THE liberty, or necessity of Human Actions, hath been a warm Contro­versy; a very doubtful, and per­plex'd Inquiry; as well among Di­vines, as Philosophers.

The Philosophers that said, all our Acti­ons are necessitated, offer'd for their Opi­nion; chiefly that, as the Understanding al­ways, and necessarily imbraceth (seeming) Truth; so the Will chooseth, and cannot but choose, what seemeth good, and best. In short, the Will ever followeth the present [Page 4]Dictate of the Understanding: what to the Understanding (for the present) seemeth Truth, or good; the Will cannot but approve, and practice. From these Maxims, it follows that, all Errors are involuntary, and all our Choices necessary.

But more generally the Philosophers de­nied this fatality of Truth and Error, of Good and Evil; and some of them with a particular Zeal. They are the words of Alex­ander Aphrodisiensis, in his excellent Book de fato to the Emperors Antonini. ‘Si fatum, tum non sunt laudationes & vituperationes; at si istae non sunt, non est bonum vel malum morale: & si ista non sunt, profecto nec Dii.’ i. e. If there be Fate, then there is neither Praise nor Dispraise; but if these are not, neither can there be moral Good or Evil: and if not these, neither truly are there Gods, or a Divine Nature. Therefore these Philosophers denied, that the Under­standing always affects, or necessarily submits to TRUTH: and much more that the Will necessarily imbraces apparent GOOD, or what seems BEST. It is too well known, said they, that; we are so far from always seek­ing, or necessarily submitting to Truth; that we are even afraid ordinarily, and very shie, of being convinced of some (unconvenient) Truths. And hence it is, that 'tis seen in daily Experience, that; Men as readily and [Page 5]easily shut the Eye of the Understanding against (unwelcome) Truths; as they can shut the bodily Eye against Light; and there­by exclude it. I may add, not only parti­cular Men, but whole Nations do this. Can there be a more bright Truth than, that; a piece of Bread is not a human Body? And yet against this, so many Nations have shut the Eye of the Understanding; believing that a (consecrated) Wafer is the real Body of Christ. In short, Interest, or even only Prepossession, often disposes Men to reject the very clearest Truths.

As to the other, that; the Will always, and necessarily imbraces apparent GOOD, and what seems BEST: the Philosophers opposed it by divers Arguments. Where­ever there is Prudence, say they, and Rea­son; there is also a Power of deliberating: and where Deliberation is, there can be no Constraint, no Necessity of any sort; if there were, there would be no deliberating. And whereas some urge, that, after delibera­ting, we always and also necessarily choose what seems GOOD, or BEST. That we always choose it, if it were true, yet were not to the purpose: For I may always choose a thing, and yet I may choose it freely, and not as constrained or fatally. But it is not true, that we always choose what is Good or Best; for sometimes, only to show that we are [Page 6]free, and not determined fatally by the Goodness or Excellence of an Object or Choice, but by an [...], an arbitrary or self-movement; or out of mere Wanton­ness, and Game; we choose, or do, not what is Good or Best, but what hath some un­convenience.

And, if it were necessary to the Will, to choose what (for the present) appears to the Understanding to be Good, or Best; we could never advise, consult, or deliberate at all: for the Understanding sees at first view, a Goodness in some things, and in others that they are best in some respects. It tarrieth for all that, it suspends its Action and Choice; it adviseth, whether there be not something still better: it may be the Consideration and Election is laid by, for days, or weeks, or even for years; which sheweth that the Goodness or even the Excellence of things, doth not necessarily and inevitably dispose us to Choice, or Action. It seems imper­tinent, to renew here the Exception, that, let the Consideration or Election be delayed never so long, we shall at last necessarily choose what shall seem Good, and Best: for I demand, why now, more than before? what seem'd Good and Best, did not before necessarily determine me, therefore neither can it now, merely because 'tis Good or Best.

