K B-43 V854e copy I J <> UK BINDER ' z/tfnrfts a W 8 ** rf ftt «*'*%&»/ ^ *«« PRINCETON, N. J. % Presented by Mr. Samuel Agnew of Philadelphia, Pa. Rare Division. Section / O W ..../ Number £ \ . EVANGELICAL PRINCIPLES RELIGION VINDICATED. AND THE Inconsistency and dangerous tendency OF THE UNITARIAN SCHEME EXPOSED ; In a Series of Letters, Addressed to the Rev. T. Watson : IN REPLY TO HIS BOOK, IN TITLED A Flain Statement of some of the most important Principles of Religion ; as z. Preservative against Infidelity, Enthusiasm, and Immorality. By GEORGE YOUNG, Minister of the Associate Congregation in Cliff Lane, White} Printed by R. Rodgers : SOLD BY RODGERS, AND CLARKE, WHITBY ; GLIPHANT, WAUGU AND 1NNES, AND D. BROWN, EDINBURGH; AND BY T. WILLIAMS, STATIONERS' COURT. AND W. BAYNES, PATERNOSTER ROW. LONDON, 1812, PREFACE. AFTER so many valuable Works have been published in defence of Evangelical Religion, any new performance on that subject may be deemed superfluous. Fresh attacks on the doctrines of yrace may be thought undeserving of notice, as they are only a repetition of attempts which have been frequently defeated. The arguments ad- vanced have been refuted long ago, and the ob- jections urged have been obviated an hundred times. Yet, it is seldom advisable, to allow any con- siderable attempts against the essential articles of the christian faith to pass unnoticed. Such publicatiofis, though they may be said to have been refuted before they were written, will be read by numbers, who have neither opportunity , nor inclination, to consult the books where that refutation may be found. — Even where the at- tack is far from being formidable, it may be im- prudent to overlook it. Great disasters have of- ten arisen from despising a weak enemy. A slight wound, if neglected, may fester and prove fatal : IV and though the affection should be only local and partial, it may be necessary to apply a local remedy. Many may be of opinion, that the Work, which has occasioned the following Letters, is one of those which should be quietly left to sink inta merited oblivion. It may be thought, that, where the arguments are looftimsy, and the misrepre- sentations too gross, to impose on the judicious, a reply would be inexpedient ; since it might pos- sibly run the risk of disseminating more widely the poison which it would be designed to counter- act. Sentiments of this kind have served to de- lay the publication of these Letters : and indeed, were cdl men judicious, their appearance would be wholly unnecessary. But there are multitudes, who examine only the surface of things, with whom assertion passes for argument, and misre- presentation for sound reasoning. By such, a booh that is unanswered will be judged unanswer- able ; and an assault unresisted will be vomited a victory.— That truth, then, may not suffer, nor error seem to triumph ;■ that the friends of evan- gelical doctrine may not be discouraged, nor its enemies exult ; that this weak and unwary may not be insnared, nor the unlearned and unstable muled ; some answer to 3Ir. Watson's perform- ance appeared to be requisite, It can scarcely be called self-praise, to say that these Letters contain a refutation of the ivork reviewed in them : for, where victory is so easy, there is no room for triumph. Had the author s object been solely to expose the fallacy of 3Tr. Watson s reasonings, the inaccuracy of his as- sertions, and the yrossness of his misrepresenta- tions, in regard to evangelical principles, a much smaller publication might have sufficed. But, in ike hope of rendering this Vindication more c.r- tensively useful, he has taken a more enlarged view of the distinguishing doctrines of the gospel, than a mere reply to the Plain Statement seemed to demand. Some of the strictures contained in the follow- ing Letters, will perhaps be judged severe; but it is hoped, that none of them ivill be found unjust. It is possible that, where there is so much ambi- guity and incorrectness, a mistake of the mean- ing of some passages may have occurred; but if any such mistakes have been committed, let them not le imputed to want of attention or of candour Ml — The use that has been made of Mr. Watson s former works cannot be deemed unfair, as they arc both recommended in this recent publication, (p. 94, 97.) It may be proper to add, that the references have been made to the first editions of these works. Perhaps some may object, that to appropriate the term Evangelical to the Principles here de- fended^ implies a begging of the question. But it is sufficient to answer, that I have adopted the word in compliance with common usage, in the same way as I have applied to the friends of Mr. Watson s system the name Unitarians. They cannot complain of our claiming the one appella- tion, while we suffer them to usurp the other. It is the author s earnest wish, that these Let- ters may, by the divine blessing, be rendered' use- ful to Mr. Watson himself, and to all wham his book has injured ; and be subservient to the in*- terests of the truth as it is in Jesus, and of pure and uadefiled religion. May the name of Imma- micl be exalted in the earth, and the triumphs of his cross be gloriously multiplied / CONTENTS, Preface, page iii..vi. Letter i. Introductory Observations, p. 1..5. The Title of Mr. Watfon's Book not appropriate Its reception among In- fidels.— Importance of anfwering it.— Difficulties in the way.— Design of thefe Letters. Letter ii. On Mr. Watson s Treatise as a Preservative against Infidelity, p. 6. .51. The plan of recommending the Gofpel to Infidels by diverting it of myfteries confidered.— Prefumption and inconfiftency of fuch methods.— Glaring in- accuracies in Mr. W's account of doctrines peculiar to the Gofpel.— Small difference between Unitarianifm and Deifm.— Mr. W's inconfiitent views of the Infpiration of the Scriptures.— Tendency of Unitarianifm to Infidelity. Letter hi. On Mr. Watson's Treatise as a Preservative against Immorality, p. 52. .62. Mr. W's ftrange mifreprefentations corrected. —The notion that Evangelical Principles encourage licentioulnefs inconfiflent with facts.— Hypocrifv as common in Morals as in Religion.— Dangerous tendency of fome ol Mr, W's principles. Letter iv. On the Moral Attributes of God and the Depravity of Man, p. 63. .92. Important omiflion in Mr. W's view of the divine attributes.- His inadcqnaf * ideas of human depravity.— A view of the moral condition oi man — Jui- tice of God's difpenfations vindicated.— Eironeous conceptions ot God.— Myfteries in the doctrine of Man's Depravity.— This doctrine acknow- ledged by the Heathen. Letter v. On Man's Inability and the Work of Ihr Spirit,' p. 93.. 108. Unitarians deny the exiftence of Satan and his temptations-and of the Spirit and his work.— Mr. W's grofs miftatcment of the doctrine of Wan 's Inabi- lity conected.-Doctiine of Scripture onthis head. ^Objections ani V1U Letter vr. On Predestination, p. 109. .153. Mr. W's burlefqued reprefentations of this article.— The doctrine dated .— I' only afferts the exact correfpondence of God's works with his counfels It is neceffarily connected with the belief of God's Omnifcience and of a particular Providence. —Objedtions an fwered.— Illiberal remarks of Mr. W. on PiedefUnarians.—Scriptureaccodnt of this doctrine. Letter vii. On the Deity and Atonement of Christ, p. 154.. 166. Summary of the Proofs which fupport thefe doctrines. Letter viii. On Justification by Faith, p. 167. .185. Statement of the doctrine —Mr. W's hideous picture of it.«The nature of Faith, and its ufe in Juftifkation.-- Proofs from Scripture.— Mr. W's fevere reflections on the Reformed Churches. Letter ix. On Regeneration, Conversion, or Repentance, p. 186.. 199. The received do&rine ftated.— Vague and contradictory obfervations of Mr. W.~ His unfcriptural notions on this fubject. Letter x. On Religious Feelings, and Enthusiasm* p. 200..206. ^jnconfiftent rcmai ks of Mr. W.— He confounds vital R cligion with Enthuuafm» Letter xi. On Religious Duties, p. 207.. 225. Mr. W's fingular ftn&ures on frequent devotions —Charge of hypocrify ex- amined.— There are moral Phaiilecs as well as religious Pharilees. —Mr. W's remarks on the flrict oblervance of the Sabbath —His opinion, that religious duties are inferior to moral, fhewn to be irrational and unfcriptural. —Ne- ceflaiy connexion between religion and morality. -Milcellaneous reflections. Letter xii. On Religious Principles, p. 226.. 228. Mr. W's inconfiftent views.— Connexion of men's principles with their prac- tice.— Error Hows from the heart rather than the head. Letter xiii. Concluding Remarhs, p. 229.. 232. On Mr. W's perverfions of the doctrines of grace.— Diffimilarity between the religion of Scripture and that of the Plain Statement .-Importance of dca!- ing faithfully with finners, inftead of framing a religion to fuit their incli- nations. EVANGELICAL PRINCIP OF RELIGION VINDICATED: In a series of Letters, addressed to the Rev. T. Watson. LETTER I. Introductory Observations, Sir, In the close of the Introduction to your IPjlain Statement, you anticipate the opposi- tion which it would have to encounter, and you venture to foretell the character of its opponents and the nature of their attacks. You expect to be censured only by " those, who are more attached to their systems and party, than to the interests of virtue and of truth; " and that they will assail you with " abuse " and with " pious calumnies," ( p. viii. ) If your book really is, what it pre- tends to be, this stigma may be justly fixed on all its adversaries ; for, who but infidels, enthu- siasts, or profligates, will reject " a preservati e against infidelity, enthusiasm, ana iuuao: A But there are many Publications which ill cor* respond with their titles, and that this is the case with your Preservative, the enlightened and candid reader will scarcely fail to perceive. It contains, indeed, like your former Publications, many excellent remarks on the attributes of God as displayed in creation and providence, on the duties of religion and of morality, and on some other interesting subjects : but, as a Preservative against injidelity, enthusiasm, and immorality, it is of little or no value : or rather, it seems, in some respects, calculated to increase the very evils which it proposes to remedy. If it shall appear, that you combat infidelity by surrender- ing almost all the points in dispute, all the doc- trines for which christians in general value the gospel and infidels oppose it ; that you encoun- ter enthusiasm, by confounding it with vital re- ligion, and by representing " all inward feelings in religion as the operations of darkness," (p. viii) as if religion, like a system of mathematics, were seated only in the understanding, and must cease to be genuine as soon as it affects the heart ; and that you oppose immorality, by stripping the gospel of those doctrines which contain the strongest incitements to holiness, and by treating with disrespect some of those sacred institutions which are the best means of cherishing both piety and virtue : — then it will be obvious, that, whatever may have been your intentions in pre-* 9 senting this Publication to the world, it must operate, not as a salutary antidote, but as a dead- ly poison ; and its effects must be the more per- nicious, as the man/ excellent sentiments which it contains, will serve, like a mixture of sweet ingredients, to conceal its baneful tendency, and render it palatable. That this is the true character of your Plain Statement, may be partly presumed from its fa- vourable reception among" such as are tinctured with infidelity ; of whom, I regret to say, there are not a few in this place. If my information is correct, it is an agreeable companion for th se who delight to misrepresent and vilify the pecu- liar doctrines of scripture, who ridicule all seri- ous godliness under the cant names of enthusi- asm, fanaticism or methodism, who consider frequent devotions as a sure indication of hypo- crisy, and resrard the strict observance of the Lord's day as pharisaical preciseness or needless austerity. If such is the real tendency of your work, I need not be afraid that, by attempting to answer it, I shall inlist myself among the enemies " of virtue and truth ; " for the interests of virtue and truth require that it should be refuted. Nor is it needful in this sen ice to employ " abuse and calumny ; " but, on the contrary, to use the hon- ourable weapons of s ber reasoning and candid investigation, f?r defending the doctrines oi grace from the " abuse " with which you have treated them, and rescuing their friends from the " calumnies " with which you haye attacked them. Yet it is not without some reluctance that I now enter the lists of controversy. To a person who desires to live peaceably with all men, it must be unpleasant to engage in polemical dis- cussions; especially with one whom learning-, character, and age have rendered respectable, and where long acquaintance and habits of friend- ship seem to make the attempt unnatural : but when the interests of truth and holiness are con- cerned, all inferior considerations must give way. If even a brother or a father pervert the gospel of Christ, he must not be suffered to escape ani- madversion. To offer some strictures on the exceptionable parts of your publication, appears to be a duty which I owe to my people, to the religious public, and even to yourself. In undertaking this task, I am well aware of the difficulties which must attend it, and cannot but wish that it had fallen into better bands. These difficulties, however, are not owing to the acuteness of your reasonings or the strength of your arguments, for the controversial part of your work abounds much more with misrepresenta- tion, sophistry, and dogmatical assertion, than with sound argument ; but they arise from the multiplicity of the subjects to be considered, the mysterious nature of some of them, and the vague and confused form in which you have discussed them. It is not my intention, in these Letters, to criticise every objectionable sentiment, much less every inaccurate expression or clumsy sen- tence that occurs in your Performance ; but, to give a fair statement of those evangelical doc- trines which you have misrepresented, to com- bat the specious arguments with which you op- pose them, to shew that they are conformable both to scripture and reason, and have nothing of that mischievous tendency which you ascribe to them ; and at the same time, to prove that the doctrines which you would substitute in their place are unscriptural, and dangerous, and in some instances absurd. — On these topics I shall endeavour to address you " in the spirit of meek- ness, " while I would also " earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints. " I am, &c. 6 LETTER it On Mr. Watsons Treatise as a Preservative against Infidelity. Sir, The professed design of your work, asr stated in the beginning of the Introduction, appears, at first sight, to be highly laudable : It is, " to shew that Christianity is a rational sys- tem : that it is simple and plain ; and that its great aim is to bring in and support universal righteousness." It is indeed a useful exercise, to prove that reason and scripture are not at vari- ance, and to point out the practical influence of the gospel, in changing the heart and regulating the life. But it remains to be considered, whether you have kept these important ends uni- formly in view, and have adopted the most like- ly methods for attaining them. — In this Letter I shall offer some general remarks on the manner in which you prosecute the first of these objects ; or, in other words, I shall take a view of your book as a Preservative against Infidelity. It is well known that infidels represent Chris- tianity as a system contrary to reason, and there- fare, to counteract infidelity, it is necessary te 7 shew, as has been often done, that thts contrarie- ty is only imaginary ; and that all the doctrines of scripture are conformable to reason, though some of them are above reason ; or, to use your own expression, " are exalted above the per- fect comprehension of men." (p. 110.) — Had this been your method of opposing- infidelity, your design would have been laudable; however im- perfect the execution. But the plan which you follow is diametrically opposite. Instead of maintaining these peculiar doctrines of our reli- gion against the assaults of unbelievers, you a- bandon them as untenable • nay, not content with surrendering the fortresses which you ought to have defended, you join with the enemy in a determined hostility to many of the fundamental truths of the gospel. All those doctrines which infidels Usually at- tack, you exclude from your system, as " doc- trines which are dark and mysterious, which gender only strife, and can be applied to no good practical purpose ;" and which you have therefore " studiously avoided," except " when they stood directly in your way." — The judicious reader will be at no loss to perceive, that these " dark and mysterious " points which you reject, are not metaphysical disquisitions about matters of no importance, or about which the divine word gives us no information, but those tenets which are generally called the distinguishing doctrines of the gospel, as they constitute the chief differ- ence between Christianity and infidelity. These mysterious but sublime doctrines, you represent as "subjects of a speculative nature," " abstruse points, " " things of no value, " " dark and use- less disquisitions" (p. 110, 94); which are therefore unworthy of a place in your Statement. That mysterious truths can have ho practical influence, is a sentiment which is often uttered by unitarians, as well as by infidels ; but it is a sentiment at once inconsistent with reason and with your own principles : For, of the doctrines retained in your system, there are some which are as much t( exalted above the perfect compre- hension of men,"as those which you exclude. God's eternity, his omnipresence, his omniscience, a par- ticular providence, and the resurrection of the dead, are subjects as incomprehensible as those points which you reject as dark and useless ; and yet you justly conceive the former to be emi- nently conducive to practical religion : — A plain proof, that the true cause of the rejection of the latter is not to be sought for in their mysterious nature, nor in their want of efficacy. And I will venture to add, that this cause is to be found in one of the leading branches oftheir practical influence —their tendency to humility, that important grace, which is the very essence of christian holiness. They are opposed, not so much because they are mysterious, as because they are luuniUaU- You wish "to shew that Christianity is a ration- al system :" — But, to degrade those sublime mysteries which an\ the sacred page, and to stigmatize a great portion of the word of God as dark and useless, is surely a most preposterous method of proving it to be rational. If you be- lieve that the scriptures contain such dark and useless tenets, than you must maintain this shock- ing- sentiment, that the infinitely wise God has given us a revelation from heaven, of which a considerable part is of no value ; nay, is not only useless but pernicious, tending- '•' only to gender strife," and " doing- infinite harm to the christian cause !" ( p. 110. ) If such a sentiment will re- commend Christianity to infidels, their minds must be singularly constructed. This reflection, however, you might have easi- ly prevented, by throwing' off that ambiguity of expression, which you seem to have " studiously " adopted, and frankly owning- that you have eluded these na lines because you wholly disbelieve them, and consider those of them which you omit as forming no part of tl gospel, any more than those which you attack. — That these are your real sentiments, it is not difficult to perceive. The mysterious te- nets which are omitted or opposed i:i 3 our Plata Statement are chiefly the following ; the doctrines of the Trinity — man's total 1 riiy 10 fcnd inability — predestination — the incarnation and atonement of Christ — justification by faith alone — the necessity of regeneration — and the work of the Spirit in enlightening" and sanctify- ing the soul. — That all these doctrines, as con- tained in the Articles of the Church of England, and the Confession of Faith of the Church of Scotland, are wholly rejected by you, though there are some of them which you barely omit, requires little demonstration. Your violent at- tack on justification, regeneration, and other doctrines, which, it seems, had the misfortune " to stand in your way," affords a strong pre* sumption of the treatment which their com- panions would have met with, had they also come before you : And when you occasionally glance at these in passing, it is with the frown of an encnry. Thus, it is insinuated ( p. 98 ), that the incarnation of Christ, is one of those " dark and inexplicable" subjects, which you pronounce to be useless : A similar hint is thrown out re- specting the atonement, which is obscurely al- luded to ( p. 102 ), as " the means of giving ef- ficacy to repentance :" And in some instances you betray the same spirit of hostility to the divinity of Christ ; as when you insinuate ( p. 113), that it is only in respect of his example, that Jesus is " the brightness of the Father's glory and the express image of his person ;" and when you in- 11 timate (p. TOO), that Christ will raise the dead, not by hi 5 own divine power, hut merely as an agent subordinate to the Father. But there is no ne id for appealing to your am- biguous phrases and (];u\ iiruiendos, to prove your enmity to all the articles enumerated ii!> ove; since tho^e which you omit are so intimately con- nected with some of those which you avowedly condemn, tint there are none who believe the one, without assenting- to the other. Who is there that reject; the doctrine of justification by faith alone, who does not also deny the atone- ment ? And where is the man, who denies the atonement, and yet acknowledges the Deity of Christ, and the Holy Trinity ? Indeed, the very omission of these doctrines is a proof that you deny them ; for it is impossible to believe them at all, without viewing" them as of the very highest importance. Besides, if you regard these tenets as belonging to the christian system, you have acted a most disingenu >us part with infidels whom you would reclaim ; for you pretend to set before them " distinguishing prin- ciples of Christianity," while those principles, which they conceive to furnish their chief objec- tions to Christianity, are kept out cf sight. Hence, we may fairly conclude; that not one ©f the doctrines mentioned above belon rs1 i , our Creed ; and that though you may suffer the doc- trine of the Trinity, kc, "to lie dormant" (p.l 19), 12 for the present, yet you would rejoice to see these dark tenets wholly exploded from the christian system. But why did you content yourself with omitting- the doctrine of the Trinity, and not ra- ther attempt to refute it ? It stood as much in your way as some articles which you directly attack ; for, if it be false, Trinitarians are all chargeable with idolatry, in giving- divine hon- ours to the Son and the Holy Spirit ; and idola- try is nearly related to immorality. Why then, in your mighty zeal for the moral virtues, did vou not solemnly warn your readers against such dangerous sentiments ? Were you influenced by some remaining portion of respect for a creed which you once acknowledged ? Or were you averse to shock the H religious prejudices " of some friends, who are still loath to consider you as a downright Arian or Socinian ? It appears, then, that you oppose infidelity, not by proving that what has been usually called Christianity is " a rational system; " but, by as- suring infidels that this is not Christianity; that what they have hitherto attacked and christians have defended, as peculiar doctrines of the gos- pel, form no part of the gospel, but are dark, and useless, and dangerous tenets; that pine Christianity approximates much more to deism than to these evangelical principles ; and that, consequently, if infidels knew how trivial the difference between their system and this rational 13 gospel is, they would drop all their hostility, and readily assume the christian name. The chief design of the following Letters is to prove that the«;e Evangelical Principles, which you .refuse to admit into your system, are not on- ly a part of chri tianity, but a most important and salutary part. — In the sequel of this Letter, I shall offer some remarks, of a more general na- ture, on your plan for converting infidels by stripping the gospel of every thing offensive to them. Every judicious reader must be struck with the vast dissimilarity between your system and what has hitherto been called Christianity, both by the friends and enemies of revelation. li* the doctrines which you reject are not derived from scripture, but owe their origin, as yen in- ■uate, to ignorance and prejudice; how ha happened, that infidels who may he suppo: to be free from every religious prejudice, I . always found them in the Bible, and have al- ways viewed them as holding a prominent pli in the christian scheme ? And how has it hap- pened that they have so long been h un- ci mental articles of Jesus' religion, not by a few weak and ignorant men, but by the c! world in general ? You acki >. Ill)), that " ever since the Reformation, doctrines of this kind have entered into the creeds of many professed christians; " and you might have s~id 14 M of almost all professed christians," in the Pro- testant churches ; for these " abstruse points of religion " are to be found, in the Articles and Homilies of the Church of England, in the Con- fession of Faith of the Church of Scotland, and in the creeds and confessions of almost all the Reformed Churches. They are the doctrines for which onr Fathers so nobly struggled at the time of the Reformation, and which so many illustri- ous martyrs sealed with their blood; 5 *' — doctrines/ which have been professed and defended by hun- dreds of divines and scholar?, at least as emi- nent for talents and learning', and for the love of truth and virtue, as the most distinguished among the rational christians of the present day. It is therefore not very consistent with that modesty which you frequently affect, to set out with alleging, that in your attempt to simplify the gospel by divesting it of mysteries, you will have only to " encounter religious prejudices ** and " attachment to systems \ " and to talk * That the Martyrs died like fools, throwing away their lives in defence cfsuch dark and usiless tenets, it a sentirhfut vhichMr. W. avows in a former Publication : " The doctrines tor which some of them suffered? were so obscure and of so little importance to general virtue, as throws a suspici n on theii knowledge or integrity Ant) in such cases, where some slight compliances, no wa\s injurious to their cause, or deiogatory to iheiar character, might have saved their lives, it gives mom to suspect, that pride^ or some preposterous ambition linked atthtbo.tom " IsriM. andZvh, of a Future Staie, p. 180, 181.— Hence we ma) infer, that if there never had been any believers more attached to the Gospel than rational christians, the name of martyr would have betn almost unknown. Indeed \\£ can scarcely think that in that caie persecution would have ever existed. 10 as if reason and virtue were wholly on your side, and ignorance absurdity and immorality on the side of those whom you attack. But it might well be expected, that, in an attempt to explode the humiliating doctrines of religion, that temper of mind to which such doctrines are directly op- posed, should make its appearance. In professed infidels, this disposition is very observable. It is not uncommon to meet with a silly coxcomb, "who, having: learned to retail a few common- place objections against Christianity, and deal out some profane jests on the scriptures, sets up for an oracle of wisdom, laughs at the folly of ancestors, and views with contempt those weak men called christians; while the poor creature is a stranger to the very elements of erudition, and to the first principles of sound reasoning and common sense. We need not then be surprised, to hear those who are equally hostile to the pe- culiar doctrines of revelation, also laying claim to reason as their exclusive property, and to find, not only Dr. Priestly himself, but some of the meanest of his disciples, assuming the title of ra- tional christians, and regarding the rest of the professed followers of Jesus as weak people, \* ho are biassed by "prejudice," or misled by " at- tachment to systems." That attachment to a system of religious prin- ciples can of itself be a proper subject Kir oblo- quy, is a seutiment unworthy of au enlightened 10 mind. The truths which we believe, cannot be injured by arranging them systematically; on the contrary, such an arrangement- will aid at once the judgment and the mtmorv. And when a system of doctrines i s found, upon due examina- tion, to correspond with the sacred oracles, to have no attachment to it, "would be criminal. Those who are loudest in raising the senseless outcry against systems, have no hesitation in adopting systems of their own. What is your Plain Slate tneni but your system ? And a mea- gre system it is : — Yet you seem to have as much attachment to it, and as strong prejudices in its favours, as others have for their systems. That your pretensions to superior learning and wisdom do not rest on the firmest basis, may per- haps be made to appear in the following Letters. INa. , even the subject now under consideration requires me to notice some instances in which you betray your ignorance ; — ignorance, not merely of the scriptures, (that is nothing un- common in rational divines*), but of heathen morality; which is the more strange, as unitarian moralists usually speak of their pagan brethren with fraternal affection. After having stripped Christianity of what are * Some Divines maybe found, even among fucli as pafswithlhe fafhion- able world for models of lafie and learning, who appear to have never read their Bible once over. In one of Sterne's Sermons we find that senti- menial author fpeaking ence and again of Hoska king or Assyria i •—Sermon on 2 Kings ;cvu, 7. 17 commonly called its peculiar doctrines, you ar« at a loss to find any thing" remaining- to discri- minate it from natural religion, except the doc- trine of a resurrection. To supply this deficiency, you introduce among your " distinguishing prin- ciples " some sentiments which were generally- received among the heathen philosophers, but which you deny them the honour of maintaining. Of this ignorance of heathen morality, you have orJven us a remarkable instance in the fol- lowing passage : " Christian principles extend to the thoughts of the heart ; and in this we meet with one of its distinguishing excellencies. It never entered into the conceptions of any of the excellent moralists of the heathen world, to pre- scribe any duties, which should extend to the thoughts. And the reason of this is very evi- dent ; because the sanctions of their law could have no force there. But in the christian sys- tem we are to pay a constant regard to the divine presence ; and are assured, that God knows all our thoughts ; hence we are to regulate them, from a regard to the presence of our Maker. — Our Saviour tells us, that out of the heart pro- ceed evil thoughts ^c ; and that these are the things which defile a man. And undoubtedly, if we indulge in any vicious or impure thoughts, it requires but very little acquaintance with hu- man nature, to be convinced, that these will Jiavc a very powerful influence on our live*. *18 Here then are two very powerful reasons for a serious attention to the discipline of our heart. Because, in the first place, wicked thoughts must be displeasing to that God, who knows our hearts, and is perfectly acquainted with every thing which passes there. And secondly, because in- dulging in vicious thoughts must of course pro- duce vicious actions. This then is a degree of morality, to which no heathen philosophy could ever aspire." ( p. 134, 135.) I know not from what source you have derived your knowledge of the heathen philosophers; but if it was from the perusal of their works, you must have read them with uncommon care- lessness, or confined your attention to a small portion of their writings ; otherwise you must have discovered in their moral system those very principles, which in this passage you would ap- propriate to the gospel. What was the profes- sed object of the heathen philosophy ? Was it merely to direct the conduct, and not also to improve the heart, and regulate the thoughts ?- What was the great aim of the Stoic philosophy in particular ? Was it not to control the pas- sions, and to produce a constant tranquillity of mind P — That the Supreme Being knows our hearts, that we are accountable for our thoughts, that wicked thoughts are the source of wicket| actions, and that we must shun not only the ac^ tua) commission of sin but all approaches to it 19 in the thoughts and intentions of the heart, are sentiments, which not only " entered into the conceptions of the excellent moralists of the hea- then world," but abound in their writing's. — Even the ancient Greek Poets, who sometimes give the most degrading pictures of the Deity, attribute to the Supreme God the knowledge of the human heart. Homer, in more than one instance, speaks of Jupiter's infatuating the mind by a secret influence, which implies an acquaintance with the thoughts :* and he mentions the in- ward piety and goodness of Ulysses, as well known to the gods ; to whom also he ascribes a knowledge of all thing's. f Hesiod asserts that the Deity perceives the wicked purposes of men, as well as their wicked actions, and exhorts Perse s to restrain his mind from sin.;]; In the following beautiful passage of Theognis, the same ideas are clearly expressed : " Dear Jupi- ter, I admire thee ; for thou rulest over all ; thy- self possessing honour and great might: and tkou hnowest well the mind of men, even the ioul of each iridividttal ; and thy power, O king-, is supreme ! " || Philemon, another ancient Poet, tells his friend Pamphilus, that he must not expect to make God propitious to him, by costly sacrifices or splendid ornaments, if his hands were stained with blood and violence, and * Iliad. Lib. vi.234.~Lib ix.377. +Odyfs Lib.v. 8,9— Lib. iv.379. ± Qpei\ et Dier. Lib. i. 2P4..267. ct 333. ||Thkocm. Seutent. g?g..j » 20 his heart defiled with lust and avarice ; for God was present with him, and narrowly observed him : And he adds this excellent advice ; " But sacrifice to God always in righteousness ; with a pure hearty rather than pure garments."* — To these passages from the ancient Greek Poets, many more might be added, expressive of the same ideas. If you had attentively examined even the Hymn of Cleanthes, of which you have given us Mr. West's translation, you might have seen that that poet and philosopher had some "conception" of " duties which extend to the thoughts;" for he speaks of obeying God's law with the mind, and prays that his soul may he illuminated, in order to praise him.f — That Socrates, the prince of heathen philosophers, considered the human mind as open to the divine inspection, and taught men to " attend to the discipline of the heart," is obvious from the writings of Plato and Xenophon, his illustrious disciples. The latter informs us that that ex- cellent moralist " believed that the gods know all things, whether words, or actions, or secret purposes ; " and that he instructed his followers to seek inward goodness. J — In the works of Cicero, such sentiments occur in abundance. * Philem. Sentcnt. i Cleanth. Hymn, in Jov em, v. a-, 30". .35. J XE#orH. Socr. Mcmor. Lib. i. c i.et 4. Lib. ii. c. 6. (f3=* The learned reader will excuie the omiiljon of the original GrcsK, iHc Printer having no Greek Types. 21 That great philosopher affirms, that " God can- not be ignorant of the state of any one's mind;"* that he takes an account of the dispositions of all men ;f that he knows even those prayers and vows which are not uttered with the voice ;f and that he must be worshipped " with a pure, entire, and uncorrupted mind. "|| The same elegant writer, in a passage where he is giving- some di- rections about graceful motions of the body, ob- serves, that * it is of much more importance to regulate the motions of the soul ;" and recom- mends a serious attention to the discipline of our heart, giving some useful precepts for managing the thoughts. § — The writings of the later hea-^ then philosophers afford the most copious supply of proofs, that they did " prescribe duties extend- * Nee enim ignorare Deus poteft, qua mente quifque fit.— De Divinat. Lib. ii. c. 60. + Sit igitur jam hoc a principio perfuafum civibus, dominos effc omnium rerum, ac moderatores Deos;— ct, qua] is quifque fit, quid agat, quid in fead- mittat, qua mente, qua pietate colat religioaes, intueri ; piorumque et im« piorum habere rationem.—De Leg. Lib. ii. c. 7. % Ex quo fit, ut homines, etiam quum taciti optent quid, aut voveant, non tiubitent quin Dii illud exaudiant.™ De Divinat. Lb. i. c. 57. || Cultus auiem Deorum eft optimus, idemque calliffimus, atque fanctiffi- jnus, pleniffimusque pietatis, ut eos fempcr pura. intcgra, incoriupta et mente et voce, venevemur.— De nat.Deoi. Lib. ii c. 28. (j Sed multo etiam magis elaborandum est, ne animi motus a natura re- redant ; quod affequemur, fi cavebimus, n'e in perturbationes atque exanima- tiones incidamus ; et fi attentos amnios ad d'-cori conkrvaf.onem tenebimus. Motus autem animoium duplices funt; alteri, cogitationis ; aluri, aj;petitus. Cogitatio in vero exquirendo maxime verfatur; appetitus impellit ad agendum. Curandum efl igitur, ui cogitatione ad 1 cs quam op'.imas utamur ; appetitum rationi obedientem ptibcamus,— De Officlib. i. a 36, nig- to the thoughts ;" and that, upon the very principles which you assert to be peculiar to the gospel. I shall produce a few evidences out of many, furnished by Seneca, Epictetus, and Mar- cus Aurelius. — " God is near thee," snys Seneca, " is with thee, is in thee : Yes, Lucilius, a holy spirit resides within us, the observer of our evil and good, and our guardian : As he is treated by us, so he treats us :"* Again he says : " Indeed we ought so to live, as before witnesses ; so to order our thoughts, as if some one could look in- to the bottom of our breast. — And there is one who can : — For what avails it that any thing is concealed from man ? Nothing is hid from God. He is present in our souls, and comes into the midst of our thoughts."! And again : " Do you ask, what is the seat of the chief good ? — It is the mind. Unless this is pure and holy, it does not receive God. "J The same author affirms, that a good mind is necessary to enjoy the divine favour ;j| and, in his admirable epistle on the im- * Prope eft a te Deus, tecum eft, intus eft : Ita dico, LuciH, facer intra nos fpivitus fedet, maloium bonorumque noftrorum obfervator, et cuftos : hie prout a nobis tractatus eft, ita nos ipfe tractat.— Epift. 41. + Sic cevte vivendum eft, tanquam in confpectu vivamus: fie cogitandum, tanquam aliquis in pectus intimum infpicere poffit.—Et poteft :-Quid enim prodeft ab homine aliquid effe fecretum ? Nihil Deo clufum eft. Intertft animis noftris, et cogitationibus mediis intervenit.— Epift 83 J Quis fit fummi boni locus, quxris ?— Animus. Ilic nifi purus ac fanctus eft, Deum non capit. — Epift. 87. |[Jubeo te habere mentem bonam, hoc eft, propiiios deos omues : qucs jiabet placates etfavenjes, qu'fquis fiLi fc piopitiavit. Epift. 1 1 o. 23 mortality of the soul, he remarks, that the hope of immortal glory will banish from the soul every thing 1 vile, and mean, and cruel ; and teach us to live as in God's sight, as those who wish to be accepted before him, and to spent an eternity in his presence.* — Epictetus speaks the same language : * You carry a God within you, and perceive not that you are profaning him, by ifn>- pure thoughts and base actions. If even the im- age of God were present, you would not dare to do any of the things which you are doing : and are you not ashamed to think and act thus, when God himself is present within you, and sees and hears aliP'f And again : "Do we ask, wlfat are those things which the philosophers tell us ? —That we must first learn that there is a God ; and that his providence is over all ; and that it is impossible to conceal from him, not only our ac- tions, but even our thoughts and conceptions ."{■— Marcus Aurelius is equally explicit on the sub- ject. In the very beginning of his Meditations, he states, that his mother taught him to abstain from evil thoughts, as well as from wicked ac- tions.ll He often speaks of a divine Monitor rea- ding within him, to inspect and regulate his thoughts. § He observes that we must check all * Uxc co petenda ror- rectio eft.