, I conclude my Neigh­bour can't help his Infirmity, and so I am in the greater Charity towards him.

[Page 9]All which things would far more appear true, if a Discourse were ventur'd concern­ing a Definition of a Saving Faith.

But we'll suppose that which is not, that both Blasphemy and promotion of Sin were in my Doctrine, was not the Original Copy shew'd to Dr. Stillingfleet and others, and I could have no Answer from them? My Clavis Aurea hath been Printed about four Years, and no Divine hath Answer'd it; only Dr. C. a Physician, hath written something against it, which Mr. P. and others, say is Ortho­dox, but hath left the most material part of my Book Unanswer'd.

If you allow his Answer true Divinity, and a sufficient Answer to my Book, I have Print­ed an Answer to it.

Some say, I ought not to have printed my Judgment in Divinity: I Answer, I can't see People in Despair, and not relieve them, and there may be many such I never heard of, that may see my Book.

If this be against Law, 'tis not against Reason, which ought to be the foundation of Law.

Our Laws were made by Christians, and so not intended against Spiritual Men: But 'tis Ignorance, (like the Grand-Jury) who I sup­pose never read my Book, so as to Consider it, which they ought to have done, nor can Discourse it, yet they found a Bill against me) that Persecuted a Spiritual Man by those Laws: Therefore Natural Men cannot be Lawful Judges of Spiritual Men.

[Page 10]Until a Definition of a Saving Faith be throughly Discours'd, your Preaching can give no Satisfaction in Salvation, neither can you be a competent Judge what is Blasphemy in what I have writ.

And truly, I am fully satisfied, that Men would not have had recourse to Persecution, (disgracing the Church, with such a resem­blance to the bloody Church of Rome) if Mi­nisters were able to Confute me.

How Sin was compell'd, by way of a live­ly Representation, to set forth unto us the knowledge of Sin the more lively, is a deep Discourse, beyond a Natural Man's finding out. See my Second Addition, pag. 21.

And if Sin be an Infirmity, (as the Com­mon-Prayer-Book allows of) it consequently follows, there's no Free-will in Man.—Hence 'twas a Sin for Joseph's Brethren to Sell him; but Joseph saith, It was not you, but God that sent me hither.

This very Mystery hath confounded the Wisdom of World in Divinity, and can ne­ver be throughly reach'd by any, without a Disputation, or Satisfaction in a Definition of a Saving Faith.

How highly then then it concerns us to search into that Faith and its Circumstances, I need not farther urge, only to say thus, There's no Satisfaction can be had in Preach­ing without it.

The words of the Common-Prayer-Book, which make Sin an Infirmity, are these, Lord, incline our hearts to keep this Law. Hence our [Page 11] very Desires must be mov'd in us to Good. Again, Though we be ty'd and bound with the chain of our Sins, yet let the pitifulness of thy Mercy losen us, &c.

Hence 'tis evident, that Men bound in Chains, cannot act as Men at Liberty, and are forc'd to betake themselves to God's Mer­cy to losen them, they not being able to help themselves.

And in another Place, the Church prays for the continual Dew of God's Blessing, or Grace. And the Tenth Article of the Church saith, that Man cannot turn and prepare himself to Faith and Prayer, without the Grace of God by Christ first moving us there­to, that we may have a good Will, and Work­ing with us when we have that good Will.

Who can't every day see, that to those who are harden'd, or Grace not given them, 'tis neither the Mercies of God can allure them, nor the fear of Hell deter them from Sin.

Now, if we can't but acknowledge such Power, nor that we can proceed in Good the least step farther than Grace assists us, it will give us to understand, that we may wholly and only trust in God, (which is not to lye in a Ditch and cry God help) for then he will take us into his protection to Govern and Defend us.

Hence my Doctrine teacheth, First, to be­come Vile in our own Eyes, and to trust in God wholly and only.

[Page 12] Secondly, To Love him above all things imaginable.

Thirdly, To love our Neighbour as our selves, denying Free-will in him, Which are the highest Duties in Christianity, and Foun­tain of good Works: Which Doctrine then is True and Safe, promoting Good, but not without Grace given to receive it with Love.

I have done with the false Aspersions cast on my Doctrine. I come now to caution Men concerning Persecution in matters of Reli­gion.

No Man can be of what Judgment he plea­ses, as will be lively set forth by an humble desire to you, to resolve me, whether it lies in your Power to be of my Judgment or not? So that a right Judgment produces good Acti­ons, and a false Judgment produces ill Acti­ons.

