HAVE you seen the late Mr. Dickinson 's Second Defence?

I have indeed.

And what do you think of it?

I think, he was very angry.

And had be not Reason to be angry, for your "wilful false Citations of his Words? P. 9. You say to him, that the Contro­versy betwixt us is not whether our Salvation be owing to the free rich and sovereign Grace of GOD; but whether GOD does re­quire any Thing at all of us, in Order to our Salvation, or as a Co [...]ition of our entering into Heaven, this you tell him he denies. P. 10. And about six or seven more Particulars be enumerates, and says they are wilful false Citations. P. 1. And none of these Things are to be found in his Book, from whence you pretended to cite them. P. 11.

You have now repeated his Charge against me for wilful false Citations. And pray tell me uprightly, when you read his heavy Complaints against me, did not your Breast swell with Indignation? And don't you think that every one who reads his Performance, and never saw mine, will certainly conclude from him, that I am a most abandon'd Liar? Nay, and impru­dent beyond a Parallel? Because, he confesses, that when I as­serted [Page 16]these Things, I referred to the Page, that every one with his own Eyes may see my Knavery.

I can't deny, but that when I read Mr. Dickinson 's Accu­sation against you, I felt my Heart rise against you with Abhor­rence and Detestation. And I [...], the Case is much the same with all other Readers: For all Men hate a Liar. And though Mr. Dickinson has not used the Term Liar, yet he has charged you with the Crime in the highest Degree. And I must own, I had rather any Man should in express Terms call me a shameless Liar, than say of me what Mr. Dickinson has said of you. The Words are not so much to be regarded, as the Thing sig­nified.

May I then have the Liberty to vindicate my self, and prove, that every one of these Things are to be found in his Book, in the Pages refer'd to, which he says are not one of them to be found in his Book? And if I do this effectually, will you not accuse me of Railing, and abusing the Dead?

I think, no innocent Man should contentedly rest under so hea­vy a Calumny. There is certainly most impudent and barefaced Falshood on one Side or the other. And if you continue silent, now that GOD has spared your Life; every one will be apt to con­clude, that the Lying is on your Side. And though Mr. Dickinson is removed out of this World, yet he has Friends enough (especially Mr. Foxcroft the Voucher) who will vindicate him, if you wrong his Memory. And though I think you are a very erroneous Man, yet I would have Justice done to an Enemy. And therefore will patiently hear what you can say to vindicate your self, provided you don't rail.

Is speaking necessary Truth Railing?

No, but then you must express it modestly, and use soft Terms.

May I not be severe towards my self, and express my self thus, "If what Mr. Dickinson has laid to my Charge be true, then I am as impudent a Liar as ever lived; but if what he has said be not true, then he was under a small Mistake? And pray did Mr. Dickinson write with Temper and Moderation; when the very first Words of his Letter to me contain no lower an Accusation than that of wilful false Citations, in English, horrid Lying? Would you think that Man excelled in Modesty and good Temper, who should send a Letter to you and begin thus,—Sir, "You are an impudent Liar?"—Every Body knows, there is no Difference between a wilful Falsifier, and a Liar. [Page 17]And pray tell me, how it was possible for him to know, that it was done wilfully, if done at all? Is every false Citation wil­ful? And pray does it appear probable that I should wilfully falsify in citing, when I refer to the Page? Unless he had the divine Prerogative and knew my Heart, he could not safely charge this upon me. But I attribute it to the Ruffle and Con­fusion he was put into upon reading my Defence. And we must allow Losers to complain.

But tell me did not you cite falsly?

I declare solemnly, and as I expect to meet my departed Friend before Christ's Judgment-Seat, I can't find in my own Heart that I had any Inclination or Temptation to cite him falsly. I found (as I thought) so many shocking Absurdities in his Performance, that I had no Manner of Occasion to invent any, and father them on him. And upon a Review of Facts, I don't find that. I have miss'd in any Citation, even so much as one Syllable, as he did by me even in that Moment he was charging it upon me. But I scorn to insist upon such a Mis­take; much less say it was a wilful Falshood: For this looks too much like a furious unbridled Passion: However, I desire not to clear my self by Protestations; let me be tried by the Facts; They will not lie; but shew whether I am guilty, or not guilty. And let every Reader be Judge. Pray do you read the Fact I stand charged with.

The first wilful false Citation, is this You said to him, ‘The Controversy betwixt us is not whether our Salvation be ow­ing to the free rich and sovereign Grace of GOD; but whe­ther GOD does require any Thing at all of us in Order to our Salvation, or as a Condition of entring into Heaven: This you tell him he denies.’ P. 10.

This is no Citation at all, and therefore can't be a false Citation. I was then stating the Question as I understood it, and as I apprehended this to be the Case, so I refer'd the Reader to P. 47. that he might judge, whether I had a right Un­rdestanding of it, or not. I don't there pretend to cite one Word of his, how then can it be a wilful false Citation? Mr. Dickinson under every Head almost states the Question agreeable to his own Mind, but very contrary to mine; but never did I incline to charge him with Lying for it. Has not every one who engages in Controversy a Right to state the Question; and say, what he supposes his Antagonist pretends to? And if it don't please him, must he be called wilful Falsifier and [Page 18]Liar for it? Now please to read the second wilful false Ci­tation.

You say to Mr. Dickinson that, ‘You deny that GOD re­quires [...]y [...]hing of Man as a [...] of Salvation.’ P. 10. N [...]e what Answer can you make to this, and another which comes to the same [...]?

These like wise are no Citation, I only tell him what I apprehended was the Sum of the Controversy; and what I in­tended to oppose.

But was not you [...], and did not you wrong him in saving that be [...], that GOD and require any Thing of Man as a [...] of Salvation?

No, I did not wrong him in saying this. For may I not judge of a Man's Opinion by his Words, when he pretends se­riously to declare and defend his Sentiments? I would not catch at an unguarded Expression, but I learn'd Mr. Dickinson's Opi­nion of in [...]ced he had any settled Opinion in this Point from the [...]enor of his Discourse, and his summing it up in the End, P. 47.— And pray, tell me, does not Mr. Dickinson undertake to prove, that the Grace of GOD in converting us, does not de­pend upon our Concurrence, in Order to its being effectual; and that GOD converts us irresistibly; and that he requires nothing of us as a Condition of Conversion upon our performing of which we shall be converted; but without which we shall not be converted?

This was certainly his Sentiment, otherwise he would not have opposed you, for asserting, that the Grace of GOD in con­verting us depends on our Concurrence, as a Condition without which it will not be effectual.

Then you acknowledge that Mr. Dickinson denied that GOD requires any Thing of us as a Condition of Con­version.

He denied it most certainly, and this Notion is your grand Error, which he has taken all this Pains to exp [...]s [...].

And pray tell me whether Mr. Dickinson don't hold that Conversion is Salvation? For he says, P. 33. That as to all con­verted Persons. ‘GOD not only will give them eternal Life, but hath already given it; they are at pre [...]ent actual Parta­kers of that Salvation which shall never end.’

This is true.

If then Conversion is Salvation; and there is no Condi­tion of Conversion, but it is the sole Result of sovereign Grace, [Page 19]as he asserts; Is it not most evident, that he denied that there is any Condition of Salvation.

I can't deny it.

And I can prove this more directly. For whereas I had said in my Sermon ‘Grace saves us in no other Way than by [...]ou obeying the Gospel." To this Mr. Dickinson reply'd, I would enquire of Mr. Beach, whether if GOD has pro­mised to save us by our Obedience, he is not indebted to us, to make that Promise good, upon our performing of that Obedience, whatever Proportion there may be, be­tween the Work and the promised Reward? And if the Condition be Works, of whatever Value the Works be, is not the Fulfilment of the Obligation due to him who has done the Work, and perform'd the Condition?’ Now I ap­peal to every Reader, if there can be any other Sense put upon these Words fairly, but only this? That is, If GOD had re­quired any even the least Thing to be done by us as a Condition of Salvation, then when we have done that Work and fulfilled that Condition, GOD would be obliged, and indebted to us, to save us; but that GOD should be obliged and indebted to save us, is most absurd to suppose: Therefore he has not re­quired the least Work to be done by us, as the Condition of Sal­vation. This is the true Meaning of this Passage. And I am satisfied, he meant it in this Sense: otherwise he would have tried to put ano [...]her Gloss upon it, after I had shewed the monstrous Absurdity of it: But alas it must shift for it self not­withstanding any Thing its Author would do for it. And now he declares he never did deny, that GOD required some Thing (Work) to be done by us as a Condition of Salvation, and in so doing he has given up his Cause. For that was one principal Point for which he began the Contention. — But enough of this. Now please to read my fourth wilful false Citation.

You tell him that he ‘ denies that Vertue is in any Sense or Degree the Fr [...]it of our Choice and Pains, even when we are assisted by the Holy Ghost.’ P. 10. Now what say you to this?

You must observe, I had asserted in my Sermon, that though Faith and every other Virtue be the Fruits of the Spirit of GOD, yet it is not so to be understood, as though they were not likewise the Effect of our Choice and Pains. This Mr. Dickinson was pleased to deny. See Page 18. Where as sure as I have Eyes I now read these Works, viz. ‘That Faith [Page 20]and every other Virtue are not the EFFECT of our own Choice and Pains— appears most evident from the following Texts.’ There he cites no less Number than Nine Texts to prove it. And yet now (who would think it) he charges me with Lying because I took Notice of it.— Pray look upon this, and read it yourself; and blush for him▪

Truly I am ashamed of it. However I will read a fifth wilful false Citation. You say to him, ‘For you new have as­serted universal Salvation, and that every Man that over lives on Earth, shall go to Heaven, as much as Tongue can express any thing.’ P. 10.

This again is no Citation at all Its only a Conclusion I drew from his Premises. And whether Right, or Wrong, let common Sense judge.

• 1. He says the Scripture does as plainly teaches universal Redemption.
• 2. He says, the Scripture does as plainly teach universal Salvation, in the same Sense and to the same Extent. From which two Premises I drew this Conclusion, then the Scripture certainly teaches universal Salvation. Now tell me, whether I was in the Wrong. I confess I can't yet perceive my Mistake. I think, he who can't yet perceive that this Consequence neces­sarily slows from these Principles, can't perceive that twice Two is Four. Be pleased now to read a sixth wilful false Citation.

You tell him, that ‘he says, Christ never purchased any Salvation for them (the Reprobates) but only upon a Condition which he know it was absolutely impossible for them to perform.’

This too is no Citation, I only tell him how I understood him. And I am very sure, I was not mistaken in his Meaning, or else he had no Meaning in his Book. For pray tell me, did not Mr Dickinson deny that Christ hath purchased Faith for any but only an elect Number?

This is true, for he supposed that if Christ had purchased Faith for all, then all would infallibly be saved.

Tell me then, whether it is not impossible for the Repro­bates to perform the Condition on which Salvation is offered, if Christ has not purchased for them nor will apply to them Faith, or a Power to believe? Or can they be saved without the Faith purchased by Christ?

This is true.

Is it not clear then, that according to Mr. Dickinson Christ [Page 21]never purchased any Salvation for the Reprobates [...] only on an impossible Condition? —

I cannot deny this. [...] the soeve [...]d wilful false Citation of wars. You tell him "He [...], that Grace don't "save as is the Way of Gospel-Obedience." What Reason had you to say so?

I had observed in my sermon, that how much soever we magnify Grace we must not imagine, that "Grace will save us in any other Way than by our obeying the Gospel." Or that in other Words, all the rich Grace of the Gospel will not save us unless in Heart and Life we be conform'd to the Gospel. I never dreamt that any but a distracted Man would deny this. But to my great Surprize Mr. Dickinson contradicted it with the utmost Zeal, as overthrowing and subverting the whole Gospel. What he of­fer'd against it I set in its genuine contemptible Light; for which he complains bitterly, that I have made him the Song of the Drunkard. But I appeal to all impartial Men, whether it was I, or he himself that made him ridiculous? But now being a little ashamed of it, he denies that ever he said it; and charges me with wilful Falshood. Now I was so weak. I confess, as to think that when he brought several Arguments and Texts to prove that Grace don't save us in the Way of Gospel Obedience, and attempted to prove that it was not only contrary to the holy Scripture, but to the Church of England, and to all the Protes­tant Churches in the World, I was I say, so weak as to think, that this vehement denying that Grace does save us in the Way of Gospel Obedience, was the same as to affirm, that Grace does not save us in the Way of Gospel Obedience. Pray what do you think of it? Is it not the same Thing to affirm that Light is not Light, as to deny that Light is Light? Just so much Differ­ence there is betwixt what Mr. Dickinson really said, and what I affirm'd, he said. And pray was this a wilful Lie in me?

I will now read the eighth wilful Falshood charged upon you. You said to Mr. Dickinson ‘ any eternal State, you say, was fixed from Eternity without Regard to all my Doings or Opini­ons.’ p. 10.

And is not this true? Did not Mr. Dickinson pretend to be a Calvinist? And don't all the Calvinians in the World believe that GOD has chosen a certain def [...]ite Number to Salvation absolutely without Foresight of their Faith or good Works. And this Number is so fixed that not one can be added, nor dimi­nished? And don't Mr. Dickinson say the same? P. 34. The [Page 22]eternal State of each single Person with all the Means con [...]cing to it is what GOD's Counsel had determined before. This is just what I meant.

Well, if you can make a tolerable Excuse for the ninth and last wilful false Citation, I'll say no more about this Affair. It is this, Mr. Dickinson says, that you said to him, ‘ You ve­hemently deny repeatedly, that our Vertuts, viz. the Holiness and gracious Habits of the Soul, do in any Sense fit it to appear in Heaven.’ Now what Reason had you for saying this?

The true State of the Case is this, in my Sermon I had Occasion to observe, that ‘as in the Marriage Feast, the Sup­per was a free Gift, the Invitation free, and no Man p [...]d any Thing for his Admission, yet when the King came in and found there a Man who had not on a Wedding Gar­ment he ordered him to be bound Hand and Foot and to be cast into outer Darkness: Now this Wedding Garment is a Temper of Mind and a Life agreeable to the Gospel, which like an Ornament or Wedding Garment to the Soul, makes it fit to appear before GOD, in the Company of Saints and Angels.’ By which I meant, that notwithstanding all GOD's Mercies and Christ's Merits, (of which I had spoken before) yet unless we in our own Persons became holy, and in Heart and Practice did conform to the Gospel, we should never see the Lord. Upon this wholesome and in these Times most ne­cessary Doctrine, Mr. Dickinson falls with great Severity, and says, P. 46. Let them (these foregoing Words) let them be taken in what Sense he pleases, this Doctrine is subversive of the whole Tenor of the Gospel, and of Method of Reconciliation therein proposed. Is not this astonishing! He seems as if he never could be satisfied with lashing me for it. He repeats it even to Nauseousness. He puts that little Word FIT in great Ca­pitals as if it were the Trojan Horse, full of monsterous Here­sies ready to overspread the Land. And now to make me some Amends for the great Injuries he has done me he charges me with wilful Falshood, for nothing else, but putting him in Mind of it. This I think is very hard Treatment indeed, to be assaulted and abused without giving the least Provocation, and then to be charged with impudent Lying, because I presumed to speak of it.

But what Answer can you make, when he challenges you thus, P. 11. ‘ Can you with Truth and Justice quote Passages as spoken by me, put them in different Characters as my Words [Page 23]because you would draw such [...] from what I have said?’

To this I answer, it is difficult to prove a universal Ne­gative, and be certain that never any Thing like it was done. But as he has not given one Instance of this Kind, and tho' I have search'd I can End none, and I remember I was exceeding careful in that Respect, not to wrong him, therefore I hope I have not at all injured him; if I have, I am sure I did not design, it, neither am I now conscious of any Wickedness to­wards him; excepting this, that I have endeavoured to rub off the Paint that he had laid upon his darling Tenets, and let them appear in their own proper Hue; that every one may see their Deformity, I have exprest his Notions in my own Language, while he endeavours to hide their Deformity in a Cloud of ambiguous Phrases, as if he were afraid to let them be seen in their proper Dress; But Truth is so beautiful that it is most charming when it has the plainest Dress of Words. And now that we have examined all these wilful false Ci­tations, tell me honesty on which Side does the wilful Fals­hood ly?

I have were Charity for you thee I had when I first read Mr. Dickinson. — But there is [...] Thing more be [...] you of, which though not so had, yet is [...] a [...]fair Practice, viz. be up­braids you with M [...]latives and Misrepresentations. P. 11.

