sy for your assertion, would you give him your vote to be an officer of the protestant in quisition; if the black tribunal which totters in Spain, should ever be set up in England? OBJ. II. "Your first declaration indeed exalts Christ; but the second uncrowns him to crown our graces;-yea, to crown ourselves as possessed of such and such graces; which is the rankest popery, and the very quintessence of pharisaism."

ANS. How can my crowning repentance, faith, and obedience with a scriptural coronet, rob Christ of his peculiar crown? Are we not indebted to him, both for our graces and for the coronet with which he rewards our acceptance and improvement of his favours? Would it be right in you to represent me as an enemy to the crown and King of England, for asserting, that Barons, Earls, and Dukes have received from him, or predecessors, the right of wearing coronets, or secondary crowns? Is it not the glory of our Sovereign to be at the head of a crowned peerage? And would you really honour him, if on a corona tion day you secured the glory of his imperial crown, by kicking the coronets off the heads of all the peers, who came to pay him hom Would he thank you for that ill-judged age? proof of your loyalty! Would he not reprove you for your unparalleled rashness? And think you that Christ will commend the Antinomian zeal, with which you set up the great image of Finished Salvation in the plain of mystical Geneva, upon a heap of the coronets wherewith he and his apostles have crowned the graces of believers ? Can you search his records without finding there the doctrine, which you represent as treasonable or heretical? Did you never read, "O) woman, great is thy faith! Thy faith hath saved thee?" And what is this, but allowing believers to wear a salvation coronet, a coronet this, which they will justly cast before the throne of the grace that gave it them, and offered it all the day long to those, who obstinately put it from them? Did you never read, "We are saved by hope-Be faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life: He is the au thor of eternal salvation to them that obey him. He will give the crown of life to them that lore him," &c. Is not this granting a salva tion coronet to the hopeful, faithful, obedient, loving believer? And if you throw my Scales away, and cry out, "Arminian Methodism turned out rank popery at last," think you there are no Bibles left in the kingdom? No people able to read such Scriptures as these? Let no man beguile you of your reward through voluntary humility,-fair speeches, and deceivableness of unrighteousness. Hold fast that which thou hast, that no man take thy crown" on any pretext whatever: No, not on the most plausible of all pretexts, The title of a Calvinistic Pamphlet published

against the FOURTH CHECK.

OBF. III." You may turn and wind as long as you please; but you will never be able to reconcile your doctrine with the doc trines of grace; for if you have the least trust and confidence in your graces, you do not trust wholly in the Lord; you trust partly in an arm of flesh, in direct opposition to the scripture,cursed is the man who trusteth in man, and maketh fresh his arm." Jer. xvii. 5.

ANS. I grant that our doctrine can never be reconciled to what you call the doctrines of grace," because your partial doctrines of grace are irreconcileable with the holy, free, and equitable gospel of Christ: but, we can as easily reconcile the primary trust mentioned in our first declaration, with the secondary trust mentioned in the second, as you can reconcile my second Scale with the first. Our secondary confidence, which arises from the testimony of a good conscience, no more militates in our breast with our primary confi dence, which arises from the love of Christ; than our regard for the Queen excludes our respect to the King. In mystic Geneva indeed they teach, to the honour of the King, that the royal spouse is all filthy; but in our Jerusalem we assert, that she is all glorious, and that the King greatly desires her beauty. To uncrown her therefore, and load her with infamy, can never be the way of honouring and pleasing our Melchisedec.

With respect to the passage which you pro duced from Jeremiah, the sense of it is fixed by what immediately follows," And whose heart departeth from the Lord." These words show, that the trust forbidden in that Scripture, is only such a trust in men and things, as makes our hearts depart from the Lord. Now this can never be the trust and confidence mentioned in our second declaration: For, in both declarations, we secure to God, as the first cause; and to Christ, as the first means, ALL the glory which is worthy of the first cause, and of the first means: And, I repeat it, if you ascribe to the Lord any other glory, you insult him as much as you would a prince, if you gave him the glory which be longs to his consort or his cook :-) mean the glory of bearing fine children, and of making good sauces.