Again, the most perfect Being of all, GOD; who judgeth what is Good, and Best, unerringly; doth not always choose the Best. He could have made the World, and every Creature in it, more perfect than they are: he could have made the World big­ger, Mankind more numerous, and morally better: He could have made us all impec­cable, as the Saints in Heaven are: He could have provided that there should nei­ther be Sin nor Misery in the World. That he hath not chose these best things; best as well to himself, as to the Creature; was from the Freedom of his Will. And if thus the Will of the most perfect Mind, is free to choose; is not obliged necessarily, by the Light in his Understanding; much less are our less perfect Minds: because, ha­ving less Light in our Understanding; our Understanding can but feebly influence our Will: so far will it be, from necessarily de­termining it.

As Philosophy has been always studied together with Divinity, 'tis obvious to ob­serve that many Divines, and very potent Parties of Christians, have followed in the Question now before us, the sense of the particular Philosophers, or Sects of Philo­sophy, whom they admired. For some have contended for it, that we have a [...], an [...]; an absolute, and arbitrary [Page 8]Freedom of Will, to choose Evil or Good, and to refuse. While others have said, on the contrary, that all Men are under some such natural, or (if you will) moral Impo­tence; that we cannot choose or will Good, without the Grace of God, exciting us, and assisting us, by irresistible Acts. The first of these is Pelagianism; the other hath had se­veral Names, but since the Reformation, it hath been called Calvinism, now (more commonly) Jansenism. What I take to be the Doctrine of the Catholick Church, and of the Church of England (and is a middle, between the Extremes of Jansenism and Pe­lagianism) but is not very commonly ob­served, or not so dexterously proposed; I shall represent and vindicate by and by. At present, I observe only in general, that the Catholick Church disapproves the Con­clusions of the Philosophers, as well of the one, as the other side. The Church doth not think, the ordinary (the civil) Choices or Actions are in any degree necessitated; but that there is a liberty of Action, and Choice: A liberty, that is grounded on the Prudence, and Reasonableness of our Natures, and the (consequent) Power of deliberating. And yet, neither doth she believe, that the Human Reason, Understanding, or Will, is sincere and sound: the Depravation by ori­ginal Sin is such, that we cannot choose [Page 9] Spiritual Good, or affect Divine Truths; by the natural strength of our (corrupted) Wills, and Understandings; but by the Power and Assistance of Grace only.

The Dispute concerning Grace, and the Powers of the Human Will, began shortly after the year 400. and was first managed by St. Jerom, and St. Austin, on the one side; and on the other, by Pelagius, Caelestius and Julianus. In the same Age, tho much later in the Century, it was argued on the one hand, by Joannes Cassianus, Vincentius Lirinensis, and Faustus of Rhiez: on the other by Prosper, and Fulgentius; besides others of less note. In the next, and the following Ages, there were on the Pelagian side (softned by J. Cassianus into Semi-pela­gianism) Hilary and Leontius, Archbishops of Arles; Rabanus, Hincmarus, J. Scotus; and divers Councils. On the contrary side, were Remigius, Lupus, Ratramnus, Godes­chalcus; besides not a few Councils. Of the Divines of the Schools, St. Thomas; of the Orders of the Church, the Dominicans; were great Asserters of Grace: allowing scarce any thing, if any thing, to Free-will, and our natural Powers. But the Francis­cans, and it may be the greater number of the School-Divines, tho they believed the Grace of God is necessary; yet they could not agree to it, that nothing is to be done, or [Page 10] can be done, by the Human Will and En­deavour. Shortly after the Reformation, this Question was disputed afresh, by the Jesuits, Socinians, and Remonstrants, against the Dominicans, Calvinists, and Jansenists.