-0 vita? phjlflfophw dux ! U vntuiib indagati x. epcpultrixque \ rio- rum ! Quid non moJo nos, fed omnino Vila hoininum fme te eiTc potu-lfet ? — Tu inventrix legu-.r, tu mag 11 a mo Mini ct difciplinae fuifti : ad ic confngi- mus: ate ope;ii pctimus : tibi no., u' an'ca magna ex patte, lie nunc penitws totofque tradimus. Eft autem unus dies, bene et ex prasceptis iu s actu , •■> i - canti immortalitati anteponendus.Cujus igitur potius, opibus utamm, quani »uis? qua; ei vita; tranquillitateni lar^i. a nobis «,et tetrorem morti '-Twfcul. Difput, Lib.v. c. 2. in is precisely his : *' We are to repent and forsake our sins ; and endeavour to root ottt our sins,* and press forward towards perfection." (p. 102.) This, according to your gospel, is the way td procure the divine favour. " The mercy of €rod, on these terms, is offered to the greatest of sin- ners*" (p. 100.) And did not the heathen phi- losophers also believe, that if great profligates, like Polemo above-mentioned, repent and forsake their sins, they shall enjoy the divine favour ? " As a limb cut off from the body," says Anto- ninus, " so is he who transgresses : But behold the kindness of God to man ! Ke hath given him power both to avoid being broken off, and, wheri broken off, to return again, and be reunited, and occupy his former place. "f In like manner Cebes says, that "repentance delivers a man from misery, and gives him new views and desires, to con* duct him to true learning and happiness. "J These moralists encouraged even the most har- dened sinners to repent and return ;|[ and though many of them exhorted their disciples to follow virtue for its own sake, yet it was the prevailing sentiment, that repentance is necessary for en- * The identical phrafe of Cicero :-" Extrahit vitia radicitus. " Ibid. Lib. ii. c 5. t M. AntoW. Lib. viii 34. t Cebet. Tab. !| Ne labor quidem magnus eft: fi mbdo, ante anirrrum noftrum formarc incipimus, et recorrigere, quam indurefcat pravitas ejus. Sed nee indurata defpero Sen. Epift. 50. Quare deficimus ? Quare defperamus ?-Licet reverti in viam ; licet in' integrum rcftitui. Ibid. Epift. 98. 20 joying' the divine favour;* and hence there were then, as in the present day, many instances of 4eath-bed repentance. f It must be owned, however, that the senti- ments of the ancient philosophers concern i tig 1 repentance were somewhat different from yours ; for, in truth, their doctrine was more conform- able to scripture. They not only inculcated ?e- poitance, but, for the most part, believed that some atonement is necessary, to obtain the par- don of sin. Hence the numerous sacrifices, both public and private, that were offered in every land, to expiate guilt, and avert the wrath of of- fended Heaven. In the moral writing's of the heathens, we find exhortations to repentance ac- companied by such advices as the following : u Have recourse to expiations ; go a suppliant to the temples of the averting Deities."^ Even daily sacrifices were sometimes recommended, to render the gods propitious, and procure the en- joyment of daily blessings. || — Their views of the mature of repentance as well as of its ejjicaty } were more agreeable both to scripture and rea- son, than yours. Your kind of repentance is at- tended with no painful sensations, but on the * Of tliis we have fufTicient evidence in Come of the paffages quoted in the former part of this letter. + Appropinquante morte,( akimus] multo eft divinior. -eofque qui ftcus quam decuit, vixerunt, peccatorum fuoium turn maxime pocnitet. Cicero de Divin. Lib. i. c 30. } ARR.Enci. Difp. Lib. ii.e. 18. || HES.Oper.ct Dicr. Lib. i. 33 1-339* so contrary is altogether jo ful and pleasant, (p. 103, 107, 108 ) But they viewed repentance as including in it sorrow for sin, and other painful exercises of mind; which, as we shall afterwards see, the scripture considers as belonging to true repentance. Almost every thing that is usually represented as forming a part of repentance, is mentioned by one or other of the heathen wri- ters, as belonging to that moral change which it was the object of their philosophy to produce. Such are the following exercises of soul, some of which must be allowed to be painful : Con- viction and self-reproach :* — sorrow for sin, and even the most pungent grief, producing tears and lamentations :f — shame on account of sin :t ! — hatred of sin, determined opposition to it, with resolutions to avoid all temptations, and to * Et hoc ipfum argumentum c ft in melius tranflati animl, quod vitia fua, qux adhuc ignorabat, videt.— Sen. Ep. 6. Initium eft falutis, notitia peccati.-- Idco quantum potes, tcipfe coaroxie: inquire in tc;aecufatoi is primum partihus fungere, deinde judicis.-SzN.Ep. 28. Sommum narrare, vigilantis clt ; et vitia fua confitei 1, fanitatis indicium eft. -Sen. Ep. 53. -Vide etiam— M. Anton. Lib. viii. 10.— Pi thag. Aur. l>icta. v. 44. I Quum i'e Akibiades afflictaret, lacrymanfque Sociati fupplex effet, ut fibi virtutem fiaderet, turpitudinemque depellerrt. -Illud, qued Alcibnades delebat, non ex animi malis vitiifque conftabut ? Cic Tufc. Lib. iii. c. 32. Ego fortaffe ilii lacrymas movebo.— Vitia ejus etiam ft non excidtro^ inhibebo.— Sen. Ep. 29. Etiam fi exclamaveritis, non aliter audiam, quam fi ad tactum vitiorun: veftrorutn ingpmiicatis.—SEN. Ep. 52. J Which Aiiftotlecalls* conditional vi&Tuz.-See CilHes'sAriftctkV ftliics. Book iv. c. o. 31 mortify every evil desire.* — Such is the repen- tance which heathen moralists taught ; and if it differs from yours, the difference lies in its being 1 more agreeable to scripture and to the general sense of mankind. When these and others of your " distinguish- ing- principles," that were taught in some form by the pagan philosophers, have been deducted, your gospel will be comprised within a very nar- row compass ; for indeed there will be scarcely any thing remaining, except the doctrine of a resurrection. Christianity, according to our scheme, is a -revival and confirmation of natural religion, with the addition of this single doctrine. That this is the gospel of unitarians, is acknow- ledged by another champion of rational Chris- tianity, Mr. Belshani ; who, in his Review of Mr- Wilbcrjbrce's Treatise, alleges that the principles of the TheophilantJiropes,.a class of infidels in France, comprehend the essential ar- ticles of the christian faith, and admits that if they had received the doctrine of a resurrection, in addition to these principles, their system f Oderunt peccarc boni virtntis amorc. Hor. Epift. Lib. i. Ep. 16. v. 5^. Scelerum fibene pcenitet, Eradcnda cupidinis Piavi fuiit elements.— Hon. Cairn. Lib. iii. Od. 24. v 50.. 52. Sed fatisdiu cum Baiis litigavimus, nunquam fat is cum vitiis : qua: 010 te, mi Lucili, perft quel e (me modo, line fine: nam iilis quoquc Dec finis eft, nee modus. Projice quxcuinquc cor tuum laniant : qua G altter «trahi nequi* rem, cpr ipfum cum illii • idum crat. Sen. Ep. 51. 32 would have been much the same with his own pure Christianity ! Here, sir, I would ask you, Is this "the glori- ous gospel of the blessed God ?" Is this that gospel which we are taught in scripture to re- gard as an inestimable blessing, a most distin- guished favour ? Was it for this that Christ was so long expected by the ancient church, that so many prophets described in glowing language the wonders of his character, the glories of his reign, and the riches of his salvation, and that so much preparation was made for his appear- ance ? Was it for this that the great Iminanuel came into our world, and that he ministered, and suffered, and died, and rose again ? — Was the great object of such extraordinary transac- tions, merely a republication of natural religion, with this one doctrine superadded to it? — Is this the gospel which Christ committed with such solemnity to so many apostles and ministers, which they esteemed as unsearchable riches, which they bore from land to land, at the ha* zard of their lives, and the loss of all that was dear to them on earth, and which so rapidly changed the face of the world, pouring the light of life on millions who dwelt in the region of the shadow of dealh, and banishing from many lands the horrors of idolatry and supersti- tion, those absurd and cruel and impious rites, which, in spite of all the lectures cf philosophy. 33 had been for to many ages " a disgrace to hu- man reason ?"* If the difference between Chris- tianity and the systems of the more enlighten- ed heathens is so trivial, to what can we attri- bute the enormous difference between their respective effects ; especially if, with unitarians, we deny the work of the Holy Spirit? Why were the discourses of Peter and Paul so many thousand times more efficacious than the lectures of Plato and Xenocrates? — Upon no other prin- ciple can this well-known fyct be accounted for, than by admitting- that the primitive ministers of Christ preached a higher gospel than yours ; that they taught those sublime mysteries, which, however they may be viliiied by men, have been found in all ages to be " the power of God unto salvation, to every one that believeth." Tjiey " preached Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumbling-block, and unto the Greeks," as unto modern philosophizing moralists, " foolishness ; but unto them which are called, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God." They pro- claimed the glad tidings that " God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them ;" and, in the name of Christ they invited sinners to " be reconciled unto God ; who hath made him a .sin- offering for us, who knew no sin ; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.""]" v , VTa'fon's Popular tviccnccf ; p. 377. + 1 Cor. i. 23, 24. 2 Cor. v. ?><;•■?> C 84 Besides, if their gospel had been the same, with yours, whence proceeded that violent per- secution which they every where encountered ? Why were the disciples of Jesus cruelly abused, not only by a Nero and a Domitian, but even by a Trajan and a Marcus Aurelius ? Where- fore did the Stoics and Epicureans unite in hos- tility to the gospel ? There is a wider difference between the system of Epicurus and that of Zeno, than between the latter and >our moral gos- pel ; why then did the Stoics not extend unto christians that forbearance which they had shewn towards the Epicureans? Surely it might have been expected, that such men as Seneca and Epictetus would have received with complacency, or at least examined with candour, a system so congenial to their own. Indeed, it is no less difficult, upon your prin- ciples, to give a satisfactory reason for the en- mity of modern infidels against the scriptures. You may pretend that they are misled by the misrepresentations of evangelical interpreters; but is it probable, that those who boast of being free thinkers would view the Bible only through that medium, and not rather examine it for themselves ? ilnd, if your gospel be that of the scriptures, understood according to their plain and obvious meaning, as you very frequently as- sert ; their hostility to these sacred oracles is un- accountable. Infidels profess to follow the re- 35 ligion of nature, nor is it likely that they will object to the doctrine of a resurrection; and if the gospel contains nothing more, what can be the ground of their quarrel with it ? — There are few articles in your creed, to which infidels would not subscribe, — few to which Jews or even Mahometans would object : Nay, there is not one of your " general principles " of the gospel, enumerated in page 94, which Jews and Turks do not already hold. This, indeed, you may count the glory of your system, as many of its patrons have done. jBoeinus made it an ar- gument in favour of his principles : "Why should honest Jews and Turks be frighted from us by the Trinity?" And his worthy disciple BJr. Fellowes, in his Guide to Immortality, boasts of his scheme, as calculated to reconcile " Jews, Turks, and infidels, of whatever denomination," to Christianity !!! But surely to jnve the name? Christianity to a system which has little more connection with the religion of Jesus, than with Judaism, Mahometauism, or Infidelity, is a gross misapplication of language — Upon your prin- ciples, the heresy of infidels is very trivial, when compared with the heresies of evangelical be- lievers, for the latter are removed many degri further from your pure Christianity, than the former are. The sentiments and feelings of the disciples of Voltaire and Hume are much more congenial to your gospel, than the sentimei 36 and feeling's of those vile heretics who receive their designation from the name of Luther or that of Calvin. You will be ready to object, that infidels deny the truth of the scriptures, which you and your brethren acknowledge, and for which you have powerfully pleaded in your Popular Evi- dences. But if infidels adhere to your gospel, it will, upon your own principles, be a matter of small moment, whether they profess to derive it from the scriptures, or from any other source. If morality is every thing, and opinions are of little importance ; if the doctrines and duties of relioion are valuable only as they conduce to morality ; if the peculiar doctrines of scripture are no way subservient to this end ; and if infi- dels receive all that you reckon valuable in the scriptures ; of what consequence is it whether they receive or reject the book itself? Kay rather, is it not more corsistent to reject it al- together, than to acknow ledge it as the word of God, and yet disown almost all its peculiar doctrines, as useless and unimportant ?■ But I cannot see that your sentiments differ greatly from those of infidels, even in regard to the inspiration of the scriptures ; at least in your views of them as a standard of doctrine, and a rule of duty. You acknowledge the facts re- corded in the Bible, and you appeal to its au- thority in support of your principles; but yen 37 are far from allowing- it to be an infallible judge of truth, and an unerring guide to virtue. You seem to regard it merely as a very useful book, containing many important truths and valuable precepts, but with a. mixture of abstruse and useless tenets, of fab e and dangerous opinions, and of sentiments unworthy of God and repug- nant to the spirit of true religion ; which, with reason for your guide, you are to deduct and set aside, as forming no part of divine revelation. If this is to believe the divine inspiration of the scriptures, infidels may at once change their name, without renouncing one iota of their prin- ciples ; for they need only to adopt as much of the Bible as suits their fancy, and throw away the rest. According to this notion of inspiration, I could receive the Koran as divinely inspired, and acknowledge your own Plain Statement as an inspired volume. Now, that such are your views of the divine inspiration of the scriptures, may appear in part from some things already stated, but more especially from some passages in your own book, of which I shall now proceed to take notice. In more than one place you insinuate that the doctrine of scripture is not always uniform, and of course that some part of it is false. " In favour of moral virtue, our Saviour is decided. Paul, in general> speaks in perfect conformity 88 •with the sentiments of his divine Master. " (p. 132.)* Of course there must be some par- ticular instances, in which the doctrine of Paul, in your opinion, varies from that of Christ. That their doctrine is perfectly uniform on the article of justification, discussed in the passage referred to, will be afterwards shewn. On that subject Christ is as much against you as Paul • though both the Master and the disciple assert the necessity of moral virtue to form the chris- tian character. But I would now remark, that if Paul, when he wrote his epistles, was inspired by the Spirit of Christ, it is impossible that his sentiments could vary in the smallest degree from those of his divine Lord. Such a supposition would render any appeal to the apostolical epis- tles altogether nugatory. Indeed, some of your bolder brethren do not hesitate to reject the au- thority of Paul, since, with all their arts of dis- torting, perverting, and new-modelling scripture, they cannot compel him to speak their senti- ments. Mr. Fellowes, in his Guide, asserts that the writings of this Apostle '• have a tincture of cabaiistical refinement, — and even occasionally glimmer with a ray of Grecian philosophy f that they are " filled with the abstruse discus- sions of rabbinical learning, or relate to ques- tions which are at present of more curiosity than importance ;" and in particular, that " the epis- * See another infinuation of the fame kind, p. 1 2 7. 39 tie to the Romans is bewildered with the polemic cal Christianity of the day "!!! What could in- fidels say more to vilify the oracles of God ? Yet your insinuations respecting Paul, seem to breathe a portion of the same spirit. But you not only insinuate that there are sen- timents in scripture, contrary to the doctrine of Christ, and consequently false j but expressly assert that there are some passages in which the sacred penmen betray a temper of mind highly criminal j and directly contrary to the spirit of the gospel. In your observations on the duty of prayer, you caution your readers against the use of some strong figurative expressions employed in the Psalms ; alleging that such language is improper under the gospel. You then proceed to affirm, that not only the language hut the sen- timents of the Old Testament scriptures must in some instances be shunned as highly reprehen- sible and unworthy of a christian : th Psalm, is full of these : And many instances of the same * A (mail (pecimen of Mr. Watfon's accukact. 40 kind are met with in several of the other Psalms. i — The 137th Psalm, employs towards the con- clusion, some resentful wishes. As christians We are not permitted to make use of language of this nature. How unlike are these to the pre- cepts, the prayers and example of Him, who has taught us to pardon offences, and to forgive our enemies ! " (p. 85.) And how like, Sir, are these unwarrantable reflections on the Old Testament writers, to the blasphemous misrepresentations of infidels! It is true that the expressions to which you allude can scarcely be used either as prayers or as songs, at least when applied to our temporal enemies ; but are they therefore to be denominated hitter imprecations, or resentful wishes ? — No ; they are important prophecies : " — prophecies dictated by God's Spirit, and ful- filled by his hand. Nor is this a conjectural ex- position of these passages : — it is supported by the highest authority, — even that of the apostles of Christ. The 100th Psalm, which you con- ceive to abound with bitter imprecations, is ex- pressly quoted by Peter, as a prophecy fulfilled in Judas Iscariot; a prophecy " which the Holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake before con- cerning Judas, which was guide to them that took Jesus."* Surely, if you had attended to this text, you could not have dared to express the blasphemous idea, that the Holy Ghost, by -* Comp. Pf. cix. 8, &c. with Acts i. »6..20. 41 the mouth of David, uttered bitter imprecations. —Another of these passages, contained in the 69th Psalm, is in like manner explained by an inspired interpreter, to be a prophecy of God's righteous judgments on the unbelieving Jews, who were guilty of rejecting and crucifying* the Lord of glory:* and it is worthy of remark, that the 21st verse, which immediately precedes that prophecy, contains a clear prediction of a remarkable circumstance attending the cruci- fixion of Christ, and that he had an eye to the fulfilment of this prediction, when he said in his last moments, " 1 thirst :"f to which I may add, that both clauses of the 9th verse of that Psalm are quoted in the New Testament, as descriptive of the zeal and the sufferings of Christ. J—rFrom these undeniable instances we may safely infer, that the same rtde of interpretation must be ex- tended to all other passages of this description. — They are not the " resentful wishes" of men, but the prophetic words of the ►Spirit of God, de- nouncing merited punishments against the w vk- ers of iniquity. We may indeed infer from the mode of expression, that the prophets through whose mouth God delivered these predict) >ns, acquiesced in his just dispensations which thej f .retold, in the same manner as the church tri- * Comp. Pf. Ixix. 2a, 23- with Romans xi. 9, 10. •'-Coinp. Pf. !\ix. 21. with John xix. 28, 29, ■ :i, 17. —Romans xv. 3. 42 uniphant is represented as praising him for his righteous judgments ;* but to impute to these holy men, who spake by " the Spirit of Christ which was in them,' f dispositions repugnant to the principles of his gospel, would be at once presumptuous and impious. What? Are the threatening^ and awful prophecies which were uttered in the name of the Lord by his faithful servants, to be regarded as the effusions of their own malice and resentment ?— They were in- deed viewed in that light, by some of those sin- ners whom they were intended to warn ; and the same uncharitable construction is still put on the warnings addressed to perishing sinners by the faithful ministers of Christ ; but the prophets under the old dispensation, as well as the min- isters of the gospel, could solemnly protest, that they never " desired the woful day," but often wept for the calamities which they were employed in predicting.!— Far be it from us to entertain such a thought as that the devotion and morality of tiie Old Testament are at variance with those of the New, or that the same amiable dispositions have not in every age, been equally necessary to form the character of a saint. Predictions of the same kind with those which we have con- sidered, may be found in the New Testament ;|j and the forgiveness of injuries and love to our * Rev. xix. 1 .3. +1 Peter i. 11. + J er - xv "« 16.— iv. 19.— ix. 1. (j 1 Cor. xvi. 22.-2 Tim. iv. 14. 43 enemies, are both enjoined and exemplified in the Old,* — exempli iied even by David himself, whose name has suffered such unmerited oblo- quy, t — "It requires a considerable stretch of chanty, to call that man a christian, who can entertain and publish reflections on the Old Tes- tament scriptures, so inconsistent with a per- suasion of their divine origin. There is another passage in your work, which, if I comprehend its meaning*,,, cannot be recon- ciled to any proper views of the divine inspira- tion of the scriptures. It is the following ■ " If there should be any expressions or sentiments, which appear to favour election and reprobation as they are generally understood, we ought to seek for an interpretation agreeable to the divine perfections ; for these must be our standard; and they must be always consistent with themselves." (p. 43.) I shall have occasion to shew in a fu- ture Letter, that in the passage of which these words form the conclusion, you are opposing predestination, not as it is generally understood by those who hold it, but as it is often misrepre* tented by those who attack it. At present, I shall confine my remarks to the rule win eh vou have laid down for expounding scripture. If you mean, in this ambiguous sentence, that one part of the scripture must be consistent with a- *Exsd. xxiii. 4, 5.— Prov. xxiv. 17, 18 —xxv. 21.— 2 Kings vi. 2;. + Pf. xxxv. 12 ,14. 44 notlier, and that what is said of God's perfec- tions in one passag*e must be agreeable to what is spoken of them m other passages j that is pre- feiseiy the idea which, in opposition to yourself, I have been trying- to establish in the foreoroinef paragraph. But if, (as appears far more pro- bable from what has been said, and from the general tenour of your system,) your meaning- is, that our preconceived notions of what the divine perfections must be, are a standard by which we are to interpret the word of God, such a sentiment is incompatible with the belief of its being divinely inspired. For, if the scriptures must be made to conform to our opinions, though we may designate these opinions the dictates of reason, a title which men often bestow on the offspring of their own vain imaginations; and if, where the scriptures speak a language which, in its natural and obvious meaning, differs from this proposed standard, "we ought to seek," by those arts of perversion in which unitarians ex- cel, " an interpretation agreeable to this stand- ard ; — there is an end to the authority of the sacred oracles, and all their decisions become nugatory. Surely, when we have received the scriptures as a revelation from God, the true dictate of reason then is, that our opinions must be regulated by this divine standard, and we must humbly receive all its doctrines, in their plain, unsophisticated meaning. If reason must 43 determine how much of the scriptures we are to believe, " not only is revelation dishonoured, and its Author insulted, but the end for which it was given is completely defeated. Instead of being- admitted as the supreme standard of hu- man opinions and practices in religfi n, it is de- graded into a subordinate rule, and possesses no more authority than the fallible and capricious wisdom of men will allow it to exercisje. A revelation, which must be subjected to a discus- sion of its contents as well as of its ei idence, prior to its reception, could not serve any valu- able purpose, which might not have Leon attain- ed without it."* That reason is an infallible guide, is an idea wholly delusive for what some men assert to be the dictates of reason, others pronounce to be the reveries of fancy, and even in the same individual, what has appeared at one time to be consonant to reason, is perceived at another to be irrational and absurd. I have been the mere desirous to expose the fallacy of this rule for interpreting scripture, as it seems to be universally adopted by your uni- tarian brethren. They will receive as much of the divine word as suits their own preconceived opinions, and the rest they will either reject as useless, or try to force into their service by every engine of torture. It is upon this princij le that their Improved Version of the New Testament • Dick's May on the InTpiration of the Scrip'mcs, p. 29, 30. v 2iid l.dh.) 46 has been constructed. The framers of this Soci- nian Bible have assumed it as an axiom, that their rational si/stem must be the true gospel ; and consequently, they are determined to make the scriptures appear on their side, and to des- troy or put to silence every passage that is hos- tile to their scheme. With this view the New Testament is invaded, with all the power of so- phistry, disingenuousness, perversion, and false learning ; which, like Attiia and his Huns, make dreadful havoc of the sacred pages : whole Books are cut off as spurious, and others as doubtful ; while those which remain are shockingly muti- lated and mangled : some chapters are rejected on the authority of the Ebionites or theMarcio- nites, an authority about as good as that of uni- tarians themselves ; seme texts must be expung- ed or altered, on the testimony of seme obscure manuscript ; where such aids are wanting, re- course is had to conjectural emendations, or forc- ed and unnatural constructions ; and when even these fail, explanatory notes are subjoined, to as- sure the reader that the inspired penman did not mean what he wrote, or to assert that the passage must be understood figuratively.* By such me- thods, you might transform the Bible into the Koran, or compel it to utter the language of the. Shasters. I do not mean, however, to charge you witk * See Mr. Narcs'* Remarks on this Improveo Version. 47 the deeds of your brethren, in forming- this most extraordinary version : for, though you have a- dopted, in your public worship, the new unita- rian Hymn-book,* you have not yet introduced this unitarian Bible ; and therefore, I am not warranted to presume that it meets your appro- bation, Yet the passages now quoted from your Plain Statement, have a direct tendency to de- grade the sacred volume, and confirm infidels in their hostility to the gospel. That your scheme, instead of being a prc- scrvatire against Infidelity, has a powerful ten- dency to promote it, appears, not only from ex- amining its nature, but from the evidence of facts. " It is notorious," says an eminent author, " and it will require no small degree of hardihood to deny it, that from those who have );rojc~ unitarianism in England, the largest stock of un- believers has arisen : nay more, that their prin- cipal Academy (at Hackney), the place in vi hi eh unitarian principles were inculcated in their-great* est purity, and with every advantage of ; ability in the teacher, and of unbiassed .!' cil the learner, has borne witness to the efficac) of those principles by its dissolution, imperiously demanded by the prevalence of infidel opinions."") 1 * Collection of Hymns and Pfalms, by Dr. Kippis.&C — In this new Cok ltction. care has been taktn to admit nothing that favours of £v.:ngelical Principles. Several of Walls's Hymns, intioduced into it, have been Carefully pared and modified to fuit theSocinian i + Dr. M?gec Pn Atpnemcntand Sacrifice, vol ■ i) 48 It is very possible that such publications as yours may increase the number of nominal chris- tians ; for some infidels, finding a system called Christianity so nearly allied to their own, will be di>< osed to assume the name, when it can be done without relinquishing* any of their favourite principles. " Men who, having- rejected the christian revelation, are yet restrained by a re- gard to opinion and decorum, from openly abdi- cating' the christian name, may find it not incon- venient to rank themselves of a class, whose lati- tude of opinion can occasion but little embarass*- ment to that freedom for which they contend : and thus Mr. Be^ham may possibly reckon a- mong the residents of his mansion, many who are content to sojourn there, on account of its commodious neighbourhood to that region, which they regard as their true and proper home."* — But, of what avail is a preservative against the name of infidelity, if the spirit and substance of it be retained, and cherished ? It must be a matter of trivial moment, whether a man be called a deist, or a unitarian, when the senti- ments and temper of the one, so nearly coincide with those of the other. "In both there is the ?ame self sufficiency, the same pride of under- standing, that would erect itself on the ground of human reason, and that disdains to accept the divine favour, on any conditions but its own. Jr * Ibid. p. 43a. 49 both, in short, the very characteristic of a chris- tian spirit is wanting — Humility."* These jnst reflections of Dr. Magee suggest another idea whi Ji ou^ht not to he overlooked. Your system recommends itself to the infidel, not only hy flattering the pride of reason but also by countenancing the boast of merit. It is very common for those who are de titute of true vir- tue, to glory in every an. earance of it and every approach to it, unto which they can lay claim. Infidels boast of their own goodness, as well as their own wisdom and sometimes proclaim the most daring blasphemer eminently virtuous. f They spurn at the thought of taking any thing from God as ajree gift* fancying themselves pos- sessed of sufficient merit to purchase his favour. The same proud, independent spirit, is the very soul of your scheme ; as will be obvious when it is ex- amined more particularly : and this circumstance is an additional proof of the monstrous incongrui- ty of proposing such a system as a preservative agfainst infidelity. But there is yet another feature in your book which cannot fail to procure for it a favourable re- ception among unbelievers ; and with a few re- marks upon that, I shall conclude this long Let- ter. Infidelity does not originate solely in ig- * Ibid. vol. i. p. 18. + See Dr. Adam Smith':, account of Mr. Hume, prefixed to Huxne'i I tory of England. T) 50 noranc© or misinformation, in pride or the love of glory : there are other principles no less powerful in producing' it, — the love of sin, and a rocced aversion to the restraints of God's law : and consequently, whatever tends to discredit strict holiness, to throw a veil over the defor- mity of sin, and to encourage the transgressor in the hopes of impunity, will be cordially welcom- ed by the infidel. " It may be laid down as an axiom," says a distinguished author, " that in- fidelity is in general a disease of the heart more than of the under 'standing. "* And that your Statement, is more likely to confirm than to cure this disease, it does not require much penetration to perceive. Tell the infidel, that opinions are of little moment, and that morality is every thing (p. 162.. 165) ; that piety towards God is but of secondary importance, and that frequent devotions, and a strict observance of the sabbath, are so far from being required, that they are presumptive evidences of hypocrisy, serving to " feed vanity, and to call forth ridicule and dis- grace " (p. 87, 88, 143, 144.) ; insinuate that a close attention to the rules of God's word is " unnecessary austerity " ( p. 121 ), and that fashionable foiiies are " innocent amusements " (p. vii, 152) ; inform him that, to procure the pardon of the greatest sins, no other atonement is required, beside repentance ; and that this rer • Wilberforce's Practical view of Chriftianily, p. 49j.T-6lH Lclii, 51 pentance is not bitter and painful, but pleasant and easy ( p. 107, 108 ) ; and assure him at the same time, that many of our sins are only " un- avoidable imperfections and deficiencies, for which God will make all gracious allowance " (p. 102) ; — and you have framed a religion just suited to his taste. If you can persuade unbe- lievers that this is the religion of the Bible, their enmity against it will be dropped, they will quar- rel no more with its evidences ; for " then is the offence of the cross ceased."* And if this is to reclaim men from infidelity, then it may be granted, that your performance is adapted to promote its professed object. ' Upon the whole, it is easy to account for the popularity of such productions among- the ene- mies of the gospel ; but if your book had been named " A Guide to Infidelity," this would have ^jeen a title far more appropriate than that which you have given it. I am, &c. * Gal. v. ix» 52 LETTER III. On j\lr. Watson's Treatise as a Preservative against Immorality. Sir, The crimes which disgrace our land, the shameful neglect of practical religion apparent among* the generality of professed christians, and the prevalence of folly and dissipation, luxury and riot, even in times of calamity and distress, indicate too clearly, that a Preservative against Immorality is peculiarly desirable. Mad you, therefore endeavoured to expose the vices of the age, had you tried to awaken the thought- less to serious consideration, and faithfully warn? ed transgressors of every sort to flee from (he wrath to come .. had you also exhibited, in their practical tendency, those sublime gospel prin- ciples which are most effectual in changing the heart and reforming the conduct ; and had you at the same time inculcated the regular and fre- quent observance of those divine institutions which are the best means of promoting true good- ness — your work might have been regarded as a useful and seasonable auxiliary in advancing 63 the interests of holiness. But far different is the nature of your Preservative. You seem to be sorry that the sabbath is so strictly observed (p. 144), to regret that so much time is spent in de- votions (p. 87,88), and to lament the neglect of " innocent amusements" (p. vii, 152 ), a name that is often bestowed on fashionable follies ; and you are alarmed at the progress of those evan- gelical principles (p. 120), which, though you pronounce them to be pregnant with mischief, experience proves to be m st efficacious in coun- teracting vice. Many of your observations on moral duties are indeed highly important ; but, in general, instead of labouring to promote the practice of morality, which is the thing most neglected, you appear more zealous to establish the theory of morals, which no one is opposing. If, indeed, your representations of the dangers to which the doctrine of morals is exposed, were as true as they are alarming, your plan might be highly laudable and necessary : " In every age, there appears to have been a conspiracy against .the moral duties of the gospel ; whilst men have laboured to make religion consist of something different from a good life. — Strange sub titutes have been invented in room of the plain princi- ples and excellent morals taught by Jesus Christ. — The moral precepts of the Saviour of the world and his perfect example have been objects only of secondary consideration ; and these, the 54 most obvious and excellent parts of religion, have been in all ages so much discountenanced, that but few have had the courage to come for- ward to advocate their cause. And, whilst the wicked and profligate of every description meet with lenity and forgh r eness, those who recom- mend the divine virtues are held up as the worst of heretics. But this was the very treatment that the Saviour of the world met with from the Pharisees and hypocrites of that age, whilst he was opening the eyes of mankind to the su- perstition and false principles then in fashion." (p. v, vi, vii.) — "The popular and overwhelming system is to teach any thing, but morals."(p-88)~ If this be a true statement, the friends of mo- rality may well tremble for its perilous situa- tion, and eagerly press forward in its defence. But where, Sir, are the proofs of this heaven- daring conspiracy ? What are the evidences of this impious warfare ? We see indeed, in many churches, a woful remissness in the prac- tice of moral duties, and in administering dis- cipline ; and no where is this defect more con* spicuons than among unitarians : but, in regard to the doctrine of morals, all are nearly no-reed. At least I know of no sect who maintain that there can be any genuine religion where there is not a good life ; — no sect who welcome into their communion the wicked and the profligate, while they reject the good and virtuous ;— no 55 sect among* whom the moral precepts and per- fect example of Christ are treated with disre- spect — Perhaps I ought to except those, with whom, as observed in the close of the foregoino* Letter, it is customary to speak of fashionable follies as" innocent amusements," and of sins as only " deficiencies and unavoidable imperfec- tions. " As a counterpart to the picture now exhibit- ed from your work, I would try to sketch out another, which perhaps will be found more faithfully drawn from the life : " In the present age, there seems to be a conspiracy against the doctrines of grace : Bishops and Barristers,* unitarian Moralists, and deist ical Reviewers, have combined to extirpate evangelical religion. Christianity is degraded into a system of ethics ; and morality is proposed as a substitute for piety. The gospel, instead of being prized as convey- ing the glad tidings of redemption to guilty men, is valued only for its morals. The sublime and salutary doctrines of Christ and his apostles are vilified and rejected, as dark and useless ; and, while infidels and scoffers are treated with moderation, evangelical believers are held up * Yet it is hoped, that there are few Bifhops who will act (o incontinently S3 Dr. Tomline, who has publilhcd a Refutation of lome ot the doc- trines of his own Church; and iew Barriilers fo devoid of candour, and fo full of enmity againft vital godlincfs, as the author of Hints io the Public and to the Legislature on the Nature and Effect o*" Evangelical Preaching, 46 as the worst of heretics. But such was the treatment which Jesus met with from the Phari* sees and self-righteous hypocrites, when he mor- tified their pride by teaching- them that they Could not be saved by their own works, but only by faith in him as their Redeemer ; and declar- ing that all their pretended morality and reli- gion were worthless before God, so long as they were destitute of inward goodness, strangers to humility, faith, and the love of God ; which, as well as justice and mercy, are the weightier matters of the law."* The shading in this pic- ture is not darker than that of the one which you have delineated ; and I hope that, in the eye of impartial judges, it will appear more correct. But what is it that has proved the occasion of alarming your fears, and awakening your zeal, for the interests of virtue? — The progress of evangelical preaching. — This is the dreadful evil, which you deplore as ruinous to morality ! ( p. 120) — But there are others, whose attach- ment to virtue is at least as warm as yours, to whom the increase of this mode of preaching gives heart-felt joy: and who are so far from dreading- it as the forerunner of vice, that they hail it as the harbinger of increasing reformation. And surely, until it appear that the gospel of Seneca, or of Epictetus, (since the term gospel *LukeK\ai 9. .14. John iii, i.,i8, 36. vi. 27. 66. Matth. xxiii. 