^^■♦Wiff!!’OT'^l^-'' •■ V..' - •', ■ '■ • . ■' V'.v^ ' -rV-y'^'V' '■■■■■•' ''-X ^'^•V*r',>.TVi
• -v'r.-
. ■ ;■
;*■ ;:*^:-“1j.,r'i-:LS-.!l ,
list; ,
,AfJ .s.-'^t X'
: rmds .:f': ' ■ - . . ; I
Ilia
w&l.>';::«':
wiil
■.!«•■■ -.WA
i
-■ " f { -^, ., '-^ i i '■•' V •')-'<■' ■' f t; '■ <-'■ '*— s^'iiCSfiiPV'J.' A '>>^V ■''J'^ »^ - - »■■'*■ fi*s ' •«'J5*i':'
:y.‘^;vvv^
t
^ PRINCETON, N. J.
If
Presented by Mr. Samuel Agnew of Philadelphia. Pa.
BF 575 ,P9 L47 1822 v.2 ^
Letters on prejudice
\
i-' 4!
I
Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2018 with funding from
Princeton Theological Seminary Library
/
https://archive.org/details/lettersonprejudi02kenn
LETTERS
ON
PREJUDICE.
VOL. II.
London:
Printed by A.& R. Spottl.swoodc,
New-Street-Square.
LE'ITERS
ON
PREJUDICE.
IN TWO VOLUMES.
VOL. II.
IN WHICH
THE INFLUENCE
OF
PREJUDICE IN RELIGION
IS CONSIDERED,
AS IT IS CONNECTED WITH
THE GENERAL ESTIMATE OF THE PULPIT DIVINITY OF
THE LAST CENTURY.
Infinite opinions there are, in matters of religion ; and most men are con.
fident ; and most are deceived in many things, and all in some : and those
few that are not confident, have only reason enough to suspect their own
reason. Bishop Taylor.
LONDON:
PRINTED FOR T. CADELL, IN THE STRAND;
AND W. BLACKWOOD, EDINBURGH.
1822.
C'jttj
,/7
BHarpa
t V ' '
' ' ' '
IR'
' T*'f>
iK ' -f4 •■ ■
R j-.v
,.‘.V > '*
Ckl
T
^1*.
«i>
» f
N
'SW^
. . - - -r - •• -, ‘ryr^^*,
• , ,v ; ' • • --1 j • .“
iV
.. ^
■ ■•'TJ
^ T .
• 4. ‘ '
.•’.<. v^v4;- _
‘ i .
l^'.-V
^ov.Vc. .;'iv
' «i«
•R
.:■■) ;V,-.
■“ W’fiV?' a4'*;).i«*t*»i»feT r»<'>|\' '^7'::-
y ■'■y_-
7^- :^-;
':}y.\-i*YW
%W^<' “a:. /f\ '‘’<*' ‘fBf , ft ■
l<
. • . «
-V:,
T
,\.r. ,
>L
t f * • , , ,
, *'• • •
s<<
CONTENTS
OF
THE SECOND VOLUME.
LETTER XVIII.
ENGLISH DIVINES.
A LOW estimate of the divinity of the last age, one of the
pi’ejudices of the present. — Enquiry into the causes
of this prejudice. — Some principles of judgment sug¬
gested. — Objections made to these divines. — Cha¬
racter of Scripture. — Dogmatical and preceptive. —
Divinity of human composition, controversial. — And
why. — ■ General character of the divines under con¬
sideration. — Farther rules for judging them fairly. —
Faith and works, why a subject of controversy. —
The latter, strongly enforced, in apprehension of anti-
nomianism. — Free-will sometimes incautiously stated.
— Farther objections considered. — Low standard of
morality. — Use of heathen authorities. — A priori
reasoning. — Circumstances which led to this latter
practice, and apparent necessity for it. — Funda¬
mental doctrines of Christianity, indispensable in the
pulpit, though modes of illustration may vary.
A 3
VI
CONTENTS.
LETTER XIX.
PREFATORY SKETCHES.
State of the Church, immediately previous to the Reform¬
ation. — Popislz doctrine of merit. — The great object
of Luther’s o})positioii. — Justification by faith. —
Strong statement of it, by Luther. — Objected to, as
derogating from the necessity of good works. — - Ex¬
plained and guarded by other rel<)rmers. — Calvinistic
doctrine of predestination. — Abuses of it. — Free
will. — Original sin. — Differences of opinion on these
points, no bar to communion amongst the early Pro¬
testants. — Separated by otlier distinctions. — Con¬
troversial habits of the Protestant divines, influenced
the style of their theology. — Two great principles of
the Reformation. — Strong statement of the doctrine
of original sin ; abuse of it. — Casual association of
this doctrine, with Calvinism. — Consequent jealousy
entertained of it, and modified proposition of it by
some divines. — English reformation; little advanced
in doctrine, during the reign of Henry VIII. — Cran-
mer’s exertions. — Early Protestant publications. —
General meaning of the phrase “ good works” at this
period ; and cause of the depreciatory language applied
to them. — This distinction afterwards forgotten ;
consequent abuses. — Lidependence of the Church,
and free use of the Bible, the two great points gained
at this time.
LETTER XX.
PREFATORY SKETCHES - CONTINUED.
Advancement of the Reformation, under Edward VI. —
Probable origin of the Presbyterian government. —
CONTENTS.
VH
Doctrine of the Church of England. — Early differ¬
ences amongst the Reformers, confined to habits and
ceremonies. — Abuse of the doctrine of predestination,
mentioned by Bishop Burnet. — Rise of the doctrinal
differences. — Catholic doctrines of the Reformation,
still unanimously maintained. — Reign of Elizabeth.
— Rise of the subsequent controversies. — Mutual
intolerance of this period. — Attacks on the hierarchy.
— Cartwright. — Field’s confession. — Loyal princi¬
ples there stated. — Probable occasion of this declar¬
ation. — Brownists, — or Independents, — Growing
irritation and final breach, between the Establishment,
and the Puritans.
LETTER XXL
DOCTRINE OF THE REFORMERS. — PREDESTINATION^
The doctrine of predestination, cautiously stated by our
Refonners. — Not Calvinistic. — Extracts, in proof of
this, from Latimer and Harper. — Probable proof,
in the introduction of Erasmus’s paraphrase, into the
Church, and omission of the writings of Calvin. —
Calvinism of Whitgift. — Lambeth articles. — Con--
dilional predestination, the original doctrine of the
Church. — Proof of the aberration of doctrine, at this
perioil. — Judgment of Hooker. — Popery, the great
object of jealousy with all parties. — Consequent
prominence of the doctrine, of justification byfakh. —
Accession of James. — Hampton Court conference. —
Discouragement of the Puritans. — Arminianisin. —
Synod of Dort. — Bearing of these circumstances, on
the character of pulpit divinity. — Infusion of politi¬
cal, with religious controversy. — Conclusion.
A 4;
Vlll
CONTENTS.
LETTER XXII.
DOCTRINE OF THE REFORMERS. - JUSTIFICATION.
Gradual aberration from the primitive doctrine, upon this
article. — Probable cause of this aberration. — State¬
ment of the doctrine, in the homilies. — Question re¬
specting a first and final justification. — Selt-renunci-
atiou, the principle of the Gospel, and of the Church.
— Probable cause, of the peculiar efficacy attributed to
faith, as the instrument or condition of justification.
— Practical holiness, enforced by the reformers. —
Union of faith and charity. — Mistakes upon the
nature of good works, noticed in the homily on that
subject. — Obscurity arising from the indiscriminate
use, of the words Justification and Salvation. — Dis¬
tinction subsequently made by divines. — Hooker. —
Antinomian abuse of the doctrine of justification. —
Consequent prominence of morality, in pulpit compo¬
sitions.
LETTER XXIII.
PREFATORY SKETCHES RESUMED, - AND CONCLUDED.
Progress of dissention in the church. — Political disaf¬
fection. — Freedom of the preachers, in strictures on
the government. — Rise of some farther doctrinal
perversions from this period. — Depreciation of learn¬
ing. — Toleration of Cromwell. — Fanaticism. —
Deism. — Two schemes of antinomianism. — The
latter, universally opposed ; — the former, more plausi¬
ble, and countenanced by some respectable author!-
CONTENTS.
IX
ties. — Influence of these circumstances, on the divinity
of the following period. — Restoration. — Rise of infi¬
delity. — Advantage taken of the Calvinistic doctrines,
to inculcate atheism and fatalism. — Consequent
encouragement of the Arminian principles, in the
Church. — Conclusion.
LETTER XXIV.
TILLOTSON.
Burnet’s character of Archbishop Tillotson’s preaching.
— Sermons on atheism. — Character and plan of
these sermons. — Sermons on the attributes. — Their
plan, and apparent object. — Gentle temper of Til-
lotson. — Misconstructions to which it exposed him.
— Sermons against Socinianism. — Selection of doc¬
trinal sermons, proposed for examination. — Promises
of the Gospel. — Regeneration. — Tillotson’s view of
it. — Remarks, suggested by the present controversy,
upon this doctrine.
LETTER XXV.
TILLOTSON.
Tillotson’s doctrine of faith. — Origin of faith. — Con-
sistency of divine influence, with moral liberty. — Ob¬
jects of faith stated. — Effects of faith, upon the charac¬
ter and life. — Observations. — Instrumentality of
faith, towards salvation. — Justification. — What faith
it is, that justifies. — Parallel of Tillotson and Baxter,
on this point. — Tillotson’s doctrine, free from pre¬
sumption. — Conditions. — Faith, a condition. — The
X
CONTENTS.
notion oF conditions, not derogatory from tlie grace
of the Gospel. — Doctrine of grace. — Extremes. —
Scriptural statement of Tillotson. — Full acknow¬
ledgment of human corruption. — Union with Christ,
the only source of divine grace.
LETTER XXVI.
TILLOTSON.
Sermons 68. and 69. — Title. — Character and office of
Christ described. — Definition of Gospel obedience. —
Reconcileable, or synonimous with that of Evangelical
faith. — Extracts. — Obedience, virtual and actual. —
Faith the principle, obedience the result. — Possibi¬
lity of Evangelical obedience, — Through grace. —
Necessity of this obedience. — Remarkable application
of the epithet “ good works.” — Consistency of this
method of salvation, with free grace. — Final state¬
ment of Tillotson’s doctrine. — Parallel extract from
Flooker.
LETTER XXVIf.
BARROW.
Biographical sketch of Doctor Barrow. — His literary
character. — Peculiar importance of this character,
to his authority as a divine. — General reflections,
upon the testimony afforded to religion, by men emi¬
nent in science. — Subjects selected for examination,
in this review. — Barrow’s sermons on Faith. — His
doctrine of human corruption.
CONTENTS.
XI
LETTER XXVIII.
BARROW.
Nature of the objection, to the divinity of the Restoi-
ation. — Remarks on this objection. — Barrow’s doc¬
trine of justification. — Nature of justifying faith. —
Limitation of the term “justification,” to initial for¬
giveness, and adoption. — Fuller application of it. —
Reference to the atonement, as the sole foundation ol
Christian dependence. — Concluding cautions and
observations.
LETTER XXIX.
BARROW.
Origin of the controversial discussions on Justification.
— Various senses of the word, in Scripture, and in
the writings of the reformers. — Object of the re¬
formers, in stating this docti-ine. — Homily on salva¬
tion. — Remarks on the word “justification,” as there
used. — Discrepancies in the statement of this doc¬
trine, reconcileable. — Opinion of Barrow. — His
account of the origin of the controversy. — - A pacifi¬
catory remark. — Farther examination of the doc¬
trine. — Consistency of free grace, with contingent
salvation. — Statement of the doctrine, in this sermon,
excludes all boasting, or presumption of merit. — Con¬
nection of justification, with baptism. — Opinions of
Luthei’, of Calvin, and of Barrow.
XU
CONTENTS.
LETTER XXX.
BARROW.
Sermon on the passion. — Its peculiar character. —
Extracts. — Full statement of the doctrine of human
corruption, repeated. — Necessity and sufficiency, of
the atonement made by Christ. — Application. —
Uses of the consideration of this doctrine. — Extracts.
— Barrow’s use of pliilosophical and classical author¬
ities. — His mildness. — Averseness to political con¬
troversy. — Conclusioiu
LETTER XXXI.
SOUTH.
Reasons for having omitted the name of South. — Cha--
racter of his preaching. — Remarks on the practical
application of Scripture doctrines. — Deficiency of
South, in this point. — Llarshness of his practical
style. — Tenderness of the Gospel, its great charm. —
Appropriate pulpit style. — Circumstances may re¬
quire a variation. — This defence applicable to South,
but no excuse for his severity and party spirit. — Cha¬
racteristic difference, in the sermons of South and Til-
lotson. — Effect of the recent divisions, upon pulpit
compositions at this period. — Conclusion.
LETTER XXXII.
BEVERIDGE.
Reasons for having omitted the name of Bishop Bever¬
idge. — Character of his sermons. — Particular lesson
O
CONTENTS.
Xlll
to be drawn from them. — Characteristic distinction,
between Beveridge and Barrow. — Biographical re¬
marks. — Laborious ministry of Bishop Beveridge. —
Reasons for dwelling upon his personal character. —
Injury arising, from the popular application of the
term “evangelical.” — The term, fairly applicable to
every faithful minister of a Scriptural church, and
descriptive of character, rather than of opinion. —
Conclusion.
LETTER XXXIII.
GENERAL RETROSPECT. — BOYLE’s LECTURES.
Polemical divinity, in the reigns of Queen Anne, and
George I. — Infidelity. — Hobbes. — Dangers and
artifice of his system. — Line of opposition, adopted
by the advocates of Revelation. — Influence of this,
upon the national theology. — Progress of infidelity.
— Zeal of Christians awakened to arrest it. — Boyle’s
lecture. — Its object, limited to the general defence of
Revelation. — Consequence of this. — Subjects of
some of these lectures. — Confutation of atheism. —
Evidences of Christianity. — Objection drawn from
the imperfect promulgation of the Gospel. — Reply
to this objection, from Bishop Bradford.
LETTER XXXIV.
DOCTOR SAMUEL CLARKE.
Doctor Samuel Clarke. — His sermons at Boyle’s lec¬
ture. — Objections made to the line of argument pur¬
sued in them. — His apology. — Remarks on this
XIV
CONTENTS.
method of defending religion. — Doctor Clarke’s ge¬
neral and practical sermons. — Modified view of
human corruption. — Probable reason of this. —
Doctrine of the atonement. — Justification. — In¬
fluence of the Holy Spirit. — Conclusion.
LETTER XXXV. '
GENERAL RETROSPECT. - BOYLE’s LECTURES. — BlStlOP
BRADFORD.
Prominent docti'ines of infidelity, at this period. — Ma¬
terialism. — Influence of this, on the divinity under
review. — Sermons of Archdeacon Gurdon. — Versa¬
tility of the infidel warfare. — Anecdote of Voltaire. —
Successive topics of infidelity. •— Various subjects of
these lectures. — Evidence of Revelation, in all its
branches. — Christian doctrines fully stated. — In¬
stance, in the sermons of Bishop Bradfoi'd. — Many
others to the same purpose, might be produced.
LETTER XXXVI.
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS.
Popular charges against the Church, irrelevant to the
present subject. — Conduct of an impartial enquirer,
with respect to these charges. — Probable decision of
such an enquirer. — A rule of judgment suggested. —
Application of this rule, to the composition of his¬
tory ; and enquiry, how far it has been observed by
some popular historians.
CONTENTS.
XV
LETTER XXXVIL
GENERAL RETROSPECT — CONCLUDED.
