[43] only, ground why we reject it, is because it is repugnant to reason. But if transubstantiation is to be disclaimed because contrary to reason, why shall not all other unreasonable doctrines upon the same ground be exploded, especially seeing there is scarce any one of them that can plead so plausible a colour of scripture for itself as that can?
Another piece translated by Mr. Biddle was Przipcovius's Life of F. Socinus, with the preliminary discourse prefixed by that writer to the works of Socinus. ‘His views in this publication,’ says Dr. Toulmin, ‘appear to have been truly laudable and liberal; namely, to do justice to a character which had been much aspersed, and to hold up to contemplation a great example, at the same time that he enters a caveat against an implicit deference to the judgment of his hero.’
At this period our author also published two remarkable tracts in the catechetical form, explanatory of his peculiar views of Christian doctrine; one entitled ‘A Scripture Catechism,’ the other ‘A Brief Scripture Catechism for Children;’ in which the apparently unexceptionable plan is pursued, of leaving the scripture to speak for itself, by constructing the questions in such a form that the answers may be given in the unaltered words of holy writ. He describes his Scripture Catechism as ‘composed for their sakes that would fain be mere Christians, and not of this or that sect; inasmuch as all the sects of Christians, by what name soever distinguished, have more or less departed from the simplicity and truth of the scripture.’ I have called this an apparently unexceptionable method; but it may,