Again: There is no medium between some degree of trust, and the utmost degree of distrust. Now if the Scripture which you proProduce, absolutely forbids every degrees of infe

rior trust in man or things, it follows, that the out working out their salvation with fear and more full we are of distrust and diabolical trembling, according to their light.-4. Most suspicions, the more godly we are. And of the Jews that have been saved, have gone thus, for fear of putting any degree of secon• to heaven without any explicit, particular dary trust in man or in things, we must mis- acquaintance with Christ's merits: (See trust all our wives as adulteresses, all our Equal Check, p. 43. Note.) but none of them friends as traitors, all our neighbours as in was ever saved without fearing God and cendiaries, all our servants as murderers, and working righteousness. 5. To this day, those all our food as poison. But if this fair conse that are saved, three parts of the world over, quence of our doctrine stands, what becomes of are in general saved by the gracious light charity, which thinketh no evil, and hopeth all that directly flows from the second gospelthings! And if the words of Jeremiah are to be axiom through Christ's merits, although they understood in your narrow sense, what becomes never heard of his name. 6. England and of Christ himself, who reposed a degree of trust Scotland, where the redeeming work of in man,—yea, in Judas, whilst he counted him Christ is gloriously preached, swarm neverfaithful? That expression of Job therefore, theless with practical Antinomians; that is, "He[the Lord] putteth no trust [that is, no with men who practically separate works absolute trust] in his saints," is to be understood from faith, and the decalogue from the creed. so as not to contradict the words of St. Paul, Now all these Gnostics follow the foolish "He [the Lord] counted me faithful, [i. e. virgins, and the unprofitable servant into trusted in me] putting me into the ministry;" hell, crying Lord! Lord! and forgetting to or the prophetic words of David concerning do what Christ commands.-7. We cap Christ and Judas, " yea, mine own familiar never be too thankful for the light of both friend in whom I trusted, who did eat of my axioms; but were I obliged to separate [multiplied] bread, hath lift up his heel them, I had much rather obey with Oba against me." diah, Plato, and Cornelius; than to believe with Simon Magus, Nicholas, and "Mr. Fulsome."

.

To conclude: If England smiles yet at the imbecility of the king, who durst not venture over London-bridge, and wondered at those who trusted that fabric as a solid bridge; shall we admire Zelotes's wisdom who wonders at our having a scriptural, inferior trust in the graces which form the christian character? And shall we not count it an honour to be suspected of heresy, for having a sure trust and confidence, that true repentance, and nothing else, will answer for us the end of repentance ?—That true faith, and nothing else, will answer for us the end of faith? That evangelical obedience, and not an imputed righteousness, will answer for us the end of evangelical obedience And that final perseverance, and not whims about "finished salvation," will answer for us the end of final perseverance.

Having thus answered Zelotes's objections against the declaration which guards the second gospel axiom, I shall now present him with some observations upon the importance of that axiom.

1. The FIRST axiom, or the doctrine of grace, holds forth chiefly what Christ has done; and the SECOND axiom, or the doctrine of obedience, holds forth chiefly what we are to do; now, any unprejudiced person must own, that it is as important for us to know our own work, as to know the work of another. 2. In the day of judgment we shall not be judged according to Christ's works and experiences, but according to our own.-3. Thousands of righteous heathens, it is to be hoped, have been saved without knowing any thing of Christ's external work: but none of them were ever saved, without knowing and doing their own work, that is, with

One

These, and the like observations appeared so weighty to judicious Mr. Baxter, that in the preface to his Confession of Faith, page 29, he says, "The great objection is, that I ascribe too much to works.-I shall now only say, &c. that I see many well-meaning, zealous men dividing our religion," [which is made up of the two-gospel-axioms]" and running into two desperate extremes. sort" [at the head of whom is Zelotes] “by the heat of opposition to popery do seem to have forgotten, that faith and Christ himself are but means, and a way for the revolting soul to come home to God by; and thereupon place all the essence of their religion in bare believing; so making that the whole, which is but the door or means to better, even to a conformity of the soul to the image and will of God. Others" [at the head of whom is Honestus] "observing this error, fly so far from it as to make faith itself, and Christ, to be scarce necessary : So a man, have God's image, say they, upon his soul, what matter is it, which way he comes by it? whether by Christ, or by other means? And so they take all the history of Christ to be a mere accident to our necessary belief, and the precepts only of holiness to be of absolute necessity. The former contemn God, under pretence of extolling Christ.-The latter contemn Christ, under pretence of extolling God alone.-He that pretending to extol Christ or Faith degrades godliness, thereby so far rejects God; and he, that on pretence of extolling Godliness, degrades Faith, so far rejects Christ, &c. I therefore detest both these extremes: [that of Zelotes and that of Ho

pel liberty. And, if at any time "Mr. Fulsome's" humours call aloud for physic, it is given with so much honey, that the remedy sometimes feeds the mortal disease.