Various associations of doctrine. — Doctrine of non-
resistance, inculcated in the homilies. — Exploded or
modified at the Revolution. — Influence of this, upon
theology.— Friends of the Revolution. — Non-jurors.
— Jacobite party. — Probable cause of the gradual
disuse of the homilies as a text book. — Non-con¬
formists become a distinct society. — Gradual and
general progress of toleration. — Partial secularity of
the Church, acknowledged. — General remarks. —
The enquiry concluded.
LETTER XXXVIII.
CONCLU])ING LETTER.
V
vyx-tiA(k^
'>■ „ . - ,, , . ^,yj.
«*'<
UMtm, '**/•.
^ -w. Tjtrm ir4Ji3|K3i:' ^ ,..4 <
•■V > . .’wUKilUJi 3tit r-fi 0 ^pfL'KflKlrt
.i3rwVa4(,^M:M a.’rj^h'l - •
(fxftxrw .!')*,« *'
.:|^;>niv l*»»f»»n-} *v.;jv.jm''' rKr.t^i') »^(is»viVi :i-Ci«iot
-w Itthm yt yritfi> ^*r. - V > ^lAf
■ :.V ? :-':*-i' • .,{ '.’7/-.' ■
cw
•/ ■ f
n’- * ■•' >^’14^*'^ ji'
a . ^ :Vf p'*'* *^*:-
fo - INtfi w. ivu
'i4vtfc-»M"'A,. :i fH. . ■ ■*; • '' ',.
.. ..;■
ht' v i ^ T ,*^' ’ ■ '•' >c ^‘"' 1 ■> •’»-
.... j i-i.- , ■; 1 ••>•» '■ -i 4.'-» j.iffs^v ■ <1^^,
' * ' ' ' ^ >• .
»v« .» ' - *riy.ijk- *i; '•v ;./';*>4R‘'>lAar»^ii
>(; ■
. •• ,,.4/ j >a i 1
■ ‘ ‘ ’ *- >
■ 114
ii
i r ,
' ?•.
^
• ^ , ■*
'V'’. *ft*i
I
LETTERS ON PREJUDICE.
LETTER XVIII.
02V THE INFL UENCE OF PREJUDICE AS CONNECTED
tTITH THE GENERAL ESTIMATE OF THE PULPIT
DIVINITY OF THE LAST CENTURY.
ENGLISH DIVINES.
A LOW ESTIMATE OP THE DIVINITY OF THE LAST AGE ONE
OF THE PREJUDICES OF THE PRESENT. - ENQUIRY INTO
THE CAUSES OF THIS PREJUDICE. - SOME PRINCIPLES OF
JUDGMENT SUGGESTED. - OBJECTIONS MADE TO THESE
DIVINES. - CHARACTER OF SCRIPTURE - DOGMATICAL
AND PRECEPTIVE. - DIVINITY OF HUMAN COMPOSITION
CONTROVERSIAL - AND WHY. - GENERAL CHARACTER OF
THE DIVINES UNDER CONSIDERATION. - FARTHER RULES
FORJUDGING THEM FAIRLY. - FAITH AND WORKS, WHY
A SUBJECT OF CONTROVERSY. - THE LATTER STRONGLY
ENFORCED, IN APPREHENSION OF ANTINOMIANISM. - FREE
WILL SOMETIMES INCAUTIOUSLY STATED. — FARTHER
OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED. — LOW STANDARD OF MORALITY.
- USE OF HEATHEN AUTHORITIES, — A PRIORI REASON-
jNG, - CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH LED TO THIS LATTER
PRACTICE, AND APPARENT NECESSITY FOR IT. - FUNDA¬
MENTAL DOCTRINES OF CHRISTIANITY, INDISPENSABLE IN
THE PULPIT, THOUGH MODES OF ILLUSTRATION, MAY VARY.
I NEED hardly observe, my dear friend, that
prejudice has often a powerful influence in
forming the critical taste, even upon general
B
YOL. II
2
PULPIT DIVINITY.
subjects ; and I should liave thought that
jour knowledge of what we may call the
history of theological literature, would have
enabled you to trace this influence more
particularly in studies connected with di¬
vinity. Your sweeping censure, therefore,
of our divines of our last century, does, I
own, surprise me; and. I feel strongly
tempted to take up the gauntlet in their
defence, or at least to urge a fair examin¬
ation of the charge, and an enquiry, before
you indiscriminately condemn them.
This is, indeed, one of the points to which
I alluded in a former letter, as particularly
connected with the prejudices of the pre¬
sent day ; and on which I had actually
thrown together some observations, more
general, perhaps, than would exactly suit
the nature of your objections. Such as
they are, however, you shall have them ;
and if you can accompany me so far, we
will continue the inquiry together ; not as
contending partizans, but as Christian
friends, in the honest pursuit of truth.
ENGLISH DIVINES.
3
You must not be impatient of the few
prefatory remarks, which are necessary,
in my opinion, to the argument. Indeed
much more might be said with advantage,
than I have said, or can say. But if I can
lead you fairly and patiently to look at
both sides of the subject, and to trace the
different schools of divinity to their his¬
torical origin, I think you will agree with
me, that many pious Christians and true
Churchmen, who are now unhappily jealous
of each other, do not really differ so much
as they suppose, and need not differ so
much as they do.
You must, however, pursue this voyage
of discovery, for yourself: I have neither
time nor ability to do more than suggest a
few leading points of direction ; and even
for this, I would gladly refer you to some
better pilot, of whom you may find many,
amongst your clerical or literary friends.
In the sublime and mysterious doctrines
which are the subject of Divine Revelation,
there is necessarily inherent a certain ob-
B 2
4
PULPIT DIVINITY.
sciirity ; not so much from the nature of the
doctrines themselves, as from the imper¬
fection of the human faculties, and the in¬
adequacy of human language to the clear
expression of ideas purely abstract and
spfritual. This inadequacy, and the at¬
tempt minutely to explain what it has
pleased the Spirit of God to assert without
explanation, are the sources of much of the
scepticism by which religion is discredited,
on the one hand, and of the dogmatism by
which it is disfigured, on the other ; — the
former, divesting it of its sublimity and
dignity, by subjecting its high and myste¬
rious communications, to the line and plum¬
met of human reason ; the latter, destroying
its symmetry and proportion, by exalting
some doctrines, to the depreciation of others,
or substituting the scholastic definition of a
polemic, for the more simple and general
proposition of an Evangelist or Apostle.
When we consider the various sects and
opinions which have at different times
arisen in the Christian world, — when we
reflect upon the pertinacity with which each
English divini^s.
5
party has adhered to its own system, as the
standard of truth, and concluded all who
dissented from it, to be in error, — we are
almost tempted to suspect, that there must
be some variation in the principles of the
human understanding ; and that the ideas
of right and wrong, of truth and falsehood,
do not naturally present themselves in the
same light, to all apprehensions. The fact,
however, appears to be, (as I have observed
in a former letter,) that many circumstances
contribute to impress a bias, upon the mind,
independent of the influence of abstract
conviction ; and that our perception of the
evidence, or relative importance, of certain
principles and opinions, depends, more than
we are aware, upon our previous associa¬
tions and impressions.
This cannot impugn the certainty of any
doctrine that rests upon the testimony of
Divine Revelation ; but it may lead us to
doubt the infallibility of our own judgment,
and indeed, to question, whether any merely
human interpretation of Scripture can be
exclusively and universally true. It may
B 3
6
PULPIT DIVINITi.
lead us to doubt, whether the views which
our fellow Christians take of that Book to
which they have equal access with our¬
selves, may not be aided as much by hu¬
man intelligence, and influenced as much
by Divine grace, as our own. It may lead
us to doubt, whether those deep and diffi¬
cult questions, which have divided the most
pious Christians, in all ages of the Church,
are capable of solution by any human un¬
derstanding ; and whether the obscure and
imperfect intimations from which such dis¬
cordant inferences have been drawn, are not
rather intended to afford an opportunity for
the exercise of the Christian grace of humi¬
lity : — a grace, of which there is, perhaps,
no exercise more difficult, than the submis¬
sion of the understanding, to him whose
thoughts are not as our thoughts, nor his
ways as our ways, as well in humbly acqui¬
escing in what he reveals, as in forbearing
to intrude upon what he withholds.
The distrust of human authority, or the
diffidence of individual judgment, which
the above observations would suggest, can^
ENGLISH DIVINES.
7
not bring into question, those fundamental
truths which are built upon the express
assertions of Scripture, and which it should
seem, could only be denied by those who
deny the authority upon which they are
stated. The doctrines — of the fall and cor¬
ruption of man, — of the atonement by our
blessed Redeemer, — of the fullness and suf¬
ficiency of that atonement, for man’s justi¬
fication, — of the efficacy of faith, as the
medium of that justification, and the neces¬
sity of Divine grace, to produce this princi¬
ple of faith, — are so clearly and prominently
revealed in Scripture, and, in fact, are so
necessarily connected with each other, that
it seems impossible to hold one link of
this golden chain, without resting upon all
the Others, in succession. And I believe
it will appear, that where these essential
truths have been disputed, it has been found
necessary to resort to arguments, which
would sap the authority of all Revelation,
and shake the foundations of all human
knowledge. The exercise, therefore, of
humility, with respect to the secret things
that belong to the Lord our God, and of
J5 4
8
PULPIT DIVINITY.
charity, with respect to the opinions of our
neighbour, may be perfectly compatible
with the fullest conviction, and the most
decided profession, of our own religious
principles ; and if we do not insist upon
substituting our modification of the doc¬
trines, for the doctrines themselves, we can¬
not be too explicit in the assertion, or too
zealous in the defence, of them.
The memorable answer of Queen Eliza¬
beth, when questioned respecting a point
of her belief, though an evasion wrung
from her by the peculiar difficulty of her
situation, may suggest to us a rule of judg¬
ment in the study of the Divine Word, and
a lesson of prudence and modesty in the
choice of controversial language. Indeed
one reason, amongst many others, why re¬
ligious controversy is peculiarly irritating,
seems to be the practice of substituting the
language of the controversialist, for the
scripture proposition he proposes to defend;
and thus claiming, as it were, for his own
interpretation, the deference due to the
authority .of Scripture itself. It is true that
ENGLISH DIVINES.
9
the precise statement of ideas, and the ap¬
plication of human language, to condense
and embody the leading principles of reli¬
gion, are highly useful to impress those
principles upon the mind ; and the rather,
as it appears, that we cannot clearly ascer¬
tain whether we comprehend the terms of
any proposition, till we have, as it were,
mentally translated those terms, into other
language. But as such translation would
not in other sciences, be admitted as a sub¬
stitute for the original proposition, so nei¬
ther ought it, in religion ; where we main¬
tain the Divine authority of the expression,
as well as of the principle. It is, however,
not only allowable, but necessary, where a
Scripture doctrine is expressed by a peri¬
phrasis, or diffused through a chain of illus¬
trations and examples, to use some concise
and conventional terms, for the expression
of bur view of the doctrine, and for the test,
if we may so call it, of the principles of
those who dispute it.
It is an unhappy feature in the contro¬
versies of the present day, that these con-
10
PULPIT DIVINITY.
cise definitions, whether derived from Scrip¬
ture, from antiquity, or from more modern
and familiar language, are oftener used as
the watch-words of party, than as the in¬
struments of truth. Not (God forbid we
should suggest it !) from any deliberate in¬
tention to suppress or pervert the genuine
doctrines of the Gospel, but from a certain
jealousy of the right of private interpret¬
ation, which leads the controversialist on
either side, to maintain the definition, in his
own sense, while he disputes it, in that un¬
derstood by his opponent, and combats a
phantom of his own raising, in the asser¬
tion of principles which have not been
questioned.
To this original, may, perhaps, be traced
something of that jealousy which has lately
been entertained by many pious and excel¬
lent persons, as if the great and leading
truths of our religion, the doctrine of the
atonement by our I^ord Jesus Christ, and
the promise of pardon to the penitent sin¬
ner, through faith in that atonement only,
were virtually disclaimed, or excluded from
ENGLISH DIVINES.
11
the Christian system, by all who would as¬
sociate and combine with those doct rines,
other principles, which they hold to be also
integral parts of Christianity ; principles
acknowledged, indeed, to be deducible and
inseparable from these doctrines, and which
the Divine Author of Christianity, has not
omitted to enforce, with all the minuteness
of detail, and all the energy of authority,
necessary in the instruction of a creature, so
prone to forget his duties, and so averse to
practise them.
It is not my intention, here, and it would
be far beyond my ability, to attempt any
general defence of what has been thus re¬
presented as an abuse of practical divinity,
and a substitution of mere human ethicks
for the high and peculiar doctrines of the
Gospel. But if sufficient proof can be ad¬
duced, that in some instances, and perhaps
in many, these high and peculiar doctrines
form the admitted basis of moral instruc¬
tion, and are only not prominently urged,
because they do not appear to have been
disputed, or sometimes, perhaps, escape
12
rrLPIT DIVINITY.
observation, from the practice of dividing
the subject for the greater facility of appli¬
cation, surely it will not be an unimport¬
ant, nor an unacceptable service, to trace
this foundation where it is apparent, and to
endeavour to account for its occasional
omission or obscurity.
To those who are conversant with theolo¬
gical writers, the observation will imme¬
diately occur, that a full and perfect system
of Christian doctrine, is hardly to be found
in any, however highly gifted, however
deeply learned in the school of their Divine
Master. Some favourite position is en¬
forced, some embarrassing difficulty is
eluded, some peculiar point of principle or
of practice is pressed, to the temporary de¬
preciation, or apparent exclusion, of others.
This disadvantage, from which, perhaps, no
uninspired writings are free, may be traced
to various causes ; sometimes to those
which are personal, and connected with the
early habits, studies, and prejudices, of the
writers ; more frequently, perhaps, to cir¬
cumstances of local situation, and those sud-
^1
ENGLISH DIVINES.
13
lien and capricious fluctuations of religious
opinion, against which it may be their ob¬
ject to guard, and which, ever since the
apostolic days, have led so many, to draw
perverse and pernicious conclusions, even
from the clearest Scriptural positions.
If we except some parts of the Apostolic
Epistles, which have necessarily derived a
controversial character, from the circum¬
stances that produced them, and from the
perversions of Christian doctrine, which
they were respectively designed to cor¬
rect, we shall observe one important
and striking distinction, between the Bible,
and almost all other books that treat
of doctrinal religion. The former is dog¬
matical i (if I may be allowed the ex¬
pression,) stating the sublime truths which
it reveals, in simple, direct, authoritative,
language, and claiming, in the name of its
Divine Author, implicit belief, and unre¬
served obedience ; bending to no superior
authority ; referring to no foreign or col¬
lateral testimony ; temporizing with no
14
PULPIT DIVINITY.
prejudice ; yielding to no passion ; compro¬
mising with no folly or foible of man ; de¬
signed for the instruction of all ages, and of
the whole human race, and, therefore, like
the Saviour whom it reveals, the same yes¬
terday, to-day, and for ever ! But the doc¬
trinal divinity of human composition, is
almost universally, and, indeed, almost
necessarily, controversial ; directed to the
exposition, illustration, or defence, of the
various truths of Revelation, and gene¬
rally most diffuse, in the examination of
such points, as ignorance has misunder¬
stood, or malice and infidelity have mis¬
stated ; referring to the Scripture, on all
hands, as the source and standard of truth,
and urging singly and successively, those
particular doctrines of Scripture, which ap¬
pear for the time, liable to question or mis¬
application. This controversial character
often gives a preponderance to the subject
of present discussion, and might sometimes
lead to a suspicion that it had an undue ex¬
altation in the mind of the polemic ; but
such an objection applies to the uninspired
ENGLISH DIVINES.
