the lowest disciple of Chrift is fully informed of all in which he is concerned, by that doctrine which was "preached to the poor," with what pretence of wisdom and reafon can the learned among men pretend to decline being instructed by a fafe and certain, though common, inftruction from the Divine Source of Truth? Can any decent objection be made against the participation of the simplest bleffing from such a quarter, because it is equally within the reach of all the fons of men? It would be the fame folly, and attended by fimilar effects, with the madness of fuch as fhould refufe the univerfal bleffing of light, or the other common benefits of nature. For, if the only way to conjecture with any probability of fuccefs concerning the divine purposes, be through the analogy of his proceedings, it should seem most likely that He, who has made thofe advantages which are necessary for our bodies equally or fimilarly perceptible by all, has likewife made the rule which is to guide all men unto justification and eternal life, difcernible by one common apprehenfion, as it is in the practice confonant to our general nature and conftitution. He alone knows what is best adapted to both, and what will without any danger of misguidance, as it were almost neceffarily, lead us unto truth. But the propriety of this mode in searching after after religious truth, is more particularly evinced in the case of those topics that refpect the agency of the Almighty in the Oeconomy of the Gospel. In confidering these, we must, very evidently, confine ourselves to the caution which has been enjoined by the Apoftle. In order to be here in the least wife, we must become "foolish," that is, void of all knowledge or opinion of our own, and like children to receive implicitly the precise lessons which our Divine Mafter thinks fit to impart. It has, I am confident, been chiefly owing to an offence against this rule of procedure, that mistakes have been made and objections urged on fuch points. It may conduce perhaps not only to the refutation of fome among the most material of them, but to invalidate in general that fufpicion and uneafiness which too often arife upon fuch subjects, if this fault be exposed in a few inftances. A few words will, it fhould feem, be fufficient on each. For, according to what has been faid, the main requisite in facred matters is caution left we go beyond our authority and it is obvious that the instruction which is equally defigned for the ignorant and the learned, must be compriseable in a small compass. Some of the principal topics that have been con controverted are, Predeftination and Election, Grace and Free-Will, Merit of works and Juftification. Of these I shall speak in their order. The first of these rests chiefly on two paffages in St. Paul's writings.* As the words in both are express and clear, whatever they affert is not to be fet afide, however afterwards we may determine concerning the inferences to which they are available. Taking them therefore as they ftand, let us allow that God did according to his own good pleasure select some out of the bulk of mankind, who confequently were admitted to his favour, and in the next life were to be exalted unto glory. They were "fore"known, predestined, called, justified, and glo"rified," fucceffively, "according to God's pur"pose." This is the fimple ftatement of the matter. And this has given alarm and horror to some who think that no regard is therefore * Eph. i. 4, 5, 11, &c. Rom. viii. 28, &c. See alfo Pet. which after the perusal of the above epiftles, especially the laft, to which it is fingularly parallel, does not feem to require a separate confideration; 2 Theff, ii. 9, &c. and other paffages which need not be difcuffed. + It may be proper to add that this election appears to bear a respect unto the fincere Chriftian, as diftinguished from those who as to the means of grace were called as well as himself. For the Gofpel was preached to multitudes who did not accept it, though offered to them. So Matt. xxii. 14. Jude 4, &c. By this laft paffage, and particularly by the example of Judas, Joh. vi, 70. xiii. 11, 18, as alfo by the various texts in the epiftles relating to apoftate, paid unto the fincere endeavour of men to procure the Divine mercy; and have deduced a doctrine from it equally terrible and impious; that all except this certain number are, notwithstanding fuch fincere endeavour, doomed by an arbitrary decree to endless torment. But the answer, I think, is plain and direct. At the fame time. that the Almighty is affirmed to have called whom he pleased to happiness, and doomed whom he pleased to mifery, and to have acted, as it is frequently nay usually said in Scripture, for his own glory, it is first to be confidered that this is the whole of what is afferted on the fubject. Nor is there, I believe, a single text which intimates any thing concerning the mo tives of his choice; or whether thefe do or do not respect the different merits, I mean comparative merits or demerits, of his creatures. There is therefore, fo far as this leads, no direct and neceffary inconfiftency revealed between these principles of his proceedings, and the wish declared in another place that "none should perish, but all fhould come to repentance;" or the conftant tenor of the invitations to the covenant of mercy, and the promises made under it. It might indeed have been expected, that no man apoftate, wicked Chriftians, it appears, as it may by the way be remarked, that even the profeffors of the Gospel were not, in the Scripture language now treated of, always among the elect children of God. could have thought one part of the Gospel inconfiftent with another. At least it surely seems ftrange that, because the Almighty has declared that He acts as He wills, He therefore could not be believed to will nothing, however freely and independently, but what was in the moft perfect degree juft and benevolent to every one of his creatures. For certainly the only conclufion which we could poffibly draw from his attributes, and the hiftory of the redemption, must be that his purpose would be all that was good and gracious. Confiftent with this reprefentation is the truly wife advice given by our Church in her 17th article of fubfcription, wherein, having thefe doctrines on one hand, and the general promifes, threatnings, and exhortations of the Gospel on the other, the directs both to be received. And fo far is the Scripture from fanctioning any other notion than the above, that if in the next place we look more attentively to these paffages in queftion, we fhall find fo irrational and dreadful a suspicion no way related to their scope and meaning. The first of these is in the epiftle to the Romans, which was written chiefly to prove that the Gentile Chriftians were entitled to the privileges of the Gospel as well as the Jewish: and the Apoftle begins the eighth chapter with affuring them that "there was now no 66 con |