Honestus sees, and justly dreads the error of Zelotes: and to avoid it, he is so sparing of gospel-encouragements, that he deals chiefly (if not wholly) in severe precepts, and hard duties. You may compare him to a stern father, who, under pretence of making his children hardy, and keeping them in proper subjection, makes them carry as heavy burthens, as if they were drudging slaves, and threatens to disown them for every im propriety of behaviour.

1

Not so a gospel-minister, who reconciles both extremes. He knows how to use sweets and bitters, promises and threatenings, indulgence and severity. He is like a wise and kind father, who does not spare the rod when his children want it; but nevertheless wins them by love as much as possible ;—who does not disinherit them for every fault, and yet does not put it out of his power to do it, if they take to a vicious course of life, and obstinately trample his paternal love under foot. Reader, who of the three is in the right, Zelotes, Honestus, or the Reconciler?

SECTION XVIII

The doctrines of Free-grace and Free-will are farther maintained against Honestus and Zelotes by a variety of Scripture-arguments.

spring from God, is it not evident, that he is the first cause of our genuine righteousness, as well as of our existence?

3. When God says, "Ask and you shall have," does he not shew himself the original of all that we want for body and soul, for time and eternity? And if God owes us nothing if the help that his done upon earth, the Lord [originally] does it himself," is oft not the height of ingratitude and pride to restrain from God, and arrogate to ourselves, the glory due to him and his infinite perfections?

܂

147 We are commanded in every thing to give thanks; but if grace is not the source of all the good we do, or receive; dues it not follow, that, in some things, the original glory belongs to us, and therefore we deserve thanks before God himself? And is not this the horrid sin of Antichrist, who "sitteth as God in the temple of God," and there re.ceives divine honours, “ as if he were God ?? P 5. Does not reason dictate, that God will not give his glory to another, and that even "the Man, who is his fellow," must. pay him homage? Is it not the Almighty's incommunicable glory to be the first Cause of all good, agreeably to those words of our -Lord, There is none good, (i. e. self-good, and truly self-righteous) but God," from whom goodness and rigteousness flow, as light and heat do from the sun? How dangerous then, how dreadful is the error of the selfrighteous, who are above stooping to divine goodness, and giving it its due! If robbing a church of its ornaments is sacrilege, how sacrilegious is the pride of a pharisee, whỏ, by claiming original goodness, robs God's grace of its indisputable honours, and God himself of his incommunicable glory!

43

I fatter myself, that the harmonious op position of the Scriptures produced in the preceding sections, demonstrates the truth of the gospel-axioms. But lest prejudice should hinder Honestus and Zelotes from yielding to conviction, I present them with some scriptural arguments, which, like so many buttresses, will, I hope, support the doctrines of Free-grace and Free-will, and render them as firm as their solid basis, Reason and Re-Christ the righteous, (as the son of David) velation. I begin with the doctrine of free grace.

6 To shew Christians how ridiculous and satanic is the pride of the self-righteous, I need only remind them that Christ himself

declined all self-righteousness. Did he not call his works," The works that I do in my 1. How gladly would Honestus stoop to Father's name," or by my Father's grace? and triumph in Free-grace, if he considered And did he not, as it were, annihilate himthe force of such Scriptures: "Without me self, when he said, "Why callest thou me you can do nothing :-What hast thou, which good," without any reference to the Godhead, thou hast not received" in a remote or imme-of which I am the living temple -“ I can diate manner?" We are not sufficient of ourselves to think any thing as of ourselves, but our sufficiency is of God."-Who hath first given HIM, and it shall be recompensed unto him again? For of him, &c. are all things."

do nothing of myself. I speak not of myself, but the Father that dwelleth in me, he does the works-Learn of me to be lowly in heart?” What real Christian can read such Scriptures without learning to disclaim all self-righte ousness, and to abhor, pharisaic dotages? If Honestus is a reasonable christian, I need say no more to reconcile him to Free-grace.