15
advocate of a7iy Scripture doctrine ; and is,
in fact, no more than an assumption, that
he does not believe, what his present cir¬
cumstances and obligations do not lead him
expressly to defend.
In asserting that works of doctrinal divi¬
nity are necessarily of a controversial cast,
it will be obvious that I use the term, in a
larger sense than it is commonly supposed
to bear; and it may not be amiss to state in a
few words, the ground upon which I apply it.
Ever since the first promulgation of the
Gospel, the efforts of its defenders have been
stimulated by opposition, and the apologist,
who maintained its evidence, against the in¬
credulity of the Gentile, has found it neces¬
sary to vindicate its doctrines, against the
perversions of the heretic. The zeal thus
awakened, has been naturally applied to the
points where danger has been most appre¬
hended ; and the variations of error, have
occasioned a corresponding variation of the
posts and modes of defence. Hence have
arisen, a minuteness of exposition, in the
16
PULPIT DIVINITY.
^ discussion of some doctrines, and a partial
enlargement, in the assertion of others,
which seem to raise them for the time
above their just proportion ; and to throw
into comparative inferiority, doctrines
equally true and important, but which,
not having been impugned, it does not
appear at the moment, necessary to vindi¬
cate. The objections, also, which are some¬
times made against the abuse of a doctrine,
are too often understood or represented, as
urged against the doctrine itself ; and a re¬
jection of the principle, is imputed to those
who would only resist the perversion. No
allowance is made for the various shades
and modifications which a doctrine may
assume, to different apprehensions, nor for
the possibility of stating with some verbal
differences, propositions substantially the
same. Thus, while the great work of ge¬
neral defence, has been prosecuted with
energy and success, the jealousy of internal
division, has gradually increased, and the
Shibboleth of some party principle or phrase
has been offered or required, as a criterion
of orthodoxy. To these causes we may
ENGLISH DIVINES.
17
trace the polemical character which I have
ventured to attribute to such discourses ;
and to the local and peculiar circumstances
of the writers, or to the actual state of reli¬
gious opinions in their day, we might, pro¬
bably refer, with success, for a clue to their
choice of subjects, as well as to their com¬
parative or individual views of doctrinal
truths or practical duties.
If, from whatever cause, any doctrine has
been elevated above its due proportion, or so
expressed, as apparently to involve practical
consequences injurious to morality, it is ob¬
viously the duty of the Christian teacher, to
guard against these consequences, while he
carefully maintains the truth of the doctrine
itself. It is not, however, easy to calculate
the difficulty of fully accomplishing this
point, under the influence of prejudice on
the one side, or suffering, perhaps, from its
effects, upon the other ; neither is it fair to
draw a general inference from a partial in¬
vestigation, and to argue that one necessary
part of the subject is designedly overlooked
or omitted, because we find another, equally
VOL. II. c
18
PULPIT DIVINITY.
necessary, perhaps, pressed with peculiar
urgency, when circumstances appear pecu¬
liarly to require its introduction.
It has been made a popular objection to
much of our English divinity since the
Restoration, that it has been in a great de¬
gree unchristianized, by the infusion of pa¬
gan or philosophical ethics, and divested of
those high and holy peculiarities, which
distinguish the religion of our Lord and
Saviour Jesus Christ. This charge, which
seems to have been as hastily admitted as
it has been peremptorily urged, has thrown
into a temporary unpopularity, writers who
were once considered as the pillars and
ornaments of the English church, and who
appear to have brought to its service, a fund
■of learning, and a patience of enquiry, — an
extent of doctrinal information, — a force
and variety of practical illustration and ar¬
gument, — a fullness and comprehension of
mind, — an acuteness of judgment, — a
fluency of language, — a precision and accu¬
racy of arrangement, — a power of becoming,
as it were, all things to all men, and of com-
ENGLISH DIVINES.
19
bating the sensualist and the sceptic, with
their own weapons, (which the apostle him¬
self does not seem to have despised,) — and
an industry in the application of these va¬
rious talents, — not alvvays to be found in the
more simple and summary productions of
later times. If a spirit of metaphysical re¬
finement, a fondness for classical allusion, an
infusion of prejudices insensibly contracted
from early habits and peculiar studies,
from the nature of their education, and the
state of religion and literature in their day,
have given a shape and character to some
of the compositions of these our “ giants in
theology,” too complex and systematic, if
not too scientific, for the purpose oi general
Christian instruction, it will at least be con¬
fessed, that they have vindicated reason and
philosophy, from the charge of being hostile
to religion ; and proved, that infidelity is to
be traced to the defect, not to the super¬
fluity, of knowledge.
The objections, however, which have
been made indiscriminately, to these vene¬
rable writers, will apply, if I mistake not,
Q 2
20
I'ULPIT DIVINITY.
but partially. The high and peculiar doc¬
trines of the Gospel, the only true foundation
of Christian holiness, as well as of Christian
hope, will appear to have been the ground
work and platform of their teaching ; and
the “ spoil of the Egyptians,” — the stores
of classical, of philosophical, or of general
learning, — will be found to have been occa¬
sionally employed, indeed, for the purposes
of illustration or enforcement, of applica¬
tion or analogy, but not to have been urged
as substitutes for Christian principle, or
motives to Christian practice.
To enable us to form a fair and impartial
estimate of the character and principles of
any class or succession of writers, it is ne¬
cessary to revert to the times in which they
lived, to the societies in which they were
conversant, to the peculiar, and local, and
occasional circumstances, which may sue-
cessively have directed their attention to
the enforcement of any important truth, or
to the refutation of any popular error : and
it is necessary, 'particularly^ in the study of
theological writers, — whose works, when
ENGLISH DIVINES.
21
not exclusively hortatory or practical, must
take much of their form and character, from
the occasions which produce them, and
may, sometimes, seem to verge towards
error on the one side, from an anxiety to
combat error on the other.
To this cause at least, it appears, may be
attributed the contrariety of opinion and
vehemence of argument, with which the
question of faith and works has been discus¬
sed, ever since the Reformation. If, in a
just and natural reprobation of the pre¬
sumptuous doctrine of human merit, our
early Reformers stated fully and forcibly, the
Scriptural truth of justification by faith only,
it appears that some of their successors went
still farther ; and not only denied the effi¬
cacy of good works, as a title to justification,
but disputed the moral quality of every
action that man could perform, and stamped
all his doings, by whatever motive suggested,
with the seal of condemnation. Hence
would naturally arise the presumption of
Antinomianism, or the recklessness of de¬
spair ; and in the anxiety to avert either of
22
PULPIT DIVINITY.
those dreadful consequences, it was not
improbable (and indeed in the heat and
vehemence of controversy, it was hardly
avoidable) that the duty of obedience to
the law, might be magnified beyond its due
proportion, and exalted from the rank of an
evidence of faith, and a prescribed condi¬
tion of final acceptance, to that of an effi¬
cient and meritorious cause of man’s justifi¬
cation. It was obvious, on the other hand,
that a fear of the presumption and self-de-
pendance which such a view of the subject
must excite, would alarm those, who feeling
their own worthlessness, and utter insuffi¬
ciency to do any good thing of themselves,
clung to the faith of the Gospel, as their
only hope and security, and threw them¬
selves upon the all-sufficient sacrifice of
their Saviour, not only as the ransom for
their forfeited lives, but as the substitution
for their covenanted duties. Hence would
arise, and hence, in fact, did arise, a conti¬
nued struggle between opposite opinions,
expressed, perhaps, on both sides, with more
heat than the sober judgment of the disput¬
ants would have suggested, and urging the
ENGLISH DIVINES.
2S
partizaiis or the opponents of each, to
extremes which their leaders never con¬
templated.
Under this view of the subject, it seems
not quite fair, to impute the suppression of
a fundamental doctrine, where there only
appears a desire to guard against the con¬
sequences which might result from the
abuse of it ; or to attribute the assumption
of a meritorious efficacy in human obedi¬
ence, to those who would only contend for
its indispensable necessity. Whether that
necessity be founded upon the conditional
nature of the Gospel promises, or urged as
a test of Gospel privileges already com¬
municated and received, — whether the
doctrine of justification be admitted in its
double sense, initial, and final, — or the one
be united and identified with the other, —
the sole meritorious efficacy must rest in
the person and character of the Redeemer ;
and the annexation of reward, whether to
the faith, or the obedience, or both con¬
jointly, of a creature whose perform¬
ances, supposing them possible, could con-
c 4
24
PULPIT DIVINITY.
fer no claim to reward, and who is capable
of no performance that is not tainted with
the blemish of his radical corruption, must be
an act of gratuitous and undeserved mercy.
In fact, the requisition of faith in Christ,
as the indispensable preliminary of justifica¬
tion, renders this blessing as strictly con¬
ditional, as the demand of the fullest legal
obedience could make it. The principle is
equally established, ’whatever be the terms
of the covenant ; and the free grace of God
is as clearly exhibited in the admission of
sincere, though ’wholly undeserving obedi¬
ence^ made, through the merits of his
blessed Son, and through faith in his blood,
not meritorious^ but acceptable, as through
the simple requisition of faith, producing
obedience as fruit, and offering obedience
as its evidence. Upon - either hypothesis,
free grace is the source, and faith is the
instrument and condition, of justification ;
and whether salvation be affirmed to be
contingent upon subsequent obedience,
prompted, and invigorated, and sanctified
by faith, or limited to the reception, by
ENGLISH DIVINES.
25
faith only, of the saving doctrines of the
Gospel, the conditional character of the
covenant remains, as well as the natural
inability of man to fulfil his part of it ; and
the utter worthlessness, not only of his
works, but of his faith, as a title to pardon
or reward, must be evident to every man
who owns the corruption of his nature, and
feels that he is neither able to believe nor to
work, but through the promoting grace of
God in Christ.
No principles, indeed, but those of irre¬
spective election and absolutepredestination,
can annihilate the conditional nature of the
Gospel covenant, or dissolve the connexion
of man’s moral responsibility, with all his
spiritual hopes and privileges. Whether
his free agency be admitted in a larger, or
a more limited, sense, — whether it be in¬
herent, or • communicated, — whether the
influence upon his will, be supposed to result
from external motives, or internal impulses,
— the statement is plain and explicit, that the
Gospel sets before him, the choice of good
or evil, and suspends his fate upon his de-
26
TUI, PIT DIVINITY.
cision. It is, tberetbre, an important branch
of the Christian teacher’s office, not only to
enforce generally, the practice of the moral
duties, but to explain them in all their bear¬
ings and relations ; and to urge them
severally, and minutely, and earnestly, with
every variety of argument and application
that may touch the hearts, and influence
the consciences, of those whom he ad¬
dresses.
If the moral character of our actions, de¬
pends, as it is acknowledged that it does, upon
the motive which suggests them, their reli¬
gious character must be tried by the same
criterion. The love of God must be the prin¬
ciple, the revealed will of God must be the
rule, of the Christian’s morality ; and if the
humble hope of a promised recompense be
allowed to add its influence to the feeling of
gratitude for benefits already received, the
warmth of this feeling is not likely to be
diminished, when we reflect, that this
promised recompense, and the ability to
seek or to obtain it, are equally the free
ENGLISH DIVINES.
27
gift of God ; equally beyond the natural
reach of human hope and human effort, and
attainable only through the merits and in¬
tercession of our blessed Redeemer. All
moral teachino; that has not this funda-
mental truth for its basis, is, indeed, but
built upon the sand ; and the omission of
it, in the lessons of the Christian preacher,
would be a dereliction of his most sacred
duty, and an abandonment of the great
object of his ministry.
But it does not necessarily follow that
this leading principle is relinquished, when
minor points of present or occasional
urgency, are emphatically pressed, and the
distinct branches of Christian doctrine or
moral duty, are urged and enforced with
minute and local application. It does not
necessarily follow that the doctrine of a
vicarious righteousness is omitted or im¬
pugned, when personal holiness is pressed,
as well as faith, as the only medium through
which that righteousness can be appropri¬
ated. General denunciations against ‘‘ the
28
PULPIT DIVINITY.
sinfulness of sin,” will but little affect the
consciences of those who claim an indul¬
gence for their favourite transgressions, in
their supposed exemption from other of¬
fences ; an exemption, produced, perhaps,
not by religious motives, but by habit and
education, by the influence and example of
respectable society, or by constitutional
firmness or kindliness of temper. The
principle of all sin, must not only be detect¬
ed, the radical corruption of the human
heart, must not only be pointed out, but
every exhibition of its effects, in the positive
infringement of God’s holy laws, must be
distinctly and minutely traced, and every
individual sinner must behold his own face,
in the faithful glass of the preacher. But
so much of the character of pulpit compo¬
sitions, must depend upon the times and
circumstances which produce them, — so
much that is local and occasional, must mix
itself with the general exhortation of the
preacher, — so appropriately must he suit his
arguments and illustrations, to the character
and comprehension of those whom he ad¬
dresses, or to that particular branch of his
ENGLISH DIVINES.
29
sacred subject which he undertakes to dis¬
cuss, — that the principle of criticism, upon
which he is to be tried, must vary with every
variety of its application, and he must be
judged, not by what it may be thought he
could have done in a different age and situ¬
ation, but by what he could have done, and
by what he did actually accomplish, in his
own.
If we would apply this criterion to the
venerable writers in question, we must take
into account, the religious character of their
age, the controversies that disturbed, the
vices that disgraced, the prejudices that
biassed, the societies in which they lived.
We must endeavour to trace the circum¬
stances which influenced their choice of
subjects, or decided their style and manner
of treating them. We must distinguish
those works which were designed exclusively,
for the proof of some particular truth, or the
refutation of some particular error ; and in
which, nothing is to be reasonably expected,
that is foreign to the direct and professed
object. We must recollect, that much of
30
rULPIT DIVINITY.
their general and discursive reasoning upon
the evidences and first principles of religion,
was necessary for the satisfaction and con¬
viction of those, to whose understandings,
the abstract truth of revelation must be
proved, before its precepts can be enforced
upon their consciences, or its promises ap¬
plied to their hearts. We must recollect,
that a different style of discussion was re¬
quisite to convince the metaphysical infidel,
from that which would have been effectual
to awaken the careless sinner, or to comfort
the trembling penitent. We must remem¬
ber, that every successive effort of oppo¬
sition to the truth, required a variation in
the mode of defence; and that a submission
to the guidance of the divine word, and a
conscientious conformity to its doctrines,
might still be consistent with certain pe¬
culiarities, resulting from the characters,
habits, or circumstances, of the writers.
We must advert, also, to the fluctuation in
the general use of language ; and the dif¬
ferent senses given at different times, to
particular phrases ; and we must especially^
ENGJ.ISII DIA’INES.
:n
take into account, the circumstances which
may make the enforcement of some single
point of doctrine, more necessary at one
time, than at another.
It is admitted, that the great and funda¬
mental truths in question, should at all times
be made the basis of religious instruction ;
and that the preaching, of which this is not
the prominent object, cannot justly be styled
the preaching of the Gospel. But the mode
of explaining and illustrating these truths, is
capable of such infinite variation, and is
often so dependant on the various feelings
and prejudices by which the preacher or the
hearer may be supposed to be influenced,
that a reader unacquainted with either, and
entering upon the study of those writers,
when their personal characters are un¬
known, and the controversies or prejudices
of their days are forgotten, may very
naturally form his judgment, without a
reference to those guiding points, and esti¬
mate them by their bearing upon the con¬
troversies of his own day, and upon the
prejudices of his own society.