I expected this Complaint. But all the Occasion I gave for it was this, when Mr. Dickinson wrapt up several Arguments, and distinct Notions in one complicated Sentence, I presumed to take them asunder. This I did in Order to examine every Argument and every Part distinctly, and to avoid Confusion. But at the same Time I was conscientiously careful, not to add, or diminish, nor alter his Sense, but took more Pains rightly to understand him, than to answer him. Be­sides, I ever directed the Reader to the Page, where he might see the whole Sentence with its Connection, and the whole Re­tinue of Repetitions attending it. And more than this, I de­sire no Antagonist to do for me.

He condemns you and Dr. Johnson P. 101 ‘ for using hy­pothetical or conditional Imputations of Cruelty, Insincerity and Unrighteousness to the over blessed GOD.’

This Accusation is perfectly groundless, I have indeed shewed, that his Doctrine represents the ever blessed GOD as the Author of Sin, of Cruelty and Insincerity. But pray how [Page 24]is this a Violation of the third Commandment? Doth not the holy Scripture speak reverently of GOD? And yet it uses these and the like hypothetical and conditional Expressions, GOD is not a Man thus he should be. He who believeth not hath made GOD a Liar. Have I used any Language, that was more irreverent than this, while I was vindicating the holy and reverend Name of GOD, from the foul Imputations of these Men? If this be taking GOD's Name in vain, then a Blasphemer can never be convicted of his Crime in any Court, for the Evidence must not repeat his Blasphemy. I confess it shocks me to mention the vile and horrid Things which these Men impute to GOD. Only let them desist writ­ing such horrid Things to us, and they shall not be so much as named among us.

But why did you load him with Invectives and Reproaches? P. 13.

Our blessed Saviour's Words are fulfill'd, With what Mea­sure you mete, it shall be measured to you again. When Men treat others with Candor, they are intitled to the same kind Treatment again. But when a Man thinks, I am the People and Wisdom shall die with me; and concludes that he has a Right to assault, insult, and domineer over every one, who gives him no Provocation, I am of Opinion, that every one who is abused has a Right by Truth and Justice to make Reprizals. The Truth is, the Sermon which has occasion'd all this Clamor and tragical Outcry, was a short plain practical Discourse, had nothing in it that could give the least Grounds of Suspicion; and was published with no worser Design than to excite Man to Gratitude towards GOD for his free Grace, and to work out their own Salvation; from this Consideration that the Grace of GOD would not save them without their own Care and Pains: And for this being furiously assaulted and scornfully insulted, in Return I have weighed my Adversary's Arguments in the Bal­lance of common Sense and found them to be wanting.— He who can't bear to be contemned, should not be forward to make himself contemptible, and at the same Time to contemn others.

And now after all Mr. Dickinson's Invectives and bitter Re­proaches bestowed so liberally upon me for my Principles, I can't perceive that he has any others to teach me, provided now out of meer Complaisance to him, I should renounce my pre­sent Opinions; pray tell me, what are those Tenets he would [Page 25]have me imbibe? Supposing, I would resign my Understand­ing as clean Paper freed from al my present Errors, what are those Principles which he would write upon it? Or if I was entirely willing to believe just as he believed, I can't possibly learn by all he has said, what his Faith was. The more he writes the more I am at a Loss to know what he would be at. Pray can you tell?

Yes, that I can, he was as clear a Writer as any since the Apostles.

Well, then you can communicate his Ideas to me. Pray tell me, did he believe an absolute Decree of Election and Re­probation?

No, that he did not; for when you told him, that was his Opinion, he accused you with Falshood, and said he chi [...]ed it: See p. 10. 11.

Did he then believe a conditional Decree, that is, that GOD foreseeing who would comply with his Mercy, elected them; but reprobated or determined to punish those whom he knew would remain impenitent?

No, this is Arminianism, which you knew, he hated.

Did he then believe no Decree at all?

No, he firmly believed an eternal Decree which fixt the ever­lasting State of every single Person and all the Means conducing to it. See p. 34.

Then it seems Mr. Dickinson believed a Decree which is neither absolute, nor conditional; and if you can tell me what that is, I promise to believe it. I am so averse to contending, that if you can help me to understand what that Decree is which is neither absolute nor conditional, I will readily acknowledge it. But until you can do that, I must remain of the same Opi­nion that I was of before.— Now tell me, what was Mr. Dickinson's Notion of Original Sin?

He believed as the Scripture teaches, that we are shap [...] in Iniquity, and conceived in Sin: And are by Nature Children of Wrath.

So do I, but pray in what Sense did he understand these Texts? Did he think that GOD had given us a wicked and di­abolical Nature?

Not so, for in saying so, he intimates, that you have blas­phemed.

How then did he differ from me, for I esteem'd that to be Blasphemy. Tell me then when the Scripture says, that we [Page 26]are by Nature Children of Wr [...]th, and [...] in Sin; did Mr. Dickinson think, that as we hate and [...] young Rattle Snakes assoon as hatch'd, before they have done any Mischief, or have so much as attempted to bite any Body, merely upon the Ac­count of their venemous Natures; so assoon as the Embrio is formed in the Womb, it is so all over defiled with Sin, that GOD hates it; and as soon as the Spirit of the tender Infant comes out of his Hands, it is so over spread with the Leprosy of Iniquity, that GOD's Heart rises against it, and he is in­clined to s [...]ing it into Hell fire; was this his Notion of Original Sin?

I can't say whether this was his Opinion or not. But this I know, that be believed that Mankind are by Nature strongly inclined to Sin.

I won't say I believe this, but I know it by Experience. And though Mr. Dickinson has accused me of denying Original Sin; yet for ought I can learn from these two Books, I believe Original Sin in a more rigid Sense than he did.

Doubtless Mr. Dickinson thought, he differ'd widely from you.

And he is not the first Man who has accused others of Heresy, while he differ'd from them in nothing but Words and Methods of explaining the same Notions.—I will not venture to say, that he did not differ from me in his Sentiments, because I am not certain what his real Sentiments were in any one Point disputed betwixt us. For as certain as I can discern Yea, from Nay, he has so often said and unsaid, so strongly affirmed, and denied the same Things, that even after reading this last Per­formance I am more at a Loss than ever to know what his Opinion was. But this I am well persuaded of, that he did agree with me in the same Measure, and to the same Degree as he agreed with himself. I am far from intending this as an Invective or Reproach against the good Gentleman. No, it was owing to the Badness of his Cause. He forsook Calvin, and hated Arminius, and intended to steer a middle Course, called moderate Calvinism, or Sublapsarianism a Cause in which I never yet knew any Man engage, but that he was so unfortunate, as constantly to contradict himself. And tho' such Men perceive it not themselves, yet the Bystanders must see it, or shut their Eyes.

Well, you must not think, that the Bitterness of Death is past with you. Here comes another more dreadful Charge against [Page 27]you. For you have not only wilfully falsified in citing Mr. Dickinson, but you have b [...]ed the incomparable Synod of Dort. p. 27. Hear what he says to you, while he chides you like a stern Master [...]iding his Whip over his poor Slave. Well, (say he to you) ‘ have you verily transcribed those Articles from the Synod of Dort? Or have you borrowed your Copy from an Enemy? &c.— It belongs to you to consider, what are proper Reflections for you to make, upon a Review of this Affair. And you are now publickly called upon either to shew where those Articles are to be found in the Synod, or to make an honest Retractation.’ P. 31.

Why, what is the Matter now! Why all this Heat and Passion! What have I done? What am I publickly called upon to retract? I told him, I had those Articles from Dr. Heylen. I told him, the Dr. said he had them from Dan. Tilenus, no Enemy, but a Friend to the Synod. Dr. Heylen did not (as I told him) pretend those Articles in the same Words were to be found in the Results of the Synod, but only it was a Summary the most favourable too, that he could find. This is all I said. And is it not every Word true? What Occasion then was there for this furious Insul [...]? What Grounds for these unchar [...]table Innuendoes? Where is the Falshood that I must retract? Besides, by what Mr. Dickinson himself has cited from that Synod, I make no Doubt but this Dan. Tilenus made a faith­ful and favourable Summary of their Opinions. I think there is nothing worse in those Articles, than in what Mr. Dickinson has cited from their Results. — When Mr. Dickinson tells me he publickly calls upon me for a Retraction, I wonder his Conscience did not say, Physician heal thy self.— First cast out the Beam out of thine own Eye.

Now I am sure you will be moved with what I am about to read; unless you are so hardened as to be past feeling; and your Conscience seared with a hot Iron, as the Apostle speaks. And it not only Concerns you but all the present Church of England, he has not only said that you are a Pelagian Heretick, but proved it. For besides comparing your Doctrines together in diverse Instances, he has come close to the Point in which you told him Pelagius 's He­resy lay, and says, you are quite as guilty as Pelagius. Thus says Mr. Dickinson to you, p. 34. Hear his (Pelagius 's) own Words, — ‘GOD (says he) helps us by his Doctrine and Revelation, while he opens the Eyes of our Heart, while he shews us future Things, lest we should be taken up with the present, [Page 28]whilst he lays open the Snares of Satan, whilst he illuminates us with the manifold and unspeakable Gifts of heavenly Grace — Whilst by the Revelation of Wisdom he raises up our stunned Wills to the Desire of GOD, whilst he puts us upon all that is good."— ▪These, Sir are his own Words; and have you any where used stronger Expressions than these, to assert the Necessity of divine Grace? The Difference therefore between him and you in the Doctrines under Consideration can't be very easily found— But that this Affair may be put in a yet clearer Light, suffer me to set before you the Sum of the Pelagian He­resy in the Words of that famous Antiquary Gerard. Joh. Vossius. Pelagius (says he) believed, that our Will either can by its own Strength (alone) omitted by Mr. Dickinson, chuse what Good it wills; or if it wants the divine Help, he thought that this, by the Law which GOD had at once appointed to himself and to Nature, is to all and at all Times equally ready, so that the divine Concourse is wholly in our own Power,’— I have now done something more than to call these Doctrines Pelagian.

I have past my Trial for Lying; and hope shall be ac­quitted, my Enemies being Judges. I now stand indicted for Heresy; and with me the Body of the Church of England. To this Indictment, I plead not guilty. And I shall use no other Evidence, than that which ray Accuser hath brought a­gainst me. For I can't wish for any more full in my Favour. First, As to Pelagius's own Words, GOD (says he) helps us— But how? By the internal Operations of his Holy Spirit? No. But by his Doctrine and Revelation. What can be more evident than that, he believed nothing of the internal Operations of the Holy Ghost upon our Hearts▪ He talks of divine Grace in­deed; but then he explains himself, and tells us expresly that this divine Grace which illuminates us, and raises us to the De­sire of GOD, is his Doctrine and Revelation, i. e. the holy Scripture. External Grace he acknowledged; but not in­ternal. And he that can't perceive this is not qualified to sit Judge in such weighty Trials as that of Heresy. In this Evi­dence there is not one Word of the Necessity of the internal Operation of the Spirit upon the Soul of Man: Whereas I have asserted and proved that the internal Operation of the Holy Ghost upon our Souls is as necessary, as the external Re­demption of Christ. — It is astonishing to me, that my Adversary could imagine, that this Passage, discovered that [Page 29] Pelagius believed the Necessity of the internal Operation of the Spirit, but only demed the Necessity of irresistable Grace. I can attribute this to nothing else, but his being so excessively fierce and eager to prove me an Heretick, that it caused him to be­come stark blind with Charity towards Pelagius. So I knew an ill natured Man, who lived betwixt two Neighbours, with each of which he was forever quarrelling alternately; but was always careful when he was in a Fit of Railing at the one, to be excessive kind to the other.

His other Evidence is Vossius, who summed up the Pelagian Heresy thus, ‘ Pelagius believed, that our Will can by its own Strength alone chuse what Good it will: Or if it wants di­vine Help, (which he did not believe) yet it is at all Times equally ready and wholly in our own Power:’ Both which Notions I oppos'd (and as I thinks with unanswerable Reasons in my Sermon. The Account which I gave of the Pelgian Heresy was exactly the same with this of Vossius, for I said that Pelagius's Heresy lay in this, that he believed that Man was able by his own Strength alone to convert himself. One Thing more I would observe, Mr. Dickinson in translating Vossius's Evi­dence, has omitted that Word ALONE, which while it remains, makes the Evidence as full and as strong as it is possible in my Favour; and for what Reason he has been tampering with the Evidence, let the Impartial judge. I have now only improved his own Evidence. I now appeal to the Unprejudiced, let a Jew, a Turk, or Pagan, be my Judge: and give Sentence be­tween Mr. Dickinson and me and my Adherents, by which he means the present Church of England. Are we condemned Hereticks? Are we Pelagians by Mr. Dickinson's own Evi­dence?

I will not give Sentence. But this I will venture to say, either the present Church of England are Hereticks condemned by famous Fathers and numerous Councils of the Catholic Church; or else Mr. Dickinson laid his Indictment a little too high.

I wonder what Mr. Foxcroft meant, when he encourages Men to read this last Performance, by telling them in the Pre­face that, they ‘ Cannot be in Danger of catching a false Heat, from the Fire of Christian Love, which here all along warms and enforces the Argument.’—If th [...]s be your Christian Love Mr. Foxcroft, to condemn Millions of Christians both living and dead for Hereticks, not only without any Evidence, but even against the strongest Evidence in the World, pray tell me [Page 30]what is unchristian Hatred? Where is it to be found? Does it exist among the fallen Angels?—No Doubt but the Lords of the Inquisition when they condemn and burn Hereticks, are warmed with the Fire of Christian Love.—Really when I view Mr. Dickinson's Attempt to prove us Pelagian Hereucks, condemned, as he observes, by famous Fathers and numerous Councils of the Catholick Church, it strikes me with Horror, to consider to what a monsterous Pitch of M [...]levolence and Uncharitableness we may arrive; and yet all the while ima­gine that we are acted by a Zeal for GOD.

Hold! did you not say that you hoped Mr. Dickinson was a good Man and gone to Heaven?

I did so, but am shock'd to observe, how good Men, when at the Head of a Party will be deceived by their own Hearts; and know not what Spirit they are of. I think of Mr. Dickinson as one exprest himself concerning the Prophet Jonah, when he had read his Book, and observed his Envy and Peevish­ness, I know not (said he) what to think of this Jonah; I be­lieve he was a good Man: but then I am sure, he was a strange Sort of a good Man.

Now [...], what you think of that Mongrel Creed, which be has made for you P. 37. by trimming your Sermon toge­ther with the 17th Article?

I tell you, I think it is a sad Spectacle to see an aged Divine, President of the College of Now-Jersey, spending his last Hours in abusing his Readers and Antagonist with such childish Sport. I thought he had done enough at this Sort of Play before. And could he but have foreseen that this was the last Work he should finish in this World; I make no Doubt he would have been better employ'd. But let us all take warning.

But don't this discover that you contradict your own Ar­ticle?

No, it does not indeed. For the Words Election and Elect often carry a very different Sense both in the holy Bible and in the Common Prayer, from the Word Predestination in the 17th Article, which I observed to him, but he chose not to take Notice les [...] it should spoil his Sport. So that it was his Inattention which has caused all that Confusion, which he pre­tends is my contradicting the Article.—To make you sensible of this, Suppose he had jumbled part of my Sermon into the Arminian Article of Predestination, just in the same Manner [Page 31]as he has into the 17th Article of the Church of England; I ask, would there not appear as great a Discord between my Sermon and Aru [...]s's Article, as there now does between it, and the 17th Article of our Church.

C. I can't deny but there [...].

And don't Mr. Dickinson call me an Armi [...]?

Tru [...].

Then this is a fallacious Method of Trial—I desire no more but this Piece of Justice from any Reader, that is, when he has read Mr. Dickinson's last Performance, to read the plain Reasons I gave in my first De [...]ence, to shew that the standing Doctrines of the Church of England were not Calvinian. And I will leave it with him to judge whether he has in the least Degree invalidated any Argument which I advanced.

I think you are both very confident, for he says the same to you. P. [...]2. ‘You have says he cited some Paragraphs from a B [...]k intitled, a necessary Doctrine and Erudition for all Christian Men, which are so plain and full on my Side of the Question, that there needs no Dis [...]ants to be made. I chearfully leave it to the Reader to judge between us, and to determine which Side has the best Claim.’