I am not aware, that there is any enquiry, that more deserves a careful and heedful Discussion, than this concerning Grace, and Free-will. If, either we our selves do not rightly understand it, or our People do not apprehend, what is our meaning; 'tis im­possible they should make sense of what they hear in this place. They can neither understand the Publick Prayers, especially the Collects; nor our Sermons, and Exhor­tations to them. For sometimes they are told they must forsake Sin, and must follow after Righteousness; or 'tis not possible they should be saved. 'Tis well, but they are told also, they themselves can do no­thing of all this: it must be Grace, if per­haps God will grant it to them, whereby only they can leave Sin, or can follow Righteousness. But what sense do we sup­pose can they make of these two Sayings; and what Troubles must these Doctrines raise in the Mind; when we consider them with any heed? I must forgo every Sin, I must always do the thing that is right and good: and yet I cannot do it, but only by God's Grace given to me; nor is that [Page 11]Grace in my Power to procure it: 'Tis the free Gift of God, to whomsoever he giveth it; and alas, how many have it not; or rather, how (very) few have it?

And what follows from this? Why, that, all our Exhortations and Reproofs, are to no purpose: unless we could also (at the same time) give to the Persons reproved and exhorted Grace; to comply. It seems also to follow, that; it became not the Wis­dom of God, to give any Laws, or Rule of holy Living; to Persons who are utterly uncapable of obeying: without that Grace which is bestowed, but on some, and but sometimes. It should seem, we can as little defend the Sincerity of God; in professing that, He willeth not that any should perish; and that he willeth, that all may be saved. For the condition of Salvation, being Obedience; and that Condition, not practicable but by Grace: it must needs be understood, that God willeth those Persons should perish, to whom he doth not give his Grace.

There is no saying, in the case; let 'em pray for God's Grace. For all, that assert the necessity of Grace to every good Action, and Disposition, are obliged to maintain, and do maintain that; the Affectus Orandi, the hearty Disposition to pray for Grace or other spiritual Good, can arise only, from Grace, aforehand given to the Person so [Page 12]praying. Or will you send them for Grace to the holy Sacrament? But our Books seem all to agree in it, that; I know not how many Graces are pre-required; that one may so receive the Sacrament of the Altar, as not to be damned thereby. It might have been said, however: an honest Inten­tion, and reverent Performance, are suffi­cient Preparation, and Qualification for that Sacrament, or other Gospel-Ordinance.

The Subject we are upon will not admit of further prefacing. As I said therefore, I shall now propound a Middle, between the two Extremes, of Pelagianism and Jansenism. The Doctrine, I take it, of the Catholick Church: a System concerning Grace, and the Human Will, which is clear of all the Difficulties, whether Theological or Philoso­phical, hitherto mentioned. It may be coucht in these (few) Articles; and Texts, and Arguments, that support them.

‘1. Whatsoever Good we will, or do, is neither done nor willed, without God's Grace; his Grace moving us thereto, and assisting us therein.’ This Article is di­rectly against the Pelagians, that hold the absolute Freedom, and arbitrary Power of Man's Will. And it seemeth very plainly expressed, or clearly implied, in these (fol­lowing) Texts.

Out of the Old Testament. Psal. 119.35, 36. Incline my Heart, O Lord, to thy Testimonies. Make me to go in the way of thy Commandments. Jer. 31.33. saith GOD there: I will put my Law into their inward Parts; I will write it on their Hearts. Ezek. 36.26. A new Heart will I give them, a new Spirit will I put into them. Lam. 5.21. Turn thou us unto thee, O Lord; and we shall be turned.

Out of the New Testament. John 6.44. No Man can come unto me, saith our Saviour there, except the Father, who sent me, draw him. Acts 16.14. The Lord opened the Heart of Lydia, that she attended to the things, which were spoken by Paul. 2 Tim. 2 25. If per­adventure, God will give to them Repentance. 2 Cor. 3.5. We are not sufficient, as of our selves, to think any thing; our sufficiency is of God. Phil. 3.13. It is God that worketh in you, both to will and to do, of his own good Pleasure. Heb. 13.21. The Lord make you perfect, in every good Work; working in you, that which is well-pleasing in his sight. 1 Cor. 15.10. (being the words of our present Text) Not I, but the Grace of God which was with me.