32
PULPIT DIVINITY.
Let it not, for a moment, be supposed,
that I would suggest an apology for the
slightest deviation from Gospel truth, or
the suppression or modification of a single
Gospel principle, to suit the prejudices of
any period. I would only suggest, that
every period has its prejudices, and that
the extreme on the one side, has no more
certainty of being right, than that upon the
other. I would entreat the candid reader
to enquire, whether some of those writings
which have been so much decried, as incul¬
cating a cold and heartless morality, desti¬
tute of power, of hope, and of life, do not
explicitly assume the great truth of redemp¬
tion by the blood of Jesus Christ, as the
basis, his promises delivered in the gospel,
as the sanction, and his precepts, as the
rule, of their moral exhortations. I would
entreat, that they may be tried by the ge¬
neral scope and tendency of their writings,
not by the partial examination of detached
portions or discourses, whose object might
necessarily preclude any doctrinal pecu¬
liarity. I would suggest the danger and
imprudence of identifying the zealous en-
ENGLISH DIVINES.
83
forcement of morality, with the imputation
of scepticism, or indifference upon the
great truths of Revelation ; and I would ven¬
ture to propose, as a fairer and safer prin¬
ciple of criticism, the test, of a general and
preliminary assumption of gospel principles
and sanctions, as the only true foundation
of moral virtue, and, in fact, the only prin¬
ciples which can give a moral character to
human actions.
Still, the acknowledgment must be made,
whatever be the cause to which the fact
may be imputed, that the Christian cove¬
nant has been more frequently preached by
these writers, in its general and federal cha¬
racter, than in its direct and personal ap¬
plication ; and that an anxiety to impress
the important truth of man’s moral respon¬
sibility, and of the contingent nature of the
gospel privileges, (so far, at least, as relates
to their final fruition,) has given a lead and
prominency to this part of the subject,
which throws into comparative obscurity,
the free grace, to which alone we must owe
the acceptableness of our persons, and the
VOL. II.
D
34
rULPI']' DIVINITY.
redemption, through which only, we must
look for deliverance from the power and
punishment of our sins. In urging the
great truth, that moral exertion is necessary,
and that, under God’s assisting grace, it will
be effectual, — in opposition to those who
denied the utility, and even the lawfulness,
of moral effort, and trusted for every thing
to the omnipotence of grace, and the substi¬
tution of a vicarious righteousness, — it has
not, perhaps, been sufficiently remembered,
that while we are commanded to work out
our own salvation, it is God that worketh
in us, both to will and to do. To this omis¬
sion, wherever it occurs, the attention of
the reader should certainly be directed, as
tending to inculcate a dependence upon the
sufficiency, if not upon the merit, of human
obedience; but still, a distinction should be
made between the charge of deliberately set-
tins: aside the foundation, and that of encom-
passing, or even of overcharging the fabric,
with extraneous or incongruous additions.
One of the charges, which, if not directly
expressed, are at least deducible from the
KNCLISH DIVINES.
35
criticisms to which I have adverted, is that
of inculcating morality upon false principles,
as to its nature, its object, and its effects;
of estimating the quality of moral actions,
by the standard of pagan or philosophical
ethics ; of urging them upon low and selfish
views of personal interest and advantage ;
and of attributing to them an efficacy and
importance in conferring a claim of actual
worthiness on the performer, founded upon
their supposed conformity with the ab¬
stract will of the Deity, and upon their
tendency to promote the happiness of
man.
It has been admitted, that peculiar habits
and studies might lead to the infusion of
certain prejudices in reasoning, or to a par¬
tiality for certain modes and topics of illus¬
tration ; and perhaps it may be urged as a
fair apology for these divines, if not a suf¬
ficient defence of them, that the indiscri¬
minate rejection of human reason and
learning, on the one hand, made it necessary
to exhibit, on the other, the possible, and
indeed the actual, consistency of their true
D 2
36
PULPIT DIVINITY.
and legitimate use, with a submission to
the supreme authority of Revelation.
Saint Paul himself, urges the great truth
of the existence of God, as deducible from
natural reason ; and our blessed Lord illus¬
trates the doctrine of a particular providence,
by the analogies of daily experience and
personal feeling. In the general announce-
ment of the divine message, all is simple,
direct, and authoritative. In the illustration
of particular propositions, reasoning is em¬
ployed, local customs are referred to, in¬
ferences are drawn from premises which
must be known and understood, before their
bearing upon the subject can be perceived.
We must carefully observe, however, the
necessity of distinguishing the illustration,
from the principle to be illustrated ; a pre¬
caution, to the neglect of which, may be
attributed many of the present religious
differences, and much of that jealousy of
religious reasoning, which would banish
from the Christian’s library, the works of
some of our most pious and valuable
divines.
ENGLISH DIVINES.
37
It is well observed by Bishop Horsley, in
reply to those who would exclude learning
from the list of ministerial qualifications,
and quote the character of the apostles in
support of their argument, that, so far from
being destitute of this advantage, “ the
apostles were, in reality, the most learned
of all preachers nay, ‘‘ that they were not
commissioned or allowed to preach, till they
had been supernaturally instructed in all
languages, and initiated into all knowledge.”
The operation of that divine Spirit which
led them into infallible truth, was evidenced
to their hearers, by a visible prodigy, as
well as bv the sudden and miraculous en-
%/
larcrement of their understandinors ; and
their previous ignorance was, perhaps, ne¬
cessary to give its full contrast and effect, to
the blaze of their subsequent inspiration.
Another of the charges which have been
advanced against this class of English di¬
vines, is that of trying the matter of the
Bible, by their pre-conceived opinions, and
substituting d priori demonstrations, drawn
from their own notions of moral fitness or
D 3
38
PULPIT DIVINITY.
rational probability, for the simple and au¬
thoritative statement of gospel doctrines. It
should be remembered here, that trying the
authority and evidence of these doctrines,
by the test of their consonancy with human
reason, isone thing; and simply proving their
consonancv v/itli human reason, is another.
To the latter of these charges only, I ap¬
prehend that the authors in question are
liable ; and v/hen we recollect the varieties
of character which infidelity can assume,
and advert to the subtle and sophistical arts
which were used at this very period, to re¬
present reason and revelation, as irrecon-
cileable, it will, perhaps, appear question¬
able, whether any other mode of defence
would have been so effectual.
Far from us be tlie presumption, of vin¬
dicating the application of human reason,
to the investigation of those deep and mys¬
terious doctrines which seem to have been
revealed chiefly for the exercise of our faith,
and the trial of our humility ! Far from us
be the blasphemous impiety, of supposing
that the express coiniminications of the Al-
ENGLISH DIVINES.
S9
mighty, are to stand or fall with our com¬
prehension of them ! The genuineness of
these communications, may, indeed, be
tried upon the ground of external evidence ;
but if they constitute a portion of God’s
authenticated record to mankind, their very
superiority to the grasp of the human intel¬
lect, may, perhaps, be urged as an additional
proof of their divine original. It should
also be observed, that it is not so much to
the abstract truth of the doctrines, as to
the investigation of their true Scriptural
sense, that the test of human reasoning is
commonly applied ; and so long as we do
not acknowledge an infallible guide, inde¬
pendent of the Scriptures, in matters of
faith, this test must be used as the instru¬
ment of our enquiries. — Nay, the very
submission of the understanding, to the
mysteriousness of the divine communica¬
tions, must be the result of a conviction in
the understanding, that the nature of the
Deity is far above our ken ; that his ways
cannot be as our ways, nor his thoughts as
our thoughts.
40
PULPIT DIVINITY.
Another point, to which I have already
adverted, and which it is necessary to keep
particularly in our view, is the distinction
of character and object, in the various works
to which this objection is made. It will
hardly be disputed, that a different line of
argument and illustration is necessary for
the conviction of the philosophical infidel,
from that which would be suited to the ha¬
bits and comprehension of the simple and
illiterate peasant. The fundamental prin¬
ciples may be the same in both cases ; the
truth, as it is in Jesus, may be enforced
with equal energy and sincerity ; but pre¬
vious impressions and prejudices are to be
combated in the one case, which do not
exist in the other ; and the style of address
is, in each, to be adapted to the character
and apprehension of the hearers.
It is observed by one of the Moravian
Missionaries, in his account of his first visit
to the Greenlanders, that the difficulties of
their conversion, were greatly increased by
the defects of their language, which afforded
no terms for the expression of spiritual
6
ENGLISH DIVINES.
41
ideas. This is a disadvantage which must
always occur, where civilization is still in
its infancy, and the mind of man is too
much engaged with personal and palpable
necessities, to have leisure for the formation
of abstract and general ideas. Accordingly,
we find, in the addresses to these people,
the Christian religion divested of much of
its spirituality, and received, at least, if
not intentionally communicated, rather
throLio-h the medium of the senses and
imagination, than of the understanding.
In concentrating the system to the two
great points of original sin, and redemption
by Christ, an appeal is made to the irresist¬
ible evidence of personal feeling, and to the
strong principle of personal interest ; and it
is obvious, that upon these two points,
must be founded the practical conviction
and moral influence of Christianity. Where
the deep and familiar experience of personal
corruption and necessity, is once impressed,
the offer of redemption will be thankfully
accepted, without dispute or discussion ;
and the question, What must we do to
be saved?” will alone meet the ear of the
42
PULPIT DIVINITY.
minister of the gospel. But the proof of
transgression, can only be established upon
the evidence of the law transgressed ; and
the obligation of submission to the law, must
rest upon the existence and authority of
the Law-giver. These fundamental princi¬
ples of natural, or, as I would rather say,
of patriarchal religion, are assumed by our
blessed Lord and his apostles, in their
teaching, without explanation or proof ; not
as it appears, because proof and explanation
were unnecessary, but because these truths,
upon express revelation, were the basis of
religion amongst the people whom they
taught. Where tlie pride of philosophy,
or the darkness of polytheism, had perverted
or obscured these fundamental principles,
we find them expressly stated and enforced ;
and the whole chain of spiritual truths,
traced in their strict and logical concatena¬
tion ; — briefly and authoritatively, indeed,
as was natural, where the arguments of rea¬
son were enforced by the demonstration of
the Spirit and of power ; but clearly enough,
to prove that the apostle considered the ex¬
ercise of reason as lawful and necessary.
ENGLISH DIVINES.
4a
though he tleprecated its presumptuous
abuse.
If the paucity of ideas, and the deficiency
of language, appear to have been, in some
cases, an obstruction to the communication
of spiritual truths, the opposite extreme of
metaphysical refinement and scholastic ac¬
curacy, presents a character still more dis¬
couraging, and, perhaps, (humanly speaking,
at least,) impervious to any impressions
that are not conveved through the favourite
channel of intellectual discussion. I would
not vindicate such a state of mind, nor pro¬
pose, as a general model, the style of com¬
position which was necessary to meet it ;
but I would account, upon this ground, for
the occasional use of a style more abstract
and metaphysical, than was, perhaps, suited
to mixed or unlettered congregations ; and
I would urge the prudence, as well as the
fairness, of distinguishing the substance of
the communication, from any peculiarity
with which it is expressed, or any extraneous
matter by which it is illustrated.
44
PULPIT DIVINITY.
But such objections, and many others,
which it would too heavily tax your time
and patience, to detail, cannot fairly do
more than bring into question, the present
utility of these writers, and limit the effi¬
cacy of their teaching, to the times and cir¬
cumstances which produced it. Yet, if it
be remembered, that characters like those
which they exposed, are still existing
amongst us, — that errors like those which
they refuted, are still maintained and pressed
with unyielding pertinacity, — that the infi¬
delity against which they argued, is tri¬
umphing in the confidence of that capricious
fashion which has thrown them into a tem¬
porary obscurity, and urging again and
again, objections which have been again
and again refuted, — if it be remembered,
that, in this particular, the state of the reli¬
gious world is still, very nearly, what it was
in their day, it will not, surely, be denied,
by those who most earnestly contend for a
different style of theology, that great and
important advantage may, even now, be de¬
rived from the study of these venerable
divines.
ENGLISH DIVINES.
45
If the objections to which I have adverted,
were always founded upon direct examin¬
ation and comparison of these writers, with
those of what is called a more evangelical
character, and upon a fair collation of both
with the standard of Scripture and of the
Church, it were unquestionably right to
exclude them from the course of Christian
study, unless for the purpose of marking
the aberrations to which the presumption
of the human understanding is liable. But if
it appear that such objections (their justice,
now, is not the question,) are sometimes
taken upon trust, and that much of the
clamour aoainst this class of theologians, is
heard amongst persons who do not even
profess to have consulted their works, and
adopted, implicitly, upon the testimony of
others, — surely, it is fair to urge an investi¬
gation of the ground of such testimony, or
a suspension of judgment upon the merits
of the case : surely, it is fair to urge, that
writers to whom the cause of general Chris¬
tianity is, confessedly, so highly indebted,
should not, now, be condemned unheard,
or charged with perverting or abandoning
46
PULPIT UIVTN1T\.
the fundamental articles of their faith, be¬
cause they may have been led, by the exi¬
gencies of their day, to enlarge upon cir¬
cumstantials, or by the character of their
audience, to adopt certain modes and topics
of illustration. The question, indeed,
whether they do preach “ Christ crucified,”
is indispensable to ascertain their merit as
Christian teachers, and their title to the
confidence of the Christian reader; 1*^ But
this question is to be decided by the in¬
quiry, not whether they teach this funda¬
mental truth, in the language of this or that
class of religionists ; not whether they build
on it, or connect with it, other doctrines of
which it maybe independent; but whether
they lay it, or adopt it, as the foundation
of their whole scheme of instruction, as
the principle of every duty which they
urge, as the source of every hope which
they suggest, as the grand and vital point
to which all others are but instrumental and
collateral ? whether they build upon this
truth as upon an admitted basis ; and whe¬
ther their not, at all times, expressly stating
and enforcing it, does not appear to have
ENGLISH DIVINES.
47
proceeded from a conviction, that it was
already fixed in the apprehension of their
hearers ?
So far, my dear friend, had I already
proceeded in the anticipation of some of
your objections, and in reference to those
which I have heard from others. It would
lead to a discussion beyond our present pur¬
pose, to enter very minutely into the ex¬
amination of this question, though its im¬
portance fairly entitles it to our attention.
It may, however, furnish you with an
excitement to pursue the subject, and a
proof of the necessity of the distinctions
which I have suggested, if I devote a few
of our future hours to the consideration of
some of the works which have been made
obnoxious to this species of criticism, and
endeavour to trace the origin of what I have
here ventured to denominate a prejudice.
I do it with a full conviction of the difficulty
and delicacy of the task, and a wish that it
had fallen into abler hands j but still, under
an impression, that if the cause of true re¬
ligion can be served, and the duties of can-
48
PULPIT DIVINITY.
dour and charity enforced, even by the
weakest and most obscure individual, the
hewers of wood and drawers of water are
as much bound to contribute their services,
as those who are “ filled with wisdom of
heart for the cunning work of the temple.”
49
LETTER XIX.
rREFATORY SKE TCHES.