With all my Heart, let us here join Issue, and let the whose Controversy be tried by the Article of Free Will, as it is laid down in this Book. And let every Reader judge whether I, or Mr. Dickinson have contradicted the Church of England. The Book being rare, and perhaps not one in a Thousand ever having seen it, I believe you will not be impa­tient if I repeat the Article, which is in these Words.

The Article of FREE WILL.

This Doctrine of the Concurrence of Free-Grace and Free-Will was the Doctrine of the Church of England 200 Years ago, at the Dawning of the Reformation; and has ever been the same. Let those Calumniators who are perpetually accusing us of forsaking the first Doctrines of our Church, look upon this, and exert their utmost Skill; and I am sure they will not be able to discover that we now vary from it, so much as one Hair's Breadth. For my Part I could not possibly express the Sentiments of my own Soul, both with Regard to Origi­nal Sin, Free-Grace and Free-Will, more exactly than they are here exprest. This is the Doctrine I have ever taught, and hope to hold fast till Death. Let Men of Mr. Dickinson Temper revile me as much as they please, and call me by the Names of all the detestable Hereticks that have ever appeared, yet this is my Protestation. If the Doctrines here laid down, be Pelagianism, if they be Arminianism, or contrary to the Church of England, then am I a Pelagian, an Arminian and an Enemy to the Church of England; but not otherwise. Mr. Dickinson confidently appeals to the Reader, which of us has the best Claim to this Article of Free-Will. Now that the Reader may easier and with more Dispatch form a Judgment, I'll set a small Specimen of Mr. Dickinson's Doctrine on the one Hand, mine on the other, and the Church's Doctrine in the middle.

My Sermon.

The Reason why any are not con­verted and saved, is because they don't concur and co-ope­rate with divine Grace. Neither GOD's Grace, nor our own Endeavours alone will save us; both must go toge­ther, if either be wanting we shall perish. GOD's Grace will never be wanting to us if we be not false and treacherous to our selves. P. 20.

Church of England.

All Men are bro't into such Blindness and Infirmity, that they cannot eschew Sin except they be made free and illu­minated by an espe­cial Grace, that is to say, by a super­natural Help and Working of the Holy Ghost, which although the Good­ness of GOD offers to all Men, yet they only enjoy it, which by their Free-Will do accept and em­brace the same.

Mr. Dickinson.

The Question is a­bout inherent Grace, or internal Help of the Spirit, whether all Men in common have what is suffici­ent to Salvation? This you hold in the Affirmative; I in the Negative. p. [...]1. GOD has not uni­versally and indiffer­ently given Grace to all Men sufficient to their eternal Sal­vation. Page 73. It follows then with the greatest Certain­ty, that all Men have not such Grace given them, as will even by the highest and best Improve­ment, intitle them to Salvation. p. 110.

[Page 36] Here they declare, that special Grace, that is to say, that su­pernatural Help and Working of the Holy Ghost which illumi­nates Men and makes them free from the Blindness and Infir­mity that came by Sin, GOD offers to all Men. Mr. Dickinson says no, he does not. They say the Reason why some enjoy this special Grace and are saved while others enjoy it not, but perish in their Sins, is because some by their Free-Will do accept and embrace it. This i [...] the very [...]otion that Mr. Dickinson so bitterly reproaches me for. This is the Occasion of all his tragical Outcries, of Pelagianism and contradicting all Protestant Churches. And could he say, that he held with these Men that special Grace is offered to all Men, but they only enjoy it who by their Free-Will accept it and embrace it? Then the Controversy is at an End: Then he came over to our Side. For this was the worst Thing he blamed me for. This he contradicted and denied almost as many Times (for ought I know) as there are Pages in his Book, and yet at the same Time he had the Assurance to appeal chearfully to these Paragraphs to decide the Question betwixt us, and says they are so plain and full on his Side that there needs [Page 37] [...]o Discants to be made. O amazing Confidence! Consummate Assurance! Are such Gentlemen capable of Conviction?

Enough of this, I am satisfied, which of you has the best Claim, though you are both equally confident.— But I have one Thing more to observe, Mr. Dickinson still persists in it, that all the Protestant Churches in the World are against you; Nay that the Augustin Confession is contrary to you.

That Abstract from the Augustin confession which I put into my Defence, I had from Dr. Heylen.—He refers to the several Chapters from whence they are taken, there can therefore be no Deceit in the Affair. Where Mr. Dick­inson found his, he don't tell us. But even that I heartily Assent to in every Part, in its plain proper grammatical Sense. And all his affirmations to the contrary are injurious, uncivil, and abusive. I know my own Heart whether I assent to a Proposition better than he does.—If a Man should be con­tinually teezing you, by telling you, that you are no Chri­stian, for you don't believe the Apostles Creed; and you should assure him that you did heartily believe it, in the pro­per grammatical Sense, or in the same Sense in which Chri­stians generally understand it: And yet he should still persist to cast it in your Teeth in all Companies, would you not at least account him very uncivil and abusive?

I own, I should.

And has not Mr. Dickinson's Conduct been very much the same towards me: And indeed the Body of our Clergy? Has he not been continually casting it in my Teeth that I am no Protestant, because I disown the Confessions of Faith received by every Protestant Church on Earth: Even the Augustin Confession in which the greater Part of Protestants agree? Does he not accuse me of dissembling with GOD and Man, when I signed the Articles of the Church of En­gland? When mine own Conscience tells me I heartily be­lieve the Augustin Confession, and the Articles of our Church too. What Name does such Treatment deserve? Is it civil? Is it manly? Is it like a Christian or Gentleman?

Well, let all that has been said pass for Nothing. Truth is Truth, let who will embrace or reject it. The Controversy should be not what this or that Man says, but what saith the Scripture: If you can by the holy Bible vindicate your Sermon, you need not be farther concerned about it.

That is my Sense of the Matter. The holy Scripture is [Page 38]the only Test of Orthodoxy. By this let us try every Point that Mr. Dickinson has condemned.

1. Of UNIVERSAL REDEMPTION.

Tell me now, how far does Mr. Dickinson agree with you is the Point of Redemption?

He agrees with me in asserting, that Christ died for all Men, P. 21. and so has renounced his Catechism both shorter and larger, unless Christ died for those whom he never re­deemed; as I observ'd before. All the Calvinists I ever con­versed with, were wont to say, that Christ only for the Elect, and no other are redeem'd by him. And whereas the holy Bible informs us, that Christ died for all Men; they tell us it means, only some of all Sorts, viz. the Elect. But Mr. Dickinson con­tradicts them, and joyns with me, in asserting that he died for every Individual of the human Race.

Now tell me wherein he differs from you: and how be states the Question.

He states it thus; ‘ The true Question, says he, is whether our blessed Saviour, who has wrought out such a sufficient Redemption for all the World— Has not designed a distinguishing Application of this Redemption to some, in effectual Calling, be­yond what he has designed for others: and whether he has not undertaken, not only to purchase for these the Privilege, that they shall be saved in case they believe, but also to purchase for them and before upon them the Spirit of Grace, to put within them that Principle of Faith, whereby they certainly will believe and be saved? — And whether the blessed Redeemer has under­taken to bestow these Benefits and Privileges upon all the rest of Mankind, in the same manner as upon the Elect of GOD?’ P. 51, 52. — Now to take no Notice of the Propriety and Elegance of this Language, viz. Christ dying for Men to bestow upon them Privileges, and put within them a Principle of Faith; what I would observe is, that he asserts that Christ has wrought out a sufficient Redemption for all the World. Now this is all I desire: I have nothing more to contend for. I never taught universal Redemption in any other Sense; or in stronger Terms. Only admit (as he does) that Christ's Redemption is sufficient for all; and the Controversy is at an End. For if the Redemption be sufficient for all, then it must be a Purchase of every Thing necessa­ry on GOD's Part for the Salvation of all. Then are all put into [Page 39]a salvable Condition; so that they may be saved if they will do what they [...]. And indeed if the Redemption of Christ don't contain so much as this, it can be neither sufficient, nor indeed any eternal Redemption at all. In a Word, that Redemption which is not sufficient to save from Hell, is none of Christ's Re­demption. He never did his Work by the Halves. So that Mr. Dickinson has decided the Controversy in our Favour, by stating the Question according to his own Mind.

Further I observe, when he says, ‘ Our Lord has not, in like Manner, undertaken to apply his saving Benefits to all the rest of the World,’ P. 53. he means that Christ doth not apply it to them at all. No, nor never intended to apply it to them; as he goes on to argue; ‘ For (says he) if he had undertaken for all the World that they should come to him—he would certainly accomplish his Undertaking—they would all be sanctified here, and glorified hereafter.’ P. 53. You see then that he asserts that these Reprobates Christ never intended apply his Redemption to them. And is it possible then for them ever to be the better for it? They can't apply it to themselves, and Christ never intended to apply it to them; he says, and thinks he proves.

I grant, that it is impossible for [...]ny but the Elect to enjoy any Advantage by the Redemption of Christ, if what Mr. Dick­inson has said be true, that Christ never designed, nor does he make Application of his Redemption to them.

Therefore when Mr. Dickinson says, that Christ died for all in such a Sense, that they may be saved if they will believe, but it is impossible for them to believe unless he gives them Faith, and that he never designed, never purchas'd for them, nor does he bestow it upon them: if this his Notion be just, then it is certain Christ died not at all for them, or for their Sal­vation, no more than for the Salvation of all the Devils:— As Dr. Whitby justly observes, in these Words, ‘Wherefore to force these Men to come over to us, or to lay aside their vain Pretences, and mere Disguises of their real Sentiments. I demand, when they say, Christ died for all, so far as to procure Pardon and Salvation for them if they will believe and repent, whether he did procure Pardon and Salvation on a Condition which it was possible upon that Assistance which he would vouchsafe them, to perform? Or only upon a Condition which to them was impossible, for want of Grace sufficient for them to perform?—If the latter only, it is [Page 40]certain that he died not at all them; for what is only done upon an impossible Supposition, is not done at all. It being the same Thing not to die at all for their Benefit, as to do it only on a Condition they cannot possibly perform. But if he died to procure Pardon and Salvation for them, on a Condition, which by that Grace, which he was ready to vouchsafe to them, as well as to the Elect, they might be able to perform, then he died intentionally, and on his Part effectually, to procure Pardon and Salvation to them, as well as to the Elect, and so all Mankind may be saved, and them Christ must have died for the Salvation of them all.’

Well, but what say you to th [...]se close Questions he puts to you, viz ‘ Did not be (Christ) originally intend the Redemption just in the same Latitude and Extent with the a [...]ual Applica­tion of it?—You won't venture to suppose that he has chang'd his Designs, or failed of Success in his Intentions.—Pray, Sir, speak out full and plain to the Purpose.’ P. 55.

Yes, Sir, that I will with all my Heart For I am never better pleas'd than when I can find out what my Antagonist would be at, that I may meet him full in the Face. Truth will never dodge and hide in ambiguous Terms.

I observe then in the first Place, these Questions are founded upon one poor Fallacy and miserable Mistake, that is, that the Application of Christ's Redemption to our Souls is so entirely the Work of GOD, as that it don't at all depend upon the Free-Will of Man, whether it shall be effectual to us, or not. This I say is a meer Fallacy and poor begging the Question. For though Christ has fully redeemed every one of us, and sincere­ly tenders and applies this Salvation to us, both outwardly by his Word, and inwardly by his Spirit: yet may we either em­brace, or reject the offer'd Salvation. And as we do either, so are we happy or miserable. Christ has done his Part both he purchasing and in applying his Salvation to Millions who are never actually saved, because they practically counted themselves unworthy of eternal Life. In the Application of Christ's Re­demption, Man's wicked Will to perish often prevails against Christ's sincere Will of their Salvation. This is plain Scripture Matth. 23.37. O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that [...]lest the Prophets, and [...]nest them which are [...] thee, how [...] would I have gathered thy Children together, even as a H [...] gath [...] ­eth her Chickens under her Wing; and ye would not! GOD and Christ willed their Happiness, but these Men willed to be mise­rable: [Page 41]And their Will prevailed to their R [...]in, even against the sincere Will of GOD and Christ. For I presume, no Man will say that Christ dissembled when he spake these Words with Tears in his Eyes: and said, he would, and they would not. O that they were wi [...], that they would consider their latter End. Deut. 32.29. O that was [...] had hearkned unto me, and Israel had walked is [...] Wa [...], says GOD. Psal. 81.12. And dare any Man say, that GOD was not serious in these Wishes? And yet this Will of GOD never took Effect, because they were not willing to comply with GOD's Will. And if you don't al­low that GOD does not really will any Thing but what does come to p [...]ss which is Mr. Dickinson's Opinion consider what horrible Consequences will follow. Then GOD is not willing that Men should obey him, when they disobey; then GOD is not willing any more should repent and be saved than are eventually saved; then GOD's Will is as truly done while Men sin, as when they repent. And can any Man be so unreason­able as to believe it? Thus having cleared the Way, I will give a full and plain Answer to that close Question, viz. Did not Christ originally intend his Redemption just in the same Latitude, and Extent with the actual Appplication of it? If by this you mean, did Christ originally intend to do more for the Conver­sion of Mankind by applying his Redemption to them, than he has actually done, I answer No. For he has done all that was necessary on his Part for the Application of his Salva­tion to every human Creature, even every Pagan on Earth would have the Opportunity to hear the Gospel, if Christians did what, it was the original Will and Intention of Christ, that they should do, i. e. preach the Gospel to every Creature.

But then if by this trying Question you mean, was it Christ's original Design and Will that more Men should have his Re­demption effectually applied to them and enjoy'd by them, than do eventually enjoy it? To this I answer, Yes: He willed that Millions should enter into his Joy, who yet through the Abuse of their Free-Will are eternally shut out.

Well, but "you won't venture to suppose, that Christ has "changed his Designs, or fail'd of Success in his Intentions." Page 55.

No, Sir, I will not suppose that GOD, or Christ have changed their Designs, there is no Occasion for this blasphemous Suggestion. Christ is the same Yesterday, to Day and forever. As Christ's Will and Design originally was to purchase every Thing [Page 42]necessary for the Salvation of all Men; so he continues at this very Day to do every Thing necessary on his Part for the Ap­plication of his Redemption to all Men. As to Christ's failing of Success, it is unquestionable Fact, that GOD's Methods to reclaim Men often fail of the Success he desires, through Men's Perverseness, even when GOD can truly say, what could have been done more for them than I have done. Did not Christ fail of his desired Success when he came to his own and his own received him not, Joh. 1.11? Had Christ as much Success when he preach'd on Earth as he wished for, or desired? What mon­strous Notions did this Gentleman entertain! And yet glories in them as if they were the first Principles of all Religion?

I never desire to see an Adversary's Cause more effectually lost than when it needs to be defended with such gross Ab­surdities.

But methinks, there is something in that, when he asks you, ‘ What you mean by Christ's not having procured for the Non-Elect a Power to believe— And says, Does any Man in the World want Power, that is in the Account of the Scripture willing to receive him?’ P. 55.

This is too childish and quibbling! Mr. Dickinson and all on his Side deny, that Christ ever purchased for, or applies to the Non-Elect. so much Grace as to enable them, or make it possi­ble for them to will or desire Salvation, truly and in the Scrip­ture Account to will it, any more than a Beast can desire or will the Knowledge of the Mathematicks; while for the Elect he [...] [...]urchased, and does apply such Grace as renders it as im­possible for them not to will and believe, as for an hungry Man not to will and desire Food. Now it is not material where the Defect lies, whether in the Understanding or Will, or both; if nothing but Grace can remove it, and Christ never purchased such Grace for the Non-Elect as is sufficient to remove the Im­pediment, call it Want of Power, or Want of Will, it comes to the same Thing, that which is wanting, cannot be numbered.

Well! Sir, says he to you, don't this Objection as much mi­litate against your Principles, as against mine? Don't you yourself tell us, that although Jesus Christ offers eternal Salvation to all who will obey him; yet no Man will ever come to him and accept of this kind Offer, unless the Father draw him, and it be given him from above; and that we cannot without the gracious Influences of the Holy Ghost become good Men.—Now says he to you, is it in fact given from above to every Man, to come to Christ, and be [Page 43]willing to obey him? have all Men actually these D [...]vings of the Father, these gra [...]us [...] of the Holy Ghost—? P. 56.