These Texts, as I said, either express, or imply, these two things. That, we are under a Disability, however it hath happened, to do, or so much as to will that which is [Page 14]good; by our own Strength, or Endeavour of any sort: And that 'tis by the Grace of God, given to us, that we are dispo­sed to do, or even to will Good.

But for the right, and full apprehending this first Article; 'tis to be noted, that: By the Grace of God, is sometimes meant, the Act; and sometimes, the Habit of Grace.

The Act of Grace, is any Operation, or Motion of the Divine Spirit, upon our Spirits; whereby it exciteth us to Good, or enables us therein. The Habit of Grace, is the gracious, or good frame of Mind; that is be­got in us, by the many former good purposes and Acts; that had been caused in us, by the particular Motions, or Actings of the Di­vine Spirit.

If the Pelagians, or Semipelagians, had observed this; they would not have alledged, the purpose of King David, to build a Tem­ple to God: nor St. Paul's essaying to preach the Gospel in Bithynia. They would not have pleaded, that God forbad David; and forbad that Apostle to execute their Purpo­ses: and that therefore, tho they were indeed good purposes; of necessity, they proceeded not from a motion of God's Spirit. That God forbad them, sheweth indeed; those Purposes came not, from what we have called, the Act of Grace; namely, a particu­lar Motion of the Divine Spirit. But they [Page 15]might, and did proceed, from the Habit of Grace: from the gracious, or holy Frame of their Minds, that had been wrought in 'em, by former Motions, and Operations of the Spirit. In short, I say; every good Purpose, as well as good Action, is from Grace: either from that Grace, which is a particular Motion of the holy Spirit: Or, from the Habit of Grace; that ariseth from the many former Motions of the Divine Spirit; and disposes us to well-doing, in the general.

'Tis very plain, I think, that this Reflecti­on fully and clearly answers to that Excepti­on; raised from David's, and Paul's holy Pur­poses, which God forbad. For we do not say, that; all good Intentions, and Actions, are from the Act of Grace: which is a particular Motion of God's Spirit. No, many good Actions, as well as Purposes, are from the Habit of Grace; even that good Frame of Mind, that was generated by some former Actings of God's Spirit.

I need only to add here, that; tho the In­stances of David, and of Paul, do not prove that, we can design Good, much less can do it, without Divine Grace: Yet they prove, with certainty, the Doctrine of the Church, that; good Actions, or Designs may proceed from the mere Habit of Grace; from a re­formed, renewed, regenerate Heart or Mind, without a particular Motion of the Spirit [Page 16]of God. For had those good Purposes of David and Paul issued from an immediate and particular Motion of the Divine Spirit, called the Act of Grace; 'tis not imaginable they would have been forbid, as we see they were, 2 Sam. 7.5. Acts 16.17. I am per­suaded also, this is our Saviour's meaning, in those words, Mat. 12.35. A good Man, out of the good Treasure of his Heart, bringeth forth good things: q. d. the renewed, reformed Frame of the Heart, doth as easily and na­turally yield sutable Actions; as an ill Man from his vitiated corrupt Heart, vomiteth evil Actions, Designs, and Words.

2. What ought to be chiefly observed and insisted on, but is commonly overlook'd, by the Managers of the Dispute concerning Grace and Free-will: I say, what is most material in this Dispute, is. ‘The Grace of God, sufficient to Conversion; and such a Frame of the Heart, as we have just now described; is common to all: Is so given to all, that no Person doth miscarry, but by a wilful neglect or dis-use of the Grace given to him.’ Let us briefly, but effectually prove this Article; it will dissolve most of the Difficulties, that are objected, by contending Parties, through this whole Question.