22. Luke xj. 42. is applied to a mere system of ethics,) has more efficacy in promoting virtue, than the precious truths of Christ we need not fear that the popu- larity of evangelical doctrine, and its ascendency over the dry morality of philosophizing di- vines, will prove unfavourable to the interests of holiness. You allege, indeed, (p. 11 8, 119, 120) that they who preach salvation by grace, " plainly teach and assert, that good works can never be accepted by God, — that they are useless in themselves, — that we need not be in any fear when we neglect them, because our salvation can in nowise be concerned in obeying God's commands, — that such preachers cast an odium upon moral duties, — neglect and abuse them, — and bring forth railing accusations against the christian virtues!!! " — If these are specimens of evangelical preaching, its progress may well be regarded as alarming ; for, " is not this" opening a wide door to every kind of vice, and letting in immorality like a flood P" — But these "pious calumnies ' are so completely unfounded, that they scarcely deserve to be noticed. It is well known that none are more zealous than evan- gelical divines, in inculcating and exemplifying morality, — even the strictest morality ; in so much that you and others have taken occasion from their strictness in morals, as well as reli- gion, to charge them with prohibiting " inno- eeni amusements," and requiring " unnecessary austerity : " and yet you employ several pages in labouring to convince these ignorant and wicked men of the importance of morality, and and to prove what is never denied, — that good, works are necessary to salvation ! " How forci- ble are right words ! but what doth your argu- ing reprove?" The errors which you refute are the creatures of your own fancy i you " fight as one that beateth the air." The hackneyed objection against the doctrines of grace, " That they lead to licentiousness," i? as old as the days of the apostle Paul, by whom it is satisfactorily answered, in the 6th chapter of Romans. It has been refuted a thousand times ; yet every new enemy to these doctrine? brings it forward again with an air of triumph, as if it were invincible. The weakness and absurdity of this objection will fall to be noticed more particularly, in reviewing your sentiments on justification ; and therefore I shall not now stop to examine it. There is the less need to say much on the subject, as we are furnished with a complete refutation of this charge, in Mr. Fuller's Comparison of the Caluinistic and tS'ociuian Systems, as to their moral tendency ; in which excellent work it is indisputably prov- ed, that unitarian principles tend to diminish our abhorrence of sin, and weaken the force of our obligations to holiness; and that the doctrines of 59 #race furnish the most abundant and cogent motives to the practice of every duty. But there is no occasion for abstract reason- ing, to wipe off the foul aspersions, that are so often cast on evangelical principles : An appeal to facts is sufficient. If these principles are hostile to morality, their pernicious effects must appear in the lives of those who profess them, and especially of those who preach them. But will any one dare to say, that such christians, or such ministers, are distinguished from others b\ r their vicious lives ? You have the candour to own (p. 121), "that, among those who support th<^se principles, there are many men of excel- lent characters and exemplary lives ; " and I trust, that it will be found, upon a fair com- parison, that the proportion of such worthy cha- racters, is by no means smaller anion o- evang-eli-* cal christians, than among the friends of your system. Does it appear, that the moral virtues are generally expelled from other parts of the religious world, and forced to take their last stand among unitarians? Who are the most distinguished for acts of piety and goodness P Who are the most zealous members of those benevolent societies which do honour to the gos- pel ? Who are the most liberal supporters of those numerous charitable institutions, which reflect so much bistre on the British name ? You ear.- not deny that the greater pavt of them adhen 60 those grand peculiarities of the christian system, which you conceive to be subversive of morality. It can be no valid objection to evangelical principles, that they are professed by many, whose temper and conduct disgrace their pro- fession. Such hypocrites have existed in every age, and may be found in every department of the christian world. Many of your reflections on such characters must be allowed to be just. Such are the following observations in your In- troduction (p. vii) : " We may talk much about religion, we may attend a number of prayers and other external services ; we may affect to believe in a number of speculative opinions, which we cannot understand ; and pretend to internal feel- ings which we never experienced ; and we may renounce the innocent amusements of life : we may do all these ; and yet be destitute of hon- esty, integrity, and charity; we may do all these, and yet be intemperate, proud, ambitious, covetous, worldly-minded, inattentive to our family, to our children, and all the other rela- tive and private duties of life." — While I pro- test against calling the sublime truths of Christ, " speculative opinions, which we cannot under- stand," and against the insinuation that those who adhere to these truths condemn innocent amusements j I am ready to acknowledge, that the other sentiments expressed in this passage cannot be disputed. But, does it therefore fcl- 61 low, that the doctrines of grace encourage hypo- crisy ? Or is there any ground tor supposing that the number of moral hypocrites is not as great as the number of evangelical h pocrites ? You have tried to detect the latter ; let me en- deavour to undeceive the former, by offering for their consideration the following thoughts, which ought to be the less objectionable, as thev are presented in the form of an imitation of your own sentence now quoted: "We may talk much about morality ; we may deliver or attend dis- course on the beauties of virtue and the import- ance of moral duties ; we may affect a venera- tion for the precepts and example of the Saviour while in our hearts we reject his salvation, and while in our doctrines we are labouring to de- grade him ; we may pretend to a zeal for vir- tue which we never felt — a love fer morality, which we never cherished; and we mnv con- duct ourselves in the world with considerable re- gularity and decorum : vse may do all this, and yet be destitute of integrity and goodness, of humility and faith, of love to (j!od and benevo- lence to man ; we may do all this, and yet be the slaves of pride and ambition, of avarice and sensuality, of envy and malice. ' — This, Sir, ii a species of hypocrisy, as common, and as dan- gerous as that which you have described. Whether your system lias not a greater ten- dency to bc^et the one, than evangelical doc* " c taken a general view of yonr book, as a pre- servative against infidelity and immorality. It professes to be also an antidote to enthusiasm ; and under that character 1 shall have occasion to review it in some parts of the following- Letters, especially in considering' your thoughts on religious feelings. — In the mean time, I pro- ceed to examine your sentiments on some par- ticular doctrines of the gospel ; beginning- with some strictures on your views of the nature of God, and the moral state of man. The first two chapters of your Statement con- tain a variety of useful remarks on the nature and providence of God. Even this part of \ v\i- work, however, is very far from being- unexcep- tionable. In your account of the divine perfect tions, there is one glaring defect which must; strike every intelligent reader. Instead of plac- ing the holiness of God at the head of his moral 61 attributes, you barely name it in the close of your enumeration; among- the moral perfections which you consider as " branches of God's good- ness or justice," or " which do not require to be treated separately." (p. 46.) lour views would have been much more correct, had you consider- ed his justice and goodness, and other moral excellencies, as branches of his holiness ; and illustrated this attribute, as the chief glory of his nature. This is that perfection of God, which angels peculiarly love and adore, and which saints are exhorted to remember with joy and praise. Holiness is the beauty of Jehovah : it sheds a pleasing lustre over all his other excel- lencies, and makes them traiisecndently bright and amiable. — The few remarks which you make on this perfection in the third chapter (p. 75, 76), by no means compensate for neglecting to assign it its proper place among the moral attributes of God : epeciaily in a work which professes to advocate the cause, and promute the practice of morality. The conciseness of your plan is no apology for such an omission ; for you could easily have made room for a description of this glorious attribute, by abridging your disser- tation on the uses of mountains ( p 8. .11 ), or omitting your illustrations of providence by the game of chess (p. 67, 68); not to mention the per- nicious or useless observations which fill so many pages in the polemical part of your performance, 00 As your views of the glory of divine holiness appear to be so defective, it is not surprizing that you should entertain very inadequate ideas of the greatness of human depravity. You in- deed acknowledge that we are " creatures w tak and fallible and liable daily to offend." — " 'i lie best of men," you admit, " are liable to offend and are daily offending- their God. There is no perfection here below. If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. There is none righteous, no not one." (p. 101, 102.) And you virtually own that we are inclined to sin rather than to holiness, when you observe (p. 116, 117), that we are disposed to keep within the standard of holiness proposed to us, and would satisfy ourselves with a less measure of holiness if the standard were lower- ed : for if the love of holiness were the prevail- ing- principle in our nature, we should be eager to come up to the standard prescribed, and could not be content to fall below it. — But not- withstanding these acknowledgments of the cor- ruption of our nature, there are many expres- sions in your work of a very different complexion; — expressions inconsistent with tlie sentiments now quoted, repugnant to the doctrine of scrip- ture, and contradicted by undeniable facts. For, while you own that " there is none righteous," you with the same breath pronounce main e that which may be know n of God is manifest in them . for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead : so that they are without excuse : Because that when they knew God, they glorified hi in not as God, neither were thankful, ^c Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts — gave them up un- to vile affections; — and even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind."' This passage suggests an important question, closely connected with the present subject ; Whence is it that any heathen nations exist ? The whole world once enjoyed the blessings of re- vealed religion, and the acknowledged means of * Remans i. 18. 28. >2 salvation ; — how then did so many nations los* ibis inestimable benefit ? At present there are numerous kingdoms and large empires, in which evennatural religion cannot be found in any toler- able form : for you admit (p. 91), that " there never was any country, nor any age of the world, where its principles have been generally believ- ed and professed, unless where revelation has published and supported them."— This fact is sufficient to overthrow your whole system ; for it is a decisive proof of the universal and dreadful depravity of man. To no other principle can we attribute this total apostasy ; especially when we take into the account the great difficulty with which God's peculiar people were prevent- ed from joining in the general rebellion. To no other principle can we ascribe this universal neglect of natural religion among the heathen nations, and that hostility which the gospel has always to encounter upon its first introduction among pagans. — You may say indeed, that the guilt of apostatizing from revealed religion can- not be charged on the present generation of hea- thens, but only on their ancestors who first cor- rupted or abandoned the worship of the true God. — Be it so : — But what will this avail in support of your scheme, while it appears, from the facts now stated, that the present heathen inherit the same depraved dispositions which led their fathers to revolt from God ? Their n aversion to natural religion, and their enmity to the gospel when at any time it is offered to them, sufficiently indicate that if they were placed in the same circumstances as their ancestors were they would be guilty of the same apostasy. And may not the righteous God, who knows the hearts of all men, impute to them a portion of that guilt which they would be ready to con- tract, if they had opportunity ? Even a hea- then could perceive that the man who is dis- posed to commit a crime, is in so far chargeable with it, though his wicked dispositions have had no opportunity of making their appearance. This sentiment is expressed in the following- passage, which we find in an interesting treatise of Seneca : " That man is ungrateful, though he receives no favour, who would not requite a favour, if it were granted him ; as that man is a robber, before he stain his hands with blood, who is already armed for murder, and has an in- clination to plunder and kill. Wickedness is brought into -exercise and discovered, by deeds; but it does not begin with them."* Every one must acknowledge the truth of these observa- tions ; and if the heathen be judged fay this rule, their guilt, in regard to their apostasy from * Licet beneficium non fit quod accipit, ipfe tamen ingrstus c(l ; quia non fuit reddituius, ciiam fiaccep'.ftlt : He latro cit, etiam ar.teqmm manua in- quinct ; quia ad occidendum jam armatus eft, ct halict fpoliandi alquc inter-. ficiendi voluntatem. Exercetur etaperifaf op«.-re ncquitia, non incipt— ~ 5sw.de Bend". Lib. v. c. i-4< 7i Ood, will not appear so small as it is often re- presented. Now, if such is the moral condition of man- kind, your sentiments on this subject must be er- roneous : for it is evident, from what has been stated, not only that men have no claim to the means of obtaining- eternal life, but that a great part of the human race do not possess these means ; and consequently that God is not bound to bestow them. All specula ions on such topics must ,b.e frivolous, if they are contradicted by stubborn facts. If God ought to give all men the means of attaining everlasting felicity, we must conclude that he has actually conferred these means, and that, being' adequate to the end, their effects must be apparent in some degree, in every quarter of the globe. W e may expect, then, to find in every land a few, at least, res- cued from prevailing depravity, walking in the ways of holiness, and made meet in some mea- sure for the inheritance of the saints in ligdrt. For, whatever allowances may be made to the heathen on account of their disadvantageous cir- cumstances, we cannot suppose that God will subvert, for their sakes, the fundamental consti- tutions of his kingdom, or alter the nature of things. Now, this is one established law, " That the unrighteous shall not inhe.it the kingdom of God." According to this law, none can reach the felicity of heaven, but such as have become 7J holy on earth. This is what you distinctly ac- knowledge (p. 34) ; 4 « We cannot be finally hap* py in the eternal world without virtue and holi- ness. Without holiness no man shall see God." Yon have also very justly observed (p. 7-3), that a supreme love to God is the foundation and sub- stance of all genuine religion. It follows, then, that none can be admitted into heaven, but those who delight in holiness, and in whom the love of God is the predominant principle. This is not only agreeable to a divine appointment, but to the very nature of things : for it is impossible that a felicity, consisting chiefly in holiness it- self, can be tasted without a holy nature. To speak of a wicked man's enjoying the celestial bliss, is a contradiction in terms ; for that bliss is placed in the performance of duties which he hates, and in the exercise of dispositions of which he is destitute. As well might we suppose the blind to be captivated with the charms of a landscape, or the deaf to be transported with the melody of a concert. Let us now turn our eyes to the heathen world, and ee if it furnishes any heirs of glory, — any who are truly virtuous, who delight in God as the chief good, and are sincerely attach- ed to the ways of piety and holiness. Jaut where shall we look for these pagan. saints? — Can Ave find them among the heathen nations of antique ty ? — Alas! their very gods were profligates, 76 and some of their devotions were acts of lewd- ness or of murder! — Shall we seek them among their illustrious philosophers ? — Some of these, indeed, seem almost christians in their doctrines and precepts ; but there was scarcely one of them whose life would not have been a disgrace to the christian name. Yon have correctly stated in your Popular Evidences, (p. 346, 347) that the characters of Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Cicero, Seneca, and other philosophers, were extremely defective ; so that, " in practice,'* they often " appeared to sink from the most su- blime speculations to the most infamous vices." One of themselves asserts, that a truly good man was like a phoenix, appearing but once in 500 years ; and that even good men of a secondary kind were so rare, that those might be said to have made considerable progress, who were not among the worst.* — Shall we inquire for the children of God among the modern heathen ? — • Our search will be equally fruitless. Infidels will indeed tell us, that in some sequestered re- gions, uncontaminated by the effects of bad ex- ample, evil habits, or wrong education, nations or tribes may yet be found, who are living con- formably to nature, in genuine purity and good- ness. St. Pierre, and other writers of the same cast, have amused themselves with painting* vi- sionary scenes of this supposed state of inno- * Sew. F.pp. 42, ct 7.5, — De Benef. Lib, v. c. 15, 77 Cence. Various spots have been fixed on as the seat of this terrestrial paradise. For awhile it was placed in China, till a more accurate know- ledge of the crimes which abound in that popu- lous empire made it necessary to shift it to ano- ther quarter. It has frequently been placed a- mong the Hindoos, or some other East Indian tribes ; but surely, since the publication of that most interesting- work, Dr. Buchanan s Christian Researches, all such delusions must have varnish- ed, if any thing- was wanting to put an end to them. Perhaps our philosophers may still ex- plore some wilder regions in search of their im- aginary paradise. Rut whither can they go? In what sequestered island, or lonely desert, shall they seek it ? It is not to be found among the cannibals of New Zealand or Sumatra, nor among the lewd and savage inhabitants of Otaheite or Tongataboo : the wilds of America utterly disown it ; and Africa says, " It is not in me." — The truth is ; it exists only in the bev. i Id— ered fancies of proud men, who are loath to ad- mit the mortifying doctrine of man's total de- pravity ; and who not only shut their eyes against the glaring evidences of this doctrine which they see around them, or which they might discover by an impartial survey of their own hearts, but conjure up arguments against it, in ideal scenes which are 'placed at a distance. It cannot be denied that God could reveal bis 78 salvation to pagans, without sending- them the gospel ; but this very revelation would be some- thing above the light of nature, — it would be like the preaching of the word from heaven. It was not by the light of nature that the three wise men were brought from the East, to worship the new-born Redeemer. No instances of a similar kind have been met with since their day ; and if any such should occur, they could furnish no proof that the light of nature is suilicient to guide us unto immortality. Besides, were we even to grant that a few in- dividuals from the heathen world have been con- ducted to heaven by the light of nature, still your- principle could not be maintained, unless you can shew, that that light is as effectual for the purpose as the light, of the gospel : for if, in those places where the latter is enjoyed, a great- er number of persons are brought to eternal life, than would have been saved by the operation of the former alone ; then it follows, that God im- parts the means of salvation to men, not as a matter of right, but of pure cjrace ; which he may give or withhold, according to his sovereign plea- sure. But surely, after all that you have said, in your Popular .Evidences, concerning the ex- cellence of the gospel, you will not maintain, that we may get to heaven as easily without it, as with it. Look at the description which you, have given, in that work (p. 432), of the glon- 79 ous change produced by tlie gospel of Christ, and say if the heathen have as uracil opportunity of entering into life, as those who are favoured with christianitv : ". In heathenish countries or in those couniries which, under the name of die gospel, have only adopted a system of su] er- stition, and where the people are totally ignor- ant of its principles, you find slavery in all its horrors, the minds of men depressed and de- based, more like to the grovelling beasts of the forest than the lords of the lower world. Give to these very men the gospel in it> genuine sim- plicity, there would instantly ari e a new world of creatures, as if truly born again." Is it pen i- ble, that among* these men who are almost tie- graded to the rank of beasts, there are as many heirs of glory, — as many who have a supreme! love to God, and a habitual delight in holiness, as there are among the inhabitants of this new world of light ? — The very ioea is absurd. You must therefore grant, that there are some, at least, whom the light of nature is insufficient to save, v\ho might have been saved if God had sent them the gospel ; and consequently, that the distribution of . dequate means for conduct- ing men to eternal life is wholly regulated by the sovereign will of God. Indeed, upon any other principle, the gosp< 1 would be a blessing of trivial importance. It might be viewed as a temporal comfort, contribute 80 nig to our happiness on earth ; but, it could not be called " the power of God unto salvation ;" it could not be denominated " the grace of God which briugeth salvation;'* it could not be term- ed " the word of God's grace, which is able to build us up, and to give us an inheritance among all them which are sanctified. "*— -The very word salvation, which is employed in scripture, and adopted in your writings, to denote that blessedness which we need, implies that it is a blessedness originating- in the free grace of God, and that we have no right, either to this benefit itself, or to the means of attaining it. For, what is salvation ? Is it a deliverance from sin ? — Nothing can be more incongruous than the notion of meriting deliverance •from demerit itself. — Is it redemption from misery ? —The existence of misery implies the existence of sin ; so that the idea of merit is again totally excluded. A just God cannot make the inno- cent miserable. Both reason and scripture teach us to trace all natural evil unto moral evil, as its proper source ; so that, wherever we see suffer- ing, we naturally infer the existence of sin; and hence the barbarians, when they saw the viper fastening on the hand of Paul, instantly formed this conclusion, " No doubt this man is a mur- derer, whom, though he hath escaped the sea, yet vengeance sufrereth not to live."f The fact, * Rom. i. :6. Tit. ii. tt. Acts XHi 32. xxvi, 18, t Acts xxviii. 4. *l that all men are subject to misery, demonstratc* that all men deserve misery ; and the universal reign of death points out the extent of the em- pire of sin. And surely, if meii are not intitled to present happiness it would he ab urd to al- lege that they have a right to eternal happiness, or even to the means by which it is obtained. Here it is necessary to take notice of a con- trary sentiment frequently expressed in \our writings ; — a sentiment which naturaiiy results from your imperfect conceptions of man's de- pravity, but which is incompatible with correct views of the justice of God. You consider the sufferings of good men in this world as injuries which God is doing them for the present, but for which he will make ample compensation in a future world ; and intimate, that these severe dispensations can be justified only on the ground of his providing this future recompense. Thus you observe in your Intimations and Evidences (p. 118, 119 ) ; " Sometimes they ( i. e. good nun ) are called to suffer much for mankind ; sometimes for virtue and the testimony of a good conscience, sometimes for their connections and friends; but all these would be unnecessary ami even improper and cruel without a regard to fu- turity." Again (p. 120), " What vast num- bers of virtuous men base (seen condemned to perpetual slavery, Sec! The history of mankind nothing else but a dreadful relation of human qais* cries, wars, bloodshed, vc. What a scene of !•. * F 82 t or,confusion, and injustice does this earth present, if there he not another world ! " — And again (p. 122), " What then shall we say to all these, if there be no future state, where injured virtue and innocence may meet with a recompense for all the cruelty and injustice that they have suf- fered here ; and where the honour of the divine administration shall be fully vindicated, and the vigilance and justice of providence demonstra- ted ?" You also observe (p. 128), "Indeed without a reference to a future state, the whole moral world is a scene of imbecility, of confusion and injustice.'''' Similar sentiments occur in your Plain Statement (p. 08), " What can be more severe, and, to us, apparently contrary to the principles oi justice and goodness, than the beginning of the history of Joseph ? bid the end justifies all the means.''' — -It is plain that, in these passages, you represent the conduct of God to- wards the righteous as in many instances cruel and unjust, or at least justifiable only when view- ed in connexion with the good ends he has in view, and the abundant recompense which he will bestow. — It cannot be denied, that the pre- sent enjoyments and sufferings of the good and bad are by no means proportioned to their re- spective characters, that we may therefore con- fidently expect a future state where this ap- parent irregularity wiil be rectified, that the ungodly are often permitted to oppress the saints, and that the latter are assured of " a great re- so oompense of reward." But, that God is bound to give his people this reward as a compensa- tion for his conduct towards them, or that he has done any thing to them which could not be perfectly justified, independent of the considera- tion of a future state, and of the purposes of his grace respecting- them, is an idea altogether in- admissible. Never let Us for a moment suppose that God can do any thing unjust in itself — any thing for which he is bound to atone ; or that lie ever employs improper means for accom- plishing- his gracious ends, doing evil that good may come, if you had entertained just views of the dreadful malignity of sin, you would not have been tempted to give this degrading re- presentation of the ways of Providence : for you would then have seen, that, as all men are daily transgressing, and as every sin is an act of rebellion against an infinitely great and holy God, the best of men deserve far more calami- ties than they ever feel. In the dispensations which you mention, there is no act of injustice : there is an act of forbearance towards the wick-, ed, a delay in executing upon them the ven- geance due to their crimes; but there is neither injustice nor cruelly towards the righteous, whose sins have deserved more than they suffer: even when their suff< rings are inflicted by the instrumentality of the worst of men, instead o£ proceeding mere directly from the hand, of God,. 84 Though thete should be no future state, no re- flections could be cast on the ways of Providence towards the righteous ; the only irregularity would be, his suffering* transgressors to escape with impunity. The recompense provided for the saints, is a reward of grace, not of debt. Accordingly we find some of the most holy men that ever lived, confessing, that they had no claim to the smallest of Gods favours ; nor any right to complain of the severest of his judgments. "I am not worthy," said Jacob, "of the least of all the mercies, and of all the truth which thou liast shewed unto thy servant."* In like man- ner Jeremiah sa} put. Lib. iii. c 1. t Ad .'ctfrioia faciles fumus; quia nee dux po'eft, ncc cones decfTc : ft ires etiam ipfa fine ducc, fine comite proctdit : non pronum iter eft tantum ad \itin, fed prxceps. Sen. F.p, 97. — Vide etiam Ep. 94. I Isocr. Oiatio ad Demon, t Vurri vitiis n°ino fine nafcitur,— IIor. Saf', Lib. i. Sat. 3. v. ^~S. ^THiaeN."Sc*ten, 1081 . io>~, than to implant good dispositions in him : no man has yet acquired the art of making" fools wise, and the wicked good. If God had taught physicians how to cure the wickedness of men, and their disordered minds, they might have gained the most ample rewards. Now, if wis- dom had been produced with, and implanted, in man, the son of a good man would in no instance be wicked, but obedient to his prudent counsels : but you cannot, by instruction, make a bad man virtuous,"* Upon the whole, since the doctrine of the cor- ruption of our nature rests on such incontroverti- ble evidences, it would be highly unreasonable to oppose it, because we find ourselves at a loss to give a complete solution of every difficulty re- lating to the origin and continuance of moral evil ;f especially as there are so many things in the nature and works and ways of Jehovah, * Ibid. 429. .438. Several other paffages to the fame effect are quoted by Edwards near tha conclufion of his Treatife on Original Sin. i See fome very ufeful obfeivacions on this fubject in Tucker on Predes- tination, Letters xvii..xx. Edwakds on Original Sin, Part iv. ch. ii.— -arid Edwards on the Will, Partiv. Sect, ix, x. — with Dr. Williams's Notes on thefe paffages, in the Leeds Edition of Edwards's Works. — In fome recent Publications of Dr. W. himfelf, the fubject is particularly and ably handled^ Yet, with all deference to the well-known abilities of that author, I canfearceiy think with him, thai by tracing moral evil to what he calls passive power — or a principle ofoEFF.ciiBiLiTY in man, he has folved all the difficulties in the qutftion. They feem only to affume a new form. Peihaps, after all that has been written on the iubject, it will ilill remain a myikry, till " that which is perfect fhali cornc, and that which- i& in part fhall be done away." 91 which are equally beyond the grasp of our facul- ties. At present we know only in part ; but the period will arrive, when all such difficulties will evanish, and every m , stery of providence be clear- ly unfolded. Some of your own remarks on pro- vidence (p. 98), are peculiarly applicable to the present subject : " If, in the hi story of this world?, We meet with many thing's which we may not be able to reconcile with the wisdom, the justice and goodness of the divine administration, we may account for these appearances from the con- sideration, that the present is only a part, and a dark part, of the grand scheme of providence ; and intimately connected with the future world: and could we see the connexion and dependence, we would [should] see that all is wise and good." — To these observations I shall only add, that whatever difficulty we may find in accounting- for the entrance or continuance of moral evil, we can easily perceive that God has made it subservient to the noblest purposes : for, in con- sequence of the permission of sin, we are furnish- ed with the most illustrious displays of the beau- ties of his holiness, the glories of his justice and faithfulness, the riches of his mercy, and the wonders of his redeeming love; while his wis- dom and power appear equally admirable, in thus extracting- the greatest good from the worst of evils. " O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of Cad ! how unsearch- 92 able are his judgments, and his ways past finding" out ! '* I have dwelt thus long" on the doctrine of man's depravity ; because a distinct view of it will greatly facilitate our inquiries into other subjects, with which it is intimately connected ; and because I am of opinion, with the excellent Mr. Wilberforce, "that it lies at the very root of all true religion, and is eminently the basis and ground-work of Christianity."*. I am, &C. Wii-BERiORCt's Practical View, p. 26. 93 LETTER V. On Man's Inability, and the Work of the Spirit. 3ir, V on have frequently honoured the friends of evangelical truth with the title of Pharisees. Perhaps there would be less injustice, in regard- ing you and your brethren as related to the Sad- duceeSy who held, " that there is neither angel nor spirit :" for it is well known, that unitarians in general deny, on the one hand, the existence of Satan and his temptations, and on the other, the existence and operations of the Holy Spirit, as a divine Person. Such as venerate the autho- rity of the sacred oracles will be shocked to hear, that among" modern Socinians, the very idea, that such a being- as Satan exists, is usually held up to ridicule. Hence, in their improved Version of the New Testament, they take care in their useful Notes, to remind the reader that the Devil is no real being-, but only the evil principle personified ; and that the scripture ac-» count of his tempting' Christ is merely an allr- 94 gory : though they might with as much propriety have alleged, that Christ is only the good prin- ciple personified, and that the whole gospel is an allegory. What your sentiments on this subject are, you have not told us ; but we may partly guess at them, from the circumstance, that in the uni- tar i an Hymn book lately introduced into your congregation, the name of Satan has been care- fully expunged from those hymns, selected from the. works of evangelical authors, in which that word occurred. In regard to your views of the Spirit's opera-* tions, we are not left to conjecture : for, though you have "studiously avoided " any direct attack on the doctrine of scripture on that head, per- haps, lest you should hurt the " religious preju- dices " of some whom it might be inconvenient to offend ; yet your hostility to that doctrine is fully manifested, by your violent assault on the doctrine of man's inability, with which it is ne- cessarily connected. This assault, however, while it suiiiciently indicates your enmity to this article, is not so much directed against the doc- trine itself, as against an imaginary heresy, which you have first invented, and then ridicu- led. In the whole of your observations on this point (p. 122.. 120), you betray a total ignorance of the subject, or something much worse than ignorance. You take it for granted, that in as- serting " that man of himself can do nothing," 95 we maintain that men have no physical power for performing spiritual duties, and upon this fajse, assumption the whole of your arguments are founded ; so that you spend your strength in combating" a doctrine which is held by no man living. We indeed maintain, " that man of himself can do nothing spiritually good ;" and we use such expressions, because we find them in the scriptures : u As the branch cannot beat fruit of itself," says Christ, "except it abide in the vine ; no more can ye, except ye abide in me. — For without rat ye can do nothing." — "'I live ; says Paul, " yet not I but Christ liveth in me. — Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think any thing as of ourselves ; but our suffi- ciency is of God.' * — Before attempting to ridi- cule such expressions, you ought to have recol- lected that they are the words of .scripture: yet you have not even tried to shew that we have mis- understood them. What right had you to as- sume, that, in employing such scriptural language on this subject, we maintain that man has not faculties adapted for spiritual exercises, nor phy- sical strength for performing them ? Such an idea i s not to be met with, as far as I know, in Civ of the writings of evangelical di\ iocs. Their doctrine \>, that this inability of man is not a physical but a moral inability ; that it consists chiefly in the perverseness of the rvill t and, the * John xv. 4.5. Cj] ii. 20. 2 Cor. iii. 5. !)0 "Want of good dispositions. Men eannot do good, because they will not : even as Jesus says ; " Ye wilt not come to me, that ye might have life,"* It is in this sense that we assert, that man can- not believe and repent of himself. His heart is so alienated from God, that he feels an aversion to all spiritual exercises. It is this which con- stitutes the guilt of unbelief and impenitence. They are criminal, only as they proceed from depraved inclinations, from a perverse will. To speak of a man's being willing to believe, but not able, is an absurdity ; for, in truth, the exercise of faith is principally an act of the will. At the same time it is admitted, that unbelief, as well as faith, is partly seated in the under- standing ; and that it is owing in a great mea* sure to the blindness and weakness of their minds when applied to spiritual objects, that sinners cannot believe of themselves : yet, as this blindness and weakness have been wholly superinduced by the influence of sin, which tends to debase all our faculties ; they are so far from extenuating the guilt of unbelief, that they teach us to trace it unto that moral depravity, in which alone they origin ate. j" Now, after having shewn, in my last Letter, that all men discover a prevailing inclination to * John v. 40. + See Edwards on the Will, Part i. Sect 4. Part iii. Sect. 4, a.nd £ 4 Edwards on man's natural Bluidnefs in Religion. Sect, i. 97 sin ; I need not spend much time in proving that, " The condition of man is such, that he cannot turn and prepare himself, by his own na- tural strength and good works, to faith and call- ing upon God :" and that " we have no power to do good works pleasant and acceptable to God, without the grace of God by Christ, pre- venting us, that we may have a good will, and working with us when we have that good will."* Since it appears, that not long after the deluge, all nations, except the Jews, lost the knowledge of the true religion, and sunk into idolatry and gross wickedness; that the Jews themselves, notwithstanding all the means of holiness em- ployed with them, were ever discovering a strong propensity to full into the same darkness and de- pravity ; and that not one of the pagan tribes was brought back even to natural religion, till the gospel came to them "in demonstration of the Spirit and of power ;" we are warranted to infer, that so long as human nature remains the same as it has been in all ages, man will not of himself turn unto God. — Nor can we believe, that till this inclination to sin be cured, there will be any actions performed that art; truly good : for, as you have well observed (p. 73), ;i supreme love to God is the foundation of all re- * Articles of the Church of England, Ait x. Their aic soirr ^nod illuftrations of this doctrine in one of the Homilies, vis, tfee 3rd Pai ike Sermon for Rotation week. G 98 ligion, and consequently of all true goodness; and such a love to the Holy One is utterly in- compatible with a prevailing inclination to sin. Where the love of God is not the predominant principle in the heart, there may be many things which have a species of goodness, many things which are good for ourselves, good for our rela- tions, good for society; but there can be nothing of that true holiness, which is conformable to the divine law, and well-pleasing to God. Ac- tions that are done under the influence of a supreme regard to God, are completely different, in point of moral worth, from the same actions, when performed solely from some inferior prin- ciple. Now, if the love of God has the ascen- dency in our souls, it will influence and regu- late our whole conduct ; so that, " whether we eat or drink, or whatsoever we do, we shall do all to the glory of God ;"* and even our common actions will be acceptable in his eyes: but where this regulating principle is wanting, — as it must be, wherever there is a prevailing inclination to sin, and consequently, wherever men are in their natural state of depravity, — there will be nothing' done from a regard to God's glory, and therefore nothing that can be accepted by him; but even common actions, and actions apparently good, must meet with his displeasure. Accordingly we learn from the word of God, that the sacri- • i Cor. x. 31, 00 flee of tli8 wicked is an abomination, and that even " the plowing" of the wicked is sin."* May, we are assured, that while we are in our natural state, nothing* that we do is pleasing" to God, since our hearts are alienated from him : " The carnal mind is enmity against God ; for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be. So then, they that are in the flesh cannot please God." And that by " those that are in the flesh," the apostle means ail who are in their natural depravity, and have not been renewed by the divine Spirit, is manifest from the context, par- ticularly from the next verse ; " But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit ; if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his."f It appears then, that, whatever our physical powers might effect, were we disposed to make the proper use of them, it is certain that, owing to our prevailing inclination to sin, we never will turn unto God and unto true holiness, till seme preternatural influence produce a change in our dispositions. This change, as the text now quoted intimates, is effected by the Holy Spirit : and there is no truth more fully taught in scripture, than that all genuine holiness is pro- duced by his grace. In almost every page of the sacred volume, true goodness is described as pro- ceeding from God. To him the success of the * Prov. xxi. 4j 27. -t Rom. viii. 7.-9. 100 gospel is wholly attributed.* His word abounds with rich promises of sanctifying" grace ;t with fervent prayers for holiness ; J with thanksgivings for grace received ;|| and with expressions of humble reliance on divine aid, for the exercise of every holy disposition, and the performance cf every duty.^j All spiritual blessings are derived from the fulness of Christ ;§ and all gracious af- fections are the fruits of his Spirit, who dwells in believers as in his temple, to irradiate their minds, pnrif their hearts, invigorate their facul- ties, and direct their conduct.