STATE OF THE CIIURCH IMMEDIATELY PREVIOUS TO THE
REFORMATION. - POPISH DOCTRINE OF MERIT. - THE
GREAT OBJECT OF LUTIIEr’s OPPOSITION. — JUSTIFICA¬
TION BY FAITH. — STRONG STATEMENT OF IT BY LU¬
THER. — • OBJECTED TO AS DEROGATING FROM THE
NECESSITY OF GOOD WORKS. - EXPLAINED AND GUARDED
BY OTHER REFORMERS. — CALVINISTIC DOCTRINE OF
PREDESTINATION. — ABUSES OF IT. - FREE WILL. -
ORIGINAL SIN. - DIFFERENCES OF OPINION ON THESE
POINTS, NO BAR TO COMMUNION AMONGST THE EARLY
PROTESTANTS. — SEPARATED BY OTHER DISTINCTIONS. -
CONTROVERSIAL HABITS OF THE PROTESTANT DIVINES,
INFLUENCES THE STYLE OF THEIR THEOLOGY. — TWO
GREAT PRINCIPLES OF THE REFORMATION. — STRONG
STATEMENT OF THE DOCTRINE OF ORIGINAL SIN ;
ABUSE OF IT. — CASUAL ASSOCIATION OF THIS DOC¬
TRINE WITH CALVINISM. — CONSEQUENT JEALOUSY EN¬
TERTAINED OF IT, AND MODIFIED PROPOSITION OF IT
BY SOME DIVINES. - ENGLISH REFORMATION ; LITTLE
ADVANCED IN DOCTRINE DURING THE REIGN OF HENRY
VIII. - CRANMER’s EXERTIONS. — EARLY PROTESTANT
PUBLICATIONS. - GENERAL MEANING OF THE PHRASE
“GOOD works” at this PERIOD, AND CAUSE OF THE
DEPRECIATORY LANGUAGE APPLIED TO THEM. — THIS
DISTINCTION AFTERWARDS FORGOTTEN ; CONSEQUENT
ABUSES. - INDEPENDENCE OF THE CHURCH AND FREE
USE OF THE BIBLE, THE TWO GREAT POINTS GAINED AT
THIS TIME.
JIY DEAR FRIEND,
To account for, what you consider as the
deterioration of evangelical doctrine, com-
VOL. II
E
50
PREFATORY SKETCHES.
mencing just at the period you mention,
we must take up the subject a little earlier,
and cast a glance back upon the history of
the first Reformers.
Under the government of the Romish
Church, and when literature was chiefly
confined to the monastic or ecclesiastical
orders, any free disquisition, either upon
the principles, or the abuses of religion,
was forbidden by interest, as well by autho¬
rity ; and whatever private or speculative
infidelity may have existed in the minds of
individuals, the strong arm of the Church
so effectually repressed any public expres¬
sion of it, that the first reformers had no
errors of this kind, to oppose.
It is true, that the subtile philosophy of
the schools, tended strongly to undermine
the principles, as well as to corrupt the doc¬
trines of religion ; and the indiscriminate
admiration of antiquity, which had followed
the revival of Grecian learning, in the cen¬
tury preceding the Reformation, had intro¬
duced a disputatious and theorizing spirit,
51
PRE r- ATO R Y SK: ETCH ES.
/
and established a fanciful distinction be¬
tween the provinces of philosophy and
theology, which, at a later period, exhibited
them in open and hostile contrast. The
wretched subterfuge of distinguishing be-
tween philosophical and theological truth,
had been used as a shield against ecclesias¬
tical severity ; and an implicit submission
to every dogma of the Church, had been
gravely professed, by those whose principles
undermined the foundations even of natural
religion.
But this distinction had probably been
sometimes adopted with more sincerity and
less reflection. The partiality of early im¬
pression, had preserved, in many minds, a
considerable portion of religious feeling ;
while the separation of faith and morality,
by the commutative system of the Church,
(I mean the power of absolution and in¬
dulgences,) had led to an acquiescence in
her speculative tenets, which imposed little
more than a nominal restraint upon the
conduct of her members. Hence, I con¬
ceive, that infidelity, strictly speaking, was
E 2
/
52 PREFATORY SKETCHES.
far from being general, even amongst lite¬
rary characters ; and I think, this is proved
by the very large and early accession of
such characters, to the ranks of the reform¬
ation. The great body of the people, every
where, highly prized the comforts, how¬
ever they may have neglected the obliga¬
tions of religion ; and their miserable re¬
sources of supererogatory works of mediation
and atonement, proved, at once, their deep
consciousness of natural guilt, and their
sense of personal incapacity to offer any
adequate satisfaction to the divine justice.
Accordingly, when Luther and his vener¬
able companions revived the precious and
fundamental doctrines of “ one God, and
one Mediator,” it mio;ht have been said of
them, as it was of their divine Master, “ the
common people heard them gladly.” The
natural hostility in their minds, to these
blessed principles of Scriptural truth, was
conquered by their experience of the ineffi¬
ciency of every other dependence for peace
and tranquillity of conscience ; and the fu¬
tility of such dependence, was still farther
proved by the- miserable end of some of
PREFATORY SKETCHES.
their spiritual physicians, whom an obstinate
rationality, (as Dr. Johnson would have
called it,) prevented from applying to their
own wounds, the spurious balm which they
had so lavishly dispensed to others.
In the opposition to the doctrine of in¬
dulgences, with which Luther commenced
his warfare against the Roman Church, the
first object was to overthrow the opinion of
human merit, upon which that doctrine was
built ; and to place Christian hope on its
only true foundation, a dependence upon
the all-sufficient merits of Christ. What¬
ever shades of difference may have appear¬
ed in their explication of this great truth,
it was the common principle of all the Re¬
formers, and, therefore, may be regarded as
the Catholic doctrine of the Reformation.
It is, however, acknowledged, that an early
advantage was taken of Luther’s vehement
and unqualified proposition of it, by the
Romanists, on the one hand, to represent
this doctrine as subversive of the obligations
of morality, and by the fanatics, on the
E 3
54
P R E 1 ' A r O R Y S K E T Cl I E S.
Other, to decry all obedience to the moral
law, as inconsistent with Christian liberty.
Observino' that Luther carried this doo-
trine of justification by faith, to such a
length, as seemed, though certainly con¬
trary to his intention, to derogate not only
from the necessity of good works as a pre¬
scribed condition of Salvation, but from
their obligation and importance as essential
to the Christian character, some of his fel¬
low labourers endeavoured to qualify the
strength of his expressions ; and though
his vehement temper and high authority
restrained the freedom of controversy
amongst the Protestants, during his life,
the discussion was afterwards pursued with
great warmth, and the different opinions
maintained with a mutual and growing ex-
aggeration, which mutually led to a com¬
plete separation of principle between the
parties.
This separation was still widened by the
controversy concerning the doctrine of pre-
PREFATORY SKETCHES.
55
destination and personal election, as taught
by Calvin and his disciples ; which, though
it originated in a different quarter, soon be¬
came general and interesting, from the zeal
and eminent character of some of its advo¬
cates. This doctrine, though strenuously
opposed by the writers of the Lutheran
school, was represented by other divines of
high reputation and piety, as inseparably
connected with the fundamental truths of
men’s utter demerit and the free grace of
God ; and the purposes of mercy towards
the favoured few, who were from eternity
the subjects of the divine election, were
supposed to be accomplished by an irresist¬
ible impression upon the will, in which the
creature was absolutely passive and power¬
less. The doctrine of a conditional decree,
which seemed to reconcile the foreknow¬
ledge of the Deity, with his moral attributes,
while it confirmed the retributive principle
of the Gospel, was represented as irrecon¬
cilable with the immutability of his provi¬
dential dispensations ; and though the Sal¬
vation of the elect, was acknowledged to be
affected through their sanctification, all
E 4
56
Pll E F A T (J li V S K E T C 1 1 E S.
human power of co-operation in the pro¬
cess, was expressly disclaimed.
If the doctrine of justification by faith, as
taught by Luther, had been found liable to
Antinomian perversion, it seemed likely to
lead, under this latter modification, to false
security and spiritual pride, if not, some¬
times, to a desperate indulgence in sin,
under the plea of necessity.
The power of free agency, is so necessarily
connected with the moral character of
human actions, that many of the writers
who have most strenuously asserted the
natural subjection of the will, to evil, have
acknowledged a certain communicated
liberty of thought and of action. Others
have supposed the depravity to consist,
rather in imbecility, and an indisposition
of the mind to holiness, than in an actual
enslavement to sin; and have allowed more
natural capacity for the rectification of the
will, and the consequent regulation of the
conduct, than seems to be warranted either
by Scripture or experience. The former of
rii E FA TORY SKETCH E S.
57
these opinions appears to coincide most
nearly, with the doctrine of’ our Church, upon
this article.
Though a difference of judgment upon
these deep and difficult questions, did not
operate as a barrier to Christian communion
between the reformed Churches, it in¬
fluenced the general character of their
theology, and gradually led each party to
establish its own view, as a key to the solu¬
tion of the Scripture mysteries. Hence
would arise a partiality on the one hand,
and a prejudice on the other, equally likely
to warp the simple and straight forward
pursuit of Scripture truth : not from any
corrupt or intentional perversion in either,
but from a natural propensity to magnify
the importance of the principles which they
had severally espoused, and to strengthen
them by an alliance with other Gospel doc¬
trines, undisputed by any party.
With these prejudices, were gradually
associated distinctions upon other points,
which marked a broader line of separation ;
/
58
rnKFAlOIlY SKETCHES.
and as they related to the external polity of
the Church, or to the administration of
divine worship, established a visible, and,
if you will allow me the expression, a ma¬
terial, standard, to fix the choice, or the
judgments, of those who were insensible or
indifferent to the subtilties of metaphysical
controversy. The humbler adherents of
these several societies, adopted the specula¬
tive principles of their leaders ; and the
continental Churches, with very few ex¬
ceptions, seem to have yielded an implicit
submission to the judgment of their respec¬
tive founders.
While their growing experience in the
interpretation of Scripture, led those great
men and their successors, to a gradual im¬
provement of their several schemes of doc¬
trine, and a closer assimilation in various
particulars, to the standard of divine truth,
the controversial habits in which they had
been trained by their long warfare with the
Romish Church, gave a polemical character
to their theology, which their recent and
imperfect acquaintance with the principles
PREFATORY SKETCHES.
59
of religious liberty, confirmed ; and which
sometimes appears to have led them to
assert as articles of faith, what might have
been better defended as points of opinion, —
or, in the investigation of truths of undis¬
puted authority, to urge their peculiar in¬
terpretations, as the decision and irrefragable
statement of Scripture itself.
Thus we see the great body of Protes¬
tants formed into distinct societies, and
though connected by the two leading prin¬
ciples which they held in common, and
agreed to maintain, as the fundamentals of
religion, (viz. the sufficiency of the Bible
as a rule of faith, and the doctrine of justi¬
fication by the merits of Christ alone,) we
find them differing upon various other prin¬
ciples both of discipline and doctrine, and
framing their systems of speculative theology,
with a view to the support of the general
scheme which each particular Church had
adopted.
As a dependence upon human merit, had
been the great- stumbling block of the
60
rilEFATOllY SKETCHES.
Church of* Rome, the strong and humiliat¬
ing language which was used by the Re¬
formers, to counteract this dependence, was
understood, and, indeed, was generally ap¬
plied, rather absolutely than relatively; and
gave rise to an indiscriminate depreciation
of man’s moral faculties, and an assimila¬
tion of the human character, to the diaboli¬
cal, not only revolting to the pride of
imregenerated nature, but apparently in¬
consistent with the evidence of history and
of experience.
Rut much of this inconsistency would be
removed by that more precise and cautious
statement of the doctrine, which distin¬
guishes religious, from social or constitu¬
tional virtue; and places the moral character
of human actions, exclusively in their prin¬
ciple and intention. May I venture to ob¬
serve, my friend, that the principle of re-
Jigion, seems sometimes to have existed
where there was little remnant of a genuine
revelation ; and that a reference to this
principle, may be traced in much of the Pagan
or popular virtue of antiquity? Indeed, the
13
P R E F A T () R Y S K E T C 1 1 F, S .
Gl
effects wliicii the public abandonment of it,
produced upon the morals of a great nation,
within our recollection, and which a con¬
tempt of it, is still daily producing amongst
our own untaught and infatuated people,
show that this statement of human depravity
can hardly be charged with much exagger¬
ation.
The apprehension, however, that the
divine justice and benevolence were im¬
peached by the proposition of a doctrine so
humiliatino;, and the advanta^ie that was
taken of it, by the enemies of religion, to in¬
culcate the principles of an atheistical fatal¬
ism, soon produced a modification of the
strength of these expressions, and gave rise
to a controversy within the Reformed church,
which gradually led to an identification of
this doctrine, with the peculiarities of the
Calvinistic scheme, and a consequent rejec¬
tion of it (in this strong statement at least,)
by those divines who denied the doctrine
of absolute predestination.
And here, my dear friend, we find (as I
imagine,) the foundation of that jealousy
62
PREFATORY SKETCHES.
with which many of our controversialists
view this strong statement of the doctrine
of original corruption, and the absolute self-
renunciation which it involves. I mav ob-
ft/
serve also, that as a certain degree of ex¬
aggeration, (not in the principle, for that
was equally acknowledged, but) in the pro¬
position and application of this doctrine,
has generally distinguished the Calvin istic
divines, and a charge of Pelagianism or
popery has been urged against those who
preach it in its more guarded and modified
form, the apprehension of these latter
errors, has led in some instances to the
opposite extreme, and produced a similar
exaggeration of statement, upon this point,
in some preachers who reject the peculiar
tenets of Calvinism. To those who are un¬
versed in the distinctions of controversy, the
prominent resemblance only, is observable ;
and all who bear it, are included under the
same denomination.
Remember, that I offer these slight observ-
ations, merely as historical or conjectural
hints, and by no means presume to enter
dogmatically into deep and intricate ques-
PREFATORY SKETCHES.
G3
tions of doctrine. Indeed, the Calvinistic
controversy particularly appears to me, to
be one of those in which the entjuirer may
be “ ever learning, and never come to the
knowledge of the truth and therefore,
when I find the opinions of the best and
wisest Christians, divided, upon these high
and mysterious doctrines, I rather endea¬
vour to turn my attention from their points
of difference, to their points of agreement,
and to follow them, as they have followed
Christ, in their united acknowledgment of
catholic and fundamental principles.
In pursuing an historical investigation,
however, and endeavouring to trace the
causes which have led to an arbitrary asso¬
ciation of principles not necessarily con¬
nected, a tone of decision must sometimes
be assumed, which may be very far from
the real judgment of the enquirer ; or a
doubt of the disputed opinion may be in¬
ferred from the freedom with which its
foundations are examined. I mean not
here to withhold, or to apologize for, the
confession, that I cannot adopt the Calvin-
CA
PHKFATOllY SK ETCHES.
istic view of predestination ; but T would
apologize for any apparent peremptoriness
of judgment upon it, into which its con¬
nection with our more immediate subject,
may lead me.
Let us now turn our view homewards, and
endeavour to trace, the origin of those as¬
sociations, in our own theology, which have
divided us amongst ourselves, and tinged
with an infusion of polemical jealousy, the
truly charitable and comprehensive spirit
of our Church. I cannot indeed discuss, in
a few short letters, a subject that would
occupy many volumes ; neither am I quali¬
fied for a full investigation of the literarv
O ^
and political history connected with it. I
shall, therefore, only venture on a few ob¬
servations, illustrative of the general prin¬
ciple upon which I would establish the
defence, or the apology, of the class of
Divines to whom your censure is applied.
You cannot have failed to observe, that
in England, the change of the legal ecclesi¬
astical constitution, preceded by some years.
/
FREI'ATORY SKETCHES. 65
the reformation of the national faith. The
king’s assumption of the supreme spiritual
authority within his own dominions, was
his only act of dissent from the established
religion ; which he had defended with the
pen of controversy, as well as with the
sword of persecution, and whose most
superstitious and erroneous doctrines he
still pertinaciously retained and enforced.