Observe once for all, we are speaking only of Men un­der the Gospel. And now to the Question, the Objection don't at all militate against my Principles, (as he imagines.) For my Principle is, that the Father draws every one of us, and is ready to give us all to come to Christ, and the gra­cious Influences of the Holy Ghost is afforded to all, till they have forfeited them by their Obstinacy.

‘ If so, them says he, every Man is actually interested in Christ, and has actually a Title to Heaven.’ P. 56.

No Sir, here you are a little mistaken, this Conclusion don't follow from my Principle: because GOD's drawing is not irresistable, or an Act of Almighty Power upon the Soul which cannot be resisted. GOD has drawn Millions, who ne­ver were actually drawn so as to come to Christ. So GOD drew the whole Body of the Jewish Nation, and yet they never were actually drawn to him, but forsook him the Fountain of living Waters, Jer. xxxi. 3. With Loving-Kindness have I drawn thee. Hos. xi. 4. I drew them with the Cords of a Man. This is spoken of all his professing People in general, every one of them had GOD's Drawings, and yet Thousands of them were never the nearer to GOD for that. So that is often given from above to Men which yet because they don't accept and improve it, they are nothing the better for it— See here the Marrow of this Gentleman's Divinity so far as concerns his Dispute with me. He seems to think, that when any Man is wicked it is because GOD don't give him Grace to become good. For why (argues he) are not all Men gracious and saved if GOD be willing to give them Grace! Just as if nothing could prevent their being holy and happy, if GOD were but willing that they should be so.—You may call it inveighing, or what you please, but I must confess I am astonished to see that your eminent Teachers have no [...]uster Notions of either Natural or Revealed Religion.—Why don't all become holy and obtain Salvation, say they, if GOD be willing to given them sufficient Grace? As if they had never heard such a Thing as Men's receiving the Grace of GOD in vain, Quenching the Spirit and resisting the Holy Ghost.—As to several Texts of holy Scrip­ture here cited, I shall consider them under one of the follow­ing Heads once for all.

W [...]ll, you may banter as you please, but there is one Ar­gument [Page 44]which he brings to prove that Christ and not die for all equally, which you can't answer, I think it is summ'd up by him in these Words, ‘ It cannot be true that Christ hath the en some, and the Father hath given him some out of the World, and yet be also true that be hath chosen all the World, and that the Fa­ther hath given him all the World alike, in the same Manner, in the same Sense, and to the some Purposes.’ P. 54.

And pray who denies this? All Mr. Dickinson's long String of Arguments arises from his not observing one necessary Dis­tinction, which is this. Christ's Death is to be consider'd in a twofold Respect. 1st, As to the Will of GOD in sending his Son, and that was that he should die for the World, and the Design of the Son which was to give himself a Ransom for all, and with Regard to the Virtue and Power of his Death, in these three Respects Christ died for every Man. But then, 2dly, If you consider the Event of Christ's Death arising from the different Behaviour of Mankind, some believing in him and some rejecting him and turning Enemies to his Cross; and thereupon the Fathers's and the Son's subsequent Will which was that none should enjoy the Fruit of Christ's Death to Eter­nity, but those who comply with the End of his Death, repent and obey him: In this Sense Christ died only for Believers, only for his Sheep, only for his Church, i. e. he never intended or designed that any should be saved by his Death, who don't comply with the Terms of that Salvation that his Death has purchased. This Distinction well attended to, all the Mist which he has rais'd in both his Books vanishes away in a Mo­ment.

And though he is pleased to say, that I took no Notice of this Argument, yet it is so far from being true, that I did in Fact answer it, and he has taken no Notice of my Answer, which was in these Words, Pag. 41. ‘ Have not I chosen you Twelve, and one of you is a Devil? Judas was as much chosen, yea and given to Christ of the Father, as the rest.’ Joh. xvii. 12. Those that thou gavest me have I kept, and none of them is lost but the Son of Perdition. It is from hence evident, that being chosen and given of the Father, don't denote an absolute Decree of their Salvation. And it is indeed astonish­ing that he should quote this Expression of the Father's giving them to Christ, to prove his absolute Doctrine, and take no No­tice of Judas being lost who had been given to him, which at once utterly demolishes his Scheme.

[Page 45] Of ELECTION.

Here the Question is, Whether there be such a Thing spoken of in the holy Scripture, as a personal Election to Salvation without a Foresight of Faith and Perseverance in Well-doing? This I think, I did not deny in my Sermon; but only seemed to doubt of it; for which Mr. Dickinson saw fit to correct me.

But Mr. Dickinson seems to think the Question, is, Whether the Words Election and Elect never imply any more in the New-Testament, than merely enjoying the Privileges of the Gospel. Page 61.

He chose so to state the Question, because this would give him some Room for disputing. But when in his Remarks, he fixed a wrong Sense upon one of my Expressions I don't say wilfully I explain'd my self fully in my Reply, in these Words, ‘The Point I am to prove is this, though the Words Elect and Chosen, Election and Choice, to Elect and Chuse are used in several different Senses in the holy Bible, and some Times the Elect denotes faithful Christians, yet never do any of these Words imply an eternal absolute Predestination to Happiness without Regard to Faith and Obedience: Neither is there any such Doctrine taught in the holy Scripture.’ P. 39. To this he replies, P. 62. It this not at all affect the Merits of the Cause, to enquire into the different Se [...]ses in which the Words Elect and Chosen, Election and Choice, to Elect and Chuse are used in the holy Bible.—This is strange indeed! What is it no Matter what these Words signify and mean in the holy Bible! I thought all the Controversy was about the Meaning of these Words, as they stand in the Scripture. If I can but find out what the Holy Ghost means, by such Words, I care not what this or that Sect mean by Election. But there was more Subtilty in this, than a cursory Reader would think of. For by not regarding that the Scripture uses the Word Election in several different Senses, and that I endeavour'd to use it in the same Manner that the Holy Ghost teaches, by this Piece of resolved Negli­gence, he has gain'd several Triumphs, though indeed it is over Nobody. I will give you but one Instance of it. P. 63. He says to me, You tell us that all whom GOD, foreknew, he foresaw would he Christ's faithful Followers, if so them all professing Chri­stians do not belong to the Election of Grace, for all professing [Page 46]Christians are not Christ's faithful Followers. And therefore ac­cording to your own Interpretation this Text utterly subverts your Scheme: When in that very Paragraph I had told him that the Predestinate did not signify there meet Professors of Christianity. Is not this now infinitely pretty! Has be not cut me down, and demolished my Scheme with one Stroke; and all by resolving not to regard what I say, nor what I mean.

I have read a few Disputes in the Course of my Life, but I never saw any Thing like this. I don't mean, that this is the weakest, no, it is crafty enough: but I am at a loss to find where the Honesty of it lies. I proved by sundry Texts that the Word Elect and Election did not denote an absolute Decree to save this or that Man, but often it means all Christians in general, and sometimes sincerely good Men. I let him know that I owned GOD's eternal Decree to save all those whom he foresaw would persevere in Faith till Death; so that his Work lay fair before him, which was to prove an eternal Election without a Foresight of Faith and good Works. At this my Friend was sensible, he could make but a mean Figure: But an Answer he must write in some Shape or other. He there upon concludes upon this Device, viz. to make his Reader be­lieve that my Opinion is, that the Word Predestination in the 17th Article, the Words Predestinate, Elect and Election in holy Scripture never mean or import more than meet Professors of Christianity: Such a Whim as never entered my Heart. And altho' when I perceived him beginning to play at this Game in his first Book, I entered my Protest against this unfair Deal­ing, and told him I understood the 17th Article, as meaning an eternal Decree, but not an absolute and unconditional one, and in the same Sense I understood several Texts in the holy Bible. But all that I could say, avail'd nothing, he was resolved to misunderstand, and misrepresent me; and by virtue of this ho­nest Resolution, he has made sad and Mongrel Work of it, as he calls it; but has not answered one Argument that I ad­vanced, not done any Thing like it.

But he has cited some Texts a-now, as Acts 2.23. And challenges you to deny if you dare, that GOD has decreed all the wicked Things that ever were done. This I think is his Mean­ing; for says he, ‘ Was the most atrocious Wickedness, that ever was committed, what GOD's Hand and Counsel had determined before? And may'nt the same be said of other Events likewise? Is it true, says he, that what GOD did before by his Counsel [Page 47]determine, he wills and was pleased with? It will then follow, that he will'd and was pleased with what Herod and Pontius Pilate with the Gentiles did to our blessed Lord, when with wicked Hands they crucified and s [...]w him. For this is what GOD did by his Counsel determine before to be done. Now Sir, answer this consistently if you can.’ P. 66.

Sir I chearfully accept the Challenge, to vindicate the moral Character of our infinitely good GOD, from such horrid Suggestions as though he decreed, will'd, and was pleased with all the wicked Deeds done by Men and Devils. Now then when it is said, Acts 2.23. Him, being delivered by the determinate Council and Fore-knowledge of GOD, ye have taken, and with wicked Hands have crucified and slain. And Acts 4.27, 28. For of a Truth against thy holy Child Jesus, whom thou hast an­ointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the People of Israel were gathered together for to do whatsoever thy Hand and thy Counsel determined before to he done. These Words don't denote, that GOD decreed, will'd, or was pleased with Judas his being so convetous as to betray Christ; the Jews be­ing so malicious as to prosecute him; or Herod's being so inju­rious and profane as to set him at nought, or Pilate's being so unjust as to condemn him; none of all these wicked Humours and Deeds were decreed, will'd by, or pleasing to GOD, who infinitely hates, and therefore can't decree a wicked Deed: But all Things being eternally present to his infinite Mind, and he foreseeing that Judas would be so convetous as to betray Christ, if he had an Opportunity, and that the Jews would be envious and spiteful enough to murder him, and Pilate would be so un­just as to condemn the Innocent; what his Counsel determined was, that Christ should come into their Hands, and be left in their Power, when he knew they would crucify him. Thus GOD without decreeing the least wicked Deed by his infinite Knowledge and Wisdom has brought the greatest Good out of the greatest Wickedness, only foreseen, not decreed. In a Word, GOD foresees wicked Deeds, and decrees to over-rule them so as to bring Good out of them, but he does not decree them. Thus, I think, I have in full, though in short, answered Mr. President's Challenge, and vindicated our heavenly Father from the horrid Suspicion of his being the Decreer or Willer of sin­ful Deeds.

And now let me tell you, as a Friend, that I can't but think it extremely improper, (to say no worse of it,) to teach young [Page 48]Children this Doctrine for one of the first Principles of the Ora­cles of GOD, ‘That he hath fore-ordained whatsoever comes to pass:’ since this is p [...]ain [...]y to teach them that he hath ordained or willed all the Sin and Wickedness that obtains in the World.

But be that another Text which sounds or if GOD fore-or­dained Men it [...]. 1 Pet. ii. 8.— Being disobedient, where­unto they were [...] oppointed. What is the Meaning of this?

Disobedience was not, could not be the Thing, that these Men were appointed to; for it cannot be GOD's Will, to ap­point Men to disobey, his Will. But what they were appointed to, was to stumble and fall into Destruction, as a Punishment for their Disobedience to Christ. GOD appoints all that dis­obey and refuse to be saved by Christ, to fall into eternal De­struction. It is appointed, it is the immutable Decree of Hea­ven, that all who will not obey Christ, shall fall into greater Mi­sery than if they had never heard of him; according to that, Christ is set or appointed for the Fall and rising again of many in Israel; that is, they who obey Christ shall be raised to the highest Happiness and Glory; but they who disobey, shall fall the deeper for him into the eternal Miseries.

W [...]ll, but met [...]ks you should take some Notice, that Mr. Dickinson [...]ill sums to per [...] in it, that the Word Election in Scripture is not applied to all Christians. P. 6 [...].

And what Reason had he to persist in it? Did not I bring a Number of Instances? Has he invalidated one if my Argu­ments? Or indeed so much as seemed to aim at weakening them? Has he not pass'd them all over in profound Silence? And can you think that such a Workman at [...]uting would have been so [...]ame, when the Merits of the Cause lay at Stake, provided he thought it possible to say any Thing that might be plausible? For my Part I never did, nor ever desire to see a Cause more entirely given up than this, while it was pretended to be defended— But that you may not say, I boast without a Cause, I will give you an Instance or two, leaving rest for another Opportunity (if GOD will) St. Peter exhorts, 2 Pet. 1.10. To give Diligence to make our Calling and Election sure: Which Command is directed to all Christians in general, and implies that they all have a Calling and an Election; otherwise they could not with any Propriety be exhorted to make their their Calling and Election sure. That which is not, and has no Being cannot be made sure in any Sense. It is therefore [Page 49]evident, that St. Peter thought, they had every one of them an Election, and all were elected in his Sense, and as he used the Word, for it is absurd to exhort to make that sure, that we suppose, has no Existence, neither is, nor ever can be. Besides, I observed, that GOD only could make his Decree sure or firm, and therefore we must not think that the Apostle would exhort them to make it sure, which was the Work of GOD alone. To this Mr. Dickinson replies, But is it not possible to make it sure to ourselves? P. 32. To which I answered, ‘By making it sure to our selves, you mean, to make it manifest, evident and clear to our selves; but the Word in the Original translated sure, has no such Meaning, but always signifies, firm, effectual and stedfast, and so cannot bear the Sense you put upon it, so it is used Heb. 2.2 If the Word spoken by Angels was sted­fast.’ —P. 44. Thus far we proceeded. And now I don't find that Mr. Dickinson has taken the least Notice of this, and many other Arguments which I thought, came very close to the Point in Dispute. Now if I am in an Error, I should have been exceeding thankful, if he would have set me right: But alas he has left me just as he found me, only a little more con­firm'd in my old Notion, that according to the Language of the Holy Ghost all the Christians in the World are elected: They have all a Calling and an Election which by Diligence they may make sure of, or by Negligence may loose.

I am sorry indeed that he has said nothing to several of your pretended Arguments. But now I remember he excuses himself, he was loath to be prolix.

A poor Excuse indeed, but the best he could make. He was writing a Book of 143 Pages, and yet [...] extremely fearful was he of tiring his Readers, that wherever the Argument pinches, he says nor a Word, but passes it by in profound Silence; and has served his Cause as cruelly as the Priest and Levite served the poor wounded and half-dead Traveller passing by without seeming to see him. This is not the only Point in which he has betray'd his Cause. I think he has abandon'd it under every Head. When the Argument comes to a Close, he seems to have entirely forgotten that there is any Dispute between us; but where there is no Need of his Help, he is liberal of his Words to Excess: And will afford us almost a Sermon upon a Subject wherein we are agreed.—I will give you another Instance I said in my Sermon, ‘Though eternal Life is GOD's Gift, yet he bestows it after the Manner of a Reward.’ P. 31.—To [Page 50]this Mr. Dickinson replies— Then according to my Doctrine Heaven is a Reward of their (Men's) Hir [...], which is the proper Meaning of the Word Wages, whether there be or be not a Proportion be­tween the Value of the Work and the Reward. P. 20.—Hereup­on I replied, ‘By this you must mean, that if ever so vast a Bounty is tender'd by a Superior to an Inferior, upon ever so small a Consideration, or ever so easy and trilling a Condi­tion, when that Condition is complied with, that Bounty then ceases to be Bounty, and is no longer Kindness, Mercy, or Alms, but becomes Wages to an Hireling and the Reward of Hire. Thus if you tell a Beggar only reach hither thine Hand and take it, and I will bestow upon thee a Thousand Pounds; if the poor Man does but make that Motion, and comply with that Condition, and reach forth his Hand, only that single Motion alters the Nature of the Thousand Pounds, so that it is no longer Bounty or a Gift; but is become Wages due to an Hireling for his Works, and is the Effect of his Merit▪ So that the Beggar may boast and say, I have merited this Thousand Pounds of you, it is the Reward of my Hire, I have earned it of you by my Works. It is not your Gift, I am no Ways beholden to you, and owe you no Thanks.’ — Thus the Appeal was made to common Sense, and that in one of the grand Articles in Contest.— And I now renew my Ap­peal. If I give Food to an hungry Man, is it no Alms or Kindness, unless I open his Mouth and force it down; if I cloath the Naked, is it not Grace and Favour, unless I also put on their Cloaths, and force them to wear them. But alas, Mr. Dickinson did not seem to have known any more about it, than if he had been at that Time in the East-Indies.—If I take No­tice of such a Conduct and expose it, as I must do, unless I will expose and betray the Truth, which I will not do for the best Friend on Earth, then you complain, that I treat him roughly; but how can I help it? It was not I that expos'd Mr. Dickinson to be ridicul'd, as he complain'd; but he expos'd himself by engaging in a bad Cause. And it is very hard that I must bear the Blame.