** liven the me- taphors, employed to express the renovation cf our nature, imply its heavenly origin ; for it is termed anew birth, a new creation, and a resur- rection from the dead :ff and we are assured that this work of grace will be maintained and completed, by the same divine agency through which it was begun. JJ Hence the saints are often exhorted to humility, from the consider- ation, that all their attainments have been de- rived from God , and that they are distinguish- ed, not by merit but by grace. |||| * l Cor. iii. 5-7.— 2 Cor. ii. 12, 14. iv. 7. Acts xiv. 27. xv. 8, g. xvi 14. + Ha. xliv. 3-5. Jer. xxxi. 31..34. Ezek. xi. I 9, 20. xxxvi. 25 .33. t Pf. ]i 10. .12. I'.ph. iii. 14..19. Col. 1.9. .11. 1 Thef. iii. 12, 13 v. 23. HMat.xi. 25. 1 Cor i. 4. 7 1 Thef. i. 2-5 2 Thef. i 3. Phileni. 4. .6. U Pf. xxv. 1, 2, 20, 21 xx\iii. 7. lxxi. 16. If. xlv. 24, 25.-2 Cor. x;i. 9, 10. (s Johni. 16. 1 Cor. 1.30,31. Gal. 11.20. Eph. i. 3. Phil iv. 13. Col. ii.9.10. MGal.v. 16 18,22-25. Rom vin. 1..16, 23, 26, 27. 1 C or. vi 11,19. it Johni. 13. iii. 3-6-2 Coi.v. 17 Eph ii 1..10. $ + 1 Cor. i. 8, 9 Phil. i. 6. 2 Tim. i. 12.-1 Pet i. 3.-5. Jude 24, 25. I! j| Rom. xii. 3 .6. 1 Cor. iii. 5 iv. 7. xv. 10. Eph. iv. a..?. 101 It is not easy to ascertain what are your precise views of this point ; for, by speaking of " the suggestion of the spirit of God" (p. 148), and of the duty of praying- for " strength and assis- tance, virtues and graces " (p. 82), you seem to assign to divine agency some share in the pro- duction of holiness ; but that this allotment is ex- tremely small, bearing no proportion to what you appropriate to human power and human merit, is obvious, not only from your remarks on man's inability, but from the general spirit of your system, which directly militates against the plan of salvation by grace. We may form some idea of your sentiments on the formation of holy principles in general, from your account of the manner in which we attain unto the love of God, which you justly regard as the foundation of every other religious exercise (p. 73), and " the first and great duty of the gospel." Instead of ascribing this primary grace to the operation of the Holy Spirit, agreeably to the doctrine of scripture,* you consider it as arising simply from a view of the divine character as it is described in the gospel: " The genuine representation given of him by Jesus Christ mu t immediately lead to love, if we firmly believe in this character. — We are brought to love God in a manner simi- lar to that by which we lo; e men. Place before us a perfect moral character, \c. — we cannot * s Thcf. iii. 5. Rom, v. q. Comp. with 1 John iv. jj, 16. 19. v. t ; 1, •102 help loving such a character." (p. 110, lil.)— Were this all that is requisite for producing- love to God, then all who know the gospel, except infidels, must he possessed of this heavenly dis- position. But such a sentiment is totally irre- concilable with facts. Alas ! there are vast multitudes who are well acquainted with the scriptures, and whom we cannot charge wifck in- fidelity, whose temper and conduct prove too clearly, that their hearts are alienated from that God, whose glorious character they have so of- ten contemplated in his word. Nay, when the perfect moral character of God was visibly placed before mankind in the person of his Sen Christ Jesus, so far was the sight of it, even in this most attractive form, from engaging the affec- tions of men in general, that it seemed rather to awaken their enmity to God and to holiness : for he who is " the brightness of the Father's -glory and the express image of his person," and in whose life unspotted purity uniformly shone, was despised and rejected, abused and insulted;, cru- cified and slain. It is true however, that love to God, with every other holy disposition, is produced by a view of his amiable character, displayed in ths gospel ; but this view is obtained by divine illu- mination, and not by the mere exercise of our own minds. The Spirit, conducting his opera- tions in a manner adapted to the nature of our 103 faculties, changes the heart by enlightening' the understanding. He cures that spiritual blind- ness which has been superinduced by sin and in- creased by the influence of Satan ; he opens the eyes of the mind to discern the glory of God in Christ, he pours celestial light into the soul, and thus transforms it into the image of that divine beauty which it contemplates : " If our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost ; in whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them : — For God who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God, in the face of Jesus Christ." — " We all with open face, be- holding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, arc changed into the same imajre, from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord."* — It is thus that the love of God, as a permanent prin- ciple of holiness, is generated in the soul ; and the whole heart is quickened and renovated. There is no room for asserting, that according to this doctrine, the freedom of the will is destroy- ed, and sinners are forced into God s service : for here the will, as in other cases, follows the un- derstanding ; the change of the one naturally arising from the illumination of the other, 'lhe * a Cor.iv 3 .6. lii. 18. 104 soul is not forced, but drawn — " drawn with the cords of a man, with bands of love ;" sweetly " constrained by the love of Christ," and the tender " mercies of God,"* which appear to the enlightened mind in a new and lovely form. Accordingly, when Christ says, " No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him ;" he presently adds, " It is written in the prophets, 'And they shall be all taught of God :' Every man therefore, that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me."f The heart is drawn unto Jesus by divine instruction, even by the teaching of the Spirit, irradiating* the soul. J It is almost unnecessary to state, that this doc- trine is far from superseding the diligent use of the outward means of holiness. The texts now referred to, import that we must seek an acquain- tance with the truths of Christ ; for these are what the Spirit recalls to the memory, and im- presses on the mind. " It is the Spirit that quickeneth :" but his vivifying power is exerted in making the words of Christ " spirit and life/* unto such as read and hear them.|| He " opens the eyes of sinners, and turns them from dark- ness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, " by means of the gospel ,«[[ and it is * Hof. xi. 4. 2 Cor. v. 14, 15. Rom. xii. 1. + John vi. 44, 45. "* John xrv. 16, 17, 26. xvi. 13.-15. 1 Cor. ii. io. 16. [j John vi. 6§» H Acts xxvi. 17, 1 *. 10,3 only in attending on the institutions of reli- gion that we are encouraged to expect his influences. Nor is there the smallest foundation for al- leging, that this doctrine leads to indolence and licentiousness, and discourages all efforts towards the attainment of holiness-, it does not, as you have ignorantly, or uncaudidly asserted (p. 125), make " men suppose themselves released from every obligation to duty, by trusting that they have nothing to do for themselves, for that Christ does all for them ; and thus purchase to them- selves a license to continue in sin ;" but, on the contrary, it holds out the strongest inducement to the diligent pursuit of true goodness, even the hope of divine aid, to render our endeavours ef- fectual. In directing* men to rely on the in- fluences of the Spirit, we do not forbid or dis- countenance the exercise of their own faculties ; for it is not supposed, that the work of the Spirit is distinct from the operations of the soul itself; but rather that he operates in and with t!ie exer- tions of our own mental powers. " In efficaci- ous grace we are not merely passive, nor yet does God do some, and we do the rest. I>ut God does all, and we do all. God produces all, and we act all : for that is what he produces, \ iz, our own acts. God is the only proper author and fountain : we only are the proper act "We are, hi different respects, wholly passi and wholly active. — In the scriptures the same things are represented as from God and from us. God is said to convert, and men are said to convert and turn. God makes a new heart, and we are commanded to make us a new heart. God circumcises the heart, and we are command- ed to circumcise our own hearts j not merely be- cause we must use the means in order to the ef- fect, but the effect itself is our own act and duty."* Surely such a doctrine, instead of pa- ralizing our exertions, must powerfully stimu- late them : for what can be more animating than the thought that almighty power is supporting us ? Hence, we are called to purify ourselves, because God has promised to dwell in us by his purifying Spirit ; and we are exhorted to "work out our own salvation, with fear and trembling; because it is God which, of his good plea- sure, worketh in us both to will and to do."f To what purpose then are all your remarks on man's inability, since you have totally misunder- stood or misrepresented the point in dispute ? How pitiful your triumph over that imaginary heresy, which you have conjured up in the room of this salutary doctrine ! You combine this ideal error with another that is equally visionary, and having conquered these creatures of your * Edward's Remarks on Important Doctrines, Ch. iv. (j 48.— Seealfo Edwards on the Will, Part iv, Sect. 4, 5. i a Cor, vi, i6,.i8. vii, 1, Phil, ii. 19, 13, 101 fancy, you seem to yourself to have gained a sig- nal victory, and exult in the fall of these sup- posed doctrines of ©race I (p. 125, 120.) " What idea must we for.u of divine grace, from the fol- lowing statement ; on the principles of this sys- tem ? God from all eternity destined a certain number of rational creatures to be called forth into being, in time, and to be placed in such a situation, that very important duties were re- quired of them ; but they can do nothing. By the very condition of their existence, they have it not in their power, and they never had it in their power, to do any thing : and this condition is imposed on them by their Maker. Some of these however, by his sovereign will and plea- sure, he raised to everlasting life; but another part, what portion we are not permitted to say are left to everlasting misery. And can this statement magnify the sovereign grace of God : Is this the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who, we are taught, is no respecter of persons?" — No, Sir ; nor is thi:: the God of evan- gelical believers, nor of any professed christians whatever. The heresier over which you triumph are the visions of your own brain. No mortal ever maintained that the duties which God re- quires of us are physical impossibilities. Our in- ability to perform them is the very thing which constitutes our sin ; for it arises from the de- pravity of our will, our inclination to evil and 108 aversion to good. — And as there are none who hold that God will punish men for not doing im- possibilities, so there are none who believe that God consigns any to eternal misery but for their sin. We maintain, however, that God distri- butes his spiritual gifts, as well as his temporal mercies, according to his sovereign pleasure ; because no man has a right to the one any more than to the other : and this doctrine does not make God " a respecter of persons, " any more than the well-known fact, that Britain en- joys the gospel with its invaluable blessings, while China and Japan are left in darkness. That text, " God is no respecter of persons," ha* no concern with the subject before us. It merely imports, that in his estimation of the characters of men, and in his judicial proceedings towards them, he is never biassed by those partialities or prejudices which are apt to influence our judg- ments, but always judges and acts in wisdom and equity. But this impartiality of God does not at all interfere with the doctrine of sovereign grace. — On this doctrine I shall not now enlarge, as I mean to examine it particularly, in the fol- io win a* Letter. "O I am, &c. LETTER VI. On Predestination. Sir, lx the Introduction to your work, you profess to have " studiously avoided all dark and mysterious doctrines, " taking- notice only of such of them as " stood directly in your way : " yet there are some of these " disputed tenets " which you seem so eager to attack, that you are willing- for that purpose to step out of your v, ay. Of this number is the doctrine of predestination; which, in the Section on God's Justice, you have violently abused, and which you take every op- portunity of attacking- or alluding to, in other parts of your book. Were this doctrine the same w ith what you have opposed under that name, it would indeed be highly necessary to re- fute it; for, in your usual method, you first to- tally mislate the point in question and then com- bat the error which you yourself have framed. "There are many opinions," you say, "which are p eserved and cherished as religious princi- ple?, by men of great worth and great pop bai- ty, which it i:, impossible to reconcile with the 110 justice of God. — It is asserted and strenuously maintained, by men of these principles, that God from all eternity selected a number of men to raise them to eternal bliss : and that without any regard to what should be the life and conduct of such men. And, on the other hand, it is with equal positiveness insisted upon and taught, that the righteous Governor of the universe, appoint^ fed from all eternity another class of men to be doomed to everlasting* destruction, and without any respect to their demerits." (p. 40, 41. )-~ Whence, Sir, did you learn that such opinions are " asserted by men of great worth and popu- larity," or by any professed christians whatever? Was it from the scurrilous pamphlets of the Barrister? or from the Bishop of Lincoln's mis- representations of Calvinism ? Such burlesqued accounts of predestination may often be met with in the works of its opponents, for it is scarcely ever attacked, without being- first mis- represented )* but where can you find such senti- ments in the creeds or the writings of those who support it ? I am loath to charge you w4tli wilful perversion, in your statement of this d * I am forry to find the learned Dr. Clark, in his new and valuable Com. mentary, indulging in thefe unfair reprefentstions of th;t doctrine ; particu- larly in his remarks on the hardening of Pharaoh's hca't. The opinions of Calvinifls on that fubject coincide with his own ; or at Ieaft, they abhor as much as he does the fhocking fentiments which he would impute to them. No where are fuch mifreprefentations more unfeemly than in a Commentary an tie Holy Scriptures. Ill trine ; but it is difficult to acquit you on the score of ignorance, as this article forms a part of that Confession of Faith, which you once professed to believe, and promised to maintain. There are no christians in the world, as far as I know, who maintain predestination in any other form, than that in which it appears in the Con- fession now mentioned, and in the Articles of the English Church. * In these abridgments of evangelical truth, it is indeed asserted, that those who are predestinated unto life have been chosen in Christ, not on account of any foreseen merits, but of God's mere free grace and love; yet it is maintained no less firmly, that they are chosen to holiness as well as to happiness : so that their conversion, their sanctification, and their g-ood life, are as much ordained as their eternal salvation, and cannot possibly be separa- ted from it. Consequently, according- to this doctrine, no man can know that he is elected, but by living- in the exercise of faith, and the practice of holiness. On the other hand, while it is affirmed, that the rest of mankind are " pas- sed by," or not included in this election ; it is not maintained, as you most erroneously slate, that God appoints them " to be doomed to everlast- ing destruction, without any respect to their de- * Perhaps I mould except a few who are nam p d I>ir.w Calvinism, ■with whole tenets I am not fully acquainted : but thef«, whatever may !•« their opinions, aie too lnconfidcrabk to be viewed as the objects of Mr. W's attack. 112 merits ; " — such a monstrous sentiment no mor- tal ever held ; — but it is expressly declared that he " ordains them to dishonour and wrath for their sin," which he foresaw they would commit.* This is a doctrine which it is very fashionable to vilify and decry : sometimes it is pictured as horrible in the extreme : at other times it is des- cribed as vastly ridiculous and absurd. But. when the false colouring - , which its enemies would give it, has been removed, it appears to be nothing' more than this, that every thing which God does is just what he always intended to do ; or, in other words, that there is an exact agree-* went between his purposes and his- providence. Such a sentiment is so far from being absurd and irreconcilable with just views of God's at- tributes, that it cannot be denied, without sup-, posing that God changes his designs, or that he cannot fulfil them, or that there are some thing's which he does, not according to any plan, but from the mere impulse of the moment ; all which ideas are utterly inconsistent with the belief of his infinite perfection. That the doctrine of predestination amounts simply to what has now been stated, — the exact correspondence of God's works with his coun- sels, — it will not be difficult to make out. Pre- destinarians maintain, that God has chosen a * Sec Cor.fclTion of Faith of the Church of Scotland, Ch. iii.--and the 3a Articles, Art. 1 7* 113 certain number of our depraved race, on whom lie will infallibly confer his salvation ; while the rest of mankind are left to meet the just punish- ment of their crimes. Now, is not this what we see taking- place in the course of Providence ? We do not perceive all men walking- in the way of salvation, but many choosing " the broad way that leadeth to destruction." But if some only are actually saved by God, is it a heresy to think that these are the only persons whom he intend- ed to save ? And if some are actually lost, is it wrong 1 to suppose that God intended to permit them to be lost? — It has been proved in the two foregoing' Letters, that, as all men are depraved, they have no right to salvation ; and that, owing to their prevailing inclination to sin, they will never come unto God and unto holiness, and of cour e will never come unto salvation, till the Spirit of God, by his enlightening and sanctify- ing grace, change their dispositions. Whoever is saved, then, is saved by God himself, accord- ing to his sovereign will ; and is it an erroneous notion, to assert that God has purposed to per- form this act of sovereign grace ? — If vou should allege, that these points have not been fully established ; if you shouid even wholly deny the work of the Spirit; you cannot even then get rid of this doctrine ; for you must still allow, that all who are saved, arc saved through the arrangements of a sovereign Providence, and II 114 that all who are lost, are lost by the permission of that Providence. — That it is God who gives the means of salvation, you cannot deny ; and as you allow, that he is perfect in wisdom and knowledge, and in his foresight and appoint- ments (p. 14,24,65); it follows, that in every in- stance where he bestowed the means of salva- tion, he must have known what effect they would produce. But does not his granting the means of salvation, to those to whom he foresaw they would prove effectual, clearly imply an inten- tion to save them in particular ? Not only the means, but all the opportunities or occasions of salvation, proceed from God ; and the result of such opportunities or occasions must, in every instance, be foreseen by the Omniscient. And does not his giving such opportunities and occa- sions to some in particular, when he foresaw that they would issue in their salvation, fully in- dicate a special design of mercy towards such individuals ? — These remarks may be illustra- ted by a few examples. — Some are brought un- to God in their youth, by means of a religious education. Is it not owing to a sovereign Pro- vidence, that this invaluable privilege has been conferred on them, while it is denied to multi- tudes? Others are reclaimed in advanced years, after a long course of iniquity. Was it not the hand of sovereign Mercy that spared them, and gave them space for repentance ; when tht-y 115 might have been cut off, like thousands around them, in the midst of their crimes ? — One man is converted by a sermon. Was it not by the arrangements of Providence that this sermon was preached, at such a time, and on such a sub- ject, and that this individual was permitted to hear it, instead of being- confined to a bed of sickness, or otherwise excluded from this oppor- tunity ? Another is brought unto God by some religious book. Did not Providence ordain that such a book should exist, that it should come into his hands, and that he should have ability and leisure to read it? — Here, a thoughtless pro-* iiigate is awakened to flee from the wrath to come, by the loss of a dear relation. There, a guilty wretch is arrested in his impious career by personal affliction, which brings him to re- pentance and salvation. From whom proceeds ed the bereavement of the one, and the sickness of the other, but from "Him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will ?" — In all these instances, the event might have been ordered otherwise, and the opportunity or occa- sion of the salvation of such individuals conse- quently taken away, in a perfect consistency with all his attributes ; and no reason can be as- signed for its not being ordered otherwise, but bis own sovereign pleasure. And who does not see, that since all the metes, opportunities, and occasions of salvation, arc distributed and aw 116 tanged by the sovereign will of God, who gives' or withholds them as he pleases ; and since he cannot in any instance be ignorant of what will be the result of his giving" or withholding them; it necessarily follows that the result itself is deter- mined by his sovereign will, — and therefore, that all who are saved, are saved by an act of divine sovereignty ? Hence it is obvious, that the doctrine of election, rests on the firmest basis, being nothing but a belief that God hath pur- posed to do, what we find him actually doing'. On the other hand you cannot deny, that all who are lost, are lost by his permission. Did ever a sinner perish, whose perdition could not have been prevented by God, if he had so pur- posed ? Take for example the case of Judas. Could not God have saved that traitor, as easily as JSaul of Tarsus, the bloody persecutor ? Or might he not have determined that no such per- son as Judas should be brought into existence ? But God resolved to permit the crime of Judas, and his consequent perdition, for accomplishing his own wise and glorious ends. To this agree the following remarks in your Popular Evidences ( p. 453 ) ; " Judas seems to have been selected as a fit instrument to bring to pass the p re-deter- minate counsel of Providence. Wicked men are employed by Heaven as agents for some useful ends. They bring about those schemes, which it would be improper for the righteous to 117 execute."— If so ; then the wickedness, and of course the punishment of sinners, must have been included in "the pre-determinate counsels" of God, as thing-s which he intended to permit, for the accomplishment of other purposes. And what is this but the doctrine of reprobation, which is often painted in the most frightful forms; but which is nothing- more than this, that God, for wise ends, has intended to permit some of mankind to ruin themselves by their own sins ? You acknowledge in your Statement (p. 68), that it would be absurd to suppose that any of God's counsels can be frustrated : " Will his aims be traversed, or any of his creatures break through his appointments ? " How then can it be supposed that any crime is committed, which God intended to prevent ? Or that any sinner is lost, whose salvation God had resolved to accomplish ? He who could annihilate the universe in an instant, cannot be at a loss to ex- ecute his purposes, or to prevent anything* from occurring - , which would frustrate his plans. He who is the omniscient Creator, could easily have provided, that none should receive existence, but such as he foresaw would be the heirs of salva- tion, lie " declares the end from the beginning-, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure."* It follows, as an * If*, xlvi. io» 118 obvious inference, that there are none who ruin themselves by iniquity, but those whose sin and punishment God intended to permit : — And con- sequently, it appears, that the doctrine of pre- destination, as it respects those who perish, as well as those who are saved, is simply the belief of an exact correspondence between God's pur* poses and his providence. As it is impossible to avoid this conclusion, so long as the doctrines of the divine omniscience and a particular providence are maintained ; some modern writers have adopted the desper- ate resolution of rejecting these doctrines, rather than submit to such humbling truths. They allege that the voluntary acts of moral agents are contingent events, which God could not fore- see and regulate. Such an opinion is utterly repugnant to the notion of God's being the Su- preme Ruler of the universe, the infinitely per- fect Jehovah. The prophecies of scripture clearly prove, that such ideas of God are wholly inadmissible ; for there we find him foretelling-, in a multitude of instances, both the voluntary acts of men and the secret purposes of their hearts.* It might with as much propriety be thought, that God is ignorant of the present acts of our will, as that he is unacquainted with our future volitions ; for all things, past, present, and future, must be equally before his infinite * See Edwards on the Will, Tartii. Sect, ii, 12. 119 mind. The principles upon which this strange opinion is built, are equally contrary to reason and to scripture. Hence they are rejected by writers of the first rank, as highly unphilosophi- cal. " Though we have no conception," says Dr. Reid, " how the future free actions of men may be known by the Deity, this is not a suffi- cient reason to conclude that they cannot be known. Do we know, or can we conceive, how God knows the secrets of men's hearts ? Can we conceive how God made this world, without any pre-exi stent matter ? All the ancient phi- losophers believed this to be impossible : — and for what reason but this, that they could not con- ceive how it could be done ? Can we give any better reason for believing, that the actions of men cannot be certainly foreseen ?"* — The same, great philosopher points out the inconsistency of holding the doctrine of conti licence along: with that of the divine prescience : " That all the actions of a particular man should be dis- tinctly foreseen, and at the same time, that that man should never be brought into existence, seems to me to be a contradiction : — and the same contradiction there is, in supposing any action to be distinctly foreseen, and yet prevent- ed : For if it be foreseen, it shall happen : and if it be prevented, it shall not happen, and there- fore could not be foreseen."'|' — It is most incon- ♦Reid'sEflayson the Active Powers, Eflay iv. Ch. x. + Ibid. Effay iv. Ch.xi. 120 gruous to say, that events are contingent or w«- ceriain , when they are certainly foreknown. If God forsees them, they cannot be contingent to him, whatever they may be to us ; for they must necessarily occur exactly as he has foreseen them. His foreknowledge of all things implies, therefore, that all things are fixed in his eternal mind, as unalterably as they could be by the •firmest decree. But, is not the doctrine of pre- destination necessarily involved in this doctrine of God's prescience ? For observe 5 this is not the prescience of one who is a mere spectator of the affairs of tins world, but of Him who is the Creator and Ruler of the universe, who 2"ives being to all creatures, and arranges the whole course of events. Now, what did he foresee ? — The creatures which he himself would make, with all their actions, and the whole scheme of his providence respecting them ; and this pro- vidence, as you have well observed ( p. 65 ), " embraces every particular of the whole crea- tion." He foresaw all things which he would bring into being, all things which he would per- mit to exist, awLall his proceedings respecting- them : and of course, he foresaw all sinners, all their sins, with all the misery which their sins would produce. Bat this foreknowledge im- plies a previous act of the divine mind, viz, hi* determination to give being to those creatures whose existence he foresaw, to permit those sins 121 which lie perceived would be committed, and to inflict that misery which was foreseen to be the consequence of them. For, although the sins which he foresaw, do not proceed from him, but wholly from sinners ; yet these sinners are his creatures, and could not exist for a moment without him ; and hence, his resolution to brim*' them into being- and support them in being-, while he foresaw all their sins and all the conse- quences of these sins, implies an intention to permit these sins with all their consequences. It follows, that the eternal state of all who are lost, was fixed in the mind of God, before they were brought into being ; — fixed, not only by his cer- tain foreknowledge of it, but by his voluntary determination to permit them to be guiltv of those sins by which they are ruined. I need not stop to prove, that the eternal state of all who are saved, must have been equally fixed in the counsels of the Omniscient. — We are sure that nothing can occur to thwart his purposes, and that all those things which do not proceed from his own agency, take place by his voluntary per- mission ; for the whole chain of causes and ef- fects, actions and events, must have been in the beginning before his all-seeing eye, and subject, to his control ; and we cannot suppose that he would bring into existence, or permit to exist, any thing which he had not purposed to mak* conducive to his gdorv. 122 Upon the whole, tlie doctrine of predestination necessarily results from the doctrines of God's providence and his omniscience ; so that there is scarcely an objection that can be brought against the former, which will not equally militate against the latter. If the difficulties belonging to the one can be solved, so also may those which appear in the other. Tell me why sin has entered the world, and still abides in it ; and I willtell you, why God intended to permit its entrance, and its continuance. Inform me why so many of mankind are permitted to ruin them- selves by their sius ; and I will explain to you why God designed to leave them to choose the road to perdition. Give me a reason why the Lord has provided salvation for fallen men, and not for fallen angels ; and has sent his gospel to Britain, and not to Japan ; and then I will as- sign the cause, why he has chosen to give eter- nal life unto some of mankind, and not unto others. — But the subject will be further elucida- ted, by attending more particularly to some of the objections which you and others have started against this doctrine. Do you allege, that " it is impossible to recon- cile this doctrine with the justice of God?" — The same objection may be made against his providence ; for surely there cannot be more in- justice in intending to do an action, than in ac- tually doing it. But where is there any ground 123 for such a reflection, either in regard to the di- vine purposes, or the execution of them ; since it has been shewn, in Letter iv, that no man is inti- tled to salvation, nor even to the means of obtain- ing" it ; and since it appears, that those who are lost, are not lost by the effect of ah arbitary de- cree, but by their own sins voluntarily commit- ted ? God's intention to permit the wickedness of men, cannot be the cause of that wickedness, any more than his actually permitting it. Were this the case, it would be impossible that sin or punishment could exist. But since the sins of men are wholly of themselves, and not of God, it is a righteous thing- with God to punish their iniquities, and of course he must be righteous in intending to punish them. And where all are guilty, may not the punishment of some be re- mitted, without doing the smallest injustice to the rest ? A short time ago, several unhappy men, who had inlisted in the service of our ene- my, were tried by the laws of their country, found guilty of high treason, and sentenced to death. To all of them, except two, the royal clemency was extended ; but was this an act of injustice to the two who suffered the sentence of the law? Shall we then dare to censure the great Jehovah for similar acts of distinguishing mercy ? " Nay, but, man, who art thou that repliest against God ? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed if, ■ Why hast thou made 124 is ? ' Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel un- to 110110111', and another unto dishonour ? What if God, willing- to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much loner-suf- fering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction ;" — fitted to it by their own sins — " and that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory 5 even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles ? "* — ■ If you cannot censure the sovereign ways of God in calling these " vessels of mercy," while he passes by "the vessels of wrath;" how can you find fault with his sovereign purposes ? Shall sovereign grace be admitted in the con- duct of his providence, and yet be excluded from the counsels of his wisdom ? But, that multi- tudes have been actually saved by free and sove- reign grace, can be questioned by none who al- low the evidence of scripture facts. — Examine the case of the christians at Corinth. Before the gospel reached them, they were living in sins which, as Paul expressly asserts, must have ex- cluded them from the kingdom of God. Might not God have denied them the gospel of salva- tion, as he did for a time to Asia and Bithynia ? Yes : but sovereign mercy had resolved to effect their redemption ; God had "much people in * Rom, be. ao,.*4. 125 that city," whom he intended to save ; and there- fore he sent them his gospel " in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, " and they were washed, and sanctified, and justified, in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God."* — Remember the abominable Manasseh. Justice demanded the destruction of that infam- ous prince. The innocent blood which he had shed was crying 1 aloud for vengeance. But sovereign mercy spares him, and sends him af- fliction, to be the minister of repentance and sal- vation, t — Consider the case of Zaccheus. Justlv j might that wicked publican have been left to perish in his sins. But, behold the methods of free grace ! Jesus comes near his residence, takes notice of him while he is gratifying his curiosi- ty, and brings salvation to his house. J — Look at the Phiiippian Jailor. See the guilty wretch standing on the brink of perdition, with his drawn sword in his hand, which he is ready to plunge into his own bowels. Just as he is go- ing to leap into the pit of woe, sovereign mercy interposes, and he is " plucked as a brand out of the fire. "II — View the case of Paul himself. The bloody persecutor is hastening to Damascus; " breathing out threatenings and slaughter a- gainst the disciples of the Lord ;" eager to be- gin his work of violence and cruelty. Suddenly * l Cor.vi.9..n."ii. 4. Actsxvi. 6,7.xviii. 1, 9, 10. +2 Chron xxxiii.s 1..13. X Lukcxix. i..ao. || Acts xvi. 27-34, Ztch. iii. a. 126 a light darts upon him from heaven. Is it aveng- ing lightning to consume the blasphemer P — No : it is a beam of mercy shed on his guilty soul.* — This last instance I am the more dis- posed to notice, as you yourself have acknow- ledged it : *' Paul was converted suddenly, but his conversion was brought about by a light, and a power irresistible." ( p. 105. ) Here then is one sinner saved by sovereign grace, JSut might not the same " irresistible power " have effected the conversion of Herod and Pilate, of Judas and Caiaphas,. if God had so determined ?• Nay, could not the same almighty power have saved all the sinners that have ever lived, had God thought fit to exert it ? — Who does not see. that from this instance, and indeed from all these instances, we obtain indubitable proofs of the doctrine of predestination ? There are some observations in your Popular Evidences (p. 398..402), concerning God's pro- cedure towards the unbelieving Jews, which ob- viously lead to the same conclusion : " That aw- ful punishment ( the destruction of Jerusalem ), and the history of the Jews ever since that pe- riod, bear strong marks of the hand of Provi- dence visiting them for their sins of rejecting and crucifying this illustrious messenger." — " Pro- vidence has deeply stamped its disapprobation of the horrid deed, by following up their pos~> * Acts ix. 1..6, 15. 127 terity with a most visible and durable punish- ment. This punishment bears a strong testimony to the truth of the gospel ; and the day of their de- liverance, of their conversion and restoration, may, Ave trust, prove a full confirmation of the truth of the doctrines and character of our ever-blessed Lord. Their sufferings were predicted by our Lord, and these have been fully accomplished : their restoration also has been foretold by him; and this, we hope, in the fulness of time, will, with equal truth and faithfulness, be fulfilled." — Here I may notice by the by, that, with such sentiments, you cannot consistently object to the doctrine of man's hereditary depravity. But what I would chiefly remark is, that since our Lord has foretold the conversion and restora- tion of the Jews, and will fulfil this prediction in its appointed season, the fulfilment of it must be an act of sovereign grace. For, what can prevent God from fulfilling it now, if this were agreeable to his purposes ? You will not say, that the present race of Jews are more concerned in the guilt of their ancestors, than their posterity will be in another generation ; or that there is any thing in the constitution of Jewish minds, to hinder their conversion now, which will not exist at a future period. What then will effect their conversion ? — An alteration in the state of the world? — The state of the world is under God's control, and he can change it when he pleases, 12S •—Superior light, and clearer evidences of the truth of the gospel ? — The Father of lights could make such communications even now. — Some affecting- events which will occur to them ? — The Gud of providence could bring about these events at the present time. — Or will the real cause be some " power irresistible," as in the case of Paul ; or a copious effusion of the Spirit, like that which was received on the day of Pente- cost ? — Then the point is conceded ; and the whole is ascribed, as it must necessarily be, to free and sovereign grace. All the arguments employed in Letter iv, to shew that no man is intitled to the means of sal- vation, equally prove that none have any claim to salvation itself ; and of course, that there is no injustice done to those who are left to perish in their sins. I would again call your attention to the proof afforded by the unequal distribution of the means of salvation. You will grant, that it is owing to Gcd's sovereign will, that the gospel is sent to some nations, and not to all. Now, whatever your views of the efficacy of the light of nature may be, you surely cannot think that it brings as many to salvation as the gos- pel. You have stated (p. v.), that the great aim of Christianity is "to bring in and support uni- versal righteousness :" and with what propriety can this be said, if itcloes not add one individual more to the number of the righteous ? But, iL 129 one individual more is saved by the gospel, than would have been saved by the light of nature a- lone \ that individual is saved by the sovereignty of God, according to which the gospel is dis- tributed ; and might have been left to perish, in a perfect consistency with his justice. And if God by an act of sovereignty may leave one sinner to perish, whv not more, — why not all sinners ? From all these considerations, I trust, it will be obvious, that all objections to this doctrine on the ground of its being inconsistent with the justice of God, must be dismissed ; because they either arise from a misconception of the doc- trine, or they militate as much against the doc- trines of God's omniscience and his providence ; to deny which, would be bordering on atheism. — The same remarks will apply to the very com- mon assertion, that this doctrine exhibits God as partial, and a respecter of persons : — an as- sertion which, after what has been said, it is scarcely necessary to name. — I proceed there- fore to take notice of some other objections. Is it alleged, that this doctrine represents God as acting a cruel and tyrannical part, making men to damn them, appointing them to eternal misery before he brings them into being ': ( — I answer; if this objection has any force, it must operate as strongly against the two doctrines a- bove-mentioned as against this: for if God is omniscient, he could not but foresee the perdi- l 130 tion of every sinner who is lost, before that sin- ner was brought into existence ; and if he is the God of providence, all who perish, perish by his voluntary permission. For instance, in the case of Judas, yon acknowledge that his sin, and consequently his perdition, came within the wise plans of Jehovah, and it must be granted that the Omniscient foresaw his sin and ruin, before he formed him ; yet will any one dare to say that God made Judas to damn him ? — But there is not the least room for such an objection ; for it evidently rests on mistaken notions of the doctrine in question. It proceeds on the supposi- tion that the purpose of God to permit the sin and ruin of those who are lost, is the proper cause of their sin and ruin, and has a positive influence in producing them. But this is a gross mistake. The mere permission of sin cannot imply any positive agency in the producing' of it ; and how then can such agency be implied in the intention to permit it ? And, as God's purpose to permit sin is not the true cause of sin, neither is his de- termination to leave any to perish in their sins the proper cause of their perdition ; for, as sui originates in the sinner himself, so his own guilt is the true cause of his ruin. All who perish, perish for their own iniquities, and not through the effect of an arbitrary decree. — The objection also proceeds on the false assumption, that God's intention to permit the perdition of sinners im- 131 plies that he takes pleasure in their perdition : but this can no more be implied in the intention of permitting it, than in the permission itself : in the same manner as his intending to permit sin, cannot prove that he delights in sin, any more than his actually permitting it. The truth is, he has no pleasure either in sin, or in the death of a sinner ; yet he permits, and of course intended to permit, both the one and the other, for ends worthy of himself ; though some of these ends may be such as our weak under- standings are wholly incompetent to unfold. Again, is it urged, that this doctrine is con- trary to such texts as declare that •' God will have all men to be saved," and that he is " hot willing that any should perish, but. that all should come to repentance ?"