His zeal for the tenets which he had main¬
tained in public disputation, and his jealousy
of the rights of his ecclesiastical supremacy,
united with his high and vehement character,
to restrain the exercise of liberty of con¬
science,^ and to obstruct the progress of the
Reformation; while his personal attachment
to the excellent Cranmer, counteracted in
many instances his habitual severity? and
gave to the infant Church, some intervals of
peace and protection, which the zeal and
prudence of that venerable Reformer, did
not fail to improve.
It is a most curious and improving con¬
templation, to trace the variation, in the
order of events by which the divine wisdom
VOL. II. F
PR E r AlOR Y SKE 1 CH ES.
GG
has accomplished in difterent places, the
great work of religious reform ; and this is,
perhaps, no where more observable, than in
the slow, and apparently casual, process of
this work, in our own country ; and in the
preparation for it, by that bold assertion of
religious independence, on the part of the
sovereign, which was here the precursor, as
in the continental governments, it was the
result, of general reformation.
In the gradual removal of various practical
abuses, and the introduction of the English
Bible, into general and familiar use, Henry
tlie Eighth laid the foundation of a farther
and more effectual reform* ; but his zeal for
those tenets of the Romish Church, to which
he had pledged himself by a public and
controversial avowal, and which vanity, if
not principle, would lead him to maintain,
combined with his arbitrary and capricious
temper, and his jealousy of the high eccle¬
siastical prerogative which he had recently
assumed, to restrain all public freedom of
religious enquiry, and to establish a spiritual
tyranny, differing from the former, only in
name.
PREFATORY SKETCHES.
67
Though, even of Henry, it were uncha¬
ritable to say that principle had no share in
his proceedings, we must trace much of the
Reformation of this period, to the happy
combination of events which placed our
eminent reformers, so high in his counsels
and confidence, and through his attachment
to their persons, secured his toleration of
their opinions, when they did not directly
contradict his own. In the successive mo¬
difications of the national creed, put forth
by authority at different periods, we have
some curious instances of his fluctuation be¬
tween the old and the new opinions ; and
in the “ Necessary Erudition of a Christian
Man,” compiled by the bishops, approved
by the parliament, and finally corrected
and published by the king, and which
seems to have fixed the standard of divinity
till the close of this reign, we have the
foundation of a more complete reform,
though still encumbered with some of those
errors, which early prejudice had so fami¬
liarized and endeared, that the light of
divine truth expelled them but slowly, even
phi; FA TORY ffKF.TCH'ES.
G8
from the minds of the wisest and most
pious Reformers.
In this remarkable treatise, as abridged
by Burnet, Neal, and other historians,
(for I have never seen tlie book itself,) the
doctrine of justification by the merits of
Christ alone, is expressly asserted ; though
there is much introduced into the explica¬
tion of it, which was discarded at the subse-
quentcompilationof the Articles ; and Cran-
mer’s judgment upon it, which, even at
this period, seems quite in accordance with
' the latter, is quoted by bishop Burnet, in
some extracts from his private papers.
Great care, however, is taken to guard this
doctrine, from any connexion with that of
special predestination ; on which no dog¬
matical opinion is expressed, . and which
seems to have been treated by our Reformers
as a question too deep and mysterious for
human decision. ,
As the adherents to the popish party
were still prevalent within the Church, the
rREFATOKY SKETCHES.
69
established doctrine of the sacraments was
confirmed in this publication; Cranmer
only being desirous of reducing their num¬
ber. It appears, however, that he still per¬
severed in his belief of the corporeal
presence ; and some years subsequent to
this period, he confesses, of himself, that
he was “ scarcely yet, thoroughly persuaded
in the right knowledge of the sacrament, or,
at least, not yet fully ripened in the same
though shortly after (in the reign of Edward
the Sixth,) being confirmed by conference
with bishop Ridley, and profited in riper
knowledge, he took upon him the defence
of the whole doctrine.
/
If we are inclined to wonder that a mind
so wise and pious, should have so long ad¬
hered to an error which appears to us, so
manifestly absurd, we may learn from this
instance, as well as from the very gradual
progress of the Reformation, upon other
doctrinal points, a lesson of caution and hu¬
mility ; and if the growing light of religious
truth, and the free circulation of the divine
Word, have enabled us to see more clearly,
F 3
70
rREFATORY SKETClIEg.
though we may find ample cause of thank¬
fulness, in our more favourable position for
the attainment of knowledge, we have
surely no ground to presume upon our in¬
dividual sufficiency for the peremptory de¬
cision of “ controversies of faith.”
It is not within our purpose, to follow the
Reformation, through all the intricacies of
its controversy with the Church of Rome ;
nor to trace, minutely, the practical and
political, nor even all the doctrinal, errors
and abuses, against which the zeal of the
Reformers was directed ; but simply to ac¬
count for the prominence, in our early theo-
logy, of the great protestant doctrine of
justification by faith, and the apparent ne¬
glect of guard and limitation, with which it
is sometimes stated.
In considering much of the depreciatory
language which, at the period in question,
was applied to “ good works,” we must re¬
collect that this name was given, in the
language of the times, and particularly by
the writers of the Romish Church, em-
P II E F A 'i’ 0 11 Y S K E TC H E S.
71
phaticallj, if not, exclusively, to those
works of superstition, or of superorogation,
which were supposed to indicate, or to con¬
fer, a peculiar sanctity of character, and to
invest the doer, with a personal and merito¬
rious claim to the divine approbation.
Of “ good works,” as thus understood,
not only was the merit disclaimed by tlie
Keformers, but their necessity was denied,
and even their lawfulness disputed. Yet a
strict conformity to the moral and evangeli¬
cal law, or, as it was called, a true evan¬
gelical obedience, though not admitted as
a claim of right upon the remunerative jus¬
tice of God, was required as the indispens¬
able fruit, and test, and evidence, of
justifying faith. At a later period, when,
whether from inadvertence or ill intention,
this peculiar application of the phrase,
“ good works,” was either forgotten or un¬
noticed, the simple and exclusive requisi¬
tion of faith, as a condition of justification,
was represented, as designed, or calculated,
to afford a refuge and an apology for sin ;
and the perversion of those who abused the
Y 4
T2
prefatory sketches.
doctrine, unhappily laid it open to iiiucli
of the severity of those who impugned it.
On the whole, the doctrinal divinity of
this period, appears to have been dogmati¬
cal, in its reference to Scripture, and con¬
troversial, in its application to the errors of
a particular Church ; and this character it
retained, till the extension of the Reform¬
ation, and the subdivision of the protestants,
upon other points, introduced new topics
of polemical discussion.
But the reign of Henry the Eighth,
strictly speaking, was no more than a found¬
ation and preparative for the Reformation.
That prince, himself, appears to have lived
and died in many of the grossest errors of
his early faith ; and when the stimulus of
his ambition, his rapacity, or caprice, did
not urge him to some new resistance of the
authority, or opposition to the principles, of
the Church, his prejudices appear to have
been favourable to all those doctrinal cor¬
ruptions which the Reformers laboured to
overthrow. During the latter years of hk
PREFATORY SKETCHES. 7.‘^
reign, the progress and retrogression of re¬
ligion, were alternate, as his capricious and
disputatious temper inclined him to the
support of the respective systems ; and as
the impulses of passion, or the views of per¬
sonal interest, led him to oppose, or to
promote, the Reformation, in his dominions.
Two points, however, were secured at
this period, to which the rapid progress and
firm establishment of evangelical truth, in
the following reign, are chiefly to be attri¬
buted, — the independence of the national
Church, and the free circulation of the
Scriptures, in the national language. By
the former, the exertions for a more effectual
reformation, were at once released from the
controul of foreign authority ; and by the
latter, a doubt was awakened, as to the
ground of many doctrines and practices
which had been enforced bv the Church of
Rome, as indispensable points of faith and
duty.
I ought again to apologize for my digres¬
sions ; or, rather, for my diffuseness upon
74
PREFATORY SKETCHES.
a part of our history which seems to have
little direct connexion with the subject of
your observations. You find here, however,
as I apprehend, the first rude outline of the
doctrinal character by which the theology
of a subsequent period, was distinguished ;
and which I will endeavour to trace more
particularly, in my next letter. Meantime,
fare you well, my dear friend ! and let us both
be careful to remember that controversy
is not religion ; and that no attention to
doctrinal accuracy can atone for the breach
of charity, or supply the deficiency of prac¬
tical obedience.
Ever yours, faithfully.
LETTER XX
PREFA TOR Y SEE TCHES — conlhmed.
ADVANCEMENT OF THE UEFORMATION UNDER EDWARD VI.
PROBABLE ORIGIN OF THE PRESBYTERIAN GOVERNMENT. —
DOCTRINE OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. - EARLY DIF¬
FERENCES AMONGST THE REFORMERS, CONFINED TO HA¬
BITS AND CEREMONIES. - ABUSE OF THE DOCTRINE OF
PREDESTINATION, MENTIONED BY BISHOP BURNET. -
RISE OF THE DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES. — CATHOLIC
DOCTRINES OF THE REFORMATION, STILL UNANIMOUSLY
MAINTAINED. - REIGN OF ELIZABETH. - RISE OF THE
SUBSEQUENT CONTROVERSIES. - MUTUAL INTOLERANCE
OF THIS PERIOD. - ATTACKS ON THE HIERARCHY. -
CARTWRIGHT. - FIELD’s CONFESSION. — ‘ LOYAL PRIN¬
CIPLES THERE STATED. - PROBABLE OCCASION OF THIS
DECLARATION. - BROWNISTS - OR INDEPENDENTS. —
GROWING IRRITATION AND FINAL BREACH BETWEEN
THE ESTABLISHMENT AND THE PURITANS.
MY DEAR ERIEND,
It gives me great pleasure to find that you
are interested in my little sketches, and en¬
courages me to pursue them without farther
preface or apology. I will try, however,
not to fatigue you with their length, and to
rREFATORY SKETCHES
confine them, strictly, to such points as
bear upon the principle which I am anxious
to establish.
When the Reformers of our Church were
emancipated from the control of Henry’s
capricious temper and arbitrary government,
they proceeded with new energy, to finish
the glorious work, of which, in his reign,
they had only laid the foundations. With
a single eye to the establishment of truth,
and advancing (it appears,) as their own
Scriptural light extended, they gradually
removed every real abuse, while they cau¬
tiously avoided all unnecessary innovation ;
and, regulating their faith, by the Bible,
and their discipline, by the pattern of the
primitive Church, they endeavoured to
frame a scheme of national doctrine, so
comprehensive, and yet so precise, as should
exclude none, for minute discrepancies of
opinion, who held the fundamental truths
of Christianity, while it should strictly bar
the entrance of the Church against all who
perverted, or who denied those truths.
77
KFATOIJ Y SKF rCH I^S.
It appears that our Reformers did not
s}?mbolize, strictly, in, doctrine with any of
the continental Churches, though they seem
to have occasionally corresponded with all ;
and the changes in^ religion, being accom¬
plished, not merely with the consent, but
with the zealous co-operation of the civil
government, our Church was happily spared
the violent disruption of all ties of ecclesi¬
astical discipline and subordination, which
necessarily followed the Reformation, in
those countries, whose governments con¬
tinued attached to the interests of the
Church of Rome.
What was at first a measure of necessity,
however, soon became a measure of choice,
from prejudice or principle, with some of
the reformed Churches ; and a doubt of the
lawfulness of episcopal government, suc¬
ceeded to their resentment of its abuses.
I think bishop Hall observes, that Calvin
himself would have been an episcopalian,
if the bishop of Geneva had adopted the
protestant principles, and become the pro¬
tector of the infant Church ; and I cannot
78
PREFATORY SKETCHES.
but believe that much of Knox’s Inveterate
opposition to episcopacy in his own coun¬
try, may be traced to the resistance made
by the Scottish bishops, to the Reformation.
In England, however, no difference of
opinion upon this point, seems yet to have
existed amongst the Reformers ; and the
established form of Church government,
{with the simple exclusion of foreign inter¬
ference,) appears to have been retained, not
merely as expedient, but as consonant to
primitive usage and apostolic institution.
In the compilation of our doctrinal Ar¬
ticles, two objects appear to have been held
in view ; comprehension, on the one side,
and exclusion on the other ; — the provision
of an effectual security against popery,
which was the object of universal detest¬
ation and alarm ; and of an allowance for
those minor discrepancies of opinion upon
some abstract and speculative points, which
might distinguish, without dividing, the
members of a protestant Church. The
very disputation upon the meaning of our
PILE F ATOPY S K E TO I f E S,
79
Articles, is a proof of the skill with which
this latter object was accomplished ; and of
the prudence and truly Christian humility
of those excellent men, who, mutually sa¬
crificing system to peace, and presuming
not to be wise above what is written, ven¬
tured no farther on these mysterious ques¬
tions, (as one of their number beautifully
said,) than the Scripture did, as it were,
lead them by the hand.
But the great Christian principle of salv¬
ation by grace, and the renunciation of all
personal or meritorious claim upon the di¬
vine justice or clemency, appears to have
been equally held by all the Reformers, and
is stated in our Articles, in strong and un¬
equivocal language. The opinion, also, of
the natural inappetency of the human will
to every thing spiritually good, and of the
necessity of preventing and regenerating
grace, to enable man even to lay hold on
the offered salvation, are expressly asserted ;
and the guards which are subsequently in¬
troduced, against the abuse of either of these
doctrines, are proofs of the ample and un-
80
PltEFATOUy SKETCHES.
qualified sense in which the doctrines were
held. Whether the expressions are stronger
than would have been used, if the object
had not been to refute the presumptuous
doctrines of merit, and inherent free will,
is another question ; but it seems evi¬
dently the intention, to disclaim all personal
sufficiency on the part of man to work out
his own salvation, and at the same time to
require his personal exertion and co-oper¬
ation. It appears to me, therefore, unjust
to identify these doctrines with the pecu¬
liarities of Calvinism, and to charge those
who preach them, with a departure from the
principles of the Church ; and still more so
to infer from her agreement in these doc¬
trines, that our Church symbolizes with all
the principles of Calvin.
The first difference of opinion amongst
the English Reformers in Edward’s time,
appears to have arisen on the dress of the
clergy. Those divines, who, towards the
close of Henry’s reign, had withdrawn from
the persecution raised by that monarch, in
the enforcement of the six articles, had
PREFATORY SKETCHES,
81
imbibed, in their intercourse with the Hel¬
vetic Churches, a scrupulous dislike of every
ancient practice, and a particular objection
to the sacerdotal vestments, as relics and
instruments of popish superstition. We
cannot but lament the severity on the one
hand, and the pertinacity on the other,
which gave to this controversy, an adven¬
titious importance, and associated a ques¬
tion apparently so trifling, with the fun¬
damental reformation of the Church j while
it laid the foundation of a distinction of par¬
ties, which has subsequently been widened
by other causes of division. We do not,
however, observe, at this period, any dis¬
putation between the Reformers, upon ques¬
tions of doctrine ; but rather a gradual and
unanimous progress in the knowledge and
establishment of Scriptural truths.
Of the divinity of this period, I know but
little from direct examination ; but so far
as I can judge, either from historical docu¬
ments, or from extracts quoted by later
writers, and particularly from the digest
which remains to us, in the Homilies, I am
VOL. II. G
82
r R E F A TORY S K E T C,T I E S.
confirmed in my impression of Uie caution
with which these divines touched upon deep
and speculative questions, and of the deci¬
sions with which they enforced what they
held to be evident and fundamental prin¬
ciples.