But you would do well, to consider some Arguments which he has advanced anew— For though he seems to allow that you have answered his argumentative Queries propounded in his Remarks, yet now he propounds more of the same Kind, which he thinks you can't possibly answer.P. 64. He thus calls for your Attention. ‘ Now what say you? Are all these Things applicable to all professing [Page 51]Christian i [...] general? Are they all begotten to a lively Hope?’ This is his first Query, now answer directly.

Yes, that is meant, and is true of every Member of Christ's Church on Earth. We may one, and all thank GOD with St. Peter and say, Blessed be the GOD and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant Mercy, hath begotten us again unto lively Hope, by the Resurrection of Jesus Christ from the Dead.— Strange it is that he should not know, that Christ's Resurrection is the Pledge and Assurance of our Resurrection, and a [...]l the Hope we have of eternal Life flows from Christ's Resurrection. As by Man came Death, so by Man came the Resurrection.

Well answer the next. Q. 2. ‘ Are they all begotten to an Inheritance in Heaven?’

Yes, GOD by Christ's Resurrection has begotten us all to the Inheritance in Heaven, and by Baptism this Privilege is sealed to us, and we become Members of Christ and Inheritors of the Kingdom of Heaven. As Esau had a Birth-Right but lost the Blessing throught his Prophanity in selling it, so all Christi­ans have a conditional Right to Heaven, which they may either secure or lose by their own Conduct. Whereas the Infidels, as St. Paul observes, were without GOD, without Christ, without a Covenant of Promise, and without Hope,— and when their Friends died they mourned for them without Hope.

Now answer his 3d Query, Are they all kept by the Power of GOD to eternal Salvation?

Yes, this is the Privilege of every Christian, that they are kept by the Power of GOD in the Sense in which St. Peter meant it. Not that GOD's Power is engaged to carry them to Heaven in Spite of all their own Opposition; or let them be ever so wicked, but GOD's Power is so engaged to bring them to Heaven, that neither Men nor Devils shall keep them out of it, if they don't wilfully leave the Way that leads to Heaven, and obstinately chuse the broad Road to Destruction. And this is as much as a reasonable Creature can desire, while he is in a State of Probation.

"Do they all love the Lord Jesus Christ?"

They all profess to love him, and we must account and call them Friends and Lovers of the Lord Jesus Christ, until their Practice gives their Profession the Lie, and this was what St. Peter meant. He did not pretend to know the Heart of so many Thousands.

Fifth Query. ‘ Do they all believe in him and rejoice with Joy unspeakable and full of Glory?’

Yes, this all Christians profess to do, and he speaks of them according to their Profession. As it may be truly said of Mankind, they are rational Creatures, this Character is justly as­cribed to Men in general, and yet sad Experience teaches, that a great many Men are very unreasonable. So what St. Peter here says, is the true Character of Christians in general, as they stood distinguished from the unbelieving World, though (to our Shame) it must be own'd, we don't all live up to our Character and holy Profession.

Now answer the last Query. ‘ Are they all receiving the End of their Faith, the Salvation of their Souls?’ Page 65.

Yes, certainly, as fast as they go out of the World: They that had Faith here then receive the End of it, even the Salva­tion of their Souls.

But Mr. Dickinson say, you ‘ can't pretend to this. It is evident then, that the Word Elect here could not be applied to Infidels as you suggest.’ P. 65.

What Confidence! What Jumble is here! Mr. Dickinson seems to be quite bewilder'd and confus'd. What he means, or what he would be at, is quite beyond my Comprehension. He seems to think that I have attempted to prove, that the Word Elect denotes Infidels. At least he says I suggest that it is ap­plied to them. Now certainly he never saw any such Thing in my Sermon or its Defence. But I will not charge him with wilful falsifying, as he has me, for infinitely less Reason: No, I had rather think he dreamt it.

After all I shall not allow, that you have return'd a suffi­cient Answer, unless you can reconcile to your Scheme such Texts as that, 2 Thess. ii. 13. GOD hath from the Beginning chosen you to Salvation throught Sanctification of the Spirit, and the Belief of the Truth; whereunto he called you by our Gospel, to the obtaining the Glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.

This, and many other Texts are a full Proof of what I pretend to in my Sermon. And they signify no more than this, that GOD had of his infinite Mercy from the Beginning de­signed to call the Gentiles, into his Vineyard, the Church, and to invite them to the Gospel-Feast; that they mighty enjoy the gracious Offer of eternal Life; which eternal Life they should obtain, provided they heartily believed in Jesus Christ, when he [Page 53]was preached to them, and gave themselves up to be guided and sanctified by the Holy Spirit.— There is not the least Inti­mation in all these Texts of an absolute Election of particular Persons to Salvation.—Who can be so unreasonable, as to think that the Apostles would write Epistles to whole Churches, in which there were many Thousands whom they had never seen, and tell them plumply one and all, that they were elected in a personal and Calvinistie Sense; and that they knew this for Truth, as 1 Thess. i. 24. To the Church of the Thessalonians — knowing your Election of GOD. Let who will believe this to be the Design of the holy Pen-Men, I shall not believe it, till I can see more Reason for it than Mr. Dickinson has offer'd Did ever a Calvinist write a Letter to all the Christians of a whole Country, nay many Countries together, and tell them they, and he knew for certain, they were all personally and ab­solutely elected?

Of ORIGINAL SIN.

When Mr. Dickinson comes to speak of Original Sin, he gives a lamentable Description of the Degeneracy and Wickedness of Mankind, and appeals to every Man's Experience, whether be does not find his Understanding naturally dark, &c.— ‘ And then turns to you, and says, what Answer have you given to all this— You say—To which I need return no other Reply than in the Words of St. Paul, Neither give Heed to Fables, P. 70.’ Now tell me, did you return that Answer, to such a Discourse as Mr. Dickinson says, you did?

No, indeed I did not. If I had taken such a Liberty with him, as he has done with me, I should have had very little Reason to complain, if he had called me by an ill Name, which I don't desire to mention. But the worst I shall say is this, he has mistook the whole Affair. I as firmly believe all this as he did, viz. That Mankind are degenerate, and that we are naturally strongly inclined to Sin— And therefore I needed not that impertinent Multiplicity of Words, either to inform or convince me.

What I called a Fable, was the Account that he gave, of GOD's entering into Covenant with Adam, which as far as I could understand him was to this Purpose, viz. That it Adam [Page 54]would forbear to eat of the forbidden Fruit for a Day, or a Week, or Month, or a Year, I could not learn from him how long exactly the Trial was to last, but he intimated, it was to be hat a very short Term, and then all Danger, all Trial and Pro­bation for Adam, and his numerous Issue was to be over, and none of them was to be put to the Trouble of a personal Pro­bation. This he suppos'd was unspeakably better than to be Probationers ourselves. And who would not rather chuse this Method, and leave all in the Hands of Adam, than be for ever upon Probation, in one's own Person? this I did then and do [...]ill call a Fable, it has not only no Foundation in the Word of GOD, but is there plainly contradicted; as I have proved in another Place. Besides it is in many Respects a most absurd Scheme. To name but one. This Hypothesis makes Adam's Righteousness infinitely more valuable and efficacious than that of Christ's the Lord from Heaven: For according to Mr. Dic­kinson, if Adam had kept but one Precept, and that for a short Time, that Obedience would have been of such infinite Virtue, as to secure eternal Happiness to himself and to every single Child of his for ever. Whereas Christ's most holy Life and dreadful Death could save but a Part of Mankind: Neither could it save one of them, but upon Condition of their own Faith and sincere Repentance, whereas Adam's Righteousness was of such Virtue as to save all, absolutely and unconditionally: Such Whims, I confess, I don't believe. And I wonder, how those Divines who pretend to make the Scripture the Rule of their Faith can give Heed to such Fables.

The Occasion to speak of Original Sin which Mr. Dickinson catched at in my Sermon was this, I said, that it is not a suffi­cient Vindication that such Men make of GOD's Mercy towards the Souls of Men, to say as they do, that GOD leaves them without sufficient Help, under a Necessity of being wicked and miserable for ever, because Adam lost their Power to be­lieve and repent—And this I am persuaded is most true and very consistent with the Church of England Doctrine of Ori­ginal Sin. That GOD should command us to do, what we cannot do without his Grace and punish us eternally for not doing it, while he was not pleased to give us necessary Help; this, I say, is to charge our heavenly Father with Cruelty, and therefore GOD forbid that I should do it. They are mistaken, when they say we lost our Power in Adam, and that GOD may justly damn us for not repenting and not making [Page 55]ourselves a new Heart, tho' he does not now give us Power to repent, because he once have us that Power, and Adam lost it for us. For as Dr. Whitby observes, ‘ Adam, when he was first created had no such Ability that in case he should fall he could rise again by Frith and Repentance.—Therefore, we never lost any such Power in him. But supposing we lost the Gift of Faith and Repentance in Adam, which is certainly false, yet you must remember, the Gospel is a gracious Tender of Pardon to sallen Creatures: Now to pro­mise Pardon to a lapsed Person upon a Condition, is in Effect for GOD to say, he will not impute to him his former Fault, but will deal with him according to his future Car­riage, to which a conditional Promise always has a Re­lation; but if he still requires what he knows the first Fault hath render'd utterly impossible to be done by him he still imputes that Fault, and punishes him at the same Time for it as he pretendeth to remit it; and surely it is no small Matter to render GOD so delusory and deceitful, so insincere and hypocritical, as this Opinion makes him.’

‘Should a Physician come to a Patient whose Stomach was so weaken'd through his Intemperance and Lust, that it could bear no strong Meat, and his Feet so enfeebled that he could scarce walk from his Couch to his Bed side, and profess an earnest Desire to cure his Distemper, and promise him Re­covery, provided he would follow his Prescriptions, might it not reasonably be expected he should prescribe such Means for his Recovery, that it was possible for him in this Condition to make Use of? If then he should enjoin him to eat and to digest the strongest Meats, and walk some Hours in the Fields, because he formerly could do so, before he fell into this Dis­ability and Feebleness; would not all Men pronounce him a deluding Cheat, and one that hypocritically and insincerely pretended his Recovery, and promised it with equal Vanity and Folly, intending only to insult over his present Misery; And yet this is the Representation of our gracious GOD, in this Affair which these Men offer to us. For the blessed Jesus is the Physician which GOD sent to heal our Natures of the Disability which we had contracted by the Fall, and to pro­mise us a Remedy, which if we would use, we should reco­ver, that or a better Life than that from which we fell, and to threaten the severest Judgments if we neglect so to do. [Page 56]But then, if he only doth promise this Recovery on such a Condition as that very Fall hath render'd us unable to per­form, and which he never will enable us to perform, must he not be guilty of the like Hypocrisy and Insincerity in pro­pounding to us an impossible Remedy, and insult only over the Misery of his Creatures whilst he pretends Kindness to them? And how unreasonable is it to impute such Deceit, Falshood, Insincerity and Injustice to a good and righteous GOD, which we cannot but abhor in Man? For sure, most graciously to exhort, most affectionately to invite, most ear­nestly by the greatest Promises and Threats to move us to repent and believe, when at the same Time he is most firmly purposed to withhold the Means, by which alone we can do either, is to insult over his miserable Crea­tures in the highest Manner: And to deal thus with Myriads for the Sin of Adam, is, as it were, to medi­tate Revenge upon the greatest Part of his Posterity to the World's End for what was only done by the first Man: yet, it is to do this under Pretence of Love and kind Affec­tion and a vehement Desire and Concern that they should escape the Misery that very Sin had brought upon them, and recover the Felicity they had lost by it, by those very Means he doth prescribe; And yet to leave them under an utter Incapacity to perform those Means: Which to con­ceive and assert of our most gracious GOD, is highly to dis­honour and blaspheme his sacred Majesty, and represent him so unto the World, as even the worst of Men would not endure to be so represented.’

Thus we are entered upon that Inquiry, whether GOD does afford the internal Assistance of his Spirit in such a Measure to all under the Gospel as to put them under a Pos­sibility of obtaining Salvation? this I affirm, and he denies.

And what can you say to those Texts by him cited? I will read them, and you may [...]ry whether you can evade the Conviction they carry with them; I will begin with 1 Cor. iv. 7. For who maketh thee to differ from another? And what hast thou that thou didst not receive?

In my Sermon I shew'd that this is nothing to their Purpose, now he has forgot it, and renews several Arguments which were then considered. But however we must repeat to them who have weak Memories.

Now the Christians at Corinth had a foolish Contention [Page 57]about several Teachers who had been among them, they grew hot and ran into Parties and Factions, some preferring one Teacher and some another; to convince them of the Unreason­ableness of this Practice, the Apostle says to them, who maketh thee to differ from another? That is, it GOD only, who in his Providence gives one Man a better Teacher than another; and therefore none of you have any Reason to be puffed up against, or despise another, altho' you have a better Teacher than he hath. The Apostle don't say, that GOD alone makes one Teacher to differ from another; for different Improve­ments will make some Difference among Teachers, but he says, Who maketh thee (i. e. [...] Boaster) to differ from another, in that you have (as you think) a more excellent Teacher? Now though GOD did make one Teacher to differ from ano­ther by miraculous Gifts (in those Days common) in receiving of which they were meerly passive; yet this is nothing at all to the Case in Hand. And it is a monstrous Error to say, that GOD alone makes all the Difference among Mankind; and, that no Part is owing to Men's different Conduct and Improve­ments. When of two Men the one is temperate, and the other a Drunkard, the one a righteous Dealer, and the other a Thief or Pirate, it is not GOD who makes all the Difference, for then the Vicious would be as worthy of Praise and Reward as the Virtuous. GOD, its true, makes a Difference among Mankind, by giving different Talents, but then Experience shews, that Men having equal Talents, may differ from each other by their different Improvements of the same Talents.

Now, what say you to that, Mat. xiii. 11. Because it is given to you, to know the Mysteries of the Kingdom of Heaven, but unto them it is not given.

Christ's Disciples who believed him to be a Teacher sent from GOD, and so were fitted to receive the plainest Instructi­ons, ask'd him why he taught the People in such a dark Manner by Parables? To this Christ answers, Because it is given to you to know the Myteries of the Kingdom of God, but to them it is not given. Now the Meaning is, You who are already my Dis­ciples, and have made some Progress in the Knowledge of my Religion, and are resolved to lead your Lives accordingly, you are better fitted than this Multitude to receive plainer Instructi­ons, and to be let into the Secrets of my Kingdom; but it is better for the common Sort of Hearers, that I preach to them in Parables first, which has a Tendency to put them upon En­quiry; [Page 58]and when they are fitted for it, by humbly learning and enquiring, they may hear the Mysteries of the Kingdom of GOD in the best Season and most profitable to them— This is Christ's Meaning, viz. That he used a Method of Preaching best adapted to the Capacity and Condition of his Hearers. And pray what is this to our Controversy? Mr. Dickinson by citing this [...]ct on this Occasion, seems to insinuate, that Christ was so disingenuous, as to preach in a dark Manner on Purpose, and for no other End, than that his Hearers might be no more wise or better for his Sermons. If this was not his Meaning I can't see how this Citation was at all to his Purpose. It must be a wretched Cause, that needs such idle Shifts to support it.

I shall now read a third Text. Mat. xi. 25, 26. At that Time Jesus answered and said, 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 unto Babes. Even so, Father, for so it seemed good in thy Sight. Now what say you to th [...]?

By this Text Mr. Dickinson attempts to prove almost every Thing Reprobation; no real Redemption for the Reprobates, and no sufficient Grace for them; because GOD hated them so as to hide Salvation from them, and Christ rejoiced and was thank­ful for it.

I shall therefore be very particular in my enquiring into the Meaning of it. St. Luke gives this Account of that same Pas­sage, Luke x. 21. In that Hour Jesus rejoiced in Spirit, and said, I thank thee O Father, Lord of Heaven and Earth, that thou hast hid these Things from the wise and prudent, and hast reveal'd them unto Babes.