For a general Proof of it, we may ob­serve, that: As so many Texts do aver the [Page 17]necessity of God's Grace, to enable us to do, or to will that which is good. Many more (express) Texts require of ALL, Repentance and Well-doing: and other Texts declare, 'tis much against the Will of God, that any should perish. Therefore these latter Texts plainly suppose an universal Grace of God, a general, common Grace, given to all. For it were a most wretched Impertinence, or a manifest Mockery, to command all Men, every where, to repent; which are the express words of holy Scrip­ture: Or to blame, and upbraid them for want of Faith, or of Righteousness. And yet much more to damn them for the lack of these things; professing in the mean time, that God willeth not that any should perish, but that all should be saved. I say, this were an open Mockery, or an Im­pertinence, if there were not a common and general Grace of God: in the use of which, we can do, as is required of us; can believe, repent, and do Righteousness.

I take this to be a very solid Proof of uni­versal Grace; namely that, universal Grace is supposed, and is implied in the Commands, and Reproofs of the Divine Word. In the Exhortations used to All at present; and in the Judgment that God will pass at last on all impenitent, unreformed Persons. And finally, in the repeated Professions, made [Page 18]by God, that; he willeth not that any should perish, but that all should be saved. 1 Tim. 2.4. He willeth all Men should be saved. 2 Pet. 3.9. Not willing, that any should perish; but that all should come to Repentance. He even confirmeth this with an Oath, passed to us. Ezek. 33.11. As I live, saith the Lord; I have no pleasure in the death of the wieked; but that the wicked turn from his way, and live.

Nor does there want particular Proof of universal Grace; or that, sufficient, saving Grace is given to all. John 1.16. Of his Fulness we have all received [...] Grace upon Grace, or abundant Grace, or (as Grotius here) Grace gratis. Ephes. 4.7. Ʋnto every one of us is Grace given, accord­ing to the measure of the Gift of Christ. Titus 2.11. The Grace of God, that bringeth Salva­tion, [...] illuxit omnibus hominibus; hath shone out unto all Men. So that, the Grace of God (that Grace which bringeth Salvation) whatsoever we take it to be, or whereinsoever we imagine it doth consist; it hath appeared, hath shone out unto all Men. Some critical Interpre­ters render this Text, rather more to our present purpose, thus: ‘The Grace of God, that bringeth Salvation to all Men, hath appeared.’ And this rendring more nearly follows the order of the words in the Original Greek.

It is true, some of these Texts may be taken in a sense different from what we have pretended to: it will be found notwith­standing, that, however taken, they do not less favour the Doctrine we are proving. For instance, admitting that, the words of St. Paul; ‘The Grace of God, that bringeth Salvation unto all,’ hath appeared; may be understood of the Gospel, which is here called the Grace of God, in the opinion of divers. The Gospel, say they; the external or outward Grace of God, is here meant; not the inward Grace, of which our present Question is. I say, admitting that, the Gospel is here meant; yet this Text supposes an uni­versal, inward Grace of God. For even in the opinion of those who understand this Text of the Gospel, the mere outward Gospel doth not bring Salvation to any; but the Gospel, as accompanied by the internal Grace, that maketh it effectual: So that, if it be true, what the Apostle saith; ‘That the Gospel, that bringeth Salvation to all, hath appeared:’ it must be true, that, an uni­versal (internal) Grace goes along with it. And this indeed was the Opinion of the antient Doctors; who all believed, that: the internal Grace of God doth always ac­company the holy Word, Ordinances, or Gospel, to make it effectual to all such, as resist not the offer'd Grace; the Grace that [Page 20]follows the Word, and other Divine Insti­tutions.

The Arguments we have alledged, may serve, I think, to caution us against a com­mon Mistake, in our way of speaking. For when we see, or hear of some very ill Action, or course of Life, by any Person or Persons; we say ordinarily thereupon, yes, for want of Grace: Implying that such Sinner had not Grace. But the particular, and especially the general Proof that we have given, of the universality of Grace, ought (as I said) to caution us against that vulgar Error, in Speech. When others sin, let us say, according to the Truth; not, he wanted Grace; but, he used not, or he neglected the Grace common to all: Even as we say of Prodigals, or Ill­husbands; not, that they have not Reason, or cannot consider; but, as the truth is, they use not their Reason, and use not the power of Consideration common to all Men.

