in what he calls my

     hypothesis

    . That is a temper that ought to go thro’ all our Inquirys, and especially before we have an opportunity of examining things to the bottom. It is safest at all times, and we are least likely to be mistaken, if we constantly suspect our selves to be under mistakes.... I have no system to defend or that I would seem to defend, and am unconcerned for the consequence that may be drawn from my opinion; and therefore stand clear of all difficultys w

     ch

    others either by their opinion or caution are involved in.

      [3]

   This is the statement of a man whose intellectual and religious commitment makes him see that his own fallibility is symptomatic of a human tendency to error. For himself, hence, he tries to avoid all manner of hard-voiced enthusiasm. Paradoxically, however, Collins searched with a zealot’s avidity for any controversy which would either assert his faith or test his disbelief. When once he found his engagement, he revelled in it, whether as the aggressor or the harassed defendant. For example, in the “Preface” to the

    Scheme of Literal Prophecy Considered

   he boastfully enumerated all the works—some twenty-nine—which had repudiated his earlier

    Discourse on the Grounds and Reasons of the Christian Religion

   . And in malicious fact he held up the publication of the

    Scheme

   for almost a year that he might add a “Postscript to the Preface” in which he identified six more pieces hostile to the

    Grounds and Reasons

   .

     [4]

   By May of 1727 and with no visible sign of fatigue he took on a new contender; this time it was John Rogers, canon in ordinary to the Prince of Wales. At the height of their debate, in late summer, Collins made practical enquiries about methods to prolong and intensify its give-and-take. Thus, in a note to his friend Pierre Des Maizeaux, he 

 Prev. P 2/245 next