Now that the blessed Jesus, that mighty Lover of Mankind, who came down from Heaven to save Souls, who left the high­est Glory for the Depth of Misery, and forsook the Bosom of his Father to hang upon a Cross, to deliver us from Hell and bring, us to his Joys: That he should be so mightily pleased and rejoice in Spirit, when he saw that Multitudes of excellent wise and prudent Persons were so blinded and hardned as to reject the Gospel, their sole Remedy and the only Way to Salvation: That he who did so much to save Men, should with transporting Joy give Thanks to his Father, because he had so ordered the Matter that the wiser and more prudent Part of Mankind were certainly to be lost and damned for ever; and that the Father who had sworn by his own Life, that he delighted not in the [Page 59]Sinners Death, and sent his Son into the World not to con­demn but save it, yet that he should so contrive the Scheme of Salvation, as to hide those M [...]teries of it which were necessary to be believed, from the Wise and Prudent, the Effect of which Hiding must unavoidably by their eternal Damnation; this is surprizing! this is amazing! In this Sense Mr. Dic­kinson plainly understands it, or else when he so often cites it, he does it impertinently. Here then let us enquire, 1. Who are the Wise and Prudent, and who are the Babes? 2. What is meant by GOD's hiding the Mysteries of Christian­ity from the Wise and Prudent? 3. What was the true Occa­sion of Christ's rejoicing and giving Thanks? To begin with the First, by the Wise and Prudent are meant the Doctors of the Law of Moses and the Rulers of the Nation: These were the most obstinate Enemies to Christ, and deaf to all the Rea­sons that could be offer'd in Defence of his divine Mission. Hence they said, Have any of the Rulers or Pharisees believed on him? John vii. 46. Now these Men are called wise and pru­dent, not because they were really so, but because they vainly esteemed themselves wise and prudent; and were generally so accounted. But had they been wise and prudent indeed, they would have honestly enquired into Christ's Pretensions, and have di­ligently examin'd the Testimonials he bro't with him from Hea­ven, and so would have been convinc'd of his being the Christ.— And by Babes are meant the ignorant and unlearn'd common People, sometimes stiled the Poor, who had the Gospel preach'd to them. Now the common People among the Jews were like Babes or Children, in that they were more free from Pre­judices, more humble and teachable, than their wise Men; and so were better prepared to be wrought upon by Christ's Preach­ing, and better disposed to receive the Gospel.

The common People here called Babes, were in Christ's Time so well dispos'd towards Christianity, that had their Teach­ers and Rulers let them alone, and not violently oppos'd it, they would have readily believed in Christ, so mightily were they affected with his astonishing Works and heavenly Doctrine. But the proud and obstinate Wretches conceiting themselves wise and prudent, would neither go into Christ's Kingdom them­selves, nor by their Good-Will suffer the common People to go in. And it was easier to reveal the Gospel to Babes, i. e. the humble ignorant Vulgar, than to convince them of its Truth. And now for the Second Enquiry, that is, in what Sense did [Page 60]GOD hide the Gospel from these Men? [...] certainly GOD did nothing with a Design, or on Purpose to hide the Gospel from them, for this would be directly contrary to the Nature of GOD and the Declaration of his Word, GOD is good and merciful and dispos'd to do all that is fit to make his Creatures happy, but to do Things on Purpose to blind and harden Men in Sin to their eternal Ruin, is as contrary to Goodness and Mercy as Darkness is to Light, and the Scripture assures us that GOD would have all Men to repent and come to the Know­ledge of the Truth: Not indeed that GOD wills this with an irresistible Will by which he made the World, but he so wills the Salvation of all Men as to do all that is necessary on his Part, even for the bringing of every Jew, Tur [...] or Pagan to the Knowledge of his Truth, and that all the H [...]tt [...]nt [...]ts in the Bay of Soldonia have not the Knowledge of the Way to Salva­tion, of whom Mr. Dickinson speaks, is not from any Deficiency in GOD's Good-Will towards them, but from Men's neglect­ing their Part in publishing and supporting GOD's revealed Truth. But for GOD to do any Thing on Purpose to hide his Truth from Men, and lead them into damning Mistakes, this is far, very far from being agreeable to what St. Peter says, 2 Pet. iii. 9. The Lord is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to Repentance. Thus then Secondly, Though GOD does nothing which can lay Men under a Necessity not to see the Things of their eternal Peace, yet it is certain, that no Men will see them, but only such as love the Truth; or though GOD does nothing to hide the Gospel from Men, yet no Men will see so much of its Excellency as to embrace it sincerely, un­less they are willing to know and do the Will of GOD. Our blessed Saviour was wont often to say, He that hath Ears to hear, let him hear, which denotes that though all Men have na­tural Capacities sufficient to receive all necessary Truth, yet there were many who were so full of Prejudices and Self Will, that they had no Ears to hear, that is, they had no Inclination towards the Truth: They hated it because it cross'd their Hu­mours and former Notions, so that their Want of Ears to hear and Eyes to see, was not because GOD never gave these to them, but because they would not use them: But when they had Ears they were like the deaf Adder who stoppeth her Ear: so they stop their Ears and will not hear the Voice of the Rea­soner, let him reason ever so wisely, their Deafness and Blind­ness is the Effect of their own Perverseness, just thus it was with [Page 61]those Zealots who stoned St. Stephe [...], they stopped their Ears and [...] upon him, resolving they would not hear what he had to say, least it should corrupt them, or in other Words, convince them of their Error. Now this was the Case of these wise and pru­dent Men in this Text. The Gospel was hid from them! How? not because it was above their Capacities to understand it, not because GOD inflicted any positive Blindness or Hardness upon them, so that it was not in their Power to see the Truth; but because they would not see, they were resolved not to be convinced, they shut their own Eyes as close as possible against the Truth, and hardened their own Hearts like an Adamant, left hi [...] Doctrines and Miracles should make an Impression upon them, and the special Reason of this their Obstinacy was, their groundless Expectation of a temporal King and Deliverer in the Messiah; which they perceived must fail, if they acknowledged Jesus to be the Person.

But why is GOD said to hide the Gospel from these Men if they al [...] were the Causes of their own B [...]iness and Unbelief?

I answer, according to the Language of the holy Bible, oftentimes GOD is said, to do such Things, which he neither decreed, nor willed, nor in any Degree effected by his Power; but only suffered it, to come to p [...]ss, when he could by his infi­nite Power have hindered it. Nothing can come to pass unless GOD see [...] [...]it to permit it, not one Sparrow fails, nor an Hair of our Head falls to the Ground, without the Notice of our heavenly Father, no Event can befall us though ever so casual, or ever so much Chance-medly, but what GOD foresees and permits; seeing therefore GOD superintends all Events either ordering, or permitting and over-ruling them for Good, there­fore in a figurative Way such Things are often ascrib'd to GOD which he neither willed nor effected, but only suffered to be done when he could by his infinite Power have hinder'd them: As Prov. xvi. 4. The Lord hath made all Things for himself; ^* yea even the wicked for the Day of Evil. Which certainly does not mean, that GOD makes Men wicked: But they make themselves wicked, and the Lord so orders all Events, as that they shall most certainly come into the Day of Evil, that is, the Day of Punishment.

Again, It is said 2 Sam. xxiv. 1. The Lord moved David to number the People. Now it is evident from other Texts, that [Page 62]all which GOD did, was to permit Satan and his own Vanity to move him to do it. So when it is said in this Text, that GOD hid the Gospel from these Men it don't mean, that GOD had not given them Grace sufficient to enable them to see the Things of their eternal Peace, or that he had lest them under an absolute Incapacity to be convinced of the Truth of the Gospel and to believe in Christ; for then they would not have been at all to blame for not seeing, and not believing: for who can blame a blind Man because he don't see, or a deaf Man because he can't hear, when GOD has not given them Power to do it? And yet Christ often reproved and upbraided these Men for their Unbelief and Hardness of Heart; which he would never have done if he had supposed, as Mr. Dickinson did, that GOD never had given them Sufficiency of his Grace to enable them to see and believe; or that GOD had never put it in their Power to receive him.

3. We come now to the last Enquiry. What was the Occa­sion of Christ's Rejoicing and giving Thanks; was it because the Gospel was hid from the Wise and Prudent, or was it be­cause it was reveal'd to Babes? Or did he rejoice in and give Thanks for both? I answer; No, it was not for both: It was only because the Gospel was revealed to Babes, that Christ rejoiced and gave Thanks. Men's Blindness, Unbelief and Damnation are no Occasion of Joy to any but the cursed Fiends of Hell, and those who are like them: And it is horrid Blas­phemy to suppose that our Saviour was guilty of so much Ill-Nature, as to give Thanks, and rejoice when he observed that Men were going blindly to Hell; and the Gospel's being HID from some, is here put in Opposition to its being REVEALED to others, only that the former may illustrate the latter, as black set opposite to white, makes the latter appear the whiter; this is a common Thing in the Scripture. But I'll only repeat that Parallel Text I gave to Mr. Dickinson before, but he was too wise and prudent, to learn from me, Rom. vi. 17. St. Paul says thus, GOD be thanked, that ye were the Servants of Sin, but ye have obeyed from the Heart that Form of Doctrine, &c.— Now you may as well argue from this, that St. Paul was thankful that these Men had spent all the former Part of their Life in the Ser­vitude of Sin, as Mr. Dickinson does from this Text that Christ was not willing to die effectually on his Part for some, nor had GOD elected these (Some) nor was he willing to give sufficient Grace to these (Some) because Christ thanked his heavenly Fa­ther [Page 63]for HIDING the Benefits of his Redemption from Some, when in Truth Christ never did thank GOD for any such Thing, but it was his unhappy Mistake which he too long persisted in. I have been the longer upon this Text, hoping I may contribute something, to prevent its being so horribly abused for the future (which GOD grant) I must be shorter upon what follows.

What [...]y you to th [...]se Texts which he has produced to prove that Conversion is a new Creation?

Though Conversion is called a Creation; and good Men are GOD's Workmanship, yet this Metaphor does not imply that they are meerly passive in Conversion; for though it be true in a proper Creation, that GOD does all, and the Creature can neither hinder or promote its own Creation; yet Mr. Dic­kinson himself owns, that we can hinder or promote our own Conversion: The Metaphor must not be forced to this Sense, which is plainly false. You allow that a good Man when fal­len into a particular Sin, does something towards his rising a­gain; and his Repentance is not the Work of GOD alone. Now in holy Scripture the same Metaphor is applied to that Case, Psal. 51.10. Create in me a clean Heart, O GOD.

What say you to Eph. 1.18. That ye may know what is the Hope of his Calling, and what the Riches of the Glory of his Inheritance in the Saints; and what the exceeding Greatness of his Power to us ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty Power, which wrought in Christ when he raised him from the Dead.

By the exceeding Greatness of the Power, the Apostle here speaks of, he does not mean, that Power which wrought in their Souls to make them Christians; but that Power that shall be exerted on their Bodies in the last Day, to raise them to a glorious Immortality, as it did Christ's Body; so that Mr. Dickinson has frequently cited this Text very impertinently.

And what think you of 1 Cor. 2.14. The natural Man re­ceiveth not the Things of the Spirit of GOD, for they are Foolish­ness to him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Some by a natural Man understand, a sensual Man, one who is a perfect Slave to his Lusts, whether Intemperance, Un­cleaness or Covetousness; now such an Epicure is so besotted with Vice, so infatuated with his Lusts, that he has no Heart for Religion, no Relish of, no Taste for spiritual and heavenly Things, they appear insipid and foolish to him. To discourse [Page 64]to him of the Pleasures of Religion, is singing to a deaf Man, and in such Cases we commonly say he can't hear you; by which we don't mean that he wants a Capacity or Power, but an Inclination, which Indisposition he might cure if he would.— Or by the natural Man is meant, the Heathen Philosophers, who acknowledged no divine Revelation; but profest to be guided merely by the Light of Nature; these Naturalists received not the Things of the Spirit, nor could they receive them, because they were to be known only by Revelation, and that they re­nounced, therefore it appeared Foolishness to them to imagine, that GOD should raise the Dead, and they mocked at it.— Which of these is the justest Interpretation I need not deter­mine, but let it be which you please, Mr. Dickinson has imper­tinently cited this Text; for though this natural Man did not receive and could not receive the Things of the Spirit while he remained in this Condition, yet nothing hindered but only his own free Choice, but that he might come out of that Condi­tion.

Again he cites Joh. 6.65. No Man can come unto me except it were given unto him of my Father, so Joh. 3.27. A Man can receive Nothing except it be given him from Heaven.

This is very true, but Nothing to his Purpose, because GOD from Heaven gives it to Millions of Men to repent and believe, who never do actually repent and believe, but die in their Sins; because they will not accept and, improve what GOD given them, but receive his Grace in vain. — Doth not Christ tell the Jews, Joh. vi. 32, 33. My Father giveth you the true Bread from Heaven; yet many of them never had it, ne­ver eat it, never believed in Christ, so never were the better for GOD's Gift. So GOD gives us our daily Bread, but many must starve, if they don't labour for their Bread. The Scripture is most express. GOD purges Thousands who are never purg­ed, because they will not be purged; GOD draws Myriads, who never come, because they resist his Drawings. The Good­ness of GOD leads some Men to Repentance, who yet are ne­ver lead, but continue to treasure up Wrath.—I grant that some Times such Phrases GOD's giving a Heart to perceive, to re­pent or to believe, do denote the desired Effect, and that the Person does actually perceive or repent, but this is not always their Meaning, that must be judged of by the Context.

Well what can you say to that? Phil. ii. 13. It is GOD which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good Pleasure.

This, as well as several other Texts I have now consider'd he has likewise improved against Dr. Johnson; now, that you may see that all the Arguments your Party can advance were answered long ago, I will reply in the Words of Clagget against Owen. ‘Now, says he, that these Words do not imply that GOD is the sole Agent in Conversion, is plain from hence, that we are exhorted in the Verse immediately preceeding to work out our Salvation with Fear and Trembling; and it is brought as a Reason why we ought to do this, because it is GOD that works in us both to will and to do. Now it would be very strange, that GOD should use that for a Reason to us why we should work out our own Salvation, which is on the other Hand a clear Reason why we need not. And yet this is the very Case if GOD's working in us be suppos'd to imply that he is the sole Cause of Conversion. For if GOD be the sole Cause of Conversion, if he does all, then there is nothing left for us to do; and then to what Purpose is it that we should work? If GOD worketh not, our working will not profit us, and if he doth work, our Negligence, nay our utmost Resistance, cannot hurt us; for this Work of GOD is suppos'd to be irresistable, and consequently uncapable of being frustrated by the stoutest Opposition we are able to make against it. This Consideration therefore that GOD worketh in us, can (upon this Supposition) be no Argument why a Man should himself work; but a plain Argument to the contrary; and therefore the Apostle would never have used it, much less would he have added with Fear and Trem­bling; for there can be no Cause of Fear and Trembling if we cannot miscarry through our own Negligence, which if GOD be the sole Cause of Conversion, we certainly cannot. But it will be enough to expose this Notion, nakedly to set down the Apostle's Discourse, as it must run according to this Interpretation. Thus then he argues; I assure you all to whom I write, that GOD work [...] in you all Things that appertain to your Obedience and Salvation, and that by an irresistable Operation, so as that it shall not be possible for you not to will, or to do whatever is necessary to Salvation: Therefore I seriously exhort you to be very careful and that with Fear and Trembling, that you both will and do such Things left you miscarry through your own Negligence and Disobedience. Than which nothing can be more absur [...] It is plain then that by GOD's working in us, no more can [Page 66]be meant, than that he worketh in us what is on his Part pro­per and fitting to be wrought in Order to our willing and doing, which is not so much but that our own Care and Di­ligence is necessary.’

The next Text is Rom. viii. 7.8. 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.

To be in the Flesh, is to be under the Dominion of Vice, to be a Slave to Sin, and it don't import, that they who are in the Flesh cannot come out of that wretched State, that they who are wicked can't become good Men by the Grace GOD ten­ders to them. It only signifies that so far as they act from a vi­cious or fleshly Mind, so far their Actions are displeasing to GOD; as when it is said of a good Man, that he sinneth not neither indeed can he sin; it only means so far as he is good, and acts up to his Character, he cannot sin. Not but that a Man who is a Child of GOD can and does sin, but then he acts not as a Child of GOD, but inconsistently with his Character. So when it is said, he that is in the Flesh cannot please GOD, it means, that whatever he does by Virtue of this fleshly or vi­cious Mind is offensive to GOD, but at the same Time he might act contrary to the Flesh, and mortify it by divine Help, and so far as he does so, he pleases GOD, and as soon as ever he has got the Mastery over the Flesh, he is a good Man and in the Spirit; but yet is still liable to be too much influenced by the Flesh, and so far as he is so, he offends GOD, although he be a good Man. So that such Expressions in the Scripture are im­pertinently cited to prove that a Sinner can do nothing towards his own Conversion; or that his Conversion don't at all depend upon his concurring with Grace.

