ページの画像
PDF
ePub

of a moral nature; and therefore commendable and difcommendable. I mean (1) That God's goodnefs confifls in the perfect reditude of his eternal will, and not in a want of power to do an act of injustice; and (2) That the devil's wickednefs confits in the complete perverfnefs of his obftinate ill, and not in a complete want of power to do what is right. Examples will explain this.

A rock cannot do an act of justice or an act of injuftice, becaufe reafon and free-agency do not belong to a ftone: therefore the praife of juftice, or the difpraife of injuftice can never be wifely beftowed upon a rock. If a rock falls upon the man who is going to murder you, and crushes him to death, you cannot ferioufly return it thanks, because it fell without any good intention towards you; nor could it poffibly help. falling just then. Not fo the Rock of ages, the Parent of rationals and free-agents: he does juftice with the higheft certainty, and yet with the higheft liberty; I fay with the highest liberty, becaufe, if he would, he COULD, with the greatest cafe, do what to me appears inconfiftent with the fcriptural defcription of his attributes? Could he not, for example, to please Zelotes, make "efficacious decrees" of abfolute reprobation, that he might fecure the fin and damnation of his unborn creatures? Could he not proteft again and again, that he willeth not primarily the death of finners, but rather that they would turn and live; when, nevertheless, he has primarily, yea, abfolutely appointed that most of them fhall never turn and live? Could he not openly command ALL men EVERY WHERE to REPENT upon pain of eternal death; and yet keep мOST men every where from repenting, by giving them up to a reprobate mind from their mother's womb, as he is. fuppofed to have done by the myriads of" poor creatures" for whom, if we believe the advocates of Calviniflic grace, Chrift never procured

procured one fingle grain of penitential grace? Could he not invite all the ends of the ewth to look unto him, and be faved, and call himself the Saviour of the world, and the Saviour of all men, tho” especially of them that believe (of all men, by initial falvation; and of them that believe and obey, by eternal salvation) when yet he determined from all eternity, that there fhall be neither favi-our nor initial falvation, but only a damner and finifbed damnation, for the majority of mankind? Could he not have caufed his only begotten Son to affume an human form, and to weep, yea bleed over. obftinate finners ; protefting, that he came to fave the world, and to gather them as a ben gathers her brood under her wings; when yet from all eternity he had abfolutely ordained their wickedness and damnation, to illuftratebis glory in a word, could he not prevaricate from morning till night, like the God extolled by Zelotes;

a God this, who is reprefented as fending his minifters to reach the gospel (i. e. to offer "finished. and eternal falvation?) to every creature, when his un-conditional, efficacious decree of reprobation, and the

Et

When Calvin fpeaks of the abfolate deftruction of so many nations, which ("una cum liberis eorum infantibus") together with their little children are involved WITHOUT REMEDY in eter-. nal death by the fall, he fays that " God foreknew their end before be male man: "and he accounts for this foreknowledge thus: "He foreknew it, because be bad ordained it by bis decree :”—a decree This, which three lines above he calls "borribly awful;" ideo præfcivit, quia decreto fuo fic ordinarat." Decretum quidem horrible, fateor." And in the next chapter he obferves, that, "For as much as the reprobates do not obey the word of God, we may well charge their difabedience upon the WICKEDNESS of their hearts; provided we add at the fame time, that they were devoted to THIS WICKEDNESS; because, by the juft and unfeirchable juagment of God, they were raifed up to illuftrate his glory by their DAMNATION.'Modo fimul adjiciatur, ideo in hanc pravitatem addict os, quia jufto, et infcrutabili Dei judicio fufcitati funt, ad gloriam ejus fua damnatione illuftrandam.” This Calvinifm unmasked may be feen iu Calvia's Inflitutions, Third Book, Chap. 23. Sect. 7.--and Chap. 24. Sect. 14.

partiality

partiality of Chrift's atonement, leave to multiplied. millions no other profpect, but that of finished and eternal damnation ?---Could not God, I fay do all this, if he would? Do not even fome good men indirectly reprefent him as having acted, and continuing to act in that manner? Now if he does it not, when he has full power to do it; if he is determined not to fully his veracity by fhuffling, his goodnefs by fuch barbarity, his juftice by fuch unrighteoufnefs; or to ufe Abraham's bold expreffion, if the Judge of all the earth does does right, when, if he would, he cOULD do wrong, to fet off his " fovereignty" before a Calviniftic world; is not his goodness praife worthy? Is it not of the moral kind?

