"tance with God, have generally made the quef"tion to run thus, How are we to be exercised, " and under what influence, prompting or fecond

ing? What shall we do, or endeavour? What shall we feel? Or, What doth God require of us, that we may escape his wrath and curse due to us for fin? Whereas the first question ought to be, Can any doing, feeling, endeavouring, any " exercise of the foul, either prompted or seconded, "be of any avail to us in this matter?"

Many passages of the fame nature might be quoted from the letters on Theron, &c. but these being sufficient to discover the author's real sentiments on this subject, at present we shall not trouble the reader with any more of them.

It is easy to perceive, that the whole of Palemon's reasoning on this head is built upon two suppositions, both of which are manifestly false, and one of them highly injurious to the character of his opponents; while the other is contrary to the whole tenor of Scripture. First, he supposes, that those whom he styles the popular preachers, and all others who affirm, that it is the duty of unregenerate finners to believe and repent, or even to read and hear the word of God, attend the ordinances of divine appointment, use the means of grace, whereby God ordinarily brings men to the knowledge of the truth, and pray for the Holy Spirit to make them effectual for their converfion and falvation, teach them to do fomething, or acquire some qualification, that may give them a diftinguishing right, or a right above other men, to the favour of God and bleffings of the gofpel, and on which they may and ought, more or less, to reft their hopes of acceptance with God. This he not only takes for granted, but frequently afferts with great confidence; though it is evident, that nothing can be more false, or injurious to the 13 chacharacters of those worthy men whose doctrine he has thought fit to attack. Do they not every where affert, in the strongest terms, that the righteousness of Chrift is the only ground of a finner's juttification, and that nothing done by finful men, or wrought in them; no qualifications of any kind, whether before or after converfion, can, in the least, recommend them to the favour of God, or be any part of their juftifying righteousness before him? Do they not constantly affirm, that as to the matter of acceерtance with God, not only those who may be supposed to have been most diligent in the performance of religious duties before converfion, but even the greatest saint, must stand upon a level with the greateft finner, being with him equally deftitute of every claim to the divine favour, but what is entirely founded on the righteousness of the great Redeemer, exhibited, and brought near to finners in the dispenfation of the gofpel? Do not those eminent teachers, against whom our author's zeal is chiefly inflamed,. with one consent declare it to be a fundamental article of the Christian doctrine, and of their faith, that all human works, duties, exercises, endeavours, experiences, or attainments of any kind, must be for ever excluded from having any place in the matter of juftification before God? Do they not always teach, that it is essential to true justifying faith to renounce all confidence in those things; in any thing in, or about the believer himself, as what can be of no avail for his juftification; yea, further, that the great design of that convincing and humbling work, and of every other operation of the divine Spirit, that is supposed to be preparatory to true conversion, is to beat down all prefumptuous imaginations of personal merit and excellency of any kind; or, in short, to bring a finner entirely out of himself to Jesus Chrift for life, righteousiness and falvation? And,

after all, must they be charged with teaching men to establish a righteousness of their own by acts of faith, or pious efforts to obtain it?

Had they been only accused of dropping some expressions now and then, which ignorant and selfrighteous men might be ready to abuse for gratifying a kind of religious pride, and cherishing a vain opinion of their own righteousness; however little ground there is even for fuch a charge as this, if joined with a modest endeavour to rectify mistakes, and prevent the misconstruction of words which, however innocently spoken, being less cautioufly expressed, might be liable to be misinterpreted, it would no doubt have been excusable. But to strain their words to a fense not only different from, but quite contrary to their true meaning, and most obvious fignification, and charge them with maintaining sentiments entirely repugnant to the whole tenor and fcope of their doctrine, as well as to their known and avowed principles, is such an instance of scandalous disingenuity and malice, as merits the contempt, and must provoke the indignation of every one who has the leaft regard for truth or common equity.

It is a maxim with the Romanists, that faith is not to be kept with heretics; and it seems to be another with Palemon, that in dealing with them, any scrupulous adherence to truth and justice may well enough be dispensed with.

Another extravagant supposition, upon which the letter-writer founds a great deal of his reasoning against the popular preachers, is, that antecedent to faith in Chrift men are under no obligation by the divine law, or on any account whatever, to believe, repent, or use any mean of divine appointment for obtaining the knowledge of Christ, and an interest in him. I do not indeed remember, that he he any where directly affirms, that unbelievers are not under the law, or bound to yield obedience to any of the divine commands; yet, if his reasoning is just, or indeed has any manner of sense in it, they cannot be under an obligation to perform any religious duty whatsoever. For he quarrels with the popular preachers, because they exhort their hearers, even those who are supposed to be in a state of unbelief, to perform such and such duties: but certainly none can be juftly blamed for exhorting persons to aim at doing their duty, or what the law of God requires of them. He would seem indeed to grant, that men are under an obligation to obey the divine law, even prior to their knowledge and belief of the truth; while he infinuates, that instead of giving them directions to use the means of divine appointment for attaining the knowledge of their loft state by nature, and an interest in Chrift, it would be more proper to say in one word, " Be perfect." But as this is spoken ironically, and the letter-writer would have finners addressed in this manner, not merely with a view to convince them of the absolute impoffibility of obtaining falvation by the works of the law, or their own doings, but to discourage them from attempting obedience to any divine command, at least from the performance of any religious duty, on any confideration whatsoever; it is plain, that, far from afserting the obligation of the law with regard to men in every condition and cir* cumstance they can be in, he in effect denies it, and infinuates, that unbelievers ought never to be called to perform, or even fo much as attempt yielding obedience to the law of God.

What our author says, p. 413. feems to confirm this; for there he tells us, that all the exhortations, commands and institutions of the gospel, are directed to confciences endued with that new instinct which

which is produced by the admiffion of the saving truth; or in other words, to believers and juftified perfons. If this is admitted, it must at the fame time be granted, either that the gospel requires some duties not commanded in the law, or that unbelievers are no way bound to yield obedience to the commands of the law.

Palæmon does not allow the first of these suppositions; for he plainly hints, that there are no duties recommended in the gospel, that are not alfo commanded in the law. When he is endeavouring to prove Afpafio chargeable with teaching an abfurdity, because he had infinuated, that repentance and faith did not so belong to the law of works which Christ undertook to fulfil, as to make them a neceffary part of that obedience which he bound himself to yield thereto in the room of guilty finners, he expresses himself in the following manner. "Will

not that law which Christ came to fulfil, the law "which requires love to God with all the heart, "condemn all who, by their unbelief, make God " a liar; and all who, after their hardness and impe" nitent heart, treasure up to themselves wrath against "the day of wrath, and revelation of the righteous " judgment of God? Does not the Spirit of God " convince all whom he brings to the knowledge " of the truth, of fin, because they believe not on " Chrift? In fine, is there any thing contrary to "the gospel of the glory of the blessed God, not " condemned by the divine law *?"

From this paffage, if it has any meaning at all, I think, it is manifest, that, according to our author, faith, repentance, and every other duty enjoined in the gospel, are also commanded in the law. And, as I suppose it will be readily granted, that he