Well, but he tells you, that an unconverted State is called Death in holy Scripture. Now what [...] a dead Man do?

So it is called a Sleep even in the same Sentence. Eph. v. 14. Awake thou that sleepest and arise from the Dead. So that if you can prove from one Metaphor, that an Almighty Power is necessary to effect the Conversion of a Sinner; I can prove by the other Metaphor in the same Verse, that an Almighty Power is not necessary, for it don't require an irrefutable Act to awake a Man that is asleep. Besides if wicked Men's being said to be dead in Trespasses and Sins, must be so understood, as to denote that they can't do any Thing towards their Conversion, [Page 67]then when good Men are said to be deed to the Law, dead to Sin, it must mean, that it is as impossible for them to sin, as for a dead Man to act.

Will you new try how you can evade all those Texts he has produced to prove that when a Man is once converted, he can't possibly miss of eternal Happiness?

If there be any Texts now cited anew, which I considered in my first Defence, and he has not at all invalidated my Inter­pretation, I desire you to omit them, for the sake of avoiding needless Repetitions.

Well, what think you of that? 1 Pet. i. 5. Who are kept by the Power of GOD through Faith unto Salvation.

This only proves that all who persevere so as to obtain Salvation, are kept, by the Power of GOD. And they are kept through Faith, i. e. GOD's Power is engaged to carry them through all Dangers, on Condition they continue in the Faith, and don't apostatize.

John vi. 37. All that the Father giveth me, shall come to me, and him that cometh unto me I will in no wise cast out.

This Text asserts no more than this, that Christ will never cast off any that come to him, but will give them eternal Life: but then this Condition is plainly implied, viz. provided they continue with him, and don't wilfully forsake him. He does not engage to keep any against their own Wills. — And by those which the Father hath given him, he here means such as have complied with and so have been effectually wrought upon by the antecedent Grace of GOD.

Well, tell me what you think of that? Joh. x. 27, 28. My Sheep [...]e [...] my [...], and I know them, and they follow me; and I give unto them eternal Life, and they shall never perish, neither shall [...] pluck them out of my Hand.

Christ hereby meant to promise no more than this, that they who were of a teachable Temper and Lovers of Truth, and so became his Sheep, and believed in him, and obeyed him till Death: he would certainly give them eternal Life; and all their Enemies in Earth and Hell should not be able to deprive them of it. For his Power which was his Father's, was superior to all other Powers: it is evident, that Christ here speaks of plucking them away by Violence: not a Word here of their not being able wilfully to desert him. It is one of the most unreasonable Notions that ever entered into the Heart of [Page 68]Man, to suppose that Salvation is promised to one single Act of Faith without Regard to a Man's subsequent Behaviour.

Well, I believe you will not so easily get clear of the last Text, Rom. xi. 29. The Gifts and Calling of GOD are without Repentance.

This is certainly spoken of the Body of the Jewish Nation, which at that very Time were given up by GOD to Blindness of Mind and Hardness of Heart; in which they have continued from that Day to this, and it only denotes that GOD has not so cast them off but that he will receive them again, upon their believing and repenting. And it will not hold al­ways true, that GOD does not repent of, or revoke his Gifts bestowed upon Men: how often does he give and take away. And to say this holds true of coverting Grace, is only to beg the Thing in Question.

And now will you tell me in a few Words, the Substance of what Mr. Dickinson has said in Answer to what I urged from. GOD's saying to the Jews, Because I have purged thee, and thou wast not purged, and what could have been done more to my Vine­yard that I have not done in it? wherefore when I looked that it should bring forth Grapes, brought it forth wild Grapes?

I think the Substance of what he has said to it is this: that GOD did not complain because they did not use special Grace, for that he never gave them, but because they did not well improve common Grace.

I am perswaded this was his Meaning; and can you be­lieve it is true, that GOD did not expect, that they should love him with all their Heart and serve him with all their Souls? Did GOD expect any Thing less from his peculiar People, than that they should be a holy People as he was a holy GOD. These were the Grapes which he expected; and for Want of these he complains, and to produce these, he declares he had done all that was necessary on his Part.

But he asks, How does it appear, that they had all of them received Grace sufficient for their eternal Salvation? P. 77.

We don't say, they had received Grace; but they might have received sufficient for their eternal Salvation, had they not rejected it. For GOD himself says it; I have purged thee: And what could have been done more? Which do as strongly as­sert as Words can do, that GOD had done every Thing neces­sary on his Part to cause them to bring forth Grapes, and to purge them [...]om, not merely gross Immoralities, [Page 69]but from all their Iniquities, and make them pure and holy. But all GOD's Grace was lost upon them, as Rain falling upon the Rocks and Sands, through their Perverseness.

But what have you to object to their Explanation of special Grace? When they say to Dr. Johnson, "the whole is greater than a Part, Three and Two make Five, Five is a lesser Number than Five Hundred, now are you not necessitated to assent to these Truths? Just thus—When the Spirit of Grace illuminates the Sin­ner's Understanding, it necessitates his free Consent to the Gospel Call. P. 108. It is a Contradiction and impossible in the Nature of Things, that a good Man should be willing to be wicked." P. 134.

That this is false, I dare appeal to your own Conscience. Have you as full a Belief of the Gospel, as you have that two and three make five? Have you no more Doubts about any Truths of Christianity, than you have whether Five be a lesser Number than Five Hundred? If so, then your Faith has no Virtue in it, is worthy of no Praise or Reward, and is no Effect of the Will. For what Choice of the Will is there in believing that Two and Three make Five? If this be true, then your Faith is perfect the very first Moment, and can never grow, and you have no Need to pray, Lord increase our Faith, I believe, Lord help my Unbelief. I acknowledge Christ could make himself so manifest to every one, as that we should be no more able to doubt, or refuse his Offer than to doubt of our own Existence. But this would be inconsistent with a State of Probation, or living by Faith. This would not be Faith, but Sight, and peculiar to the Saints and Angels in Heaven. See a Specimen of the Arrogance and Pride that is cherished by these Doctrines! With what Scorn do they look down upon us poor Wretches, who have nothing but common Grace! I confess if this be their special Grace, I have it not; nor do I ever expect it in this State of Probation. Nor have I ever seen any Signs of it among them, notwithstand­ing all their Boasting (like the Quakers of their Light within) on Purpose to inveigle weak People. I esteem this nothing but playing the Mountebank with Religion. I have known several, who have boasted that they had this special Grace; and were mounted aloft above Doubts or Fears, but I have found many of them with all their special Grace, to be destitute of common Honesty.

And now will you help me to understand what he has said [Page 70]in Reply to my Reasoning from Ezek. xxxiii. 11. As I live saith the Lord GOD, I have no Pleasure in the Death of the Wicked, &c.

I think the Sum of what he has said is this, that GOD does not really will that all Sinners in general should be converted, his Oath means no more, than that when any Sinner is converted it is acceptable to GOD. For if he did really will the Conversion of all Sinners, he would certainly convert all, for nothing can hinder GOD from accomplishing his Will.

That is indeed his Argument: But it is a very great Mistake, to think that GOD always by his infinite Power does accomplish every Thing that he would have his Creatures do. If this be true, then GOD is not willing that any Men should o­bey him, who do not actually obey him, then he is not willing that any should repent, who don't repent, he is not willing that one Soul should be good and obtain Salvation, who don't actually obtain it. And then what Sincerity is there in all GOD's earnest and passion­ate Wishes? Ps. lxxxi. 12. O that my People had hearken'd unto me! O that they were wise that they would consider their latter End. How often would I have gathered—but ye would not! Who dare charge the GOD of Truth, with Hypocrisy and Dissimulation, and say that he did not will or desire this? Which yet he ne­ver did accomplish by his infinite Power. If this Notion of Mr. Dickinson's be just then, no wicked Man in the World does, or can do any Thing contrary to GOD's Will, for if it were contrary to his Will GOD would hinder him by his exceeding great Power. And can this Notion be true, when it contains such monsuous Absurdities? So I shall leave it to be determin'd by common Sense.

You may remember, that Dr. Johnson had suggested, that it is not impossible but that some Men who never were so happy, as to hear the Name of Christ, "yet may be saved by his Merits. — To this they reply, "What so great Cause of Thankfulness for the "Gospel, if Men may be saved without the Gospel? P. 143.

By this you may see the Envy and Unthankfulness, the stingy narrow uncharitable Spirit of Calvinism; they can't bear to think, that GOD should be so merciful to all Men, as to make it possible for them to be saved. No, they will not thank him for the Gospel, if he has not confined Salvation to them; of the same cruel and envious Temper were the Jews in the Apostles Time, and cav [...]lled against the Calling of the Gentiles, just as these Men; Rom. iii. 1. What Advantage then hath [Page 71]the Jew? To which the Apostle replies, much every Way. The same Answer I return to these Men. Had not such Men as Sir Isaac Newton Reason to thank GOD for his great Intellectual Powers, because that one who has scarce common Sense may be saved as well as he? When a Man has received five Talents, has he no Reason for Thankfulness; because the Man who has received but one, may possibly so improve it, as to be accepted? And whereas there are many Mansions in Heaven, is it no Cause of Thankfulness that you are put into a Capacity to arrive at the highest of them, unless you can be sure that all others shall be shat out from the lowest? It is so melancholy to think, that all who never heard of Christ shall be eternally damned, that I can't but suspect that Man's want of good Nature, who is fond of proving it.

Of JUSTIFICATION.

We are now come to the last Head under which Mr. Dickinson seems to be a little more calm and condescending. He tells me if I meant no more by some Expressions in my Sermon, than I seem to do in my Defence it is well, and he is willing to accept mine own Explanation, and I am vastly obliged to him for that. And if he had but been willing at first to have accepted of what was every whit as well explained and as well meant, it would have saved himself, and me a great Deal of Trouble. However a little is better than none. — Pray, tell me now what are the chief Articles of his Belief in the Point of Justification?

1. He says, ‘If his (Christ's) Righteousness alone will justify as in the Sight of GOD and make us fit to appear before GOD — then our Temper of Mind and Life agreeable to the Gospel cannot be this Wedding-Garment that will make us fit to appear before GOD.’ P. 85.

This is one Error in his Divinity; Christ's Righteousness alone will not justify us in the Sight of GOD, nor make us fit to appear before GOD. For if that alone were sufficient, we should need no personal Righteousness of our own; no Repen­tance, no Faith, no Love of GOD, no Charity towards Men. But we must have a Righteousness inherent in our own Persons, or else we shall never see GOD, Heb. xii. 14. Follow Peace with all Men; and Holiness, without which no Man shall see the Lord. Matth. v. 8. Blessed are the pure in Heart; for they shall see GOD. If Christ had come down from Heaven a Thousand [Page 72]Times, and lived the same most righteous Life, and died a thousand Deaths for us; yet would this never have reconciled GOD to us, and caused him to delight in us, or to admit us to his Presence, unless we had a Righteousness in our own Persons, or a Temper of Mind agreeable to the Gospel; Mr. Dickinson mistook the Tenor of the Gospel, and the Design of Christ's Righteousness. — I freely acknowledge Christ's Righteousness is most perfect and abundantly answers its Design; but it never was intended to excuse our Want of a Righteousness in our own Persons. Hear Christ himself Matth, v. 20. Except your Righteousness shall exceed the Righteousness of the Scribes and Pharisees ye shall in no Case enter into the Kingdom of Heaven. Let no Man deceive you, he that doth Righteousness, is righteous. The Gospel is Christ's Law by which we shall be judged, and finally justified or condemned, Christ never did fulfil his own Law for us; he never repented or crucified the Flesh with its Lusts for us, but enjoined it upon us to do it by his Holy Spirit, and according as we have, or have not obeyed the Gospel, in the last Day, so shall we be justified or condemned.

Well, but hear him explain himself. ‘ Though sincere Obe­dience (says he) be a necessary Qualification for Heaven— Yet it is no antecedent Condition of the Pardon of Sin, and has no Hand at all in our Justification before GOD.’ P. 85.

Here is another Mistake; a sincere Repentance of all our Sins, a giving up our selves to Christ with a full Resolution to obey him till Death, is certainly the antecedent Condition of the Pardon of our Sins; and no Man's Sins are pardoned before he performs this good Work: And a persevering in Well do­ing till Death, is the antecedent Condition of our full and final Justification in the Day of Judgment; which is the only perfect Justification before GOD. This is the Tenor of the Gospel, Repent and your Sins shall be blotted out— Be thou faithful unto the Death, and I will give thee the Crown of Life.

But hear his Reasons. ‘ There can be no such Thing as a Course of sincere Gospel-Obedience, before we are justified, and consequently our Gospel-Obedience cannot be the Condition of our Justification.’ P. 86.

This is another Error. For though a Man is in a State of Acceptance with GOD immediately upon his sincere closing with Christ, and giving up himself to be ruled and saved by him, even before ever he has had an Opportunity to perform one external good Work, yet this closing with Christ is Gospel Obe­dience [Page 73]begun, is a good Work of our own, and is a Condition of our initial Justification. And our being obedient till Death is the Condition of our full, perfect, and final Justification in the Day of Judgment, Mark xvi. 16. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved. That Faith by which we are first justified, is not a meer Assent of the Understanding, but contains in it a sincere Resolution to obey Christ till Death; and as this Faith is a good Work of our own, and goes before every Sort of Justification, so it vertually contains in it all good Works: Which must preceed our final Justification.

But hear him further, ‘Again, says he, we must either have a perfect Justification—or no Justification at all.’ P. 87.

I am sure the Scripture doth not reckon after this Manner, Justification in this Life consists in the Pardon of our Sins, and the Approbation of GOD, neither of which are perfect here. Good and justified Men do often offend GOD, and need a new Pardon, otherwise they need not repent, or pray for Pardon. Upon David's Repentance of his Murder and Adultery, GOD pardoned his Sin so far as to remit the heavier Part of the Pun­ishment, viz. temporal and eternal Death; but yet he did not perfectly pardon him and exempt him from Punishment, for that Sin the Child must die, and the Sword must never depart from his House, and a Series of dreadful Punishments must follow him to the Day of his Death. 2 Sam. xii. 14. The Lord hath put away thy Sin, here is his Pardon and Justification, Howbeit the Child shall surely die—Indeed we shall not be per­fectly justified, until the general Judgment; when Soul and Body which have as a Punishment for Sin been separated, shall be reunited, and the eternal Judge having compared our Lives with the Law of Faith and Covenant of Grace, shall pronounce the final Sentence, Come ye blessed.

‘ Furthermore, says he, if we are made righteous by the O­bedience of Christ, and justified by the Blood of Christ, we then cannot be justified either in whole, or in Part, or in any Respect by our own Works of Obedience.’ P. 88.

Here is a full Discovery that his Hypothesis and Notion of Justification was entirely wrong. For, says he, we are not justified neither in whole, nor in Part, nor in any Respect by our own Works of Obedience, i. e. Nothing that we do justi­fies us in any Degree, or in any Respect; Whereby he has Point blank contradicted our blessed Saviour, who says Matth. xii. 37. By the Words shalt thou be justified, and the governing of our [Page 74]Tongues is a Part of our Gospel-Obedience. So has he in ex­press Terms contradicted St. James. Jam. ii. 24. You see then how that by Works a Man is justified, and not by Faith only. So Luk. xviii. 14. Christ says of the Publican after his humble Prayer, I tell you this Man we [...]e Home justified, rather than the other. Now it is certain, that when Christ says this Man was justified; and by thy Words shalt thou be justified, and St. James says by Works a Man is justified, they meant it in some Respect or other. No, says Mr. Dickinson we are not justified by these Things neither in Part, nor in any Respect whatsoever. When the Scripture so expresly teaches that we are justified by our Works, it becomes us modestly to enquire in what Respect, or in what Part this is: But in comes Mr. Dickinson like Alex­ander, he will not spend Time to untie, but immediately cuts the Gordian Knot, and plumply denies there is any such Thing. But certainly since there is a most express and full Contradiction between our Lord Jesus Christ and his Apostle James on the one Side, and Mr. Dickinson on the other; the one or the other Party must be mistaken. I leave it to the World to judge which is most likely to be in the Error.