Burnet mentions, at this time, the abuses
of the doctrine of predestination, against
which, it appears that the caveat at the
close of our seventeenth Article is directed j
or rather (perhaps we should say), against
which, the whole statement of the doctrine
in that remarkable article, is framed. He
states, also, the modification, if not the
rejection, of this doctrine, by Luther, and
the public opposition to it, by Melancthon ;
and the earnest cautions against the pre¬
sumptuous or particular application of it,
by those divines who still continued to
maintain it.
' The meat care to restrain this doctrine to
O
its general sense, in our Article, and the
total silence observed upon it, in the homi¬
lies, seem to indicate that unity of judg-
15
PREFATORY SKETCHES.
83
ment upon this point, was not considered
as essential ; and that it was thought too
deep and mysterious, to be a safe subject of
speculation for the people. It is observable,
that no such strong cautions or qualifica¬
tions are inserted respecting the other doc¬
trines of our Church ; and yet, I believe,
there are not any, in which a spirit of dog¬
matism has been more freely indulged.
It is remarkable, that Heylin states the
Book of Homilies to have been not only ob¬
jected to, by Calvin, but even to have been
a subject of angry declamation with the
high predestinarians of that time ; though
it is approved by those divines of the pre¬
sent day who maintain the Calvinistic in¬
terpretation of our Article on that subject.
From hence, I think we may infer, that
this doctrine was not then held in that close
association with those of original sin and
justification, which the course of subsequent
controversy has created.
The doctrinal differences amongst the
Beformers, appear to be referrable to the
a 2
1
84
PREFATORY SKETCFIES.
reign of Queen Mary, and to have com¬
menced at home and abroad, pretty nearly
at the same time. Some of those v/ho were
imprisoned for the profession of the Gospel,
are said to have denied the docrines of pre¬
destination and original sin; “upon which”
(says Neal,) “ they were answered by the
leading reformers, and especially by Ridley
and Bradford;” the latter of whom, we
should observe, went much higher in his
opinions upon the point of predestination,
than the former. But it rather appears
that Pelagian, and even Arian principles,
were attributed to those who provoked this
controversy ; and that some of them, at
least, extended their objections, to the fun¬
damental doctrines of the Trinity and the
Atonement.
It should not, however, be overlooked,
that such accusations were sometimes
urged on the part of the high predesti-
narians, against those who rejected their
peculiar principles, which they held to be
inseparably connected with these fun¬
damental doctrines ; and that most, if
PIlEFATOllV SKETCHES.
85
not all the Reformers so accused, very
strenuously disclaimed the heresies im¬
puted to them.
The dissension amongst the exiles at
Frankfort, respecting the Liturgy and cere¬
monies of the Church, as it ended in the
separation of the contending parties, seems
to have laid the foundation of those
differences of doctrine which afterwards
unhappily widened the division. The publi¬
cation of the Geneva Bible, and the pro¬
position of the doctrine of predestination, in
the high and peremptory statement of
Calvin, involving, as it did, the tremendous
doctrine of reprobation, and virtually an¬
nihilating the principles of responsibility
and conditional salvation, appear to have
first brought this doctrine, into controversial
discussion within the Church ; and the in¬
discreet and inflammatory language held on
political subjects, by some of those who
maintained it, caused it to be easily, though
perhaps not quite justly, identified with a
radical objection to regal authority.
G 3
86
P R E F A TD K Y SKETCHES.
This observation, however, belongs rather
to a later period of oiir enquiry. Any doc¬
trinal controversy that arose at this time,
was not sufficiently public or important to
divide, or to agitate the Church ; and it
was by a gradual association with other
topics of dissension, that differences of
doctrine finally became the prominent dis¬
tinction between religious parties. The
whole polemical strength of the early re¬
formers was directed against the tenets of
popery ; and the question of transubstan-
tiation was agitated with more vehemence
than that of the divine decrees. Indeed,
on this latter point, considered as an ab¬
stract question of doctrine, we cannot but
remark, that all dogmatical decision is care¬
fully avoided ; though the opinions of these
great men, upon its Scriptural extent and
practical consequences, are sufficiently in¬
dicated by the caution with which they re¬
strained its particular application, and by
the earnestness with which they inculcated
the free agency and responsibility of man,
and the conditional character of the Gospel
PREFATORY SKETCHES.
87
promises. “ Although,” says Cranmer
(and this seems to have been the general
sentiment of his brethren), God’s pro-
“ mises in Christ be immutable, yet he
“ maketh them not to us, but with con-
“ dition ; so that, his promise standing, we
may yet fail of the promise, because we
“ keep not our promise.”
So far, it appears that the circumstances
of the times, fixed the polemical character
of our Divinity, and brought into prominent
and practical view, the doctrines — ofsalvation
by grace, through faith ; — - of original sin ; —
of the consequent depravity of man’s nature;
— of his utter destitution of all meritorious
claim upon the justice or the mercy of God,
and the necessity of a simple and absolute
reliance upon the all-sufficient merits of the
llcdeemer ; — of the futility and guilt of all
personal and commutative expedients for
the expiation of sin and the purchase of
forgiveness; — and of the indispensable ne¬
cessity of holiness and purity of life, not as
an efficient or procuring cause, but as a pre-
G 4
88
PREFATORY SKETCHES.
scribed condition, of final salvation, and as
the fruit and evidence of that lively and
justifying faith, of which it is expressly
asserted, that it “ worketh by love.”
It would be irrelevant to our present ob¬
ject, to enter minutely into intricacies of
doctrine, or disputed points of ecclesiastical
discipline. Yet, in the theology of the
period upon which we are now entering,
we cannot entirely overlook the seeds of
division which afterwards struck so deep a
root, and laid the foundation of some ex¬
traneous associations with questions more
strictly theological ; which, in our own
country at least, seem continually to have
led to a temporary deflection from the pure
and scriptural standard of the Reformation,
and to a long and angry contest of re¬
ligious innovation with political jealousy
and alarm.
During the first year of Elizabeth’s reign,
the ostensible ground of controversy in the
.Church, was limited to the question of habits
PREFATORY SKETCHES.
89
anti ceremonies. No doctrinal point ap-
4b
pears to have divided the Reformers at this
period ; and it seems evident, that a doubt
of the lawfulness of episcopal government,
had not yet arisen among them. “ Several
of the reformed exiles,” says Neal, (him¬
self a non-conformist,) “ were offered bishop-
ricks at this time, but refused them, on
account of the habits and ceremonies'^
Though it seems ungrateful, to quarrel
with a reign to which we owe the establish¬
ment of the Reformation, we cannot but
lament, that Elizabeth’s strict exercise of
her ecclesiastical supremacy, upon points
apparently of little importance, should have
excluded so many pious men from the
higher offices in the Church; and finally
driven some of them back into an exile
where all their early prejudices were con¬
firmed, and gradually extended to a general
opposition of discipline, and a considerable
discrepancy of doctrine.
We must observe, however, that Eliza¬
beth’s severity has been vindicated on the
90
P 1 1 E F A T (M I Y SKETCHES.
principle, that the ceremonies in dispute,
though indifferent in themselves, had been
established by legal authority, to which
every subject was bound to submit; and
that a resistance upon these points, involved
the principle of resistance to the govern¬
ment, and tended, not remotely, but ob¬
viously and directly, to the subversion of
the established Church ; as the non-con¬
formists did not merely contend for the free
[)rofession of their own principles, but for
the enforcement of those principles, upon
the nation.
In truth, the spirit of Christian toleration
seems to have been but little known to
either party ; and it is painful to trace the
progress of mutual animosity and jealousy,
which turned the attention of the Divines
of this period, from the general defence of
the Protestant faith, to the strict enforce¬
ment, or pertinacious rejection, of some
minor circumstantials in religion, — indif¬
ferent, perhaps, in themselves, but deriving
an adventitious importance from the associ¬
ation with other principles, in which they
PllEPATORY SKpyrCHES.
91
\ycre hold by each of the contending
parties.
Cartwright appears to have been the first,
or at least the boldest and most eminent, of
the non-conformists who directly and
publicly attacked the government of the
Church. He is said to have been “ at the
head of a new generation of Puritans, of
warmer spirits, who opened the controversy
with the Church in other branches, and
struck at some of the main principles of the
hierarchy.”
But even in these, we do not yet find any
symptoms of disloyalty to the civil govern¬
ment. On the contrary, they seem to enter¬
tain principles upon that subject, not very
remote from those inculcated in the Homi¬
lies ; as, I think, is proved by Field’s con¬
fession, in the defence of their famous ad¬
monition to the Parliament, as quoted by
Neal, from whom I extract the passage :
W e hold,” says he, “ that Christians
“ may bear offices ; that magistrates may
92
rREFATORY SKETCHES.
“ put offenders to deatli lawfully ; that they
“ may wage war, and require a lawful oath
“ of the subject ; that subjects are bound to
“ obey all their just and lawful commands ;
“ to pray for them ; to give them all
honour; to call them by their lawful
“ titles ; and to be ready with their bodies
“ and goods, yea, and all that they have,
‘‘ to serve them with bodily service. Yea,
“ all these things we must do, though they
“ be Infidels, and obtain their dominion either
“ hi) inheritance, by election, by conquest,
“ or otherwise^’’ He afterwards states the
duty of magistrates, but without any in¬
sinuation that the tie of allegiance is con¬
ditional.
It is probable that the necessity for these
declarations of loyalty, arose either from
some misinterpretation of their principles,
on the part of the government, or from
a desire to restrain the more licentious
and intemperate innovators; and to vindi¬
cate themselves from the imputation of any
agreement in principle, with those seditious
fanatics who had so much agitated the
PREFATORY SKETCHES,
93
Cliurcli on the Continent, and were now
beo'innino: to be troublesome at liome.
Still, I believe that a remnant of the sore¬
ness which the cruelties of Mary’s reign had
left upon the minds of the exiled Reformers,
contributed to indispose them to the high
prerogative assumed by her sister; and gave
rise to a freedom, and perhaps a licentious¬
ness, of political speculation, in some in¬
stances, which their subsequent difficulties
and discouragements at home, and renewed
intercourse with the Helvetic reformers,
(who were all of republican principles,)
were likely to confirm.
The Brownists, with whom seems to
have originated what is called the Inde¬
pendent scheme, innovated still farther, —
renounced all connexion and communion
with the Church, as popish and anti-chris-
tian, — established ademocratic government
in their own congregations, — and denied
the distinct order and character of the
priesthood ; which they regarded as a tem¬
porary and elective office, and subject to re-
94
PREFATORY SKETCHES.
sumption by the same popular authority by
which it was conferred. Some of this sect
are said to have suffered in the course of
Elizabeth’s reign, for seditious practices, as
well as for innovations in religion. The
Anabaptists, also, and other fanatics, in¬
curred the penalties of the law, for offences
not merely ecclesiastical ; and it appears
to have been a matter of complaint amongst
the Presbyterian party, that they were too
often identified with sectaries, whose prin¬
ciples they disclaimed, and whose practices
they detested.
I avoid entering into any particulars of
the arbitrary proceedings of the court of
high commission, and other ecclesiastical
tribunals, in this reign, as they have no con¬
nexion with our subject, farther than as they
widened the schism in the Church, and pro¬
duced a spirit of reciprocal alienation, which
strengthened the influence of everv new
topic of division. Neither does it fall
within our purpose, to enlarge upon the
episcopalian controversy, which seems to
have been pursued till mutual irritation
PREFATORY SKETCHES.
quite changed the original question ; and,
as the one side would admit no modification,
the other would be satisfied with nothing
less than subversion ; a consequence cer¬
tainly much to be deprecated by those who
have observed the evils and inconveniences
of a popular or fluctuating government in
the Church.
While there remained any prospect of
an accommodation between the Church and
the Puritans, it appears that the controversy
was conducted with decency and serious¬
ness, if not always with Christian temper ;
but as soon as this prospect was at an end,
both parties resorted to new weapons of
warfare ; and the separatists began the at¬
tack, by a succession of bitter and scurrilous
publications against the hierarchy, in which
the laws of the land seem to have been as
little respected, as the privileges and con¬
stitution of the Church. These libels were
answered with equal vehemence, by the
friends of the Establishment ; and the
queen, who held her prerogative involved
in the controvers}^, inflicted upon their
90
PREFATORY SKETCHES.
aiitliors, all the severities of the law. Some
cases of peculiar hardship, in the punish¬
ment of suspected libellers, contributed to
give popularity to their cause j and the
general impression that these persons were
sufferers in defence of religion, exposed the
government to all the odium of persecution,
and probably kindled the spark of popular
hostility, which blazed with such terrible
fury in the next century.
Another circumstance, which gave a more
just and well-founded popularity to the Pu¬
ritan party, was their superior strictness in
attending to the decencies of religion ; and
particularly their earnestness in enforcing
the observance of the Sabbath. The strange
infatuation (for we can call it nothing less)
under which, the governors of the Church in
this and the following century, endeavoured
to desecrate this holy festival, very natur-^
ally alarmed the consciences of the pious,
as much as it offended the scruples of the
precise, and involved an important point of
Christian practice ; upon which it appeared
that the scriptural decision (by inference at-
P R E F A T O R Y S K E T C H E S.
97
least, if not by express precept) was clear
and unequivocal. Hence, it is probable
that at this time, and at a later period, it is
certain, that many of the best and wisest
Churchmen united v/ith the Puritans, upon
this question, and clearly foresaw the ruin
of the Church, from so flagrant a violation
of Christian discipline — a violation not
merely allowed, but actually enforced, by
legal authority.
Though, several years before Elizabeth’s
decease, the Puritans, by the subscription
to their Book of Discipline, had associated
themselves as a distinct bod}^ — they still
professed to hold communion with the
Church, and to desire nothing more than
a compromise. It seems improbable, how¬
ever, that where their opposition to episco-
[)acy had been so strong, and aggravated by
so firm and irritating a resistance, any
measure less violent than its entire aboli¬
tion, would have softened the prejudices of
some of the dissenting party, or satisfied the
ambition of otliers.
voE. ir. n
i
98
PREFATORY SKETCHES.
So much of the retrospect of this contro¬
versy, was necessary to illustrate my idea of
its effect upon our theology, — to which I
will return in my next letter.
I am, meantime.
Very affectionately, yours.
99
LETTER XXL
DOCTniNE OF THE REFORMERS— PREDESTINATIOET.
THE DOCTRINE OF PREDESTINATION, CAUTIOUSLY STATED
BY OUR REFORMERS. - NOT CALVINISTIC. - EXTRACTS
IN PROOF OF THIS, FROM LATIMER AND HARPER. - PRO¬
BABLE PROOF, IN THE INTRODUCTION OF ERASMUSES PARA¬
PHRASE, INTO THE CHURCH, AND OMISSION OF THE WRIT¬
INGS OF CALVIN. — CALVINISM OF WHITGIFT. ^ — LAMBETH
ARTICLES. - CONDITIONAL PREDESTINATION, THE ORIGI¬
NAL DOCTRINE OF THE CHURCH. - PROOF OF THE ABER¬
RATION OF DOCTRINE, AT THIS PERIOD. - JUDGMENT OF ^
HOOKER. - POPERY THE GREAT OBJECT OF JEALOUSY
WITH ALL PARTIES. - CONSEQUENT PROMINENCE OF THE
DOCTRINE OF JUSTIFICATION BY FAITH. - ACCESSION OF
JAMES. - HAMPTON COURT CONFERENCE. - DISCOURAGE¬
MENT OF THE PURITANS. - ARMINIANISM. - SYNOD OF
DORT. — BEARING OF THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, ON THE
CHARACTER OF PULPIT DIVINITY. — INFUSION OF POLITI¬
CAL, WITH RELIGIOUS CONTROVERSY. - CONCLUSION.