3. It hath appeared, I suppose, that; the Grace of God is necessary to all, and hath shone out unto all: but we must now add fur­ther, that: ‘This Grace doth not operate in an unresistible manner, but in a way sutable to our Reasonable Natures; that is to say, in the way of moral Suasion.’ Let us again, in few words, prove the for­mer; and explain the other, even Moral Suasion.

I said, the Grace of God doth not ope­rate in us in an irresistible manner: it will gently and sweetly move; not constrain and force, in a physical way. The Divine Grace moves us, so agreeably, and in a way so soft, and natural; that ‘We cannot distin­guish its Motions upon our Minds, from our own Thoughts, and the proper Movements of our own Spirits.’ We may resist, reject, and refuse the Grace; by which we should be either converted, or bettered; as we may, and often do, the different Thoughts, and various Counsels, of our own Minds. That we can refuse the Grace, and Spirit of God, striving with us, for our good, is clear in a great many Texts: I shall need to instance but in some, that are particularly remarkable. Ezek. 12.2. They have Ears to hear, and hear not; they have Eyes to see, and see not; because they are a rebellious House. Acts 7.51. Ye stiff-necked, and uncircumcised in Heart; ye do always re­sist the Holy Ghost. It even appears that, all Grace, both external and internal, is used to some, who notwithstanding so reject it, as not to be bettered in the least by it. Isa. 5.8. What could I have done more, saith the Lord, to my Vineyard (the House of Israel) that I have not done? Wherefore then, when I ex­pected it should bring forth Grapes, hath it brought forth wild Grapes?

As to the other, that; the Grace and Spirit of God, do work in the way of mo­ral Suasion. The meaning hereof is; we are excited to Good, by the Spirit's representing to our Minds such Arguments, and in such seasonable Opportunities, as are sufficient to persuade, and to dispose us, to choose this good way, and to refuse the contrary evil. The Divine Spirit first suggests good Thoughts, and then, proper Arguments and Motives: it brightens also those Arguments, to give to them the greater force. What we hear, what we read, the Mercies of God, and his Judg­ments: the Spirit represents all these in the fittest time, and best manner; in a more effectu­al manner, than Human Wit and Endeavour can. If we should say also, the Spirit sometimes elevates our Minds; clears 'em, and (as it were) enlightens 'em, by an extraordinary Act: we should thereby speak, not disagreeably to not a few Expressions of holy Scripture. Briefly, moral Suasion is no other thing, but reasonable Persuasion. I say, reasonable Persuasion; by the Word taught, by holy Readings, by Hea­venly Suggestions; by Favours, by Chastise­ments: and by that Long-sufferance, and Patience of the Lord; that subdues, and wins ingenuous Minds. ‘All these, and all such like, represented to our Minds; after a Divine manner, by the Spirit of God, which always accompanies them; are what [Page 23]is called, moral Suasion, or reasonable Per­suasion; or God's Spirit, or Grace, acting by moral Suasion.’

It was thus, that the Lord opened the Heart of Lydia, to hearken to Paul. The Dis­course, and Reasonings of Paul, were (as I said) brightned upon her Mind; and her Mind it self was cleared, and elevated by the Divine Spirit. There is no Hearer but often experiences this Power of the Spirit, on his Mind; and it may be, divers times, during one reading or hearing.

Let us see to it, that we resist not the Holy Ghost; as the Apostle hath said, that we quench not the Spirit; but comply with, and be led by, those his blessed Motions. Which brings me to another Article; very necessa­ry to a right Apprehension, of this (much litigated) Enquiry concerning Grace, and the Powers of the Human Will.

