Mr. Thomas Pierce hath in an Appendage to a late book of his, printed five Letters wrote unto me by him, in each of which I cannot but much acknowledge his respects to me. To the four first I gave little else but brief returns of the like to him, which consisting chiefly, either in the asserting of the nearness of his judgement to the Primate's, or the remoteness of Mr. Barlee's, I did not conceive it fitting for me to interpose, and where there was a professed full agreement, it was no good office ⟨p. 360⟩in me to make a difference. Now for those, the cause rendered of his not publishing them is good, there being nothing (as he saith) needful, or of concernment, in any one of them, Only to the fifth of his, wherein three Certificates are published as testimonies to confirm his former assertion of a late change of judgment in the Primate, with other applicatory passages from thence, I did return him a larger answer in this Letter following, (excepting some few circumstantial alterations) having then no imagination that either of them should have bin made public. And I have as little mind to it now, only by the provocation of divers of my Friends who conceive the Primate suffers in the interpretation of many by the silence of it, I have been compelled ⟨p. 361⟩upon this occasion, to put forth this brief defence of him without any offence to Mr. Pierce. For his Appendage (wherein his respects to me are rather increased then lessened) I have thought fit to clear one passage. He saith I have spoken indiscriminately of Universal Grace, and Universal Redemption, and the place he quotes for it, is out of my second Letter to Mr. Barlee, p. 64. in these words, viz. But that by an Universal Redemption should be understood, an Universal Grace, &c. will not be attested to have heen affirmed by the Primate, &c. doth not this clearly imply a distinction to be made between them▪ I am sure I then so intended it. And therefore that which he adds immediately after. viz. That there is a wide difference between ⟨p. 362⟩them, I do fully concur with him in it. Yet it seems to me, that himself puts them together often indiscriminately, as in the page before this, thrice in one page, 86. and p. 88. l. 32. as in his Philanth. p. 15. and elsewhere. And if I have in any other place done it, as in the title of the Letter, I was led to it by him.
Mr. Thomas Pierce hath in an Appendage to a late book of his, printed five Letters wrot unto me by him, in each of which I cannot but much acknowledge his respects to me. To the four first I gave little else but brief returnes of the like to him, which consisting chiefly, either in the asserting of the nearnesse of his judgement to the Primate's, or the remotenesse of Mr. Barlee's, I did not conceive it fitting for me to interpose, and where there was a professed full agreement, it was no good office ⟨p. 360⟩in me to make a difference. Now for those, the cause rendred of his not publishing them is good, there being nothing (as he saith) needfull, or of concernment, in any one of them, Only to the fifth of his, wherein three Certificates are published as testimonies to confirm his former assertion of a late change of judgment in the Primate, with other applicatory passages from thence, I did return him a larger answer in this Letter following, (excepting somefew circumstantiall alterations) having then no imagination that either of them should have bin made publick. And I have as little mind to it now, only by the provocation of divers of my Friends who conceive the Primate suffers in the interpretation of many by the silence of it, I have been compelled ⟨p. 361⟩upon this occasion, to put forth this brief defence of him without any offence to Mr. Pierce. For his Appendage (wherein his respects to me are rather encreased then lesse•ed) I have thought fit to clear one passage. He saith I have spoken indiscriminately of Universal Grace, and Vniversall Redemption, and the place he quotes for it, is out of my second Letter to Mr. Barlee, p. 64. in these words, viz. But that by an Vniversall Redemption should be understood, an Vniversall Grace, &c. will not be attested to have heen affirmed by the Primate, &c. doth not this clearly imply a distinction to be made between them▪ I am sure I then so intended it. And therefore that which he addes immediately after. viz. That there is a wide difference between ⟨p. 362⟩them, I do fully concurre with him in it. Yet it seems to me, that himself puts them together often indiscriminately, as in the page before this, thrice in one page, 86. and p. 88. l. 32. as in his Philanth. p. 15. and elsewhere. And if I have in any other place done it, as in the title of the Letter, I was led to it by him.