■*— To this also I reply, that these texts are as easily reconciled with predestination, as with providence ; and they are not contrary to the one, unless they are also contrary to the other. If you understand these passages to mean, that God freely offers his salvation to all men; that he gives sinners every encouragement to receive it; that there is no ob- stacle to prevent them from obtaining it but the perverseness of their own wills, with the self-ac- quired blindness of their minds; that he is will- ing to receive them if they were willing to re- turn to him ; and that consequently all gospel- hearers who perish, perish through their own 132 voluntary unbelief : — all these sentiments are perfectly reconcilable with predestination, and are almost universally adopted bypredestinarians. But if you suppose these texts to signify, that God intends actually to bestow his salvation on all men, or even to give all men the means of salvation ; how can you reconcile them with his providence, when you find that, in fact, such in- tentions are very far from being fulfilled ? It is absurd to allege that the Sovereign of the uni- verse forms any plans which he cannot execute, or has any designs to which he is unable to give effect. If he had intended to bring ail men to salvation, all men must infallibly have been saved: for, to use your own words (p. 68), "Will his aims be traversed, or any of his creatures break through his appointments ?" — As a fur- ther answer to this objection, I quote the follow- ing observations of a most respectable divine. " The Lord certainly taketh no pleasure in the death of the wicked. He will have all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. These are the true and faithful and gra- cious sayings of God, and ought to be belie ved, without doubting, in their iri\Q and important sense. But we are not to believe them in a a sense which was never meant. They cannot mean, that God ever intended to save all whom it was possible for him to save by the exceeding greatness of his power : for then they would im- 133 ply that God has brought himself under an obli- gation by such gracious words, to save all man- kind, if not all devils also, without exception. Was it not as easy to save Judas as Peter, if it had been God's good pleasure to save him ? Could he not have rescued Caiaphas from des- truction as easily as Saul of Tarsus ? It is true, Caiaphas appears to have been a much greater sinner: But cannot God pardon the greatest sins ? Or if the sins of Caiaphas had been such as it would have been inconsistent with the ar- rangements of divine wisdom to pardon, he could have prevented them from being ever com- mitted. " — " Who will set such limits to the power of the Holy One of Israel, as to allege that it is not in his power to convert a single sinner more, or to convert all who are yet un- converted, without infringing that liberty, which has not been violated in any instance of those conversions that were actually accomplished in the world ? "* If it be asked, How is it consistent with God's sincerity to invite all men to believe, and accept salvation, when he intends to give salvation only to some ? — It is answered, that the same objec- tion may be brought against the doctrine of God's prescience : For it may with equal pro- priety be asked, How can God be sincere in * Sermon prcaclicd before the Edinuurgh MitTionarJ' Society by Dr< Geo. Lav/son, p. 26. .28.. 134 inviting all to receive salvation, when he cer- tainly foreknows that he will only give it to some ? — But the difficulty, in either case, is only imaginary ; as it proceeds upon the false hypo- thesis, that God's purpose, or his prescience, in- terferes with our duty. Nothing, however, can be further from the truth. His designs and his foreknowledge are not the rule of our duty ; they do not hinder us from performing it, nor impede our freedom of action. Whatever God may have purposed or foreseen, faith is always our duty, unbelief our sin : and his withholding, or intending to withhold, his efficacious grace, is no more the cause of our unbelief, than the sun is the cause of darkness. In requiring men to be- lieve, God is only calling them to what is their duty ; and he is perfectly sincere in the general offer of salvation accompanying this call, be- cause he is ready to bestow this salvation on every one who accepts the offer, and there is no- thing that prevents any one from complying with the call and receiving the offer, but his own obstinacy. — It is to no purpose to reply, M But why does God call men to believe, when he does not intend to give them grace to com- ply with the call ? " Such a cavil must rest on, the absurd supposition, that God is bound to dispose us to obey every command which he is- sues. Already we have physical power to obey him; inclination is the only thing wanting ; and 135 it is the want of this which constitutes sin. We are able, if we were willing-. Now, what would be the consequence of maintaining, that the Lord is under obligations to give us not only the power but the will to obey his commands, and comply with his calls? It would lead to this dreadful conclusion, that no such thing- as sin exists, or that God is the author of every sin that is committed. For, if the unbeliever may say, " I am not bound to believe, till God dis- pose me to believe;" the thief may with as much propriety say, " I am not bound to be honest, till God incline me to honesty ; " the drunkard may say, " I am not obliged to be sober, till God cure my love of drunkenness ;" and the mur- derer may say, "I did no harm in slaying* m\ neighbour, for God did not check my inclination to kill him! " Surely it is needless to discuss a principle so pregnant with blasphemy. — The case of Pharaoh is sufficient to prove the futility of such objections. When Moses was sent to that proud prince, to command him, in God's name, to release the Israelites, the Lord express- ly told his servant, that Pharaoh would not obey, till many dreadful plagues were inflicted upon Egypt to compel him j nay, that he- himself would harden his heart, that is, he would leave him to his own obduracy, and not exert that powerful influence on his mind, which could easily have insured obedience to the command 130 when it was lirst delivered. Yet who will dare to say, that Jehovah acted insincerely with the Egyptian king ? God had a right to give the command, it was Pharaoh's duty to obey, and nothing but his own obstinacy kept him from complying. Do you also allege, that predestination " de- stroys every principle of religion, and must scat- ter gloom and melancholy over all who believe it ; none of whom can either adore or love their Maker." — I still reply, that the very same thing may, with equal propriety, be urged a- gainst the doctrines of the divine omniscience and providence. There is nothing fixed by God's purposes, which is not as unalterably fix- ed by his foreknowledge ; nothing ordained in his decrees, which is not fulfilled in his provi- dence. — But how can melancholy or irreligion arise from any, or from all of these doctrines ? The principles which result from the denial of them, are much more likely to have this perni- cious effect. Which system is most favourable to sentiments of humble piety and holy joy ? That which considers God as ignorant and weak, unable to foresee or prevent the evils which may occur? Or that which describes him as the omniscient and supreme Ruler, who sees at one glance the past, the present, and the future; and who arranges and controls the whole system of the universe ?'■ — That which - 137 supposes him to work without a plan, and to leave the most important affairs to be decided by chance or contingence ? Or that which views him as ordering 1 all things in infinite wisdom, and comprehending in his plans the whole series of causes and effects, actions and events ? — That which represents him as meeting with innumerable disappointments, his purposes thwarted, his hopes blasted, his best schemes frustrated, through the caprice or perverseness of his creatures ? Or that which exhibits him as fulfilling all his unerring counsels, attaining all his ends, and permitting nothing to take place which will not be subservient to his glory? — That which informs us, that he takes no part in the salvation of our souls, but leaves it to our- selves or to accident ? Or that which, while it excludes none from the offers of grace and the hopes of immortality, holds out the cheering prospect of that divine aid, which, it tells us, will infallibly accomplish the redemption of millions ? — Lt is indeed a melancholy considera- tion, that multitudes of the human race perish in their sins : but this doctrine does not at all in- crease their number. The question is not whether those who are saved are many or few ; but whether they are saved according to God's special purpose or not. Whatever opinion is held on the subject, the number of those wfoci 'iv los! will be llie verv same. Were vac b< (•< 138 ter acquainted with the works and ways of the Lord, we might be able to see more clearly how he is glorified in the punishment of so many sinners. Who can say, that the fate of our re- bellious race may not be conducive to the holi- ness and felicity of the inhabitants of thousands of worlds, which have not apostatized from God ? At any rate, we may rest assured, that in the great and final day it will be manifest to an assembled universe, that not one sinner has been permitted to perish, but for some ends worthy of Him who is infinite in wisdom, holi- ness, and goodness. You have yet another objection to predestina- tion, and it seems in your eyes to be the strong- - est of all ;— you fancy that it leads to indolence and vice , " To what purpose is Christ preached to such men ; for their everlasting fate is deter- mined ? Why urge diligence ; for diligence and industry are of no avail ? Promises, threatenings, instructions, praying, preaching-, and every other religious and moral duty are unnecessary. We must cause to cease every duty, and every hope, and wait in gloomy silence the irrevocable decree of heaven." (p. 41, 42) — To this objection, as to those formerly noticed, I reply, that it strikes as much at the divine pre- science, as at predestination : for our eternal state is rendered as certain by God's foreknow- ledge, as by his purpose. — But your reasonings, 139 however formidable you may think them, can- not shake either the one or the other. They betray a culpable ignorance of the point in dispute, Calvinists never maintain, that God appoints his elect to eternal life, without appointing the means which are required to its attainment ; but, that their diligence and watchfulness, their prayers and their attendance on ordinances, their faith and love, their piety and benevolence, are as much fixed as their final salvation. The means are as necessary as the end ; and as they are united in God's purpose, they cannot be se- parated in his providence. This doctrine, then, is so far from superseding* our diligence and ac- tivity in seeking salvation, that it absolutely re- quires them ; and unless we seriously improve the means which lead to eternal life, we cannot hope to attain it. If a man say, " There is no need of diligence, for if I am elected, I shall be saved without using exertion ;" his reasoning is most absurd, for it supposes that God has re- solved to save men without means : ho mio-ht as well talk of living without breath, or walking without feet. If a man persevere in neglecting the means of salvation, he will then make it evi- dent that he has not been elected. — On the other hand, if a person say, " If I have not been elec- ted, I cannot be saved at all ; and therefore all my efforts are useless ;" he atao is arguing most preposterously: for lie ought to consider, that sal- 140 vation has commonly been obtained in the use of appointed means ; that those means are condu- cive to that end \ that God has promised to bless them for that purpose ; that the offers of divine mercy are full and free ; that JesUs has express- ly said, " Him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out;" that he has no rig'ht to presume that he is not elected, but rather the contrary ; and that the very hope that he may be of that chosen number should be a sufficient inducement to him " to sfive all dilioence to make his callinsf and election sure." — These considerations afford the strongest encouragement to all who are seri- ously inquiring after salvation ; and the thoughts of this doctrine* when accurately viewed, will tend rather to stimulate than relax their exertions. To ascertain the tendency of this doctrine, in regard to spiritual things, let us take a view of its effect, as to temporal affairs. You grant that these are regulated by the sovereign will of God; that the man of business cannot be sure of attain- ing his object by his own efforts, for " a man's success in life cannot be calculated from his in- dustry and diligence " ( p. GO ) ; and that the husbandman, when he has plowed and sown, " must look up to the Governor of the seasons for his blessing" (p. 53). In every instance then, it must be fixed in the miud of God, whether he will give or withhold this blessing, which is necessary to crown men's labours with success-. 141 But does this consideration tend to unnerve human industry, and, produce inactivity and gloom ? Does the man of business relax his diligence, because lie does not know whether God intends to give him wealth or not ? Does the farmer neglect to cultivate his fields, because he cannot tell but that God may have determin- ed to give him no harvest? Does the one say, " If God intends to make me rich, I shall be rich, whether I be industrious or not ?" Or does the other say, " If Qod has purposed to cover my fields with a rich crop, I shall receive it, whether I sow them or not ?•*■' Surely then it is most unreasonable to argue, that because, in spiritual things also, we can only " plant and water, and God alone giveth the increase 3" our own indus- try must be wholly superseded: especially as, in both cases, the means are adapted to the end, and usually lead to it; in both, there are pro- mises to encourage the diligent ; and in both, the result must, in all instances, be fixed in the mind of the Omniscient, previous to our employ- ing the means. Were mankind as eager in seek- ing spiritual blessings, as they are in the pur- suit of temporal enjoyments, the doctrine of pre* destination could never be urged as a plea for indolence. But there are facts which furnish more direct evidence concerning the tendency of such senti- ments. — It is well known, that the doctrine of 142 fate, which formed a conspicuous part of the system of the ancient Stoics, greatly resembles predestination ;* yet it cannot be denied, that no sect could boast of so great a number of men who are celebrated for justice, fortitude, tem- perance, and other virtues ; while none were more dissolute and worthless than the Epicu- reans, who held the doctrine of contingence. * The Stoics have been frequently charged with believing in blind fate: but, whatever might be the opinions of fome, the mofl judicious philofo- phers of that feet were clear from this charge ; for by fate they undcrftood the eternal and wise purposes of God. Thus Seneca obferves, that V the Creator and Ruler of the univerfe follows the fates which he himfelf has appointed; and always obeys, what he has once ordained. " Illeipfe omnium conditor ac rector fcripfit quidem fata, fed fcquitur : femper paret, lemel jufTit De Prov. c. v. The fame philofopher remarks in another place, that " God himfelf may be juftly termed fate ; for, as fate is nothing elfe bus the complex feries ofcaufes, he is the nrftcaufe,on whom all the rtft depend." Hunc cundem etfatum fi dixeris, non mentieris : nam cum latum nihil aliud fit, quam feries implexa caufarum, ille eft prima omnium caufa^ ex qua cetera* pendent De Benef. Lib. iv. c. 7. Again, heaffeits, that " outward objects do not force the gods, but their own eternal will is a law to them ;" and he goes on to obferve that their eternal purpofes are immutable, becaufe they can never have any caufe to repent of their firftdefigns. Non externa coguai dcos, fed fua illis in legem aeterna voluntas eft: ftatucrunt, quae non muta- rent. &c. Ibid. Lib. vi.e. 23. It is worthy of rcmaik, that the very objection here noticed was oppofid in ancient times to the doctrine of fate, and we find it fatisfactorily anfwered in the following pafiage in Cicero's Book concerning Fate : " If the deciee is, ' CEdipus fhall be bom to Laius ,-' it cannot be faid, ' Then this will hap- pen, whether Laius fhall have been with a woman or not ;' for the one muft be decreed with the other. And if it fhould be laid 1 , ' Milo fhall wrdtle at the CH\mpic Games ;' and one fhould reply, « then he will wreftle, whether he fhall have an antagonift or not ;' he would be miftaken ; for the very term wres 1 le implies that there muft be an antagonift. All cavils of thatfort, then, are refuted in the fame way : Thus the objection, ' If it is your fate to recover of this difcafe, you will recover, whether you apply to the phyfician or not,' is frivolous ; for your applying to the phvfiaan is as much the. object 143 But there is no need to appeal unto antiquity, in proof of the salutary influence of such princi- ples. Look at the conduct of predestinarians in the christian world at this day. Are they more licentious, or more slothful than others? Are they less diligent in the observance of divine or- dinances, or in the practice of moral duties ? If candour speak, it will own, that they are " not a whit behind the very chiefest " of their chris- tian brethren, who are of other sentiments. The fact, that Calvinists in general are by no means the most wicked, or the most unhappy of man- kind, seems to present an insurmountable dif- ficulty in your way. This difficulty, however, you have got over, by charitably concluding that they are all hypocrites: " If there be any who honestly and unfeigncdly believe in such doctrines, they must be the mo^t miserable of men." (p. 42.) So, it seems, if they arc not the most pitiable Avretches on earth, they are base hypocrites, who profess a doctrine which they do not believe: and yet, strange to tell! of fate as your recovery." Si ita fatum fit, Nafcetur CEdipus Laio : non po- lerit dicij Sive fuerit Laius cum muliere, five non fuerit ; copulata enim res eft, et confatalis ; fie cnim appellat : qtiia ita fatum fit, et concubiturum cum uxoreLaium, et ex eatEdipum procreaturum. Uifi efTet dictum. Luc- Ldbitur Olympiis Milo ; et letctrct alicjuis : Ergo, five habueiit advcifarium, five non habueiit, luctabitur ; erraret ; til cnim copulatum 9 LucrAinus, quia fine advcrlaiio nulla luctatio eft. Omncs igitur iflius generis captiones eodcmniodo refelluntur : Sive tu adhihueris medicum, five non adhibueris, convalefces: capliosum : tarn cnim ell tatale medicum adhiberc, cjiiniTi con- valcfccrc.— Dc Fato, c. 13. 144 these opinions are " cherished by men of great worth." (p. 41.) But what follows is still more extraordinary \ for in the very next sentence, vou assert, that these most miserable men, who believe in this doctrine, enjoy a great deal of self-complacency : " Only such people take care to work themselves by some principles or other into the number of the elect , and then, with a savage satisfaction, surrender the bulk of man- kind to eternal misery." There is no passage in your Statement, that deserves more severe reprehension, than the sen- tence now quoted. It contains sentiments as il- liberal — I might almost say as malicious — as any reflections on Calvinists that I ever met with. First. It is intimated, that all who believe this doctrine consider themselves as elected ; and it is insinuated, that they are disposed to re- strict the elect to their own denomination. But. neither this assertion, nor the vile insinuation that accompanies it, is founded in truth. Pre- destinarians indeed believe, that all may hope that they are elected, as they can have no evi- dence to the contrary ; and that it is the duty of all to " give diligence to make their calling and election sure :" but they never teach that all the children of God have this assurance ; much less, that it is enjoyed by all who believe in predesti- nation. Thousands who assent to the doctrine, have nothing more than a hope that they may be 145 found in the number of the elect. — Equally un- founded is the idea, that Calvinists confine the elect to their own party. " All they that love our Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity " are his elect, by whatever name they may be distin- guished. Multitudes, no doubt, are among- the elect of God, who are far from having- accurate views of the doctrine of election. Secondly. It is here alleg-ed, that predestina- rians flatter themselves into the belief of their own election, by enthusiasm or self-deception ; " They work themselves by some principles or other into the number of the elect." In these words, it is more than insinuated, that " such people " are self-deceivers, who " work them- selves " into the notion that they are saints, while they are only deluding- themselves, and imposing- upon others. Wretched indeed is the character of professed Calvinists, in your esti- mation : for, not only are those of them who dis- believe their principles hypocrites, but even the rest of them are self-deceivers and impostors : — and yet these are men of great worth f — What rig-ht have you, Sir, to attempt to fix sucli :i stig-ma on a body of men, whose g-eneral char- acter will bear a comparison with that of any other professed christians in the world ? What are the principles upon which they try to ascer- tain their election ? — The very same by which other christians incpiire iuto their spiritual state; K —the very same by which Peter exhorts us to ?nake our election sure : " And besides this^ giv- ing all diligence, add to your faith virtue ; and to virtue knowledge ; and to knowledge tem- perance \ and to temperance patience ; and to patience godliness ; and to godliness brother- ly kindness; and to brotherly kindness charity : For if these things be in you, and abound, they make you that ye shall neither be barren nor un- fruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ, Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure : for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall. "* Such are the principles upon which- predestinarians endeavour to obtain an assurance of their election. They never pretend to be able to look into the book of life, to s^e if theii names are written there : but maintain, that the only way in which our election can he knov. n, is by gracious dispositions and a holy life. It any who profess this doctrine, " work themselves into the number of the elect ' ? upon any other principles ; it would be extremely iinfairto mi-. pute their hypocrisy to (lie doctrine itself : es- pecially as such self-deceivers are at least as nu- merous among those v* ho reject it. Yes ; tht ve are people, who " work themselves into the num- ber " of the lovers of God ; while they are bit- ter enemies to his holiness : who " work them- * 2 Feter i. 5. .10. 147 selves into the number " of the patrons of mor- ality ; while true virtue is a stranger to their hearts : who " work themselves into the num- ber " of the benevolent ; while their pretended benevolence, if duly analized, will be found to be a compound of selfishness and vanity. — But indeed, if Calvinists cherish the dispositions which you ascribe to them, they may justly be denounced as hypocrites : For, Thirdly, You assert that having- wrought themselves into the number of the elect, V they then, with a savage satisfaction, surrender the bulk of mankind to eternal misery ! ! ! " — In reading this unfounded allegation I cannot but feel astonished at your effrontery. Wliat ! Are predestinarians then nothing but a set of hard- hearted wretches who triumph in the destruc- tion of mankind — savages who exult in the per- dition of their fellow-men ? How, Sir, could you utter this shameful calumny ? Look through the christian world, and see if you can find any proofs to substantiate this invidious charge. Who are the most laborious ministers of Christ ; — most ready to exhaust their strength, and to en- counter hardships and dangers, for the instruc- tion and salvation of souls ? Who are they that use the most strenuous exertions, make the noblest sacrifices, and submit to the most pain- ful privations, for diffusing the light of life throughout the dark places of the earth ? And 148 who are the most zealous and active in promot- ing every benevolent institution, in shewing compassion to the children of misery, in im- parting instruction to the ignorant and relief to the needy, education to the young and comfort to the aged ?t— A large proportion of them are predestinarians.. Yet these are the men whom you have dared to represent as barbarians, who feel a savage satisfaction in the perdition of mankind ! Blush, Sir, at the thoughts of hav- ing vented so foul a calumny. God is their witness, thei^ own hearts bear them witness, nay, the world will bear witness, that they are not the \yretches whom you describe. I^o,they cherish be- nevolence upon ^he noblest principles : the love of Christ constrains them not pnly to promote his glory but the good of men ; and in proportion as they feel the influence of their principles* tjieir Jiearts will be tender, their goodness active. They can pity the unhappy state of mind even ct indignation at such illiberal abuse. JIow you could call these savages men. of great worth, I shall not stop to inquire. But before I dismiss this passage, I cannot forbear asking, Yfhere J s th»-t boasted moderation, to which men of your principles are wont to put in an almost exclusive claim ? In canvassing the Opinions of infidels, indeed, sufficient modera- l49 tion is discovered : all is then mildness and can- dour, and brotherly kindness. But as soon as evangelical heretics come under review, charity and forbearance disappear, while illiberality and bigotry, calumny and abuse, nay even hatred and malice; come forward in their room. Such is the spirit of some pretended monopolizers of moderation, and patrons of moral virtue ! Before closing" this Letter, it is necessary to advert to your remarks ort what the scriptures teach us about predestination. " In scripture, '* you observe, " there is certainly a reference to some kind of predestination ; but this predesti- nation refers to temporal privileges. This is plain from the case, which is stated, in choosing Jacob, through whom the promises and bless- ings were to descend, and rejecting Esau. " (p, 42.) Here you have given us a specimen of your vague manner of writing oA theological subjects. You talk as if there were but one case of predestination noticed in scripture, and leave it to your leaders to divine where and how it is mentioned. The passage which you allude to appears, " from the case stated,'* to be the 9th Chapter of Romans. Something 4 more than your bare assertion was requisite to make it plain, that the case of Jacob and Esau there stated, relates only to an appointment to tem- poral privileges ; especially as you have not shewn, that " the promises and blessings " as- 150 signed to Jacob were wholly temporal. But, it" that case were given up to you ; what could you make of other cases stated in the same Chap- ter ;— the case of Pharaoh ; the case of " the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction - 3 " and of " the vessels of mercy prepared unto glory, whom God hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles— called to be his people —to be the children of the living God — a rem- nant that shall be saved— who have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith ?" There is not, in this last case at least, the most distant allusion to temporal bless- ings. And by what arts of perversion will you be able to bring over to your side the case of the believing remnant spoken of in the 11th Chap- ter (ver. 5.. 7) : " Even so then at this present time also, there is a remnant according to the election of grace. And if by grace, then it is no more of works; otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace : otherwise work is no more work. What then ? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for \ but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded."— But it is not in this Epistle alone that the proofs of this doctrine are to be found. They occur in almost every page of the sacred volume. A few passages will suffice to shew, that the predestination of scrip- ture, is not a predestination to outward priv*- 151 leoes only, but to spiritual and eternal blessings. The divine word informs us, that the elect of God were " ordained to eternal life ;'** — "fore- known and predestinated, to be conformed to the image of his Son, — to be called, justified, and glorified ;"f that God hath " blessed them with all spiritual blessing's in Christ Jesus ; according- as he hath chosen them in him before the found- ation of the world, that they should be holy, and without blame before him in love : having- pre- destinated them unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according" to the good pleasure of his will, to the praise of the glory of his grace ; " and that in Christ they " have ob- tained an inheritance, being predestinated ac- cording to the purpose of him who worketh all thing's after the counsel of his will :"J that "God hath from the bejrinnino* chosen them to salva- tion, through sanctification of the Spirit and be- lief of the truth: "[| and that " he hath saved them, and called them with an holy calling, not according to their works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given them in Christ Jesus before the world began. "§ Some, who are not so ignorant of the scrip- tures as to allege that they speak only of a pre- destination to temporal privileges, maintain that the election mentioned in such texts, is not an election of particular persons to salvation, but * Acts xiii. 48. Titus i. l, 2. + Rom. viii. 29. 30. J Eph. i. 3.-6, 1 1, j| 2 Thcl. ii. 1 j. fj a Tim. i, 9. See alio 1 Thcf. i- 4, 5.--V. g,— 1 Tut. i. 2, 152 a general election of all who should be found to possess the characters here described. But that such an idea cannot be admitted, is obvious, both from the repeated declarations, that elec- tion is not of works but of grace ; and from the consideration, that in most of these texts the very things which constitute excellence of character are represented as included in the de- cree of election : for it would be absurd to say, that God chose believers for those very things which they receive as the fruits of his electing love. Besides, that it is an election not of char- acters, but of individuals, is evident from this, that particular persons are, in many instances, said to have their names written in heaven — re- corded in the book of life j intimating, that God has appointed them to salvation individually, with as much precision as if their names were enrolled in a register.* *Lukex.2o. Phil. iv. 3. Heb. xii.23. Rev. xvii. gf.—xx. 15.— xxi. 47.— xiil 8.~The date in this laft quoted text fcems to mark the time of the writing of the names in the Lamb'* book, and not the time of the flaying of the Lamb himfelf, as it is ufually confidered. The parallel text, Ch. xvii. 8, warrants this interpretation. In both thefe texts, the expreffions, in the original, exactly correfpond} excepting that the Owner of the book, TiE. slain Lamb, is named in the former and not in the latter : and it fe«ms unnatural to refer the date in the one to 1 the writing in the Book, and in the other to an epithet of the Owner's name. This verfe ibouM therefore be read: " And all that dwell upon the earth fhall worfhip him, whofe names weienot written from the foundation of the world, in the book of life ot the Lamb that was (lain. "—If this tranflation be found correct, this text will no longer countenance the ftrange affertion, " that believers have been jufti- fied horn eternity;" which is faid to be adopted by thofc who are Called Jlijih Calvmifts. 1<33 You have asserted ( p. 43 ), that Christ " has not a sentiment favourable to predestination, as it is generally understood." What then did he mean, when he uttered these remarkable words ; " I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth ; because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them un- to babes : Even so, Father, for so it seemed good in thy sight ?"* Why did he call the dis- ciples his sheep, whom the Father had given him, whom he himself had chosen out of the world, for whom in particular he laid down his life, for whom alone he interceded, and to whom he would infallibly secure eternal bliss.f And wherefore does he declare, that it is impossible to seduce the elect ?J It is manifest from these and other texts, that Christ himself, as well as his apostles, taught the doctrine which I have now been vindicating". Upon the whole, I trust, it has been fully prov- ed, that, however mysterious the doctrine of pre- destination may be, it is neither absurd nor un- scripturalj neither gloomy nor pernicious ; but is supported by the dictates of reason, and b\ the oracles of God \ and ought to be received and maintained^ as precious and salutary. I am, &o. It may be of life to inform the reader, that be will lu-.d the arguments for Prcdtilmation more fully handle! in Uoopii'iTrci'.ilc <^t, t!:at docttjuc- . I in Tucker's Letters on the fume fubject. *Mat.xi 25, 26. f John k, 15, i6,a6. .».,-)- mi, s, 3,6, v;», I Ma: ftsJ7. 24. MarR ktu.iJa. lu LETTER VII. On the &eilg and Atonement of Christ. Sir, 1l he subjects proposed to be discussed in this Letter are some of those mysterious points which you have " studiously avoided : " but, though you have not directly attacked them, it would be improper for me to say nothing in their defence ; for they are necessarily connected with other doctrines which remain to be vindicated, and you have shewn your hostility to them, not only by assaulting these doctrines, but by vari- ous dark insinuations noticed in a former Letter.* It is not uncommon to find unitarians denomi- nating- Christ " the ever-blessed Saviour, " and " our divine Lord and Master : " but they give him the epithet divine much in the same way as they call Milton " the divine poet, " and as Milton himself speaks of " the human face di- vine." They view him as a mere creature ; some of them (viz. the Arians) allowing him in- deed to hold the first rank among the creatures, but another class (the Socinians) who are per- * Letter ii. p. 10, 11, 155 haps the most numerous, believing him to be on- ly a man, who had no existence previous to his entrance into our world. From some exores- sions which occur in your Intimations and Evi- dences (p. 152, 153, 157), it appears that when you wrote that work, you had only adopted the sentiments of the former ; but recent circum- stances induce me to fear, that you have now de^- generated into the grosser errors of the latter. I do not mean to enter at large into the proofs which establish the doctrine of Christ's true di- vinity, — a doctrine which has been so often and so ably defended :* but merely to give a sum- mary of the principal evidences by which this important article of our religion is supported. These, as the nature of the subject indicates, are to be found only in the holy scriptures. Now, what do we learn from these oracles of truth, concerning the person of our Redeemer r — They teach us, that while he has a real hu- man nature, lie is also the second Person in the glorious Trinity, being truly God, equal with the Father, — dignified with the same names and titles, possessed of the same excellencies, performing the same works, and intitled to the same adoration. The names and titles appropriated to the Divine Being are conferred on Jesus. He is *Sesin part'.cu'.ai Dr. Ows.vs Trcarife on ths Pen'on of Cluift, but cf-~- pecially Dr. Jamieso*'* V*indies^on.eflhe Deity of Chrift, 156 called Jehovah,* God,f Immanttel or God with us, j the true God,j| the great God,§ the mighty God and everlasting Father,^[ the only wise God,** King- of Kings and Lord of Lords.ff Every divine perfection is attributed to Christ, He is said to he one with the Father, to be in the form of God and equal with him,JJ to be the image of the invisible God, the brightness of his glory and the express image of his person :|||| and this last designation does not refer to his example only, as you have insinuated (p. 113), for in that passage the apostle is not saying a word about his example, biit is discoursing of his glorious person, as the Creator and Preserv- er of the world, the Redeemer of men and Lord of angels, and the eternal God and King, He is declared to be eternal,§§ immutable,5[^| almighty,*** omnipresent, f f f omniscient ; JJJ *Exod.xvii 7. Num. xxi.6,7.cbmp, 1 Car. x. g. Pf.cx. 5 Ifa^vi 5,9,10. c'omp. John xii. 40,41. Ifa. xl 3.comp. Mark i. 3. Lukei. 76. Zech. xi. 12, 13. comp Mat. xxvii. 9, to. Mai. iii. 1. Zech. xii. 8, 10. comp. John xix. 37. Ifa. xiv. 21. .25. comp Rom. xiv. id, it. i Cor. i. Jo, 31. It may be neceffary to inform forfie readersj that in the Old Teftament, wherever the name Lord is printed in Capitals in our verfion, the word in the origi- nal is JiHOVAH. t Johni.i. xx.28. Acts xx. 28. 1 John iii. 16. Rom. ix. 5. Pf. xiv, 6. comp. Heb i.8. 1 Tim. iii. 16. * lfj. vii. 14. Mat. i. 23. || 1 jofhn v. 20. §Tit.ii. 13. llfa.ix.6. ** Jude 24,25. t+Rev.xvii. 14. xiX. 13. .16. %\ John x. 30. v. 18. xiv. 9, 10. Zech. xiii. 7. Phil. ii. 6. ||||Co!.i.i 5 . Hcb.i.3. ^Mic.v.2. Ifa. ix. 6. John i. 1,2. viii. 58. xviii 5. Rev. i. 8,11. I? Heb. i. 12* xiii- 8. **• Rev. i. 8. Phil, iii 20, 21. Ifa. ix. 6. -tttMar.xviii.20.xx\iii,20.John iii. 13. JJJJohnii. 25. xxi. 17iRcv.ii.23' 157 and in short, it is stated, that, " in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily."* There are no works peculiar to God which are not ascribed unto our great Redeemer. Creation is always viewed as a distinguishing operation of Jehovah : \ and Christ is the Creator of all things, whether in heaven or in earth, whether spiritual or material. J None but the true God can uphold and govern the universe :|| and this divine employment belongs to Jesus. § It is God alone who quickeneth the dead :^[ and Christ shall awaken all the inhabitants of the grave ; not in the capacity of the Father's agent, as you insinuate (p. 160), but by his own autho- rity and power.** God alone is the Judge of the world :f| and this also is an office of the glorious Immanuel.JJ The divine worship to which Christ is con- sidered as intitled, is also a decisive proof of his Deity. This is a prerogative of God, to which the most exalted of men or angels dare not as- pire. !||| Yet Jesus never reproved those who worshipped hjm:§§ nay, he taught, "that all men * Col. ii. 9. + Rom. i. 19, 20. Ifa. xl. 25, 26. xliv. 24. ;; John i. 3. Col. i. 15, ;6. Eph. iii. 9. Hcb. i. 2, 10. || Neh. ix. 6. Ifa. xl. a£. Job. xii. 7. .10. Pf. xxxvi. 6, 7. § Hcb. i. 3. Col. i. 17, 18. I Rom. iv. 17. a Cor. i. 9. ** John v. 2t, 28. 29. x. 17, 18. -f + Pf. 1. 1..6 J| John v. 22. 2 Tim. iv. 1, 8. Rom. xiv. \o..\z. 2 Cor. v. 10. Rev. xix. 11. UK Acts x. 26. Col. ii. 18. Rev. xix. 10. §§ Mat. viii. 2. ix. 18, John ix. 38. 