Hence 'tis often that the Persecutor and the Persecuted are both satisfy'd in Con­science, the one to Persecute, the other to Suffer: As 'tis Writ, Some of You they shall Kill, and think they do God good Service.

But who was in the Right, the Apostles, or the Jews?

If the Scripture speaks of a Spiritual Man to come, it will be worth our Enquiry how to know him, and in the next place, how to avoid the Persecuting of him.

[Page 13]We are satisfy'd, in John 10. 41. that John did no Miracle: It was never known, but that the Doctrine of Spiritual Men, hath been esteem'd Blasphemy, promoting Sin and Sedition, and were Murder'd for supposed Blasphemy: 'Tis a hard matter then, to know such a Man by his Doctrine.

The only way that I can propose is this, First, Let not Passion nor unbelief of his Do­ctrine (let it seem never so Blasphemous) domineer over your Reason; but let former Examples of the Murder of the Apostles, de­ter you from such Practices. If his Doctrine cannot be Overthrown by the whole World, or no Man can be found that can Discourse him, so as to overthrow his Doctrine, you need not question but such a Man is a Spiri­tual Man, taught by the Holy Ghost.

In vain have Disputations been amongst Natural Men, because amongst such, none could be found that understood the Myste­ries of the Scriptures, and so Disputations could have no end.

But when a Spiritual Man is come, he over­throws all Men, and then Disputes in Divi­nity will have an end to the Satisfaction▪ of many.

These things strikes deep with me (though I do not say I am a Spiritual Man) partly from the Visions I have had, partly from my Doctrine, by Natural Men esteem'd Blasphe­my, a promotion of Sin and Sedition, and partly from the Malice of many, who are for [Page 14] Burning me and my Book, yet cannot Over­throw it.

Its safe for Men, (and God expects no more from them) to rest satisfied with a Doctrine that cannot be Overthrown, notwithstand­ing they cannot altogether believe it. Had the Jews done this, they had not Murder'd the Apostles.

But some are for pinning their Opinions on Great and Learned Men's Judgments, when poor men that are despised, God hath chosen to confound the Wisdom of the World: Even the Great and Learned men who sate in Council, Crucified Christ, and order'd the Apostles, (some of whom were poor Fisher­men) to be Punished.

And now I see the unruly Multitude are for Great and Learned men, and for Mur­dering me for that I cannot help, nor they Confute.

I can say little more to this, and enough is said, if well considered; I shall only Answer one Objection, and so take my Leave of you. Many say, It's not worth the Ministers time to Answer me.

I Answer; If my Doctrine be the greatest Truth, or the greatest Error, it ought to be Answered, either Confuted, or Preach'd up.

Again, many receive it, and if it be a dam­nable Doctrine, the Consequence is easy, it must of necessity then be damnable for those that can Answer it and will not: Which I think, is a full satisfaction, that it ought to [Page 15] be Answer'd: Then if they Answer it not, it must be for want of Ability.

If my Lord, these Arguments affect you not, but still I must suffer for my Conscience sake, through the Ignorance of those men that can­not Discourse me, I hope God will strengthen me that I may (since from you I cannot get better Satisfaction) not draw back, but ra­ther rejoice to Seal what I have writ, tho' it be with the Sacrifice of my Life.

Yet, that I may have a clearer Conscience, I must inform you, how that Natural Man, J. P—hath fore-judged my Book to be Burnt, and my self to be set in the Pillory: Where if by the maliciousness of the Igno­rant (who are generally most Envious, I am there Murder'd, I am clear of it, since I have first inform'd you of that Danger.

Mr. P—and Mr. M—, say I am no Scholar, and cannot write Sense; truly then I am the easier Answer'd, and they are Sense­less they have not done it. Neither do I care to puzzle the Vulgar, my Enemies, with obscure words; so that for the word Praevi­ous, I write Foregoing; for Inevitable, I say Unavoidable, and for Arcana's, I say Secrets, & c.

And tho' I do not pretend to much Learning, I am not so Illiterate, but I can find much Learned Nonsense in the World.

[Page 16]No more at present, but humbly craving your Lordships due consideration of th [...] Matter, whereby (under God) I shall account my self Obliged to you, who am

Your Lordships Most Humble Servant in Christ, T. M.

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Text Creation Partnership. Searching, reading, printing, or downloading EEBO-TCP texts is reserved for the authorized users of these project partner institutions. Permission must be granted for subsequent distribution, in print or electronically, of this EEBO-TCP Phase II text, in whole or in part.