The fame might be faid of the devil's wickedness. Though he is confirmed in it, is it not fill of a moral nature? Is there any other restraint laid upon his repenting, but that which he firft lays himself? Could he not confefs his rebellion, and fufpend fome acts of it, if he would? Could he not of two fins, which he has an opportunity to commit, chufe the least, if he were fo minded? But, granting that he has loft all moral free-agency, granting that he fins neceffarily, or that he could do nothing better if he would; I ask, who brought this abfolute neceffity of finning upon him? Was it another devil who rebelled 5000 years before him? You fay, No: brought it upon himself by his wilful, perfonal, unneceffary lin: and I reply, Then, he is blame-worthy for wilfully, perfonally, and unneceffarily bringing that horrible misfortune upon himfelf and therefore, his cafe has nothing to do with the cafe of the children of men, who have the depravity of another entailed upon them, without any per fonal choice of their own. Thus, if I miftake not, the doctrine of liberty, like the befpattered fwan of the fable, by diving a moment in the lympid ftreams of truth, emerges fairer, and appears purer, for the afperfions

afperfions caft upon it by rigid Bound-willers and Fatalifts, headed by Mr. Edwards and Mr. Voltaire.

SECTION XXI.

The fourth objection of ZELOTES to a reconciliation with HONESTUS. In answer to it the Reconciler proves by a variety of quotations from the writings of the Fathers, and of fome EMINENT DIVINES, and by the TENTH ARTICLE of our church, that the doctrines of FREE-GRACE and FREE-WILL, as they are laid down in the SCRIPTURE-SCALES, are the very doctrines of the PRIMITIVE CHURCH, and of the CHURCH ENGLAND. Thefe doctrines widely differ from the tencts of the Pelagians and ancient Semipelagians.

OF

BJECTION IV.. "You have done your beft to vindicate the doctrine of moderate freewillers, and to point out a middle way between the fentiments of Honeflus and mine, or to fpeak your own language, between rigid free-willers and rigid boundwillers but you have not yet gained your end. For if you have Pelagius and Mr. Wefley on your fide, the primitive church and the church of England are for us: nor are we afraid to err in fo good company."

Anfwer. I have already observed, that, like true proteftants, we reft our caufe upon right reason and plain fcriptures and that both are for us, the preceding fections, I hope, abundantly prove. Neverthelefs, to fhow you, that the two gofpel axioms can be defended upon any ground, I fhall, fift, call in the Greek and Latin Fathers, that you may hear from their own mouth, how greatly they diffent from you. Secondly: To corroborate their teftimony, I thall

fhow

how that St. Augulin himfelf, and judicious Calvinists, in their right moments, have granted all that we contend for concerning free-will, and the conditionality of eternal falvation. And thirdly, I fhall confirm the fentiment of the Fathers by our articles of religion, one of which particularly guards the doctrine of Freewill evangelically connected with, and fubordinated to Free-grace.

I. I grant, that when St. Auguftin was heated by his controverfy with Pelagius, he leaned too much towards the doctrine of Fate; meaning by it the over-ruling, efficacious will and power of the Deity, whereby he sometimes rafhly hinted that all things happen: (See the note page 105; but in his belt. moments he happily diffented from himself, and agreed with the other Fathers. Take fome proofs of their averlion to fatalism and bound-will, and of their attachment to our fuppofed "herefy." (1) Fiftin Martyr, who flourished in the fecond century, fays: "Si fato fieret ut effet aut improbus aut bonus, nec alii quidem probi effent, nec alii mali:" Apol. 2. That is if it happen by FATE (or NECESSITY that men are either good or wicked; the good were not good, nor should

:

the wicked be wicked.

(2) Tertullian, his co-temporary, is of the fame. fentiment: "Caeterum nec boni_nec mali merces jure penfaretur ei, qui aut bonus aut malus neceffitate fuit inventus, non voluntate." Tert. lib. 2. contra Marc.-No reward can be JUSTLY beflowed, no punishment juflly inflicted upon him, who is good or bad by NECESSITY, and not by his own CHOICE. In the fifth chapter of the fame book he afferts, that God has granted man liberty of choice, "ut fui dominus conftanter occurreret, et bono fponte fervando, et malo Sponte vitando; quoniam et alias pofitum hominem fub VOL. V.

M

judicio

« 前へ次へ »