158 should honour the Son even as they honour the Father;"* he commands his ministers to bap- tize in the name of the Son and Holy Ghost, as as well as of the Father; and they are directed to bless in the name of the same Holy Trinity. f We are encouraged to offer up prayers and praises, not only to the Father, but also to the Son. J This adoration is paid him by angels as well as men ; and it is remarkable, that in the same passage where the angels are called gods, they are required to worship him:jl — a clear in- timation, that his divinity is not of the same kind with theirs, as they themselves must adore him as their God. When ail these proofs of the Godhead of Cliribt are duly considered, we may venture to assert, that those understandings must be strange- ly blinded by prejudice, which cannot discern this doctrine in the sacred scriptures. Some of the texts referred to may seem inconclusive when Mewed individually; but the whole taken to- gether furnish a mass of evidence in support of the doctrine, which all the sophistry and perver- sions of unitarians will never be able to overturn. The incarnation of Christ will indeed remain an inscrutable mystery to man, in his present * John v. 23. + Mat. xxviii. 19. 2 Cor. xiii. 14. % Acts vii. 59, 60. 2 Cor. i. 2. Phil. ii. 10. 2 Thef. ii, 16, 17. Rev. i. 5, 6. v. 9, 10. vii. 9.. 12. [j Pi', scvii. 7. cemp. Heb, i. 6. 159 imperfect state : for who can understand how Deity and Humanity are united in the person of Immanuel ? Bat there are mysteries in our own nature, which are equally unsearchable. Who can trace the connexion between mind and mat- ter, between our soul and body, or explain how the one operates on the other ? It would be highly presumptuous, to question the existence of this glorious union between the divine nature and the human, because we cannot comprehend it ; when we find even in our own constitution so much to perplex and confound us. Nor is this sacred mystery a trifling- point, that "can be applied to no good practical pur- pose :" it is the very basis of the plan of redemp- tion— r-the rock upon which our salvation is built. For upon this mystery rests the grand doctrine of the atonement, to which you have shewn yourself equally hostile, and which I hall therefore proceed to vindicate. — To this doctrine you seem to allude (p. 102), when you speak of "disputes about the means which infi- nite wisdom has devised to give efficacy to re- pentance :" but it is plain, from your observa- tions in that place and in other passages, that you do not conceive any such means to be neces- sary. Your doctrine, and that of all unitarians, is, that sinners are saved by the merits of their own repentance and their own goodness, and that no other atonement for sin is required. In 160 opposition to these sentiments, evangelical di- vines maintain, that a holy and just God cannot, in a consistency with his nature and his wise plans, forgive sin, unless its guilt be fully ex- piated by the enduring* of the punishment which it deserves ; and that Christ, having been con- stituted the Surety of sinners, according to the gracious counsels of Heaven, has by his suffer- ings and death made an atonement for their ini- quities,— an atonement, which being made by a divine Person has infinite merit for removing- our guilt, and through which alone the sins of rebellious men can be pardoned. That there is nothing in this doctrine contrary to reason, has frequently been shewn :* and the history of the world proves it to be agreeable to the common sense of mankind. That an atone- ment for sin is necessary, is a sentiment which seems to be imprinted on the human mind ; till prejudice and pride deface the impression. In every land altars have been reared, and sacri- fices have been offered, to propitiate the Deity : nay, in almost every part of the heathen world human victims have been sacrificed, to appease the wrath of offended Heaven. f In the divine word we not only learn the ne- cessity of an atonement ; but our views are di- * See Edwards's Remarks on Important Doctrines, Ch. vL -r See this fact fully efiablifhed by Dr. Macee in his learned and valuable v^oik on Aionemem and Sacrifice. 161 rected to that great expiatory sacrifice which alone can fully satisfy for our sins. To this point, even the institutions of the ancient econo- my naturally led : for, while it was their uniform language, that " without shedding of blood there is- no remission, " they contained in themselves sufficient tokens of their own inefficacy ; and thus they served to guide men unto that real and perfect expiation, which should be offered in the fulness of time. That this was their tendency, is peculiarly evident from the Epistle to the Hebrews. There we are informed, that all the legal sacrifices and rites were types and shadows of good things to come ; that they all pointed to Christ; that Jesus is the true High Priest, who has made reconciliation for the sins of the people by his own blood, and who is able to save them to the uttermost, that come unto God by him, seeing he ever livetli to make intercession for them; that whereas the repetition of the legal sacrifices bespoke their insufficiency, his sacri- fice was complete and effectual, for he was once offered to bear the sins of many, and by this one offering he obtained eternal redemption for his people, and perfected them for e\er ; that the in- efficacy of all other oblations was ;■ reason why he voluntarily offered to be our Surety, to obey and suffer in our stead ; and that this is the onh atonement by which we can be reconciled unto God, for if we persist in unbelief aud sin, instead L of drawing near to God through Christ our High Priest, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sin, but a certain fearful looking for of judg- ment and fiery indignation which shall devour the adversaries.* Indeed this whole Epistle might be fitly termed, a Treatise on the Priest- hood and Atonement of Christ. But it is not this Epistle only that instructs us concerning the atonement of Jesus. " To him give all the prophets witness," as well as all the apostles, " that through his name, whosoever, believeth in him, shall receive remission of sins, "f Daniel foretold that " Messiah the Prince should be cut off, not for himself, but to finish the transgression, and make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity. "J- Zechariah predicted, that the sword of divine justice would smite the shepherd, the man that is Jehovah's fellow; and that he should be pierced by our sins, jj Isaiah writes on the sub- ject, as cli tinetly as Paul himself: "He was wounded for our transgressions, he was braised for our iniquities : the chastisement of our peace was upon him, and with his stripes we are heal- ed. All we like sheep have gone astray ; xs e have turned every one to his own way ; and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of as all. — He was cut off cut of the land of the living : for * Hebrews ii. i 7. vii. 25.. 27. ix. 1 1..28. x. 1..27. + Acts x. 43. }Dan. \x. 26,24 ||Zech. xiii. 7. xii lo.comp. Mat. Jixvi.31. Jchn xix. 37. 163 the transgression of my people was he stricken, i — Thon shalt make his sonl an offering* for sin. — By his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many ; for he shall bear their iniquities."* ■. — When we look into the New Testament, this doctrine meets us in almost every page. In a multitude of texts it is stated that Christ died for us, suffered for us, gave himself for us, laid down his life for us. He is " our passover sacri- ficed for us, the Lamb that was slain and has redeemed us to God by his blood, the Lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world , we are redeemed by the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot, fore-ordained to this end before the foundation of the world. "f Unitarians allege, that such phrases merely denote that Christ died for our benefit, to confirm his doctrines, and to edify us by an example of patient suffering. But this notion is irreconcilable with some of the texts al- ready quoted, and with many others which evi- dently imply, that Christ died not merely for our benefit, but in our stead. " Christ hath re- deemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us. Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust ; that he might bring us to God. He hath made him to be sin (or a sin-offering ) for us, who knew no sin ; that we might "be made the righteousness * Ifa. liii. 5.. 12. -f i. Cor. v. 7. F.cv. \. 9. Jolin i. 99. 1 Tct. i. 19, 2cv 164 ©f God in him. He bare our sins m his own body on the tree. He is the propitiation for our sins. God hath set him forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood ; to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins. We are reconciled to God by the death of his Son,— by whom we have received the atonement. We are bougm) with a price ;— rpurchased with his own blood. He gave his life a ransom for many."* In the last of these texts, the word for in the original, is a term which always denotes substitution or commutation ; and in all of them, the vicarious nature of Christ's sufferings is clearly pointed out. — Had Christ died for us merely in the uni- tarian sense, it might with equal propriety be said that Stephen died for us, or that Paul died for us. Paul was indeed in an inferior sense of- fered up for the church ;f but he utterly dis- claims the idea of being sacrificed for it, in the same sense as Christ was: "Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you ? Or were ve bap- tized in the name of Paul ?" % This doctrine is strongly corroborated by con- sidering' that unparalleled anguish which Jesus felt, in the night before his crucifixion. Upon what principle can you account for his agony in the garden, his inexpressible sorrow, his bloody •Gal.iii.13. 1 Peter ii. 24. iii. 18. aCor.v.21. 1 John ii. 2. Rom. iii. 25. v, io, ii, 1 Cor. vi. 20. Acts xx. 28. Mat. xx, 28,. + Phil. ii. 17. I 1 Cor. i. 13. 166 sweat, his strong cries and tears ?* Was it the mere prospect of death that thus appalled him ? — Impossible. — Thousands of those who have died for Christ, did not shrink at the view of death, even when arrayed in its most dreadful forms; and not one of these holy martyrs be- trayed half the anguish which Jesus expressed, in the prospect of suffering-. Can we then sup- pose that the disciples of Jesus have more cour- age and resolution than their divine Master? No : it was not the dread of death that agitated his mind : it was the wrath of God which he bore in our stead; it was the enormous load of our guilt, the weight of which was sufficient to have sunk us to hell. In speaking of Christ and his salvation, you frequently seem to affect a studied ambiguity; employing orthodox phrases, but using them in a sense totally different from their common ac- ceptation. Such expressions in the mouth of a uni- tarian always appear most uncouth and unnatural. There is an incongruity even in your application of the terms salvation and redemption. For if Christ has not atoned for the guilt of sin, nor saves us from its effects, nor sends his Spirit to free us from its power ; if he has merely given us important instructions, set us a good example, appointed some useful institutions for teaching us, and confirmed his doctrines by his death ; * Mat. xxvi, 38. Luke xxii. 44. Hcb. vi, 7. 166 with what propriety can he be called a Saviour and Redeemer? Why are such appellations never bestowed on the prophets and apostles, if his work was so little different from theirs ?— - It is plain that he is our Saviour in a sense in which none else can be so denominated. " Nei- ther is there salvation in any other ; for there is none other name under heaven given among men wherebv we must be saved."* I am, &c. * Acts IV. 1 2 , 107 LETTER VIII. On Justification by Faith, Sir, The doctrine of the atonement is inti- mately connected with that of justification by grace, of which indeed it is the foundation. The acknowledged sentiments of the Reformed Churches, on this head, are, that Christ having fulfilled the law in our room by his obedience unto death, it is only through his merits that God pardons our sins and admits us into his fa- vour ; and that this privilege, which is called justification, is obtained in the exercise of true faith, " by which we receive and rest upon Christ alone for salvation, as he is offered to us in the gospel:" "We are accounted righteous before God only for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by faith, and not for our own works or deservings."* This invaluable blessing, being a deliverance from the curse, and consequently from spiritual death, is neccs- vaiily attended with holiness; and hence, all who * Afferhbly's Shorter Catcdiiim, Quell 86. Thirty-nine Articles, Ajt, XJ> Sec alfo Coufdlion of Fat'.h, Chap. xi. 168 adhere to this doctrine maintain, that "justify- ing 1 faith is never alone in man, without true re- pentance, hope, charity, and the fear of God ; " " but is ever accompanied with all other sav- ing 1 graces, and is no dead faith, but worketh by love. " * Such is the article of justification by faith, which you have so strangely misrepresented and abused (p. 118.. 121); painting it in the black- est colours, as hostile to all moral duties and all christian virtues ; describing it as " opening a wide door to every kind of vice, and letting in immorality like a flood," nay "paving the way to infidelity, by exposing the religion of Christ to contempt and ridicule ;" so that, if you did not foresee " that such a phrensy cannot be of long duration," you might expect it to issue in such horrors as attended the French Revolu- tion !— These calumnious charges have already been noticed and refuted, as preferred against the doctrines of grace in general :f it remains, that I offer some remarks for vindicating this doctrine in particular. The picture which you have drawn of justi- fication is so frightfully caricatured, that scarce^ a feature of the original has been preserved. It is true that, according to this doctrine, we are- not justified by moral duties, either in whole or * Homily iii. Part 2. -Conf. of Faith. Chap. xi. Sect. a. i L«ttei iii. p. 5 7-59' 169 in part: but does it therefore follow that they are " useless, and have no concern with our sal- vation j" or that such doctrine " casts an odium upon them," or "brings forth railing accusations against them? " — Yoit conceive that if they are not admitted as our justifying righteousness, there is no other scriptural ground upon which they can be enforced : and hence you assert that though the advocates of this doctrine recom- mend good works, they have no intelligible way of producing the authority of God in support of them, but inculcate them merely by their own authority. " This," you observe, " is carrying Protestants back to that implicit faith which we blame so much in the Catholic church ; and the deliverance from which constitutes one of the greatest blessings of the Reformation. And though the gospel be preached to the poor, yet it requires great learning to understand this gospel." (p. 119.) — It is very common to em- ploy the word popery as a kind of bugbear to frighten the weak and ignorant. To me the term Avian or Socinian sounds much more dread- ful than the name Catholic. Had the Reform- ation consisted in exchanging popery for yoiu rational Christianity, instead of being a bless- ing to men, it would have been one of the greatest of curses. Far rather would 1 cast in my lot with catholics, \>ho believe in the Holy Trinity, and acknowledge in some form Hi* 17D atonement of Christ; than be numbered with those deisticai christians by whom the sublime mysteries of the gospel are held up to ridiculed Whether our doctine or yours, On the head of justification, comes nearest to popery, let those who have read the works of Luther and the first reformers determine.— But what founda- tion is there for this most contemptible remark ? When good works are excluded from having any share in our justification, are there no scrip- tural principles remaining, upon which the prac- tice of them can be enforced ? Since you are so little acquainted with the subject, I shall mention a few of the principles and motives which evangelical divines produce from scrip- ture for enforcing their exhortations to holiness: and then yoit may judge whether in such cases their hearers need to rely on their word and authority or not.— They urge men to the exer- cise of holy dispositions, and the practice of holy duties, from the consideration of the holi- ness of God which his children must imitate,* his common goodness which we should thank- fully acknowledge,-]- his redeeming love which demands our warmest gratitude,^ the price which has been paid for us,jj the example of Jesus and our union with him,§ the inhabita- *i Pet. i. 15, i<3. + Rom. ii. 4. Pf. cxvi. 12. •J 2 Cor.v. 14,15.1 John iv 19. || 1 Cor. vi.20. i Pet. i. 17..19. § Phil, ii 5. 1 Pet. ii. 21. .23. 1 Cor.vi. 15. 171 tion of the Spirit and his illuminating' grace,* the beauty of holiness and the deformity of sin,f the pleasures of true religion and the vanity of the world,{ the promises of God and the dread of his fatherly displeasure, || the comfort of hav- ing" an assurance that we are in a state of grace and the necessity of preparing- for a state of glory § — These are some of the principles from which the friends of this doctrine inculcate holiness. Are there any of them dark and per- plexing 1 ? Whatever they may appear to ra- tional christians, they are level to the capacities of the meanest of Christ's humble disciples : and undeniable facts attest, that they are efficacious as well as perspicuous. Besides, will not every candid mind allow, that most of these principles are of a more generous and noble kind, than the desire of purchasing salvation ? This sel- fish principle, it seems, is, according- to this part of your system, the only one that effectually se- cures obedience. 1 will not try to reconcile this idea with your own declaration ( p. 73 ), that " love is the foundation of all the duties which we pay to our Maker." But I would re- mark, that if the boasted morality of unitarians consists merely in serving- God for hire, \\c will freely resign to them the exclusive posses- * i Cor. vi. :g. 2 Cor. vi. 16. Eph. v. 8. t Pf. ex. 3. Jer. xliv. 4. 'I Prov. iii. -.7, i3. Eccl. k'u 8'..io. |j a Cor. viz. 1. 1 Cor. xi. 30..32 Pf. Ixvi. :8. '> Si Cor.i. 12. 2 ?>A. i. 4 ,ix. iii, 11. .m. Ikb.xii, 14. Tit.ii. 12.14, 172 sion of this Mercenary virtue. Such as are vir- tuous only or chiefly on this principle serve God as slaves, not as sons ; as hireling's, not as friends ; their great object is self, hot God ; they trade with hiul, but they do not love him. It is strange that in the whole of your rea- soning's on this subject, you completely lose sight of the point in dispute. The question is not whether good works and good dispositions are necessary to sulfation %. for here all are a- g-reed : but it is, whether or not they are the price of salvation. Now, instead of investiga- ting' the latter question, your whole attention is bestowed on the former ; and in Establishing- the importance of moral duties, you enjoy an easy triumph over heresies which exist only in your own imagination. Who is there that denies that Christ and all his apostles teach the neces- sity of holiness ? You treat evangelical chris- tians with great injustice, in so often alleging that their doctrine on this head is not the same as Christ's. Equally incorrect and unfair is your account of their views of faith and of the place which it holds in justification. They never teach men to " rest upon belief or faith alone, maintaining that this is every thing." ( p. 120.) Nor do they ever "look upon Paul, as the father and founder of that system, which tells us that we are not to rely upon good works, but upon 173 faith." (p. 131.) If they could find that any part of their doctrine rests on the private autho- rity of Paul, or of any other mortal, they would instantly reject it. But the doctrine here im- puted to them is neither theirs nor Paul's. They never direct men to rely upon faith, in opposi-. tion to good works, but unanimously affirm, that however eminent the grace of faith is, " yet it putteth us from itself, and remitteth or ap~ pointeth us unto Christ, for to have only by him remission of our sins, or justification •" and that God justifies believers, " not by imputing faith itself, the act of believing, or any other evan- gelical obedience to them as their righteous-: ness ; but by imputing the obedience and satis- faction of Christ unto them, they receiving and resting on him and his righteousness by faith ; which faith they have not of themselves ; it is the gift of God."* According* to this doctrine, justifying faith is not, as you insinuate, a mere belief of the truth, like the dead faith of which the apostle James speaks, which is found even in devils ; but it is an act of the \\ ill, as well as of the understanding; it includes in it a firm assent to the gospel, an acceptance of its oilers, a cordial choice of Christ as onr Saviour, with a humble reliance on his merits, a\h] on the mercy of a redeeming God manifested in his mediation. This description of f:«ith accords * Hopjily iii, Part 2* Conltflion of faith, Ch. xi. Sect. l. 17 l with the sacred oracles, where it te said to con- sist in receiving Christ, in coining to him, in eating his flesh and drinking his blood :* ex- pressions which clearly imply that in this exer- cise there is a cordial acceptance of Christ and his salvation. Even when it is called believing on Christ or believing in his name, we are taught that it is chiefly an act of the will, a re- liance on Christ as our Redeemer : we are never said to believe in the nanie of Moses, or to be- lieve on Pa.nl. Accordingly we find Jesus tracing the unbelief of men to the perverseness and pride of their hearts : " Ye will not come to me, that ye might have life. — How can ye be- lieve which receive honour one of another, and seek not the honour that cometh from God only ?" j— -Now, the idea of relying on this faith is excluded by the very definition of it; for it consists in relying wholly upon Jems. It is not a meritorious work, supposed to give us a title to salvation ; but has been fitly termed the hand, of the soul, which takes hold of salvation as the free gift of God. Indeed the notion of merit in the exercise of faith is wholly set aside, by the consideration that both faith and repentance originate in the grace of Go.d, and are pro- duced by his Spirit. J * Johni. 12. vi 35, 47. 58. + Joi.11 •.. 40, 44. X Luke xvii. 5. Atis v. 31. xi. 17, i 8. xiv. 27. xv. 8, 9. x\jn. 27. Eph. ii. 8. rhil. i. 29. 2 Thcf. i. n, 12. 2 Tun. ii. 25, 2 Pet. i, 1. You complain of disputes about the na- ture of faith ; the "waste of learning- and tor- turing of language. " ( p. 133 ) on that subject. But these disputes, as far as evangelical divines are concerned in them, are more about words than about the exercise itself. Faith is a grace in which various powers of mind are brought into action at once, the whole soul being then directed towards Christ ; and the chief question among them is, whether the whole, complex act should be termed faith, or whether some parts of it should be distinguished as only the neces- sary concomitants of faith. Such a discussion is not so likely to bewilder plain christians as you imagine; for it does not affect the nature of the exercise. Since the subject has been so much perplex- ed, it might have been expected thai vou would have done something to clear is up ; but instead of that, you involve it in tenfold abseuri- j y : "If in Paul we find some sentiments, differinar from the above sentiments, where faith seems to have the preference ; we may fairly infer, that the works there mentioned are not the moral virtues, but the works of the law of Moses, on which the Jews, and the Pharisees in particular, laid so much stress : and that by faith we are to understand, sometimes the gospel in general, sometimes the dispositions arising.from the gospel, sometimes the firm hold that it has of the under- 176 steading and heart, as a principle of action, &c. And in all these senses, it is undoubtedly supe-, rior to the ceremonial law of the Jews. — This sense accords with the simplicity of the gospel dispensation, is more consistent with the perfec- tions of the Supreme Being-, and is much better adapted to the common understanding of men." (p. 13*2.) Here we have a choice specimen of your plain gospel. Faith meatif this, or it means that, or it means any thing the reader pleases, provided he does net understand it in the evangelical sense ! The best way, it seems, to explain a thing to common understandings is to leave it unexplained, or to cover it wilji darkness! Which sense is it -that is so simple ? Is it one of the three expressed, or one of those included in your et cetera ? You cannot justify these vague remarks by saying, that the word faith has different significations. When I ask, What is God ? The proper answer is not, that the word sometimes means an angel, sometimes a magistrate, sometimes the Supreme Being. And when J ask, What is justifying faith? It is not a sufficient answer to say, that faith some- times- signifies the gospel, sometimes has other meanings: for what I want to know is, What is its precise meaning in those places where it is said to justify us ? — if any sense can be collected from the passage now quoted, it seems to import, that when Paul says, that we are justified by 177 faith and not by works, his meaning is, that we are justified by evangelical obedience or the moral virtues, and not by obedience to the cere- monial law. This is a sentiment frequently adopted even by some who are not professed unitarians. Let us inquire how it agrees with Paul's doctrine. According to him, justification bv faith is the same thing as justification by grace :* but what grace is there in being justi- fied by moral virtues, more than in being justified by ceremonial rites ? It excludes boasting :f but may we not boast of our morality, as much as of religious observances ? It is the justifica- tion of the ungodly :$ while yours is only the justification of the meritorious. It is peculiarly connected with the blood of Christ, who was " delivered for our offences," and is "set forth to be a propitiation," through which God is just and yet the justifier of believing sinners :\\ but how can such things be spoken of your kind of justification ? It is always opposed to works, — to the deeds of the law: but your justifica- tion is entirely by works, by the deeds of the law. And of what law does the apostle speak in such passages? That law which forbids theft, adultery, and sacrilege ;.§ — which forbids all unrighteousness, — -cursing and bitterness, * Rom. iii. 24. iv. 4. 16. + Rom. iii. 27. iv. 2. Eph. ii. 9. J Rom. iv. 5. v. 10, 11. j| Rom. iii. 24.. 26, v. 24,25. Eph. i. 7. (j Rom. 11. 21, 22, M 178 bloodshed and every crime ; — that law by which is the knowledge of sin, and in reference to which it is said, that " all have sinned and come short of the glory of God ;"* — that law which prohibits covetousness and evil desires, and which is "holy, just, and good;"f — that law which denounces a curse against all who trans- gress it ; and what law that is, may be seen by consulting the passage in Deuteronomy to which the apostle refers. J The works to which faith is opposed, are not merely rites and sacrifices, but " works of righteousness." || " Put the scriptures of the New Testament, then, into the hands of a man of honesty and plain understanding, but ignorant of every sys- tem " (p. 133) ; what will he consider as Paul's sentiments? He will indeed see, that Paul teaches the importance of a good life, and of the moral virtues ; and so do all evangelical di- vines ; but will he ever suppose that when Paul asserts that we are justified by faith, he really means that we are justified by works ; that when he ascribes our justification to the free grace of God, he means to impute it entirely to our own merits; that, when he excludes from our justifi- cation all our works of righteousness, the works of that law by which is the knowledge of sin, he has nothing in his eye but ceremonial rites; or * Rom. iii. 9-23. + Rom. vii. 4-7, 12. J Gal. iii, 10. ccr^p. Ecut. xxvii. 1 5. .26. || Tit. iii. 5. 179 that, while he speaks of our being- justified by faith in the blood of Christ as a propitiation for sin, he really intends to inform us, that the blood of Christ has no more concern with our salva- tion than the blood of Stephen or the blood of James ? Would this plain man have these views of Paul's doctrine ? — No : such ideas can only be admitted into minds that have been perverted by Socinian sophistry. But is this doctrine of justification by faith peculiar to Paul ? Is he its " father and found- er ?" — By no means. It is the uniform doc- trine of scripture. It was known in the days of Abraham, of Moses, and of David ;* and it was taught by Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Habakkuk.f Nothing can be more clear on the subject than the words of Christ himself. When the Jews put this question to him, "What shall we do that we might work the works of God ?" he re- plied, " This is the .work of God, That ye be- lieve on him whom he hath sent. — This is the will of him that sent me, That every one which seeth the Son, and belicveth on him, may have everlasting- life. "J Among- the last words which he spake on earth were these ; " He that be- lieveth and is baptized shall be saved ; but he that believeth not shall be damned. "fj This * Gen. xv. 6. xii. 3. corcp. Gal. iii. 6 .9. Pf. lxxviii. 22. comp. Hcb' iii. 12, 18, 19. iv. 1, 2. Pf. xxxii 1, 2. comp. Rom. iv. 5.-8. + Ila.xlv. 24, 25. liii. 11. Jcr. xxiii. 6 xxxi. 34. Hab ii. 4. comp. Rom. i. 17. Gal. iii. u. J John vi, 28, 29, £0, |] Tviaik A\i. 16. 180 was the doctrine which Christ taught Nicode- mns ; and it was taught also by his forerunner John Baptist : " He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life : and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life ; but the wrath of God abideth on him. "* The parable of the Pharisee and the Publican is a striking instance of the doctrine of Christ on this head. The Pharisee is introduced as a self-righteous man, who trusts in his virtue and his piety, who hopes for the divine favour through the merit of his own hon- esty, integrity, chastity, temperance, and liber- ality. The Publican is described as a convinc- ed sinner, deeply humbled before God, and be- taking himself to redeeming mercy as his only refuge. And what was the issue of their respec- tive approaches to God ?— The former, with all his moral virtues, was rejected ; but the latter was justified by free and sovereign grace. j* The same doctrine is taught throughout the Acts of the Apostles. J In some instances indeed, re- pentance is enjoined as the means of receiving salvation ; and such exhortations are used, not- only because true repentance is a necessary con- comitant of faith, but because the word repen- tance often denotes the whole of that act in which the soul turns unto God, and consequent- * John iii. 14.. 18, 36. + Luke xvii. 9.. 14. X Acts viii. 37. ix. 42. x. 43. xi. 17,21. xiii. 38, 39. xiv. 1, 8$, 27. xvi. 30,31. xix. 4. xxvi. 18. 181 ly includes faith ; which is obviously the case in some of the instances alluded to.* All the Apostles agree with Paul in asserting- justifica- tion by faith > t f not excepting' Peter, nor even James, whom you suppose to be " entirely on the side of good works. " (p. 132.) It is true, James teaches us that " faith without works is dead ;" but it is plain that he is not speaking- of true faith, — that faith which cordially receives Christ, and which is always productive of good works. He speaks of that bare belief of the truth, which is found in devils, as well as in many wicked men : and he truly asserts that such a faith is dead and cannot justify us. In. the passage referred to, he is not addressing- true believers, but those who say they have faith, while their conduct proves their pretension to be false ; and he reminds them that justifying faith is always operative, and that no man can be approved before God, or acknowledged as a. justified person, whose faith does not shew itself to be genuine by its effects. J This sense of the word justify is not unexampled in scripture ;|| and }'ou will recollect your own remark, " that the apostles do not write as critics and logi- cians, — and are to be interpreted, not by verbal criticisms, but by the general spirit and design * Acts it. 38. comp. vcr. 41, 44. iii. 19. coitip. iv. 4. + 1 Pet. i, 6. .9, 21. ii. 6, 7. 1 John iii. 23. v. 1, 5, it-. 13. % James ii. 1 4. .26. || Luke vii. 29. Rom, iii. 4, 1 Tim. iii, xl>» 182 of the whole." ( p. 133. ) Besides, when this apostle speaks of true faith, he views it as an important and vital principle in the chosen of God, who are all " rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom."* After what has been said, it is scarcely neces- sary to take any notice of the plan of salvation by repentance and good works, which you have laid down in your own vague, indefinite way ( p. 99.. 102 ) : — a plan which is not only in- consistent with scripture, but even repugnant to reason; especially as it implies, that our repentance and moral duties are works of supererogation.^ You have been very unhappy in the choice of illustrations of your scheme \ particularly in the case of Paul which you quote ( p. 101 ) as a standing example of " the extent, the benefit and efficacy of repentance ;" whereas in reality, there never was a more striking instance of sal- vation by free and sovereign grace, being in- tended by Jesus Christ " for a pattern to them which should afterwards believe on him to life everlasting. " J I cannot dismiss this subject, without advert- ing to your reflections on the reception which this doctrine and the other doctrines of grace have obtained in the Reformed Churches : ' J-\mes i. 3. 6. ii. 5. + See Dr. Magke on Atonement, &c, Difcourfe i. i 1 Tim, i. 12 .16. 183 rr Ever since the Reformation, doctrines of this kind have entered into the creeds of many pro- fessed christians ; but still in those churches, where they have been adopted, they have ever appeared so contrary to every maxim of reason, and to the first principles of religion, that they have been suffered to lie dormant by most of the preachers ; and, if they have occasional^ been brought forward, they have endeavoured to explain and guard them in one way or other, from doing- the mischief which they are calcu- lated to produce." (p. 119, 120. ) Here are some very strange things said of these Reform- ed Churches :— They have admitted into their creeds tenets that have ever appeared absurd, impious, and pernicious: the majority of the minis- ters in these churches have entered them by basely professing- to believe these vile dogmas, and have been so mean and unfaithful as to continue in them without lifting up any testi- mony against such wicked principles ; nay, they have even preached them, while they were sensible of their pernicious tendency ! — Could the Pope himself have given us a blacker pic- ture of these reformed churches P Had you candidly inquired into well-known facts ; you might have found, that in the early times of these churches, this article was regarded as " a most wholesome doctrine ; "* that for a long * Thirty-nine Articles, Art, x\. 184 period the discourses delivered from their pul- pits exactly corresponded with their creeds, the doctrines of grace being- the chief subject of both ; that when men of contrary principles treacherously entered their communion, they at first brought in their heresies privily, introduc- ing them so sparingly that they seemed to leave them almost dormant, in order to avoid expul- sion ; that the leaven of corruption, thus intro- duced, gradually insinuated itself till it acquirecl a predominant influence ; that nevertheless, there were found in one of these churches, at a memorable era, two thousand ministers, who not only faithfully preached the doctrines of grace, but conscientiously resigned their livings and submitted to cruel persecutions, rather than a- dopt unscriptural practices attempted to be im- posed on them ; that from that period corrup- tion became more open and general ; that, though evangelical preaching has partly reviv- ed in the present day, (a revival which you de- plore, but at which I rejoice,) there are still in the churches to which you allude, many minis- ters, by whom the doctrines of grace which they have professed to " subscribe willingly and ex animo,^ or promised to "assert and defend,"* are not even suffered to lie dormant, but are openly trampled under foot ; and that this degeneracy * See the 36th Canon of the Chtirch of England ; and the Formula of ♦.he Church of Scotland. 185 is still more deplorable in those congregations (called Presbyterian) originally founded by the pious ejected ministers, or their successors and disciples; in all of which, those evangelical truths, which you and your brethren now hold up to ridiculej were formerly preached in their purity and power. You might also have found, that these doctrines were never taught with any other cautions than what are still used in preaching them ; and that similar cautions are equally necessary in preaching- some of the truths which you retain ; being required, not on account of any dangerous tendency in the doc- trines themselves, but on account of the corrup- tions of the human heart, by which the most precious and salutary truths are frequently abused. The mercy of God must be viewed in connexion with his justice, and the doctrine of sanctification must be preached along with justi- fication by faith : but it does not follow, that the one is less necessary, or less valuable, than the other. — That the friends of this doctrine as- sert the necessity of holiness, is clear from their sentiments on regeneration, with which it is closely connected. — That doctrine I intend to consider in the subsequent Letter. \ am, &<*, 186 LETTER IX* \)n Regeneration, Conversion, or Repentance, Sir, You might have seen the injustice of alleging that the doctrine of justification by faith leads to licentiousness, had you considered that all who hold this doctrine also maintain that no One is justified without receiving a new nature. They assert that, at the very time when a sinner believes in Christ for justification, he is sanctified by the Spirit; receiving those holy dispositions, which not only produce outward re^ formation, but quench even the love of iniquity. It has been already shewn,* that all men natur- ally discover a prevailing inclination to sin, and that this depraved inclination can be cured only by the Spirit of God. Now, this cure is effected at the time when true faith is first exercised j and this grace, which is produced by divine il- lumination,f and is the first act of the new na- ture, is itself employed as a powerful principle of holiness ; for it purifieth the heart, worketh * Sec Letters iv. and v. -f Sec Lei, £ v- p. ioj . 187 by love, and overcometh the world.* Justify- ing faith, then, is always accompanied with a change of dispositions. This great and important change receives various names, according to the light in which it is viewed. When considered as the work of God on the heart, it is called a new creation, a resurrection from the dead, illumination, reno- vation of heart, transformation into the divine image, and frequently the new birth, or regen- eration :f but when spoken of as the act of our own minds, resulting from this divine operation, it is usually designated repentance or conver- sion ; which terms, when applied to this change, can scarcely be distinguished, except we should say, that the former respects our forsaking sin with true contrition, and the latter our turning- unto God and holiness. Your observations on this subject are so vague and contradictory, that it is difficult to discover your real sentiments. — You tell us that '•conver- sions ought not to be confounded with repen- tance" (p. 105) ; and vet you neither point out the difference, nor do you observe any such dis- tinction yourself; for Paul's conversion men- tioned in that page, you elsewhere call his repen- * Acts xv. 9. Gal. v. 6". 1 John v. 4. + 2 Cor. v. 17. F.ph. ii. 10. 1 John iii. 14. Eph ti. 1..3. Heb. x. 32. a Cor. «r* 6. Ezek. xxxvi. 26. Col. iii. 10 Eph. iv. 22. .2^. John i. t j. iii. 3. James i. j 8. iPet,i,2fl. 1 John iii. g. v, 1 , 4. 188 tance (p. 101) ; and in another place ( p. 143 J, you speak of Christ's " calling simiers to re- pentance, " as synonymous with his "converting sinners from the evil of their ways." You seem to allow, that the repentance of great shiners is attended with painful feeling's. Nay, the passage last referred to ( p. 142, 143 ) implies an acknowledgment that repentance is always accompanied with such feelings, for you admit that, in order to be brought to repentance, we must see that we are sinners who have need of Christ's assistance ; according to the Saviour's words ; " They that be whole need not a phy- sician, but they that are sick :— I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance." But how can we be made sensible of our sins, — our spiritual sickness, without painful emotions ? The sense of guilt must always be painful to an awakened conscience : for, as you have well ob- served in your Intimations and Evidences ( p. 72), " This moral principle stamps the strongest disapprobation on guilt. The serious recollec- tion of it is ever accompanied with remorse, shame and horror:" and "these horrors accom- pany the most secret as well as the most public guilt; — and excite pain and uneasiness for those very actions, for which human laws provide no punishment" — Yet, strange to tell ! you main- tain that repentance, which implies a sense of guilt, is attended with no pain, but is altogether 189 joyful ! You even assert, in defiance to the ex- press testimony of scripture, that the conversion of Paul, one of the chief of sinners, was accom- panied with no horror ; and that of the Philip- pian jailor, another great sinner, with no pain. ( p. 107, 108. ) Did Paul then experience no mental distress, when he trembled and was as- tonished, on finding- that he was persecuting- the Lord of glory ; and when for three days he was without sioht, and could neither eat nor drink ?