I now desire to know what he has said to those horrid Things which I mentioned as being essential Parts of Calvinism, and which I must embrace if I become a Calvinist?

He says thus, ‘ If he (GOD) foreknew all Events as they will come to pass, then they will certainly and infallibly come to pass, as he foreknew they would.— And why them will not your frightful Consequences follow as well from your own Doctrine, as from mine?’ P. 91.

To this I answer with Dr. Whitby, ‘It is observable, that though this Argument be offered in Favour of the Decrees of absolute Election and Reprobation, yet doth it plainly over­throw them, or render them superfluous. For be it that these Decrees were made from Eternity; yet seeing GOD's Fore­knowledge of the Events of all Men, was also from Eternity, must he not know what would be the Condition of all Men when he made these Decrees? And what Need then could there be of a Decree for that Event which was infalli­ble, by Virtue of his Foreknowledge without that Decree? Either GOD foresaw these Events, independently on, and in the same Moment that he made these Decrees; and then seeing the Objects of both these Decrees are the same indi­vidual Persons, which he saw then would certainly be faved, [Page 75]or perish independently upon them, what Need could there be of these Decrees to ascertain that Event, which his own Foreknowledge had render'd certain and infallible?’ So that Mr. Dickinson in granting an eternal divine Foreknowledge of all Events, has entirely given up the Notion of eternal absolute Decrees, or made them altogether needless and superfluous. — Or else if he pretends, that GOD only ‘foresaw these future Contingencies by Virtue of his Decrees, that they should come to pass;’ then must he hold that GOD's Decrees are before his Foreknowledge, and the Reason of it: And if so, then this Argument of his does not in the least Degree lessen the Horror of them: But leaves that Notion obnoxious to all those dreadful Consequences I mentioned and a Thousand more. And this Sort of Foreknowledge ‘must be attended with a fatal Necessity: Though in this Case it is not GOD's Foreknow­ledge, but his Decrees, which creates that Necessity; all Things upon this Supposition being necessary; that is, such as cannot otherwise be, not because GOD foreknows them; but because by his immutable Decrees he hath made them necessary; i. e. he foreknows because they are necessary, but doth not make them necessary by foreknowing them.’

GOD's Foreknowledge has no Influence at all upon my Be­haviour, it is no Cause at all of my Salvation or Damnation. ‘ Foreknowledge is Knowledge, and Knowledge depends on the Ex­istence of Things known, and not they on it." Should GOD by immediate Revelation give me the Knowledge of the Event of any Man's State or Actions, would my Knowledge of them have any Influence upon his Actions? Surely none at all, and yet my Knowledge as far as it is thus communicated, would be as certain and intallible as is that of GOD's. To illustrate this in some Measure by the Comparison of our own Knowledge, we know certainly that some Things are, and that some Things will be.’ I know my good Friend is dead, I know certainly there will be a Resurrection, and ‘when I know these Things are, or will be, they cannot but be, yet manifest it is, that our Knowledge doth not at all affect the Things we thus know, or make them either more certain, or more future than they would be without it. Now Fore­knowledge in GOD is Knowledge; as therefore Knowledge has no Influence on Things that are, so neither has Fore­knowledge on Things that shall be. And consequently the Foreknowledge of any Action that would be otherwise free, [Page 76]cannot alter or diminish that Freedom: Whereas GOD's Decree of Election [is his Will concerning the Event.] it is powerful and active, and comprehends the Preparation and Exhibition of such Means as shall unfrustrably produce the End. And his Decree of Reprobation (is his Will and Pleasure) it is active, as far as Action is required, to render a Man deficient, and therefore sinful of Necessity, it being a Decree of withholding from the Objects of it, that Grace which can alone enable them to do what GOD commands, or to avoid what GOD forbids on the severest Penalty. Now Sin having no efficient but only a deficient Cause, it consisting only in not doing what is commanded, and not avoiding what is forbidden, that which renders it necessary for me to be thus deficient must lay me under a Necessity of sinning. — GOD's Foreknowledge renders no Action necessary, other­wise it would lay a Necessity upon his own Actions, for he foreknew from all Eternity that he would create a World, that he would send his Son, &c. but this did not make it necessary that he should create a World or send his Son, why then should it be conceived that it lays a Necessity upon human Actions, or impairs the Freedom of them? Now if Foreknowledge doth not impair the Freedom of our Actions any more than if GOD had no such Foreknowledge, and it be reasonable to give Precepts, and render Exhortations and Motives to Men free to perform what is required, and what they are exhorted and thus moved to, it must be reasonable thus to deal with Men, notwithstanding GOD's Foreknowledge of their Actions; but it is not so with Respect to GOD's Decrees, his Decree of Election comprehending not only the End, but the Means to it, as to be wrought by his special Grace and unfrustrable Operation, which I cannot resist, if I cannot have the Will to resist it; and that I cannot have, if this Operation determines my Will to Act in Com­pliance with it: And where the Sin consists in a Defect i. e. the not doing what is required, and the not avoiding what is forbidden, the Decree of with holding that Grace without which that Effect is necessary, is a Decree that the Sin should be inevitable, and to the Objects of it necessary. — Moreover GOD's Foreknowledge reaches all Things, not only those which will be, but also those which may be, he foresees not only what will be done, but also after what Manner it will be done, that free Actions will be done freely, and so his Fore­knowledge [Page 77]must rather establish than take away our Freedom; for if God foresees that I might abstain from what he sees I will not abstain, and that I might will and do, what I neither will nor do, as he must if he sees I act freely, then he sees that I might not perish, when he sees that I will perish, and he sees that I might be willing and obedient, and so be saved, when he sees that I will not be saved. And then there must be Place and equitable Grounds for all his Admonitions, Ex­hortations and Motives not to perish but to turn and live, because they are only Exhortations. Commands and Motives to do, and to abstain from that which he sees that I may freely do, or may abstain from, and therefore must have Power so to do.’ So that there is an infinite Difference between the Consequences of GOD's Foreknowledge as held by us, and the Consequences of the absolute Decrees as held by the Calvinists.

Now let me briefly take Notice of one or two Things in his concluding Address. 1. He insinuates, as though we kept Men off from an entire Reliance on Christ. This I esteem very injurious, and slanderous. No, GOD forbid that I should do any Thing like this. I rely as entirely, as wholly, as ab­solutely, and as unreservedly on my blessed and only Redeemer Jesus Christ for Salvation, as any Calvinist on Earth. Christ is all in all to my Soul, in him are all my Hopes for Assistance both to begin, continue, and end my christian Course, to obtain a Pardon not only for the Myriads of Myriads of my Sins (which I committed while he gave me Grace to do better) but even for the Pardon of my best Duties, on Christ I depend for all I need in this Life, and all I hope for to Eternity. On him I depend not only as the Meriter but as the Bestower of all. Only herein (perhaps) I differ from you, I think Christ will allow me no Interest in him, he will not own me as his Disciple, unless I depart from all Iniquity, and obey him. Here, here is all my Fear, and all my Concern.

Well, say what you please, his Observation that practical Holiness prevails most among those who embrace our Principles, this goes a great Way with me.

This Gentleman has written four or five Books against me, in the space of a few Years, in each of which (I think) he has boasted of the great Piety of [...]is Party, and because Com­parisons are odious, I have return'd little or no Answer, — And now shall say but a few Words to it. ‘This Trick, says [Page 78]Bishop Patrick of appropriating true Piety to your selves, and despising the Professors of the Church of England, as destitute of the Power of Religion; and mere Formalists, has always been the topping Argument of your Party — But are you the great Chamberlains of the House of GOD? Are all the Vessels of Honour in it committed to your Custody? Are you Keepers of the Book of Life, wherein the Names of the Heirs of Grace are all registered? Have you the Balance of the Sanctuary? Or is the Fan put into your Hands to separate the Chaff and Corn▪ Speak no more so presumptu­ously; and let not such Arrogance come out of your Mouth, lest it prove true upon you, which St. Austin saith to Per­menian — Because you have l [...]st Patience, and make Haste before the Time to separate Chaff and Corn, accounting at your Pleasure some Men abominable, and some approved; you have declared your selves to be but Chaff, and most light Chaff carried out of the Compass of Charity, by the Wind of your own Pride.’

But supposing you were all holy, even every one of you, yet this is not the Effect of Calvinistic Notions, but by Virtue of our Principles, which in spight of all you can do, you can't help but believe, and our Doctrine is all you have to keep you back from Wickedness. And if any of you are wicked (as I hope not) yet this is not so much the Fault of the Man as of his Principles, whereas if we are vicious (as is too true) it is the Man and not his Principles that is to be blamed. — Christianity is the best, and the only true Religion in the World: and yet some Christians are the very worst of Men. Will you then renounce Christianity upon that Account. Never was true Christianity set in a better Light than at this Day in the Church of England. Never was any Scheme better calculated to make Men wise and good Christians: and if we are vicious, we are of all Men on Earth the most inexcusable.

But with all I must observe, that different Sects have different Notions about Piety, and wherein it consists. As you know the holy Pharisees differ'd in their Sentiments about real Holiness from our blessed Lord, and accounted him a very loose Liver. And I think learn'd Men are agreed that the Pharisees were ri­gid Predestinarians or Calvinists, as they are now called.

They repeatedly insist upon it, that Piety prevails among any People in Proportion as these Tenets obtain: The Reverse of which the World knows to be true. Look back upon the State [Page 79]of our Nation just One Hundred Years past, in the Time of the grand Rebellion, never did these Principles prevail so much before or since, and never was there so much Wickedness in the Nation. It is amazing to observe what horrid Crimes were perpetrated by those Men, who pretended to your special Grace and had their Mouths full of religious Cant. And what did these Principles end in but a monstrous Variety of Heresies, and even Atheism itself? The like will ever be the Effect of those Principles, when they are zealously propagated without a Mix­ture of our Principles to counterwork them.

We are now to part, and perhaps may never have a second Meeting, tell me then are you of the same Mind that you exprest in your last, that if you became a Calvinist, you must admit into your Mind all those horrid Notions. And don't you think that as Mr. Dickinson has represented that Scheme, it is tolerable.

I hate this painting and disguising one's Sentiments in Religion. I'll receive nothing as an Article of divine Faith which I am asham'd to shew naked to the World. Mr. Calvin (give him his Due) was a very great, and a very honest Man, he spoke his Opinion frankly, because he believed it to be a divine Truth: But these Gentlemen turn into a thousand different Shapes, so that it is impossible to know one of them when you meet him, whether he be a Calvinist or an Arminian: I have but one Mark or Criterion to know them by, and that is, they always seem to bear a mortal Hatred against the Use of Reason and Common Sense in Religion, and will certainly pick a Quar­rel with you if you talk intelligibly about Christianity. Now as to your other Question, I seriously declare, that I firm­ly believe that all those horrible Things are insepara­ble from Calvinism. I hoped, but alas my Hopes were vain! that Mr. Dickinson would have at least attempted to shew me how I might have separated them from his Doctrines. And whereas you think you see clearly, that they have no Connexion with Calvinism, I therefore beseech you for my Soul's Sake, let me into this Mystery, and shew me how I may see, as you do. You know it is a common Saying with your Ministers, that every Man is naturally a Hater of GOD, and if you don't know the Time when you hated GOD, wished there were no GOD, and would gladly dethrone him, you are not converted. And truly their Doctrines of Predestination, original Sin, special Redemp­tion, and denying a Sufficiency of Grace to all but the Elect (as I understand them) make such an injurious and frightful Re­presentation [Page 80]of GOD, that I cannot see how they can avoid hat­ing him, and wishing there were no such GOD; until they are sure of their own Election. The Representation which the Gospel makes of GOD, is to beautiful and charming that it will captivate a rational Affection: and none but Devils and their Accomplices can hate the GOD of Christians. The holy Scrip­ture represents GOD as Live it self, the Lord, the Lord GOD merciful and gracious, long suffering, abundant in Gr [...]e's and Truth, pard [...]ning Iniquity, Transgression and Sin. One who bears the Affection of a Father to all Mankind, and treats all as his Offspring, and his tender Mercies are over all his Works; he casts off none of the human Race, but only for their incurable Wickedness: He prepared Heaven for Mankind, and Hell was originally designed only for the Devils: hence Christ, the Judge will say of Heaven, Come ye blessed of my Father, in [...]t the Kingdom prepared for you: But of Hell, Go ye Cursed into ever­lasting Fire, Prepared for the Devil and his Angels: Not prepar­ed for Mankind, as Heaven was. He sent not his Son to con­demn but to save the whole World, he is always ready to assist and holds out his helping Hand to every one; his Arms are open to receive and embrace every human Creature, and is al­ways more ready to give, than we are to ask—And though some Countries and Ages have, and do enjoy fewer Talents than we, and they have been destitute of a standing Revelation; yet will he make all fair Allowances for it, and require little where little is given, and no Man shall ever be miserable through any Defect on GOD's Part, but only through his own wilful Negligence and Perverseness. Thus the holy Bible represents GOD. And who would not love and rejoice in such a GOD? Who would not wish that it might be true, that there is such a GOD, if there were any Doubt of it? But to draw the Picture of the ever blessed GOD according to our Idea of the very worst of Beings; to represent him as an Hater of the greater Part of Mankind, as one who hated his own Offspring before they were born, and resolved to damn them to H [...]l Torments before they had done Good or Evil, or were capable of offending him, merely to shew his Sovereignty, and that he can do what he pleases with his own; as one whose Justice is such, that he sets the Childrens Teeth on Edge, because their Father had eaten sour Grapes Thousands of Years before they w [...] born; and makes them a motly Mixture of Beast and Devil, as fast as he gives them Being, because Adam sinned, which was not in their [Page 81]Power to prevent, as one whose Love to the Souls of Men is so very little, that when all might have been redeemed by Christ's Passion as well as a few, he of his meer Pleasure chose that the bigger Part by far of them who equally needed it, and would have equally improved it, should be excluded, and shut out, and have no Part or Share in it; not because it would have made any Addition to Christ's Sufferings, but merely because GOD did not chuse that they should be saved And though he declares his most tender Love to Mankind, and his compassionate Concern for their Salvation, and intreats them to be happy, and swears to them that he does not will their Death, but their Con­version and Life, and asks them affectionately, why they will die? and how long it will be ere they be made clean? and what could be done for them more? and wishes they would hearken to him, and says, O that thou hadst known the Things that belong to thy Peace, yet notwithstanding all this Show of Mercy, his secret Decree and unchangeable Will and Desire is, that the most of them shall burn forever in that Fire prepared for the obstinate Devil and his Angels. And therefore would not that his Son should effectually redeem them, or his Spirit yield them sufficient Grace, without which he knew, they could no more escape Hell than they could shun Death. Now when we represent GOD to our Minds surrounded with this amazing Horror, how can we prevent our Hearts rising against him, and wishing there was no such GOD. I profess for my Part, I had rather a Million Times, never to have had a Being, than to think thus of GOD.—And why this horrible Representation of GOD should be called A Vindication of Sovereign free Grace, is past my Comprehension, unless it be ironically. That any Man should be found, that can think so unworthily of GOD, and im­pute such cruel Things to the Father, of Mercies, is very surpriz­ing! But what is still more wonderful, is, that they should so strangely affront common Sense, and the Reason of all Man­kind, as to stile these horrible Tenets, the Doctrines of Free Grace; As if the fewer GOD was willing to save, the freer and richer his Grace must be. And if so it must follow that to preach that GOD w [...] not willing to save any at all, or not more than one; this would be to preach the most precious, the most free, the most rich Grace of all. Whoever before, imagined that Good­ness was magnified by being confined to a few; and lessen'd by being extended to all: By this Rule he is the most charita­ble and bountiful Man whose Bowels of Compassion are con­tracted, [Page 82]and Hands so close shut, that he will shew no Kindness, but only to one or [...]o Favourites and Fondlings; not he whose Heart and Hard is open to all Men.—I have now done, and I do declare as a dying Man, as far as I know my own Heart, my real Design in this Discourse has been to vindicate the moral Perfections of our heavenly Father, the free Grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the liberal Communications of the Holy Ghost. If I have in any Thing erred (and who can know his Errors) I desire a candid Admonition from any of my Fel­low-Christians, and most humbly pray for Par [...]on from GOD, through Jesus Christ, to whom, together with the Holy Ghost, Three Persons in one GOD, be Glory forever.

AMEN.