4. 'Tis necessary towards well-doing, and towards Conversion to Good, that; we re­ceive, and embrace the Motions and Strivings of Grace, and of the Divine Spirit, with our Spirits. 'Tis necessary that, our Wills do accept offered Grace; that we will and endeavour to be good. For our Wills ( ex­cited, and quickened by Grace) can will Good, and endeavour it: in a word, can comply with the Intention of the Divine Spirit; moving us to Good.

There is an opening of the Heart, on our part; as well as on the part of God; saith that Text, Rev. 3.20. I stand at the door, and knock; saith our Saviour there to the Churches; if any Man will open unto me, I will come in. Some other Texts speak more plainly. Jer. 4.4. Circumcise your selves to the Lord; take away the fore-skin of your Hearts. Ezek. 18.31. Cast away, from you, your Transgressions; make you a new Heart, and a new Spirit. When these Texts bid us, to open the door of the Heart, to put away the fore-skin of the Heart; nay, to make us a new Heart, and a new Spirit: they evident­ly suppose our Free-will; and Power of co­operating, with Grace. That is to say, as our Will is made free, and is enabled to co-operate; by that Grace that is given, and is continued to All.

I said, and is continued, to All. For our present Life having been given to us, in or­der to our Salvation: 'tis reasonable to think, that; ‘ The term of Life, and the day of Grace, are co-extended.’ The Grace of God, I say, is not withdrawn; while our Life is indulged to us: and least of all, from such as are in fear, that they have out­sinned the (supposed) term of Grace; for such a Fear implies many Graces, as particu­larly Repentance and Faith. I confess how­ever, this Point hath considerable Difficul­ties; [Page 25]and we need not, to affirm it. That Text before quoted; If peradventure God will give to them, Repentance; may seem to imply, that. Some Persons may have sinned so obstinately; that is to say, so long, and so audaciously: that it will please God, to with­draw from them that Grace, which is suffi­cient to convert, and change them.

And this, at length, is that System; Scheme, or Account, concerning Grace and Free-will: that, as I said, at first, is free of all the Incumbrances; that so much distress the other two Schemes. The Scheme, I mean, of the Pelagians; who maintain an arbitrary and absolute Free-will, to Good as well as Evil: which has been condemned, as Heresy; by the Catholick Church. And the Scheme of the Jansenists, who admit only of an unresistible Grace: a Grace, that never operates but by an Omnipotent Act; and which, they say, is given but to few. What we have advanced, to the contrary of both these, may be abridg'd; into these two Propositions. The Human Will; made free by Acts, or by the Habit, of Grace; can will, and do GOOD. And, this Grace is given to all; if also it be not continued, while their Life is.

This Scheme provides, for the Honour of God; by ascribing to his Grace, (as Janse­nius, and Mr. Calvin do) our whole Power [Page 26]of doing, or willing that which is Good. It provides also with the other Party, or Free­willers, for the safety of every Person: by sup­posing, what the Pelagians knew not; an universal, sufficient Grace of God, given to All. ‘A Grace, that accompanies all the holy Ordinances; and all other means, of reclaiming Sinners.’

Our Scheme justifies also the Wisdom of God; in giving Laws, to Persons disabled by ori­ginal Sin: it clears the sincerity, of the eternal King; in professing, that he desireth the Salvation of all. For his sincerity, as well as his Wisdom, is manifested beyond contra­diction: by that Grace, which (we have proved) he bestows on All; and that goes along with all the Invitations to Good. It shows, that we may exhort one another, and be exhorted by our Teachers; to all the Du­ties, required in the Divine Law. For tho it be most true, that; without Grace we can do nothing: this System informs us (in the words of holy Scripture;) that. Of his Fulness, we have ALL received Grace, gratis. That, to every one of us is Grace given. That, the Grace of God; that Grace which bringeth Salvation to ALL; hath appeared.