* Did the jailor tremble only for fear of the earth- quake, or of an ignominious death ? Surely you must have been half asleep when you con- sulted that passage ;-\ else you might have seen, on a bare inspection, that it was not till after "his mind was made easy on that account, by the generous assurance of the apostle," that his trem- bling began. After Paul had " cried with a loud voice, ' Do thyself no harm ; for Ave are all here: Then he called for a light, and sprang in, and came trembling, and fell down before Paul and Silas ; " thus acknowledging them to be the servants of the God of heaven, and con- fessing the guilt of his barbarity to them : and while he hastened to make reparation for the in- juries done them, his conscience being alarmed at the thoughts of his wickedness towards them and of his attempt to commit suicide, he eagerly asked them, " What must I do to be saved ? " * Aas ix. 6, 9. + Acts xvi. 27 .34, 190 Such a question would have been absurd, had he felt no apprehension of danger. He per- ceived that he needed salvation for his guilty soul : nor was it till Paul and Silas had preach- ed Christ to him and his house, and he had "be- lieved on him to the saving of his soul, " that that he began to rejoice. — That true repentance is preceded by convictions, and includes sin- cere contrition for sin, is an opinion, not found- ed, as you allege, on the term regeneration, but on the nature of things, and on the clearest scripture evidences. It is absurd to speak of turning from sin, where no conviction of sin is felt; and conviction is always painful. It is impossible to hate sin, and yet feel no sorrow — no pain at the remembrance of guilt ; but there can be no holiness, and consequently no repen- tance, where there is not hatred of sin. Now, these convictions which must precede conversion, and this contrition which is included in it, con- stitute the whole of that labour and pain which accompany repentance. Your notion, that this change is attended with no pain, is at once in- consistent with some of your own sentiments, contrary to the holy scriptures,* and repugnant to reason and to the general sense of mankind. \ To what purpose are all the threatenings em- ployed in scripture, both in the law and under * Jcr. xxxi. i8, 19. Ezek. xxxvi. 31, 32. 2 Cor. vii. 8.^11, + See Lee. ii, p. 30. 191 the gospel, both by prophets and apostles, both by John Baptist and by Immanuel himself? Are they not intended to awaken transgressors to a sense of their guilt, and excite them to flee from the wrath to come ? How then can you dare to charge those ministers with u spreading gloom and melancholy over all, and giving a most forbidding representation of the christian religion, and of its great Author " (p. 108), who are only imitating their divine Master, in try- ing to produce the same salutary, though pain- ful convictions, by the same important means ? But you are resolved to quarrel at any rate with the friends of this doctrine ; even at the expence of consistency : for while you accuse them of making repentance very gloomy, you with the same breath reproach them with ascri- bing too much joy to it; even the joyful assurance which true converts generally obtain, " that their sins are pardoned, and that they are secured of eternal life." (p. 109.) You allege (p. 147) that men are " proceeding to the utmost height of extravagance, when they feel assured, that their sins are pardoned, and that their eternal happiness is secure." Such " high hopes," you conceive (p. 150 ) ? must be attended vtith "■ spiritual pride and presumption, " and with " contempt for those whom such persons have left below " them. — But if there is any extrava- gance, any pride, or presumption, accompanying 192 such high hopes and exalted joys, what will yon say of the ancient saints and primitive chris- tians, who are almost all represented as expe- riencing these joys and hopes? Why did the Philippian jailor rejoice ? It was because he believed in Christ, and was reconciled unto God. What occasioned the joy of the Ethio- pian eunuch ? A sense of his interest in the sal- vation of Je:us:— and his joy would be en^ hanced by the contrition which he must have felt, while Philip was discoursing on the suffer-* ings of Christ fo** our sins. Why were the primitive disciples in general « filled with all joy and peace in believing ?'"* It was because* " being justified by faith they had peace with God, through our Lord Jesus Christ, and could rejoice in hope of the glory of God."f Consci- ous that they hadtruty believed in Chrkst, and as- sured that none could separate them from his love, they " rejoiced with joy unspeakable and full of glory. "{ All the apostles speak the language of assurance, not only concerning themselves, but often concerning the christians whom they address. And they enjoin all be- lievers to give diligence to make their calling and election sure, they lay down various marks of true faith to assist us in the duty of self-exam- ination, and speak of the assurance that we are the sons of God as a most comfortable attainment, * P.ora. xv. 13. + Rom. v. 1, 2. | Rom.viii. 14..1 3. 31..39. i Pet. i. 8, great day, his judgment will principally turn on the great duties of Morality, and particularly on the duties of Benevolence. This is the most ex- cellent and the most amiable part of the duties of man." (p. 143, 144, 163.) — If these passages do not mean, that moral duties are superior to religious duties, I know not what to make of them. That such a sentiment is repugnant at once to reason and scripture, it will not be diffi- cult to shew. For : what is duty ? Obedience to God, or doing his will. And, in what does this obedience consist ? Not surely in the mere outward act — the opus operatum ; but in the conformity of the heart to the divine will, pro- ducing- that act. Outward acts are acts of obedi- ence, only in as far as they proceed from this inward submission of the soul unto God. Hence it is plain, that neither religious duties, nor mo- ral duties, can consist in mere outward actions ; and that God never enjoins us to engage in the outward actions alone ; for where the heart is wanting, these actions have nothing of the na- ture of duties, or works of obedience to God. Outward acts of worship, and of morality , there- fore, are not required on their own account, but as means of cherishing and bringing into exer- cise those inward dispositions which must ac- company them. The mere outward acts, then, either of worship or of morality, can bear no comparison with acts of real obedience : "Be- •217 hold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams. " But it cannot be said, that outward moral performances are better than outward religious services ; for there is no real goodness in either, abstractedly con- sidered. It may indeed be urged, that outward moral actions are beneficial to men, whereas outward worship is wholly unprofitable to God : but, let it be considered, that outward devotions may also be profitable to men, by Operating- as an example, and in various other respects. Be- . sides, the circumstance noticed, makes no dif- ference in the goodness of these actions before God ; for he has as little need of our acts of charity, as of our acts of worship : he could supply the poor without our aid, and has no oc- casion for our assistance to make his creatures happy. — If then, there is any excellence in mo- ral duties above religious duties, it cannot be in the mere outward acts, but only in the inward exercises which produce or attend them. Now, the spiritual exercises which enter into acts of true devotion are admiration, gratitude, holy desires, resignation, confidence, hope ; and in . short, all those holy dispositions which are sum- i.i' d up in love to God, which, as yon have well observed (p. 73), is " the foundation " of all re- ligion, and which 1 may eull the essence, oj ('piety. But is there any thing more excellent in those dispositions which belong unto moral duties ? 218 Is there more goodness in the exercise of our affections towards our fellow-creatures, than in directing them immediately to the great and amiable Creator? — Then the second table of the law should have been placed first, and love to man, which is the sum of morality, should have been called " the first and great command- ment !" Then also, since the greatest happi- ness must consist in exercising 1 the most holv dispositions, it follows, that our supreme felicity, cannot be placed in loving and enjoying God, but in the love and enjoyment of creatures; and, instead of a heaven where all is devotion, we must look for a heaven resembling the Mahom- etan paradise ! If moral performances are the " higher duties," and religious ordinances have been instituted only for enforcing them, how strangely was the Psalmist deluded, when he counted " a day in God's courts better than a thousand, " and earnestly longed " to dwell in the house of the Lord all the days of his life, to behold the beauty of the Lord, and to inquire in his temple !"* How grossly have the saints in every age been mistaken, when they attended the ordinances, chiefly to glorify and enjoy their God ; and regarded morality, not as the end of religion, but as its necessary ornament !f Devotional exercises are so far from being in- ferior to moral duties, that the latter cannot be * Pf. Ixxxiv. 10. xxvii. 5. t Tit, ii. 1..10. Eph. iv. i, 2. 219 truly holy and acceptable to God, but when they partake of a portion of religion. Love to man is not morally good, unless it is subordinate to, and regulated by, love to God. Without this supreme love, which is the essence of religion, there can be no true obedience to God ; and consequently no holiness. In every genuine saint, this love will be the regulating principle, and will extend its influence to the whole tem- per and conduct ; according to the well-known command; "Whether therefore ye eat or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God. '•** — Hence, there are many actions which have a certain kind of goodness, and which may be called negatively good, in as much as the neglect of them would be criminal, which never- theless do not partake of the nature of holiness, •as they do not proceed, either directly or indi- rectly, from a sense of duty to God, and a su- preme regard for him ; but arise wholly from other principles. For instance, the affection of a mother to her offspring, if not accompanied and regulated by love to God, lias no more of holiness in it, than the attachment of a lien to her chickens, or of a bear to her whelps. In like manner, those acts of compassion which proceed merely from instinctive feeling, and those acts of apparent goodness which are wholly owing to a good natural temper, have no more * x Cor. x. 31, 220 holiness in them, than the meekness of the lamb, or the gentleness of the dove. Even when ap- parently good actions are done from a sense of the natural fitness of things, yet, where a prin- ciple of obedience to God does not enter, there is still no real holiness. Accordingly, Christ assures us, that if we only love those who love us, and do good to those who do good to us, this is no evidence that we are holy. Profligates are often kind to profligates ; infidels to infidels ; and possibly, even devils may be kind to devils. None of those works that are called moral have any real holiness in them* but in as far as they are done under the influence of a religious prin- ciple, — a principle of obedience to God, and su- preme love to him. Yet, while religion must be viewed as, in it- self, of primary importance, and the true found- ation of morality ; the latter is equally indis- pensable in the christian character : for wherever this love to God exists, it will necessarily lead to a universal obedience to his will. Hence it is, that religious duties are not only of vast mo- ment, in themselves, but are eminently conducive to moral goodness. Hence also, we may see the reason why the reality of religion may be tried by " the test of the moral duties." (p. 129) It is not because the latter are greater than the former, but because the same principle which pro- duces the one must necessarilv lead to the other. 221 And here a perfect reciprocity takes place : for, as an immoral life cannot consist with real reli- gion ; even so a profane life is equally incom- patible with true morality. Drunkards, liars, and thieves are destitute of piety ; but swearers and sabbath-breakers are no less destitute of mo- ral virtue : and the outward appearances of mo- rality in the latter, are as pharisaical as the out- ward appearances of religion in the former. The idea that there can be "a good life," where there is not a strict observance of religious duties, is altogether absurd, (p. 144, 145.) Your repeated assertions ( p. 124, 128, 144 ) that, to suppose that God requires acts of wor- ship as important in themselves, is to represent him as " vainglorious, " and " pleased with courtly flattery, " are presumptuous in the ex- treme. What! Are the glorious hosts of hea- ven, who are praising God day and night, no- thing but a crowd of flatterers ? Are his pe pie on earth, whom he hath formed for himself to l * shew forth his praises," whom he hath redeem- ed for this express purpose,* engaged in flatter- ing him, if their highest aim, in their acts of de- votion, is his glory? Would they not rather he mockers of God, if their chief object in these duties were their own moral improvement, or any thing else in preference to his honour ? Af- ter all the exhortations which God has civen us, * I fa. xliii.2i, i Fet, ii, 9. 222 to glorify and praise him by acts of devotion ; shall we dare to say, that his own glory is not the end for which he appointed them ? Away with such blasphemous ideas ! God is "worthy to be praised, " nay, he is " exalted above all blessing- and praise ;" so that the highest praises which men or angels can give him are so far from being flattery, that they fall infinitely short of the honours which he deserves. It is true, that God has appointed religious duties for our happiness, as well as his glory ; for the worship of heaven is at once the work and the blessed- ness of its inhabitants. It is true also, that our praises cannot profit him ; but this remark, as well as the former, will also apply to our moral duties t he has no need of the one, any more than of the other. The same considerations which bind us to obey him, equally bind us to praise and adore him. That your notions oii this subject are wholly unscriptural, is manifest* even from the princi- pal passage which yon adduce to support them, viz. the account of the proceedings of Christ in the day of judgment, contained in the 25th Chapter of Matthew. For, what does Christ there say of the righteous ? " Ye visited me, — yc came unto me, — ye have done it unto me:" In which words, he clearly intimates, that it is only when our works of benevolence are done unto him, from, a supreme love to him, and a 223 regard to his glory, that they are proper evi- dences of a holy nature. Nor can we say that in that place he is speaking- of the highest duties of the righteous, any more than of the greatest sins of the wicked : and be it observed, to the confusion of your system, that he represents the wicked as condemned, not for flagrant crimes, but for mere omissions, — for " imperfections and deficiencies!" He intended to teach us, that truly gracious acts, though of an inferior kind, are sufficient evidences of our being in a justified state ; and, on the other hand, that a mere ne- gative goodness will be of no avail, and sins of omission will be sufficient tokens of enmity to Jesus. You mention the preference which Paul gives to charity above faith and hope, as a proof that morality is superior to religion, (p. 163.) It is true, that Paul recommends charity as more abiding than faith and hope ; but he does not say that faith is less necessary, in our present state ; far less does he affirm, that love to man is greater than love to Qod. It is to no purpose to say (p. 89), that your strictures on prayer, and other religious duties ** are not meant to discourage them." What- ever they might be meant for, this is their na- tural tendency. Mankind, you know, are dis- posed to " keep within the measure of the stand- ard " proposed to them (p. 11(>) ; and those who '224 are averse to religious exercises will eagerly catch at such remarks, to excuse their neglect of the sabbath and of the ordinances. — One of your unitarian brethren, Mr. Belsham,* express!* condemns the sabbath as hurtful to morality ! He says indeed, that " to the christian every day is a sabbath. " This remark sounds finely, but I never heard it used, except by those who wish- ed only to make every sabbath a work-da;/. That this is Mr. Belsham's design, he plainly tells us, when he observes, that " a virtuous mars is performing his duly to the Supreme Being, as really and as acceptably, when he is pursuing the proper business of life, or even when enjoy- ing its innocent and decent amusements, as when he is offering direct addresses to him in the closet or in the temple." So, it seems, the sabbath may be as well spent in amusements, as in di- vine worship \l It is not surprising that you have said nothing- on the ordinances of baptism and the Lord's supper : for, if your system is true, they are only unmeaning ceremonies. V> hat can be more incongruous, than for a unitarian to bap- tize " in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy G host ?■" What more inconsistent, than for persons to use Christ's words in the institution of the supper, " This is my bleed of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remis- * See LisRevie"*" of Mr, WiLBEKroRCt's Trcatife, 225 sion of sins • " when they believe that Christ's blood has no more connexion with the remission of their sins than the blood of Paul or of Stephen? I wonder that unitarians have not wholly laid aside these institutions. The new unitarian ver- sion* could easily have effected this improve- ment : at least, as easily as it has set aside the evangelical doctrines, and got rid of satan, and of hell itself ! It is observable, that in all your performance you never once recommend the reading of the scriptures. Perhaps you are aware that the Bible, as it has been hitherto received, is un- friendly to your gospel ; and you may judge it best to defer such recommendations, till you have introduced the unitarian Testament, as a companion to your new unitarian Hymn-book. I am, &c. j* In fpeaking of that Verfion in Letter ii. p. 46, I have ufed an expref- iion which may be deemed unfair : " Whole Books are cut off as spurious, and others as doubtful." I fhould have faid : " Whole Books are cutoff as doubtful, if notspurious :" foi the framers of that verfion only ven- tuie'to call the rejected Books doubtful. Here Imayalfo notice another inaccuiacy into which I have inadvertently fallen in the fame Letter, p. 11, 1 have afked, '« Who is there that rejects the doctrine of juftification by faith alone, who does not alio deny the atone- ment ?" I fhould rather have faid, " Who is there that pleads for juftifica- tion by works alone, as you have done, who does not alfo deny the atone- ment ?" For there are fome, who hold, however inconfiftently, that an atonement is necefTary, for the acceptance of our faith and obedience as ow juftifying riehteoufnefsj P 226 LETTER XII. On Religious Principles. Sir, As you wish to exalt morality above religious duties, so you also propose this darling idol as a substitute for religions truths. You, allege, that it is of no moment what opinions we adopt, if our conduct be good ; and, that all the points in dispute among professed christians are insignificant : " It is no where said that you are to be judged by your opinions, by your professed principles, but clearly by your works." (p. 162, 165.) " The disputes, the quarrels, the animosi- ties, the dissensions and hatreds, have oil sprung- up about things of no value.'" (p. 110.) To what purpose, then, have you so fiercely attack- ed the friends of evangelical truth ? Why dis- turb them in the possession of their harmless heresies, and thus kindle the flames of religions discord, when the matters in dispute are so trivial ? — But let me contrast with these remarks, what you have elsewhere said of some of these dark tenets : " They are fast paving the way to infidelity— letting- in immorality like a flood— a deadly poison," which even " the excellent cha- racters and exemplary lives " of those who pro- fess thern, cannot counteract! (p. 120, 118, 121.) How the same things can be of no moment, and 227 yet so dreadfully pernicious, is a mystery which rational christians perhaps may believe : for even, they can swallow mysteries. Probably your opinion is, that it is vain to contend/or these points, but of great importance to dispute against them ! That there are matters of inferior moment, a- bout which christians have often disputed keenly, will not be denied : but that the doctrines of grace cannot be numbered among- these trivial points, may be seen by the slightest examin- ation. Even their connexion with the tem- per and conduct of men is of the highest conse- quence. Is it of no moment, whether we be- lieve, that Jesus is our God, or merely our fel- low-creature ? That he died to expiate our guilt, or died only as a martyr ? That we must receive salvation as a free gift, or purchase it L* That the Spirit sanctifies us, or that we sancti- fy ourselves? That we must serve God from love, or serve him for hire P It is needless to prove, that these two classes of principles will have a widely different influence on our tern-* per and conduct : so that a transition from the one to the other will alter the whole system of our motives, and views, and exercises of mind. Our opinions, therefore, on such subjects, affect the very vitals of morality ; and our eternal in- terests are deeply concerned in them. ISnt may not the very adopting of a system of errors be itself a crime, which Cod will punish in the (Jay of judgment? Whence arise gross 228 errors ? Is it merely from incapacity, or the want of the means of information ; and not ra- ther from the depravity of the heart ? What is the cause of infidelity ? Not any defect in the proofs which support Christianity ; as even your own " Popular Evidences" testify. Nor can it be as- cribed to mere want of intellect. It lies in the corruptions of the heart,— pride, the love of sin, and an aversion to the restraints of God's law. These beget a wish, that the gospel were false ; and this impious wish is the root of infidelity. The influence of the will on the decisions of the understanding is well known. Why is even the most upright and intelligent man not allowed to be a proper judge in his own cause? Not be- cause his mind is weaker when applied to his own affairs, than in other cases; but because self-love is apt to blind the understanding, and bias the judgment. To use a favourite phrase of yours, men " work themselves up " into a belief of what they eagerly desire to be true : and hence, it is easy to see how errors in the head may origi- nate in the heart. Accordingly the scripture speaks of unbelief, error, and even ignorance, not as infirmities, but as crimes, — crimes which expose men to God's righteous judgments. They are not traced to weakness of intellect, but to a hatred of Cod, of holiness, and of the truth.* I am, &.c * 2 T!u.f, ii. 10.12. 2 Pet.ii. l iii, i6, 17. John iii. 18..21. aThef. i. 8..JO. 229 LETTER XIII. Concluding Remarks* Sir, Having endeavoured, in the foregoing- Letters, to vindicate the doctrines of grace which are attacked, and expose the leading errors which are maintained, in your Statement, I shall now, in this concluding Letter, offer some general reflec- tions on the spirit and tendency of your system. It is observable, that all the doctrines which you directly attack, are misrepresented. Instead of candidly stating, and fairly combating the sentiments of your opponents, you, in every in- stance, impute to them some heresy which they never hold. This surely does not argue a state of mind the most favourable for investigating truth. It seems to betray a rooted enmity against the doctrines attacked, and a fixed resolution to condemn them without a fair hearing. Is this acting like one who " relies on the justice of the cause which he is labouring to support?" (p. viii.) In the general tenour of your doctrines, there appears a striking contrast between your religion and that of Christ. The religion of Jesus is hum- bling and mortifying ; demanding such a separ- ation from the world, as will generally incur its 230 enmity. * — But your religion flatters the pride of the understanding'; countenances the boast of merit ; requires little or no self-denial, not even the sorrows of repentance ; seems to recognise the follies of the world as " innocent amusements; " and does not expose men to " ridicule and dis- grace, " reproach and persecution. Here the young are encouraged in viewing parental disci- pline as " unnecessary austerity" (p. 121) : the gay and thoughtless, to whom religion is a bur- den, are gratified by hearing prayer-meetings cried down, and the strict observance of the sab- bath discountenanced : nor is nny one alarmed by viewing the terrors of the Lord ; for the des- criptions of the wrath to come are carefully sof- tened (p. 165) : polite ears are not offended with the sound of hell ; and even those whose mouths are familiar with damnation, must not hear it denounced against their crimes. A religion so smooth and easy, so congenial to the dispositions of mankind, is sure to obtain patronage. So long as pride pre vail s, so long as carnal pleasure is loved, so long' as an aversion to serious godliness is felt; such a system will be welcomed. Where weight of argument fails, there is still enough to make the scale prepon- derate in its favour. The biassed mind " works itself up " iuto the belief of such principles, and *Lukeix. 23. xiv. 26, fj, 3.3. xviit. 14. John xv. 1 8, 19. 1 Johnii. 15. iii.- 13, 1 Cor. i, iS; 23..31. 231 pronounces all contrary doctrines absurdity and phrensy. — This gives unitarians a great advan- tage over their opponents, — an advantage, of which, in attacking evangelical religion, they know well how to avail themselves. Against such arts, the strongest arguments from reason or scripture are but a feeble defence. Yet, let it not be supposed that the religion of Jesus is inconsistent with true pleasure. It is common to consider those who withdraw from fashionable levities, and spend much time in de- votion, as morose and gloomy ; strangers to joy themselves, and enemies to it in others. But this is a gross mistake. Genuine piety affords the sweetest pleasures ; — pleasures far superior to all the frivolous joys of the world ; pleasures thnt are noble and angelic, solid and durable. In various passages (p. 8-3, 90, 108) you com- plain of those who preach "(he terrors of the law, and the threatenings of eternal wrath; " and you seem to impute this kind of preaching to a gloomy or malevolent spirit. As well might vcu ascribe gloom and malice to the divine word itself, which abounds with threatenings, .Some of the most tremendous threatenings may be found in the sermons of Christ. And what malevolence can there he in publishing the "ter- rors of the Lord, " along with the joys of his salvation ? His threatenings, as well as his promises. b< >peafc his love; for both .are intend- 232 ed to bring" us to salvation. Is the preacher who " speaks smooth things," and lulls men into se^ curity, to their eternal rain, more benevolent, than he who faithfully " warns them to flee from the wrath to come ?" And now, Sir, permit me, in concluding these Letters, solemnly to declare, that, however severe some of my strictures may appear, none of them have proceeded from a spirit of malevolence. Far be it from me to entertain resentment against you : you never did me a personal injury. God is my witness, that I earnestly desire that this Vindication of his truths may be profitable to your soul, as well as to the souls of others. The time draws nigh, when we must stand before the tribunal of that divine Lord of whom we have preached and written. May we then meet at his right hand : no more to dispute or disagree, but to join in adoring a Three-one God, and ex-» tolling the wonders of redeeming love ! I am, Sir, Your sincere well-wisher, George Young. Whitby, July 16, 1812. Rodgers, Printer, Whiter LETTER TO THE REV. T. WATSON: Occasioned by HIS PAMPHLET, ENTITLED, "EVANGELICAL PRINCIPLES EXEMPLIFIED." BY GEORGE YOUNG. runted by R. Rodgers: SOLD BY RODGERS, AND BY CLARK & MEDD. A LETTER To the Rev. T. Watson, &c« Sir, IN the Letters which I published in an- swer to your Plain Statement, I expressed a wish that my attempt to vindicate the in- jured truths of scripture might prove beneficial to v ourself. This, however, was the language of desire rather than of hope. It was too much to expect, that my publication would be the means of reclaiming you from errors which had been so long and so fondly cherished. Whatever good might be done to others, there was reason to fear, that no salutary effect would be produced on your own mind. \et, as I was not conscious of acting dis- honourably, either in the design or execution of my work, I had a right to expect honourable treatment. I had indeed animadverted with se- verity on some parts of your Statement ; but in no instance was I sensible of using more severity than the ca e seemed to require, much less of doing you injustice, or of acting from principles which I could not openly avow. — What then was my surprize, when, upon reading your re- cent publication, which you have named " Evan- 4 gelical Principles exemplified, " 1 found mv Vindication imputed to the worst of passions and the basest of motives, and myself held up to pub- lic detestation, as a wretch who deserves to be hissed out of society ? You accuse me of " rude- ness and illiberality, — bigotry and intolerance,— hatred and malice, — envy and jealousy, under* mining the character and interests of a neigh-? bour, ostentation, vain-boasting*, and spiritual pride,— unparalleled presumption and consum- mate arrogance, — profanity, hypocrisy, — and. lying unto God !! " You describe me as a ras- cal destitute of integrity, on whom honour, moral rectitude and delicacy, will be no check • — from whom an honest answer cannot be expected ; — whose chief aim is evidently to excite prejudices against vou among those with whom you are connected as a mini ter of religion, to fix a stain upon your character, to ruin your usefulness and to degrade you in society ; — and who', after do- ing all the injury in his power, stabbing you in your character, and in your dearest interests, presumes, with heaven-daring profanity, to crave the divine blessing on such diabolical labours ! ! ! (p. 2, 3, 4,5, C.S-.C.) Now, were I guilty of even half the crimes detailed in this black libel, 1 must indeed be re- garded as a disgrace, hot only to evangelical re- ligion, but to human nature : and it would be vain for me to speak or to write in my own be- half; for who would believe such a \ lliain? But, if it shall appear, on the contrary, that these accu- sations are wholly unfounded ; then, the charges preferred against me inu.it revert upon yourself, the stigma which you would fix on my principles must be fixed on your own, and your pamphlet, in- stead of retaining its present name, must be call- ed " Unitarian Principles exemplified ; " as dt-s hibiting a specimen of the influence of such principles on ilie temper and conduct. What theft are the grounds of these serious charges ? Was there any .thing- in my general character that seemed to countenance them? On this head I am so well satisfied, as to think, that scarcely any who know me will imagine that I could act a part so base and criminal. — Did my conduct towards yon, as an individual, aflferd any indication of such malignity and wickedness ? On the contrary, you allow, that niy behaviour to you in private never betrayed any symptoms of enmity, but fully corresponded with those expressions of regard for your best interests, which 1 have published. This very circum- stance, by a strange kind of pervcrseness, you interpret as a token of the basest hypocrisy : I (juote your own polite and dignified language ; " In our accidental meetings he accosted me as usual, by stealing- forth the hand of friendship, piping out professions of regard, smiling - also with a treacherous countenance, for at the stime time, it now appeal*, that hatred and envy were rankling in his heart ! " (p. &) How far this " now appears" remains to be considered; but here is an acknowledgment, that no presumptive proofs of my guilt a speared in my private con- duct — You have indeed more than hinted a'dark suspicion that 1 have privately interfered with youtf congregation (p. 4. Note) ; but I defy you to produce the slightest evidence in support of this insinuation. With some of your hearers I have been in habits of friendship; and if any of them asked my opinion of your Plain State- ment, honesty required that, if I answered them at all, I should condemn it. 1 recollect too, that in one family I expressed my regret at the intro- duction of the unitarian hymn-book. In no other way have 1 ever interfered with your people. If I have tried to entice any individual of them from your ministry, let that individual come forward and bear witness against me. It appears then, that your accusations must be founded wholly on my answer to your Statement: I therefore proceed to consider what evidences of my wickedness you have produced from my Letters : and it will be proper to begin with the proofs of my malice : for upon this the charges of hypocrisy and treachery, profanity and perjury, entirely depend. You complain (p. 4) that I have called you by names that tend to excite prejudice ; that is, I have called your principles unitarian, and have alleged that you are either an i^rian or a Soci- nian : but if I wronged you by such appellations, why have you confirmed your title to them, by the most shameful misrepresentations of the doc- trine of the Trinity, and of the Divinity of Christ? (p. 19, 20). I have charged you with believing heresies which you have not avowed, and deny- ing doctrines which you have merely omitted : but, if the accusation was false, why have you not boldly disavowed these heresies, and acknow- ledged these doctrines ? You " never promised to exhibit the whole of your creed ; ' yet since the articles exhibited are necessarily connected with those which are studiously concealed, was it not my duty not only to expose the errors which you had published, but those also which form a part of the same system, but which you had thought it prudent to withhold. In the passages to which ,ou thus refer as indications of malice, there is indeed sufficient evidence of hostility to your doctrines, but not a vestige of enmity against yourself. You produce as another proof of malice, my having noticed the favourable reception which your {Statement obtained among persons tine- tured with infidelity. This, you remark, is aft intimation, that all who do not embrace my principles are infilels. ( p. 5 ). By what kind of logic is this inference drawn ? If yon should say, that my book has been favourably received among' baptists, would tins be an intimation that all who do not embrace your principles, or who favour my publication, are baptists? To trace the affinity between unitarianisni and infi- delity, is no evidence of personal enmity. It is done by almost every author who has written a- gainst unitarianisni : and the severest remarks on the subject, in my Letters, are quoted from the ex- cellent work of Dr. Magee on Atonement and Sa- crifice. Your display of profane wit on the subject of satan's existence (p 42), and your remarks on priestcraft, hot-bed christians, crusading- among the heathen, &c. will not tend to convince the public, that your principles bear no resemblance to deism. You exclaim loudly against my taking notice of the introduction of the new collecti n of psalms and hymns into your congregation, in the room of Or. V» atts's. But as the publication of your Statement was the forerunner of this change, I can see nothing unfair, much less any thing malicious, in mentioning it; for it served to illustrate the tendency of your principles, and to prove that I did you no injustice in calling y.it a unitarian. You indeed assert that I have mis- named this hymn-book ; but this I cannot ac- knowledge, till you shew me that it is used in any congregation, where the minister believes in the doctrine of the Trinity. It may indeed be called the universal hymn-book in the same sense in which the system of fruitarians may be called the universal gospel : for a great proportion of the hymns may be used not only by christians -8 and Jews, but even by Turks and infidels. You may possibly get Cleanthes's hymn to Jupiter in- serted in the next edition. Perhaps too, some of the ancient hymns to Mercury or Apollo may be a useful accession. But the charge of malice seems chiefly to rest on my insinuating-, that your care to conceal the more obnoxious parts of your system proceeds from a fear of offending 1 some of your friends; (p. 4). Even here, however, it will be difficult to discern any symptoms of malignity. In speak- ing of your cautious method, I was naturally led to inquire into its causes ; ; nd to hazard a con- jecture on the subject, could be no indication of enmity. But supposing it to be true, that I meant in these passages to apprize your people of the nature and tendency of your scheme, can such a design be termed malicious ? If I believe the doctrines which I have vindicated, it is im- possible to divest myself of compassion for your people, as well as for yourself ; and to warn them of their danger must be an act of benevo- lence. Even upon your own principles it could only be considered as mistaken kindness. And if the action itself is good, its connexion with your interests, or with mine, must be out of the question. Had your Popular Evidences ruined the trade of any person, whose support depended on the prevalence of infidelity, could such an one complain that you had maliciously " stabbed him in his character, and in his dearest interests?" The tendency of your Plain State- ment is to bring evangelical principles into dis- grace, and thus to disperse the congregations of those who preach them ; and you seem pleased with the idea that they " thought their craft in danger " ( p. 2 ) ; yet would it be fair to say, that the chief aim of that performance was to .scatter, the congregations of evangelical minis* ters, " to fix a stain on their character, to ruin their usefulness, and to degrade them in society?" But indeed, so far was I from indulging in the thoughts of hurting your interests in this respect, that, in resolving to publish an answer to your Statement, I laid my account with forfeiting the friendship of all your people ; and it was not without a considerable sacrifice of feeling, that 1 could prevail on mys< If to incur the displea- sure of some whom, on various accounts, I have reason to respect. These are all the passages which you have produced as proofs of my malice. The severity of some of my remarks may also be thought to countenance the charge. But where have I done you any injustice ? Where have I attack- ed your character, except in as far as it is neces- sarily connected with your writings? Where have I tried to hold you up as an object of ha- tred ? I have viewed your principles with ab- horrence, your calumnies with detestation, your reasonings with contempt, — but yourself with compassion. Some instances of severity might well be expected in replying to such a book. You profess indeed ( p. 2 ) to have " preserved the most tender attention and respect for those '* whose principles you attacked But how did this " tender attention and respect" appear ? — By telling them that they " take care to work themselves into the number of the elect; and then, with a savage satisfaction, surrender the bulk of mankind to eternal misery," — by calling* them pharisees and hypocrites, — by charging them with " establishing a system of falsehood and deceit, and banishing truth and integrity. " —and by other expressions of regard, equally consistent with truth, and equally tender and respectful ! It 20 The charge of malice being* now, I trust; completely refuted, it will be easy to dispose of .the remaining* counts in the indictment; for* since the charges of hypocrisy and treachery, profanity and perjury, intolerance and bigotry, with several others, all rest upon this, they must fall to the ground along with it. As t* envy and jealousy, it is needless to say any thing* • for I have yet to learn, that either your celebrity as an author, or your popularity as a preacher, is such as to excite envy. To the charge of " wilful and gross misrepresentation " it is im-± possible to reply ; for you have not quoted a single instance in which I have misrepresented you at all. The proofs of my rudeness and incivility, seem to be wholfy drawn from the circumstance of my addressing the Vindication to yourself: but though this form was adopted for the sake of convenience, why should it preclude me from honestly expressing* my sentiments? .Had I complimented you on the accuracy of your state-- ments, the extent of your biblical learning, the acuteness of your reasoning's, and the candour of your reflections, you might have thought me extremely polite ; but I should then have ap- peared in my own eyes' to resemble the impi'm-* eipled villain whom you have described. As a noted instance of rudeness you refer more thai* once to a passage in my fifth Letter, where I have said that, " m the whole of your observations out this point, " viz. the doctrine of man's inability, ' ** you betray a total ignorance of the subject, or something much worse than ignorance." Your perversions of that doctrine are so palpable that I could scarcely impute them to ignorance^ •done : especially as I was not then so well ac- quainted with your ignorance of divinity as I now am, since the reading* of this pamphlet. 