Misrepresentations corrected, and truth vindicated. In a reply to the Rev. Mr. Solomon Williams's…

Mr. W. uses many peremptory strong Expressions (P. 109.) to set forth the Certainty of that which never was denied; viz. That a Man can't know he has a Right, unless he knows he has the Qualification which gives him a Right. But this is not the Thing in Question: The Point is, Whether a Man mayn't have a lawful Right, or mayn't lawfully come, and yet not know his Right, with such a Knowledge and Evidence as is beyond Probability? This is the Thing asserted, and herein lies the Argument. And the Negative of this cannot be stood to and maintained, in Order to maintain Mr. W—ms's Scheme, without the grossest Absurdity; it being a Position, which, according to Scripture, Reason, Mr. S—d's Doctrine, and Mr. W—ms's own, effectually destroys his Scheme.

Mr. W. uses many peremptory strong Expressions (P. 109.) to set forth the Certainty of that which never was denied; viz. That a Man can't know he has a Right, unless he knows he has the Qualification which gives him a Right. But this is not the Thing in Question: The Point is, Whether a Man mayn't have a lawful Right, or mayn't lawfully come, and yet not know his Right, with such a Knowlege and Evidence as is beyond Probability? This is the Thing asserted, and herein lies the Argument. And the Negative of this cannot be stood to and maintain'd, in Order to maintain Mr. W—ms's Scheme, without the grossest Absurdity; it being a Position, which, according to Scripture, Reason, Mr. S—d's Doctrine, and Mr. W—ms's own, effectually destroys his Scheme.

To this Purpose, I observed, If this Proposition be true, that no Man may come, save he which not only thinks, but knows he has a Right, then it will follow, that no unconverted Person may come, unless he knows that Doctrine to be true, That unconverted Men may have a Right. Because an unconverted Man can't know, that one in particular (viz. He himself) who is an unconverted Man, has a Right, unless he knows that Doctrine which Mr. S. maintained, to be ⟨p. 155⟩true, viz. That Men may have a Right, tho' they are unconverted. And consequently no one unconverted Man may lawfully come to the Lord's Supper, unless he is so knowing in this Point of Controversy, as not only to think, and have probable Evidence, that this Opinion is Right, but knows it to be so.— Mr. W. endeavours to help the Matter by a Distinction, of different Kinds of Knowledge: And by the Help of this Distinction would make it out, that common People in general, and even Boys and Girls of 16 Years old, may with Ease know, that his Doctrine about unsanctified Men's lawful Coming to the Lord's Supper, is true. And we must understand him (as he is defending Mr. S—d's Argument) that they may know it with that Evidence that is distinguished from Probability; and this according to Mr. VV. himself, is Certainty; which he speaks of as above a Thousand Probabilities. (See P. 118. c.) But how miserable is this? to pretend, that his Doctrine about Qualifications for Sacraments, is so far from a disputable Point, that it is of such plain and obvious Evidence, to common People and even Children, that without being studied in Divinity, they may not only think it to be exceeding probable, but know it to be true! When it is an undeniable Fact, that Multitudes of the greatest Ability & Piety, that have spent their Lives in the Study of the Holy Scriptures, have never so much as thought so.