But this once more. Take away this Sup­position, of universal Grace; and see what follows. All Reproofs are impertinent, all Exhortations to no purpose; all Punishment [Page 27]is both lost and undeserved. Because the Persons for lack of Grace, can act no other­wise than they do. The Divine Majesty hath mocked us; by Laws, that we cannot obey: and by proposal of Rewards, that we cannot obtain; for want of his Grace. All our Sins, the very worst of them; toge­ther, with our Damnation; are to be im­puted, not to the wilful neglect of the Sin­ner. But to a defect, of Divine Mercy; and Sincerity: in withholding necessary Grace; and yet professing, that God willeth All should be saved. I ought to think, this learned Assembly abhors these Confequences; and no less sees their immediate Connexion, with the Doctrine of partial Grace; or Grace that is given but to a few.

The Opinion of only partial Grace, is grounded on two Distinctions: the most sur­prizing (to give them no worse Name;) that ever were advanced, by Men speaking of GOD. For when we urge the Declara­tions of God, in the Divine Word; that he WILLETH the Conversion, and Salvation of ALL.

As to the WILLING, they answer by the famous Distinction; voluntas signi, & beneplaciti. Of which, the English is this. God indeed makes show, by external signs; such as exhorting, and reproving; that he willeth the Salvation of those Persons. But [Page 28]we are not to judg of his real meaning, by those Signs: for tho he exhorts, reproves, and even swears to them; after all, 'tis his secret Pleasure, and absolute Purpose, that they shall be damned.

As to the ALL; or that, God willeth All should be saved: they answer again, with the Distinction; singuli generum, & ge­nera singulorum. In English thus. Not all Persons, but Persons of all Orders. That is to say, High and Low, Old and Young, Men and Women; some of all these Orders and Ranks. If now, we should suppose. The King publishes an Act of Grace, to all his Subjects; saying therein: it is our Will, that they be All indemnified; and not any of them be punish'd for past Faults. But the Judges, in their executing this Act, in­terpret it thus. Some Persons, of all Ranks and Orders, shall be indemnified; shall be restored to Estate, and Name: some, I say, of every sort, and degree, among them. Women, as well as Men; old, as well as young; rich, as well as poor; some FEW of all these. I cannot but think, every body would say; such Expounders of the King's Indulgence, do very much abuse and per­vert their Master's gracious, and general In­tentions.

And let us see, what it is that has occa­sioned the Jansenists, and other learned Men, [Page 29]to betake 'em to such remote, and unsuffi­cient Defences. For all that I remember, 'tis only this. ‘If God indeed willeth, that ALL should be saved; then, ALL shall be saved: for what God willeth, he hath all Wisdom, and Power, to effect it. But it is certain, ALL shall not be saved; therefore, neither doth God really will that they should be saved.’ I shall grant, this were home to the purpose; if our Scheme said, God willeth absolutely and positively that; ALL shall be saved: without any Conditions, to be performed on their part. But we say only, God willeth that, ALL may be saved; unless themselves will not: that is, unless they will not perform the Conditions. God willeth, that ALL be saved; How doth he will it? Why, on the Conditions or Terms, proposed in his Word; on the Conditions of Faith, Repentance, and newness of Life. Unto which, ALL are called, by his Ordinances; and ALL are enabled, by his Grace, if they will use it. The Grace, we mean, that accompanies the holy Ordinances; and all other means of reclaiming, or perfecting us.

In a word, it was never said, as is sup­posed in the Objection; that GOD willeth the Salvation, of ALL; or of Any, abso­lutely, and unconditionately: but only, on this Supposition; that they use the Grace, [Page 30]whereby he enables 'em to obey him.

And thus, as fully as the Time would allow: I have proposed, as I undertook, and vindicated; what, I take, to be the Doctrine of the Church; concerning GRACE, and FREE-WILL. I hope, it hath appeared, with some clearness, that, as Pelagius mistook: in maintaining the present Freedom, and absolute Power of the Human Will; without Grace. So others mistake, as dangerously; as his Error has been judged presumptuous: while they deny, either the Ʋniversality of God's Grace; or the Co-operation of the Hu­man Will, and Endeavour.