11 You seem to feel peculiar delight' in exposing any vanity and pride, my " unparalleled presump- tion" and " consummate arrogance." In regard to the passages in the second Letter, where mv vanity has been chiefly displayed, you have tried to cure it by leaving- me nothing- to be proud of, except the honour of having- a number of learn- ed friends, lor the knowledge of your blunders concerning heathen morality I w.is indebted to the British Critic, and the " artillery of quota- tions " brought to attack you on that point, was collected from my friends, (p. (3, 7, 8.) It hap- Fens however, unfortunately for my vanity, that have never read the Review of your Statement in ike British Critic ; and, though I have nothing* to boast of in detecting a mistake so obvious, 4. was not aware that it had been publicly noticed. With respect to my " artillery of quota- tions, " I owe nothing to private friendship, ex- cept that I borrowed from a friend three vo- lumes of Cicero's Works, which I happened not to have. For the number of these quotations I have already apologized, ( Vinclic. p. 24, 2o. ) Whatever share of vanity I may have in com- mon with many other authors, 1 trust, my chief aim was of a much nobler kind than either the gratification of my vanity, or the mortification of yours. That I have spoken with some confidence concerning the truth of the fundamental doc- trines of Christianity, cannot be denied. God forbid that I should ever hesitate in acknow- ledging them ! That I have, in some places, held up your reasonings to contempt, is equally unquestionable: and 1 leave it with the public to decide, whether such passages are the oii- Spring of vanity or not. To you it seems, they bespeak " unparalleled presumption" and " con- 12 summate arrogance. " But there is a good old heathenigbt precept, Know thyself, which it may be of use both for you and me to follow more closely. Perhaps there are many whose ideas of your talents as a philosopher, arid especially of your learning as a divine, are not higher than my own. This leads me to notice what appears to be the grand source of all the shameful invec- tives and foul abuse with which this pam, hlet is filled. They may be traced to the workings of bitter mortification and keen resentment. I have presumed to detect your ignorance, to lay open your gross misrepresentations, to expose the weakness of your arguments, and holer* up your silly criticisms to ridicule; nay, shocking* to tell ! I have dared to class you with those ephemerous writers, whose dull productions scarcely outlive themselves. — Aye, here is the dreadful crime that has numbered me with the vilest miscreants ! Here is the atrocious deee( that has fixed an indelible stigma on my cha- racter! This was enough t stir up the wrath even of a cool philosopher, and produce such a mighty effervescence of passion. And now, Sir. let the public judge, whose principles are most exemplified, and most dis- graced by this controversy. If I have said any thing- severe, any thing r,ude, surely you have repaid me an hundred-fold : if you have called my Letters " the blood-hounds of orthodoxy, sent forth to hunt you down" (p. 5}, much more may your remarks on them be compared to the efforts of a wounded snake, that is hissing and spitting venom, when it is incapable of reach- ing its assailant. But it is not on me only that you seek to wreak your vengeance ; your invectives are H- *3 berally dealt out to all who have the misfortune to come in your way. One might be tempted to suppose it an article in your creed, that none who oppose your principles are capable of act- ing from anv honourable motive : for you are determined to view every thing- which they speak or do, in the worst light. Yh ere any alarmed at the appearance of your Statement? They were not influenced by any love for the truths which you had attacked : no, " they thought their craft in danger. " ( p. 2). The Reviewer in the Methodist Magazine called it " a heathenish book ;" for this good reason, that it contains little more of religion than what may be found in the writings of some heathen au- thors : and his expression is charitably inter- preted as a " renunciation of every virtue that appears in the heathen moralists! " (p. 12 ) Do Arminians and Calvinists agree in condemn- ing your principles ? It is an iniquitous league, — Herod and Pilate united to crush the innocent advocate of morality. ( p. 21. ) Do they com- mend one another in any thins"? It is ail iiat- tery ;— paving and returning compliments . (p. 20 21.) Are the friends of evangelical truth liberal? It is ostentation. ( p. 27. ) Are they active in sending the gospel to the unenlighten- ed nations? They are "crusading' among 1 the hea- then." ( p. 44. ) Does a missionary find plea- sure in reading Edwards's Sermon on the Jus- tice of God in the damnation of sinners ? lie is not pleased at finding an important doctrine of scripture ably vindicated, and vindicated in a manner peculiarly fitted to awaken thought- less sinners and lead them to eternal life : No, no ; it would be too candid to make this supposi- tion : he feels a diabolical satisfaction in view- ing the torments of the damned! 'I (p. 4Q.) 14 ?' Judg-e not, that ye be not judged." Let us 4 see how you could bear to be examined by your own standard. In various parts of your writing's, yon have vindicated, with apparent satisfaction, the justice ofGodinthe miseries and death, both of men and of the inferior animals. strange ! How could 3011 rejoice in the woes of mankind, and the tortures and slaughter of brutes ? In this pamphlet (p. 30), vou have considered death as a gieat blessing to the human race, as it car- lies off the superfluous population, to make room for survivors. What precious benefits then are war, famine, ond pestilence ! They are but weeding the world, that there may be room for Ms to grow in it. When the Gazette announces the slaughter of thousands, this must be blessed ■ Dews to such a " lovely saint. " In your Plain Statement, you have repeatedly spoken, and with seeming pleasure, of the justice of God in excluding sinners from happiness; nay, in ma-^ king " a final and everlasting separation be- tween the righteous and the wicked. " ( PI. St. p. 40.) What? Can you also f* enjoy with rapture this delightful picture, which represents the eternal punishment of sinners ? " ( p. 32. ) " Can there be a rational creature, who can ex- tract pleasure from such subjects? " (p. 46.) You see, from this specimen, what might be made of your writings, were they to be meted with your own measure. Raving answered your charges against my- self, it remains that 1 take some notice of what you have written in reply to my Letters. Mere it js unnecessary to say much ; for you have scarcely brought forward any thing that deserves to be noticed, You have repeated misrepre- seutatipns already corrected, and objections al- io ready answered ; and you have perverted aritfm>- her of my expressions; but it will be difficult to find an instance in which you fairly meet my aro-uments. What indeed can be expected but a display of ignorance, when a man presumes to write on subjects which he has never studied? " They have appeared to me always so dark and inexplicable, and of so little use to genuine piety and real goodness, that 1 have ever thought it mispent time to occupy myself with them." (p. 18.) Such is your acknowledgment in regard to some of those articles, the whole of which, at your entrance into the ministry, you professed to believe and promised to maintain! That you have never investigated some of the subjects on which you have written, may indeed be inferred from your professed ignorance of the Works of President Edwards (p. 40) ; a man, whose name will be revered, and whose writings will be admired, in the churches of Christ, long- after your Plain Statement, with its scurrilous? appendix, shall have sunk into merited oblivion. It must be owned, however, that along with this ignorance, a considerable share of cunning is discovered. Some of your apologies, perver- sions, and objections are artfully expressed. You have prudently avoided meeting me on some of those points in which you are most vul- nerable, and have chiefly attacked me on those subjects, in which you have the prejudices of a great portion of professed christians on your side. And where you have not encountered my arguments, you have adopted the wisest method of answering them by pronouncing them "dog- matical assertions, nonsense, contradictions, jar- gon, " and what not. It is curious to read yonr apology for that pas- sage in your Statement which misrepresents the 16 heathen morality. It is "jan unguarded expres- sion. " ( p. 6) ; — a pretty long expression, to be sure, occupying a whole page ! This expression, it seems, would have been sufficiently guarded, had you observed, that the ancient philosophers " prescribed the discipline of the thoughts as exercises to their scholars, yet did not believe themselves accountable for their thoughts. " Were it worth while, it would be easy to shew, from some of the passages which I have quoted, (Vindic. p. 19..24), and from others of the same kind, the gross inaccuracy of this supposed a- mendment. Your blunders about repentance are got over with equal dexterity, by informing the" reader, if I understand you, that it was not the doctrine of repentance, but the promise of pardon and acceptance, that you meant to represent as pe- culiar to the gospel ! (p. 8.) As you think it below you to occupy yourself with the sublime mysteries of scripture, it is no wonder that you should think it mispent time to read my Vindication attentively. This may in part account for the strange perversions of my sentiments, which occur in page 9, and many other places. — I have condemned you for calling any of our sins " frailties and infirmities, for which God is bound to make all gracious allowance ;" and hence you infer, that ,( deny that God, in judging the world, will make any allowance for the unfavourable cir- cumstances in which some men are placed! (pi 2) —I have noticed, as an instance of contempt of the authority of scripture, that unitarians deny the existence of satan, and have accordingly omitted his name in their hymn-book ; and hence you describe me (p. 42) as lamenting, with much feeling, that satan is neglected 1 ! 17 I have asserted that " it would be degrading God, and injuring the interests of holiness, to attempt to form such a character of him as would attract the affections of those who are in love with sin : ' And from this you take occa- sion to hold me up to public detestation, as a savage who exults in contemplating- the per- dition of sinners ! (p, 32, 3-3.) To this idea you often recur, and you seem to dwell on it with peculiar delight ; of what sort let the reader judge. You find it even in the Note in page 80 of the Vindication, (p. 46.) But I might, with equal propriety, infer from your remarks on the subject, that you would rejoice if God were strip- per of his holiness, and would love him supreme- ly if he would not punish the wicked at all. — - I have maintained that man cannot procure the divine favour by his own merits, — that we are justified not by our own works but by the righteousness of Christ, that eternal life is not a debt due to our worth, but is " the gift of God through Jesus Christ our Lord "; and hence you seem to conclude ( p. 37 ) that, ac- cording to my doctrine, the sincere endeavours of God's children to do his will are not pleasing to him, and that he does not encourage them in holiness by promising them gracious rewards! ■ — It is the doctrine of that Church to which you once belonged, and of other Reformed Churches, that those who are truly regenerated, shall not totally nor finally apostatize ; and this senti- ment ou have transformed into an opinion which is held by none, that, " after conversion, be- lievers no more offend, that they have no more occasion for repentance. — but pass into a state of absolute security ! " (p. 10, 11.) Presuming that these are my sentiments, you wish to cate- chise me concerning my conversion ; and ex- c 18 pect that, " if you could depend upon an honest answer," I mu-t own myself a reprobate, (p. 11.) Now, since you have such a desire to be my Father Confessor. 1 will acknowledge tq you that I have much need for repentance ; and that, were I guilty of half the crimes which you have laid to my charge, so far from being- a saint, I could not be numbered among 1 honest men. Yet I must feel some further convictions, before I can confess among my deadly sins the grievous crime of answering your Plain Statement. M ,T sentiments on the nature of faith you have strangely metamorphosed, imagining that by faith i mean only an assent of the understand- . ing unto the truths of scripture, and particularly a belief of the doctrines which I have vindica- ted (p. 15, 16, 17) : whereas, if you had attend- ed to what I have written on the subject (Yind. p. 95,96, 173, 174, See), you might have seen that your remarks have, no connexion with my views of saving- faith. In that case, however, you would have lost an opportunity of display- ing your wit and learning with Galileo, the in-» quisition, and Procrustes. To the same wilful ignorance of the senti- ments of evangelical divines, may be traced those invidious reflections, in which you so fondly indulge, that they insist on the belief of all their doctrines as necessary to salvation, that, according to them, no man can be a sincere be- liever who is not a philosopher and a metaphy- sician, and that they shut out from the everlasting mercy and love oi Goij, all who are npt precisely of |heir sentiments! (p, 8,9, 10, 16, 17, 18, 22). You seem to think (p. 23) that the many man- sions in heaven are intended to accommodate the many denominations of professed christians, —tae fiSocinian mansion, the Arian mansion^ \\§ 19 Arminian mansion, &c. and accuse me of leaf* ing but one mansion, — the evangelical mansion. I confess I am not much disposed to cherish the idea that there will be divisions in heaven, but far be it from me to restrict true faith and true piety to any one denomination of christians on earth. This groundless charge is of a piece with the calumnious reflections on the first sece- dersin Scotland (p. 38), which you have copied from Evans's Sketches, a book more remark- able for its candour towards unitarians, than for its accuracy in describing other sects. That these excellent men disapproved of what is call- ed mixed communion will r adily be granted • but that they affirmed or thought, " that they were exclusively God's people, " is a foul calum- ny which will be believed by those only who are strangers to their eminent piety and worth. You have called on me and my methodist coadjutor to determine how many doctrines are essentially necessary to salvation, and advised us to expunge all the rest from our respective creeds, (p. 21, 22.) It might be presumptuous in either of us to attempt to fix the precise quantity of knowledge that is necessary to sal- vation ; but though it could be djne it will not follow that We Should adopt your counsel. If all truths are unimportant, which we cannot af- firm to be essentially necessary to salvation; then the whole of the New Testament must be of little u e, because true believers were saved without it under the old dispensation. — There are some truths, indeed, which God, for wi,e purposes, has not reveal, d so clearly as other , and which we may therefore affirm to be of in- ferior moment; but, I trust, it has been shewn in the Vindication, particularly in Letter xif, that the doctrines of the Trinity, the deity and 30 atonement of Christ, justification, adoption, sanctification, and other articles which you re- ject as dark and useless (p. 9, 10 17 .20), are by no means of that description, since they hold a conspicuous place in the divine word, and are of the highest practical importance. Some of these doctrines ou have brought for- ward under the name of mysteries, while you evidently attempt to hold them up to ridicule as downright falsehoods, corresponding with the assertion fi that 2 and 3 make exactly 4." (p. 19, 20.) To exhibit them in this light, you have strangely perverted them. In holding the doc- trine of the Trinity, we do not assert, as you insinuate, " that three persons make only one " person ; but that there are three persons in one Godhead: and in maintaining: that Christ is truly God, we do not affirm "that God was born, or that God died, or that God prayed to himself;" for these things are spoken of his human nature. The other doctrines misrepre- sented in that vile paragraph will fall to be no- ticed afterwards. I cannot see, from any thing which you have advanced, that the divine eternity and omnipresence are not mysteries, in the true sense of the word, as much as the sub- jects to which you would restrict that name. It is as difficult to understand how God exists from eternity to eternity, and how he fills the bound- less immensity of space, as to conceive how ho subsists in three Persons. You raise a mighty outcry (p. 16) against fix- ing a standard of faith, and collecting the truths of scripture into a system. Why then did you presume to construct your Plain Statement ? But you have an excuse ready : your system is only a short one, resembling the creeds of primi- tive christians, (p. 14.) It is true, their creed; '21 were short : but to what was this brevity owing? Not, as yon allege, to any similarity between their doctrines and yours : but to the well-known fact, that the heresies which afterwards troub- led the church had not then arisen. Since the art of perverting" the scriptures has become- more common and more subtile, it behoves the disciples of Christ to be more explicit in assert- ing- the doctrines of the gospel ; that they may not hold communion with those who-, retaining* the name of Christianity, reject the substance. — « As a proof of the analogy between your gospel and that which was preached by Peter and Paul, } r ou have traced the doctrine of the resur- rection throughout several of their discourses (p, 43, 44) ; but it would be just as easy to shew, that the doctrines of the divinity of Christ his atonement for sin, and justification by faith in his blood, are asserted in their discourses and Epistles, as articles of equal importance. The manner in which you attempt to defend your reflections on some passages in the Book of Psalms, is truly astonishing. You affirm ( p. 25) that " no man of common understanding can ever conceive them as prophecies ; " with- out taking anv notice of the instances, which I produced ( Vind p. 40, 41 ), in which they are quoted by the apostles of Christ, as prophecies " which the Holy Ghost spake by the mouth of David " ! ! Job s cursing his birth-day is not at all a parallel case ; for the book of Job is not delivered to us as a book of devotion, to be used in divine worship, like the Psalms ; but, though written by an inspired penman, it records several speeches that were not uttered under the influ- ence of inspiration, and some of the sentiments in these speeches are expressly condemned in the book itself. n Your method of defending" your arrangemen of the divine attributes, if not so bold, is at lea* as curious. The passage which you quote fror Till tson ( p. 28, 29 ) exactly corresponds wit jjiv views of holiness; and you could not hav , adduced a stronger proof of the incorrectness c your arrangement: for if "holiness is the beau- ty of the divine nature — God's highest excel lency and perfection," how came you to give it only a subordinate place among his moral attributes ? In regard to my third and fifth Letters, I am quite willing" to join issue with you, in leaving it to the religious public to read and compare what we have written on the subjects there dis- cussed. I would only observe, for correcting your remarks on the former, (p. 27) that, when I appealed to the lives of those who profess evan- gelical principles, to wipe off the reproach of their alleged immoral tendency, the appeal was not made to their public acts of charity alone, but to their moral conduct in general. And I would add, that your reflections on the latter (p. 36), betray the strangest inattention, if not ignorance. I am charged with obscurity, me- taphysical jargon, &c ; because I have distin- guished between physical power and moral power. But, however the terms may sound, the distinction it>elf is plain even to a child. When I say, that a man of clear judgment and ordinary candour neither blinded by passion nor biassed by prejudice, cannot write such a pamph- let as that which I am now reviewing j and when I say, that an unletered Indian cannot write such a pamphlet; it is obvious that 1 am not speaking in both cases of the same kind of im- possibility. Again, when it is said, that a man of strict integrity cannot speak lies, and that ft 23 dumb man cannot speak lies ; a similar distinc tion must be apparent to every one. Now, what obscurity is introduced by calling the one a moral impossibility, and the other a physical impossibility ? 1 did not expect, that it would be necessary to explain to you a distinction so well known. The charge of obscurity, jargon, &c. comes with a very bad grace from you. V> ere it worth while, I could produce many passages from your works which, by their clearness and brilliancy, might astonish the reader. 1 quote, as a specimen, your definition of depravity, on account of its connexion with a subject on which I am presently to enter: '« Depravity implies some original weakness in the moral constitution ; and for which original weakness God will make all gracious allowance." (p. 28) How to interpret this bright sentence I am ut- terly at a loss. If this "weakness" includes any thing sinful, the definition will not answer our purpose ; and, if it implies nothing sinful, there can be no need for " gracious allowance " — You have spoken of an evangelical vocabulary ; but von seem, in many inst nces, to have used a vo- cabulary of your <,wn, which, I suppose, to suit your hymn-book and your gospel, must be call-. e& the universal vocabulary. In this new sys- tem of language j* whole page of blunders is — t' an unguarded expression" abusive epithets' are — marks of " the most tender attention and re- spect," mystery means falsehood, and depravity js weakness. But the doctrines of original sin and predesti- nation form the grand object of your attack.^ Having the prejudices of a great proportion of professed christians on your side in this part of the controversy, your hostility is more open and more fierce than usual ; and all your skill in perversion is employed, to exhibit these doctrines as horrid and detestable. I do not mean, however, to follow you through all your assertions and reasoning's on these topics ; es- pecially as they are discussed at some length in my fourth and sixth Letters, where most of your misrepresentations are already corrected. In- deed, it would be difficult to follow you closely through observations that are not only incohe- rent but contradictory. On both these subjects, you charge me with attempting, like yourself, to conceal the more obnoxious parts of the sys- tem ; and yet, almost with the same breath, you affirm that I have presented them in a form tore horrible than you ever thought of! In the title of Letter fourth, I did not, as you imagine, employ the word depravity as synony- mous with original sin. Had I adopted the latter term, the title would not have correspond- ed with the contents ; for the principal subject, of that Letter is man's actual wickedness. — I did not think it necessary to inquire into the origin of that wickedness ; because the difficul- ties which occur on that head, are not peculiar to the evangelical system, nor even to revealed religion in any form. You are pleased indeed to assert (p. 29) that, " the origin of evil is to- tally out of the question ; " but to me it appears to be the main question about which there is any difficulty. If you can explain how moral evil began in the minds of our first parents, who were created holy ; and how it now springs up in the hearts of their children, while we are sure that an hoi s God cannot be its author ; then, the remaining difficulties will easily be got over. Your statement of the doctrine of original sin (p. 28), like your account of predestination ( p. 40 ), is far from being correct : and hence the conclusions which you draw from it, may be expected to be unfair. Witness that passage (p. 34) in which you try to work upon the feel- ing's of parents. It is true, I maintain, and you once maintained, that " all mankind sinned in Adam, as their representative, and fell with him in his first transgression " : but it is no part of mv principles, to believe that there are any children in hell who have not committed actual sin. The doctrine of original sin does not. as you allege, excite in the breasts of christian parents the most distressing- apprehensions tor the fate of their infant offspring-. They per- ceive, indeed, in their infants, unequivocal proofs of their relation to the first Adam : hut, having: devoted them unto Gcd through Christ, they view them as connected with the second Adam; and are encouraged by these gracious words, "Of such is the kingdom of God, " and that kind promise, " 1 will be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee." The views which you have given us of Adam's fall, and our connexion with it, are drawn with a masterly hand. To prove that the words. In the day thou eatest, thou tthalt surely die, cannot be a threatening of eternal death, it is sufficient to ask, " Were Adam and Eve sent to hell ? (p. 29, -30.) It did not occur to you, that the ques- tion might be retorted, Were Adam aud Eve in- stantly put to death? This question would go as far to prove th t temporal death is not in- cluded in the threatening, as yours does to shew that it does not include eternal death. — In the beginning ol this wonderful paragraph you cry out against the injustice of our sharing in the guilt and punishment of Adam ; and yet, in the clo^e of it, you maintain that \>c are, in fact, us 5(5 much punished as he was ; " Adam was made subject to natural death for his offence . ana we in this share with him:" although with the shme breath you assert that, •' V e are no more answerable for Adam's sin, in justice, than we are for the sins of the fallen angels " ! ! ! The grand difference, then, between our doctrine and yours on this subject, is, that, according to the former, God punishes Adam's posterity, viewing them as guilty ; hut, according fx> the latter he punishes them, while he views them as perfectly innocent ! The degree of the punish- ment is out of the question ; for it is as absurd to suppose that God can do a small act of injustice, as that he can do a greater act of injustice. Nor will it menu y< nr doctrine to say, that God will make compensation in another world for the punishment inflicted (according to you ) on) Adam's innocent posterity in the present ; for? this would be to admit the blasphemous idea that God is now committing crimes, for which he must hereafter atone! Neither can your sentiment> be vindicated by alleging, tha^'this punisl nient ends in goodness, " since fleath pre- vents the world from being- overstocked with in- habitants ( p, 30 ) ; for still it is a punishment, and, in your view a punishment inflicted on the innocent: pa} 7 , it is more severely felt by us than it was by our Sfuilty progenitor ; for his life was prolonged above nine hundred years, hut the term allotted to us extends only to three- score and ten. Besides* though the death of one g-eneration should be viewed as a blessing to their posterity, because it leaves room for them jrt the world, is it therefore a blessing to them- selves ? Death, indeed, removes g-ood men to a better world ; yet still it is a severe and dread- ful thing in itself : and we may safely affirm. 27 that if God had not thought it necessary, as £ just punishment on guilty men,, he would nevev have thought it necessary as a blessing to them. Had mankind conti nued i n i nnocence till/the world Was siith'ciently peophd, if he did. not then think fit to prevent their further increase, he could easily have enlarged their habitation, or have translated a portion of them, from time to time, into a better world, as he did Fnoch and Elijah* without the intervention of death Your remarks on this subject remind me of £ curious idea which occurs in your Popular Evi- dences (p. 181), that *< the tears and cries of in- fants— -may be necessary for their health and exercise — necessary for, their increase, and strength." What a pity it is that mothers and nurses areignorantof philosophy ! Alas! how often do. they injure the health of their tender babes by, soothing* and stilling* them ! Instead of be- ing uneasy at their cries and tears, as they fool- ishly are, they ought to be alarmed at seeing- them smile too often, and should now and then pinch them and tease them to make them enjoy the salutary and invigorating exercise of crying and sobbivig ! . In my fourth Letter, which you represent as, a mass of confusion, I have adopted a mode of reasoning not usually regarded as the most ab- struse,— reasoning from facts. ., One of these facts is, that, nil men actually suffer miseries and death, from which 1 infer, that God views thein. as guilty creatures^ not entitled to favour, but meriting punishment; since a righteous God cannot be supposed to do hi creatures' injustice : '* The fact that all men are subject to 1 miser;; demonstrates that all men deserve misery' ; and the universal reign of death points out the ex- tent of the empire of sin, kc," This argumctii you arc pleased to call " childish ; " but per- haps few readers will see any tMng childish in the matter, except your own awkward attempt to hold it up to ridicule, (p. 34. 35.) Another of the facts from which I have rea- soned is, that " the whole world once enjoyed the ble sings of revealed religion, and the ac- knowledged means of salvation." This fact you are inclined to dispute, (p. 31.) I would ask you then, What heathen nations were there in the world for many years after the deluge ? You must surely acknowledge that there was then a period when all the inhabitants of the globe enjoyed revealed religion ; though its doc- trines, promises, and precepts were not then committed to writing. In connexion with this fact, I have observed, that the present generation of heathens, may be as guilty before God, as their ancestors who first apostatized from his worship ; for the omniscient God may perceive from their dispositions, that, if they were placed in the same circumstances, they would be chargeable with the same apo- stasy. That there is nothing in this sentiment liable to be abused by earthly rulers (p. 35), it is needless to shew, unless it were necessary to prove that they are not omniscient : nor will there he any difficulty in demonstrating that it is perfectly consistent with the justice of God.. There must be an essential difference between human laws, and the rules of his administration* for, being the Searcher of hearts, he judges uot only the works of men, but their dispositions, intentions, and desires. For example; if two persons, who are equally dishonest in their dis- positions, are so circumstanced that the one has no opportunity to commit fraud, while the other is strongly tempted to it, and is guilty of some 29 overt act of dishonest" ; human laws can only take cognizance of the latter, yet. the former is no less criminal in the sight of the Omniscient. It may often happen, that men who, owing- to their external circumstances which keep them from temptations to vice or occasions of indulg- ing in it, do not commit any remarkable crime, are nevertheless much more wicked in their hearts, and consequently more odious to God* than some who are chargeable with daring enor- mities. On the article of predestination it is almost unnecessary to say any thing in reply to what you have written. It may suffice to refer to my sixth Letter, where your objections have been anticipated, and your misrepresentations already corrected. Let the candid reader judge if I have there confounded predestination with pro- vidence, or have used any trick in connecting the one with the other, or have brought forward on that subject any thing detestable, — any thing dishonouring to God or discouraging to man. There is nothing which I have written on that topic which I feel the smallest inclination to re- tract. The first specimen of my sentiments oa predestination which you have quoted (consist- ing of scraps of sentences which you hare tack- ed together and called a sentence ) will be found to contain almost nothing but extracts from the Westminister Confession of Faith and the Ar- ticles of the Church of England, (p. 40.) The other passage, which excites your strongest in- dignation (p. 41), is a conclusion fairly deduced from premises which you have not tried to over- turn. Let the judicious reader examine my rea- sonings in that part of Letter sixth ( Vind. p, 118.. 121), a. id say if it is not fully proved, "' that the eternal ^tate of all who are lost was 30 fixed in the mind of God before they werfc brought into being* ; — fixed, not only by his cer- tain foreknowledge of it, but by his voluntary de- termination to, permit them to be guilty of those sins by which they are ruined.". I have nq doubt that you abhor this humiliating senti- ment ; yet, as far as I can see, you cannot deny it, so long as you acknowledge God to be the omniscient Creator and Governor of all things. Por, if you believe that God actually does per- mit sinners to ruin themselves by their iniquities, can there be any thing horrible in maintaining that he intended to do it ? And, if he is omni- scient, this intention cannot be the thought of the moment - % it must have been hisjixcd purpose from the beginning. The stale objection, that this doctrine "de- stroys the foundation of every duty ; " ( p. 41 ) was examined in the Vindication, p. 1*38. .142. To obviate that objection more fully, I quote a passage from that Sermon of President Edwards which you have vilified, but never read (p. 46) : the extract may at once serve to gratify your curiosity and answer your cavils : " Let the de- crees of God be what they will, that alters not the case as to your liberty, any more than if God had only foreknown. And why is God to blame for decreeing things ? Especially since he decrees nothing but good; How unbecom- ing an infinitely wise Being would it have been to have made a world, and let things run at ran- dom, without disposing events, Or fore-ordering how they should come to pass ? And what is tliat to you, how God has foreordered things, so long as your constant experience teaches you, that it does not hinder your doing* what you choose to do ? This you know, and your daily practice and behaviour amongst men declares (it that v ou are fully sensible of it, with respect to yourself and others. {Still to object because there are some things in God's dispensations above your understanding, is exceedingly un- reasonable ,T Before you commence any new attack on evangelical principles, I would advice you to make yourself better acquainted with the wri- tings of that truly learned and rational divine whose words I have now quoted ; and whom you have brought in for a share of the abuse with which you have loaded me. To prevent such shameful misrepresentations in future, it may also be of considerable service to attend to some judicious observations which you will find in the Edinburgh Encyclopaedia, under the article Calvinism. There is no part of your pamphlet which af- fords more glaring evidence of your inattention to the subjects on which you have written, than your remarks on the success of evangelical preaching in the present day. ( p. 43..47. ) When 1 appealed to the success of the discourses preached by the apostles of Christ, as a proof that the must have been vastly different from the lectures of Plato and Xcnocrates, and conse? queritly from your gospel, 1 was fully aware that the miracles wrought by the former may in part account for the greatness of their success : but if the difference between the doctrine of the one and that of the other is as trivial as your system would represent it, these mh-acles cannot account for the enormous difference in the success of their respective labours. To destroy the force of my argument, you triumphantly state that evangelical ministers in the present day ' make few converts;" and that the evangelical mis- sionaries, who are sentr— to crusade among the 32 heathen, make no converts. " (p. 44.) Your il- liberal reflections on these missionaries, men vh have hazurded their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, who in general are dis- tinguished for piety and goodness, and some of vyhom are persons of great learning and worth, - — are very far from doing honour either to your Ijeart or your head. r Ihe public may judge of the credit due to these reflections, as well as to your accounts of the small success of evangelical preaching in general, by examining your bold and repeated assertion, that these missionaries " make no converts/' From what sources did, you receive this intelligence? It could not be from the journals of the Moravian Brethren, whose missionary labours have produced such glorious fruits, both in the torrid zone, and in the polar regions : and of whose diligence and success among the Hottentots the most honourable men- tion is made in Barrow's Travels in Southern Africa. It could not be from the accounts transmitted by the learned Dr. Carey, and his fellow-labourers in the East, through whose ex- ertions hundreds of Bindoos, and other natives of India, have bee brought unto the light of the gospel. It could not be from the journals of the excellent Dr. Vanderkemp, and his col- leagues in Africa, whose efforts have been bless- ed for bringing many hundreds of the rudest of the human race to civilization and religion. It could not be from the journals of Mr Wray, and other zealous missionaries in the West Indies, and on the continent of South America, through whom multitudes of wretched Negrcs have been cheered with the joys of salvation — What then shall we say of this round assertion " they make no convert- V ? 1 he best con- struction that can be put u^on it, is to say, that 8a you hate presumed to enlighten the world, on a ject about which you are wholly in the dark, and into which you have never inquired. But 1 am wearied with wading- through so much ignorance and sophistry, misrepresentation and abuse ; and would now hasten to take my leave of you as an author; having no wish to enter on a minute examination of every assertion jn your pamphlet, and no intention to reply to any thing- which you may hereafter write on such subjects. You may repeat your misrepre- sentations, and throw out your bitter invectives, as often as you please : I am not afraid that you will overturn my principles by the one, or hurt my character by the other. Indeed it is contrary to the advice of some of my best friends, that I have taken any notice of a pamphlet that does so little credit to the cause which it was written to support. Had it been likely to do any ma- terial injury to my character or principles, it would not have remained so long unanswered. And now, Sir, in taking my leave of you, I again solemnly protest, though this protestation should be stigmatized as " profanity and hypo- crisy, 5 ' that I bear you no malice, but cherish a sincere regard for your present and future wel- fare. Earnestly do I wish, that you may re-ex- amine \ our principles, and be led to the acknow- ledgment of the truth. You make strong pro- fessions of sincerity, (p. 48.) I have no doubt that you are sincere, both in your attachment to your own principles, and your hostility to mine. But it does not follow that your sentiments are not awfully dangerous. Paul imagined that he was engaged in a glorious work, when he was an accomplice in the murder of Stephen ; and, that he was honourably employed, when he was furiously persecuting the church of Christ. u Some of the Jews sincerely thought that they were doing God service, when they crucified the Lord of glory. There are many sincere Jews, mussulmen, infidels, and pagans, as well as sincere unitarians. Blessed are all they who are sincerely attached to a redeeming" God and. to the precious truths of his gospel ! " Grace be with all them that love our Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity. Amen." Whitby, Feb. 9, 1813. I am, Sir, Your sincere well-wisher, George Young. Eodgers, Pi inter, Whitbj. MtM v sM2