MY DEAR FRIEND,
It is (I think) an observation of Mosheim,
that theEnglish Reformers, though generally
attached to the principles of Calvin, did not
implicitly receive his doctrine respecting
predestination. At least, it is evident (as I
n 2
100
DOCTrilNE OF THE KEFORMERS.
have already remarked) that this doctrine
is stated in oiirArticle, with extreme caution^
and scrupulously guarded from arbitrary
and particular application and if we view
this Article, in connection with those which
tl’eat of our fundamental doctrines, and
more particularly in connection with our
liturgical offices, we shall find it, as I ap¬
prehend, the principle of our Church — to
exclude no human being from hope, and
to absolve none from responsibility ; to
restrain curiosity upon those mysterious
questions which are amongst the secret
things that belong to the Lord our God ;
to lead us to the understanding and appro¬
priation of God’s promises, only as they
are generally set forth in Scripture ; and to
enforce obedience to his will, as it is ex¬
pressly revealed to us, in his word.
Under such an impression, I would turn
with respect and humility, from this awful
subject, but that it is necessary to the course
of our argument, to investigate the opinion
of our early Reformers upon it ; and to en¬
deavour to trace the circurastances which
PllEDESTINATIOX,
101
gmduallj rendered it a subject of contro¬
versy in the Church.
In this enquiry, we must be careful to
separate the doctrine in question, from those
fundamental principles of Protestantism, in
which the fathers of the Entrlish Reform-
ation appear to have symbolized with all the
reformed churches. W e must also observe,
that the doubt is not, whether our first Re¬
formers held the doctrine of predestination,
but in what sense, they held it. From their
belief of the Divine foreknowledge, and
from the evidence of prophecies fulfilled, as
well as from the frequent intimations in
Scripture, of the preparation of particular
instruments, for the accomplishment of the
Divine purposes of wrath or of mercy, — and,
above all, from the express declaration of
the apostle, that ‘‘ whom God did foreknow,
“ them he did predestinate to be conformed
“ to the image of his Son,” &c. — these ve¬
nerable men appear to have drawn their
doctrine of predestination and election in
Christ, not as an irrespective and arbitrary-
H S
102
DOCTRINE OF THE REFORMERS.
privilege, but as a free and gratuitous,
though still a contingent, gift ; suspended
upon the condition of faith in Christ, and
appropriable only through the fulfilment of
this condition.
That such was the view of this doctrine
entertained by our first Reformers, and that
a personal and irrespective application of
it, “ without reference had to faith in
“ Christ,” was considered by them as
presumptuous and unscriptural, is evident
from various passages in their writings
which we find quoted by the disputants in
this controversy. ‘‘ Think,” says Bishop
Latimer, “ that God hath chosen those that
“ believe in Christ ; and Christ is the Book
“ of Life. If thou believest in him, then art
“ thou written in the Book of Life, and
“ shalt be saved.” And elsewhere, “ Those
“ persons,” says he, again, “ that be not yet
“ come to Christ, or, if they were come to
“ him, be fallen again from him, and so lost
“ their justijicatmi (as there be many of
us when we fall willingly into sin against
PREDESTINATION.
103
conscience); we lose the favour of God,
our salvation, and, finally, the Holy
‘‘ Ghost.” And again, in another place,
he says, ‘‘ You will say, How shall I know
“ that I am in the Book of Life ? How shall
I try myself to be the elect of God to
“ everlasting life ? I answer, first, we may
know that we may be one time, in the
Book, and another time, come out again,
“ as it appeareth by David, who was vv^rit-
ten in the Book of Life, but when he
sinned, he, at that time, was out of the
‘‘ favour of God, until he repented, and
was sorry for his faults. So that we may
be in the Book at one time, and after-
‘‘ wards, when we forget God and his word,
and do wickedly, we come out of the
‘‘ Book, that is, out of Christ, who is the
Book.”
As to their judgment of the doctrine of
particular or partial redemption, and the
arbitrary exclusion of any individuals from
salvation, the following testimonies of Lati¬
mer and Hooper, are decisive.
u 4
104
l^OCTRINi: OF THE IlEFORWEliS,
‘‘ Seeing,” says the former, “ that the
“ preaching of the Gospel is universal, it
“ appeareth that God would have all man-
“ kind saved, and that the fault is not in
“ him, if they be damned ; for it is written
“ thus, God would have all men to he saved.
“ But we are so wicked of ourselves, that
“ we refuse the same, and will not take no-
“ tice when it is offered to us.” — “ The
“ cause of rejection or damnation,” says
Hooper, “ is sin in man,” (not 'predestina¬
tion^ take notice), “ who will not hear,
“ neither receive, the promise of the Gos-
“ pel ; or, after he hath received it,” (not
heard it, only, as I should conceive, but
heard it, at least with present acceptance),
‘‘ by accustomed doing of ill, falleth either
“ into a contempt of the Gospel, and will
“ not study to live thereafter ; or else
“ hateth the Gospel, because it con-
‘‘ demneth his ungodly life.”
Against their belief of any absolute or
personal decree of reprobation, as relating
to the privileges of a future life, the follow¬
ing passages are equally explicit.
PllEDESTl NATION.
105
Cain,” says Hooper, “ was no more
exckided from the promise of Christ, till
“ he excluded himself, than Abel ; Saul
“ than David ; Judas than Peter ; Esau
“ than Jacob.” — “ God is said to have
“ hated Esau, not because he was disinhe-
“ rited of eternal life, but in laying his he-
“ ritage and his mountains waste for the
“ dragons of the wilderness and “ the
“ threatenings of God against Esau, if he
“ had not of his wilful malice, excluded
“ himself from the promise of grace, would
“ no more have hindered his salvation,
“ than God’s threatenings against Nineveh
“ hindered him from sparing that city, at
“ that time ; which, nevertheless, stood
“ forty years after.”
To the same purpose, and citing the
same remarkable example, Latimer says,
‘‘ Christ only, and no man else, merited re-
mission, justification, and eternal felicity,
“ for as many as will believe the same.
“ Christ shed as much blood for Judas, as
‘‘ for Peter : Peter believed it, and there-
^ fore was saved; Judas would not believe,
106 DOCTRINE OF THE REFORMERS.
“ and therefore was condemned ; the fault
“ being in himself only, and nobody else.”
Of the judgment of the other Reformers
who were employed in the compilation of
our Articles, I know nothing so specific as
the above quotations j but it appears to me
that the general tenor of Cranmer’s doctrine,
is inconsistent with the notion of an abso¬
lute decree ; and it is upon record, that
Ridley dissented from the opinion of Brad¬
ford, on this subject.
Another argument, and I think a strong
one, may be urged to show that the general
sense of the compilers of our Articles, was
unfavourable to the Calvinistic view of this
doctrine (for into their Calvinism upon
other points, I do not enter) ; I allude here,
to the remarkable fact of their introduction
of Erasmus’s Paraphrase into public use,
under Edward the Sixth and Elizabeth,
and the establishment of it, as a standard
exposition in the churches, under the sanc¬
tion of royal authority. If this step had
been taken in the reign of Plenry, some
12
PREDESTINATION.
107
necessity for Cciution or compromise, miglit
be pleaded ; but Edward’s own principles,
und those of his more immediate instruc¬
tors, seem to have rather leaned to the
Calvinistic system ; and Elizabeth does not
appear to have looked with any jealousy,
upon the doctrine of the decrees, till Whit-
gift’s attempt, many years after, to define
and enforce it, by additional and explana¬
tory articles.
Now, if you recollect that Calvin died in
1564, that his Institutes had been published
in 1536% and his Commentary (which ex¬
tended to almost all the books of Scripture)
at different periods, previous to the esta¬
blishment of our Church by authority, you
can hardly (I think) reconcile this public
adoption of the work of a professed oppo¬
nent of his doctrine, to the supposition of
* Many editions of the Institutes were published
durinfr Calvin’s life, and each, with considerable addp
tions.° The last appeared but a short time before his
DOCTRINE OF THE REFORMERS.
Here, I imagine that justification is taken
in its simple reference to the remission of
sin, through the atonement of Christ; by
which, it appears that man is released from
the condemnation which his offences had
deserved, restored to his federal and
adoptive relation to God, and rendered ca¬
pable, with God’s grace preventing and as¬
sisting him, of that subsequent improve¬
ment in holiness, without which, we are
told that no man shall see the Lord.
This view, would, indeed, tend to es¬
tablish the doctrine of a first and a final
justification; and though so much exception
has been made against it, as tending to en¬
courage pride and self-dependence, I cannot
but think this doctrine (in substance, at
least,) is inculcated by our Church, and
maintained by our first reformers and
divines.
I
If justification be invariably identified
with a certainty of final salvation, there
seems to be an end of the notion of respon¬
sibility, and of the probationary state in
JUSTIFICATION.
137
which believers are represented to be placed,
by their reception into the Gospel covenant.
And the admission, or rather the assertion,
of our Reformers, that this justification,
after it has been obtained, may be lost
again, appears clearly to designate it as the
re-admission into the covenant of grace, —
the restoration to a capacity of salvation, —
the being received as righteous, for the sake
of the righteousness of Christ, and saved
from the guilt, strengthened against the
power, and eventually delivered from the
punishment, of sin ; — the being made, in a
word, partakers of the blessings of the
Gospel covenant, “ by which,” says the
apostle^ “ ye are saved, if ye keep in me-
“ mory what I have preached unto you,
“ unless ye have believed in vain.”
This Gospel, which Paul preached, and
of which he here reminds his converts, was,
indeed, the sacrifice and resurrection of
Christ, in which they were to trust for sal¬
vation ; but of which, it appears, they might
still lose the benefit ; as is evident from the
exception, unless ye have believed in
138 DOCTllIisE or THE REFORMERS.
vain.” And it should not .be overlooked,
that this exception immediately follows
(with only the interval of some temporary
and' occasional advice,) the remarkable
chapter, in which charity, or Christian prac¬
tice in its perfection, is exalted even above
the highest instances of faith.
I think it is evident, that our Reformers
entertained this double view of justification,
and spoke of it sometimes in its forensic
sense, (as relating to the forgiveness of past
sins, through the atonement,) while on
other occasions, they have used it more
largely, to express the final admission of
the believer to eternal life. A remarkable
instance occurs of both senses, at the close
of the first homily on good works ; in which
the example of the penitent thief, an em¬
inent instance of final justification by faith,
is adduced, indeed, in direct proof of that
doctrine, yet not so as to impugn, but ra¬
ther to confirm, the general notion of an
initial or conditional justification, or, to
state it more precisely, an initial justifica»
tion and conditional covenant. The thief
JUSTIFICATION.
139
“ that was hanged when Christ suffered,
‘‘ did believe only, and the most merciful
“ God justified him. And because no man
shall say again, that he lacked time to
do good works, lor else he would have
“ done them, ti'uth it is, and I will not
“ contend therein. But this I will surely
“ affirm, that faith only saved him. If he
‘‘ had lived and not regar^ded faith, and
the tc?or/rs thereof, he should have lost his
“ salvation again.
The sentiment of Latimer (which I have
already quoted upon another point,) seems
also to agree with this view of the doctrine.
“ Those persons,” says he, ‘‘ that be not
“ yet come to Christ, or if they were come
« to him, be fallen again from him, and
“ so lost their justification, (as there be
« many of us, when we fall willingly into
“ sin against conscience,) we lose the fa-
‘‘ vour of God, our salvation, and finally
“ the Holy Ghost.”
t
You must not, however, misunderstand
me or suppose me to doubt that this jus“
140
UOCTIUNE OF THE KEFORMEKb.
tificatioii includes a certain promise of sal¬
vation, though it have not time to bring
tbrth “ ijood works,” and a life according
to God’s commandments. I would only
assert, that if there be time, it is necessary
that faith should be perfected and proved,
by a course of Christian obedience ; and
that upon the concurrence of both, is sus¬
pended the promise of final salvation. But
I would add, in the words of our homily,
that “all this is brought to pass, only through
“ the merits and deservings of our saviour
“ Christ ; and not through otir merits, or
“ through the merit of any virtue that we
“ have within us, or of any work that
“ cometh from us and, therefore, that
“ in respect of merit and deserving, we
“ forsake, as it were, altogether again,
“ faith, works, and all other virtues.”
And here, as I apprehend, is the true
principle of the Church and of the Gospel ;
the principle of self-renunciation. The ex¬
clusion of any thing that we can do or de¬
serve, towards the purchase of a meritorious
acceptance with God. The conviction,
JUSTIFICATION.
141
that all our thoughts, and words, and works,
are tainted with the blemish of corruption,
and stand in need of the propitiation made
by the sacrifice of Christ. That, after all
our best endeavours, we must throw our¬
selves entirely and unreservedly upon this
sacrifice for salvation, and acknowledge,
that “ there is no other name given among
men,” but the name of the blessed Jesus,
“ whereby we must be saved.”
/
I will venture to quote one passage more,
(from the third part of the homily on salv¬
ation,) as explanatory of the came of the
peculiar efficacy attributed to faith, as the
instrument or condition of justification, and
also illustrative of this principle of self-re¬
nunciation, on which the Gospel scheme
of salvation is built.
“ Truth it is, that our own works do not
“ justify us, to speak properly of ou^justifi-
“ cation ; that is to say, our works do not
“ 77ierit or dese7've remission of our sins,
“ and make us, of unjust, just before God ;
“ but God of his mere mercy, through the
142
DOCTRixt: OF rui; reformers.
only merits and deservings of his son
“ Jesus Christ, doth justify us. Neverthe-
“ less, because faith doth directly send us
“ to Christ for the remission of our sins,
and that by faith, given us of God, we
embrace the promise of God’s mercy, and
of the remission of our sins, (which
‘‘ thin OP none other of our virtues or works
O
“ properly doth,) therefore, Scripture iiseth
“ to say, that faith without works doth
“ justify.”
But while our Refoi mers ascribe its full
efficacy to this saving and justifying faith,
as that act of the mind through which alone
we can appropriate the blessing of a
vicarious atonement, they also refer to it as
the root and principle of Christian obedience,
and inculcate such obedience, as a necessary
condition of salvation ; as the evidence,
the fruit, and the perfection of a sincere
and genuine faith. Their doctrine seems
clearly to be, that as the work is worthless
without the principle, the principle is vain
without the work, ‘‘ if there be time and
opportunity thereto ; ” and that ‘‘ the
jUrfTIFICATlOV.
143
“ keeping of God’s commandments,” be¬
cause we faithfully believe them to be such,
‘‘ be the very way,” (to use their own
strong language,) “ that doth lead to ever-
“ lasting life.”
The faith that is necessary for the ob-
taining of our salvation,” (says the ho¬
mily of faith) “ hath charity ahvays joined
“ unto it, and is fruitful, bringing forth all
good works.” To this doctrine, indeed,
Luther objects, as popish, in his commentary
on the Epistle to the Galatians ; but his
zeal against popery in that early production,
seems to have driven him towards the oppo¬
site extreme, and led to an apparent,
though certainly not an intentional, depre¬
ciation of moral obedience. The dissent
of our Reformers, from his opinion upon
this point, and from that of Calvin, upon
some others, proves that they did not im¬
plicitly follow any foreign authority.
It appears to be the leading object, in the
homilies on justification and faith, as well
as in the article which relates to the same
144
DOCTRINE OF THE REFORMERS.
doctrines, to overthrow the presumptuous
notion of human merit, and to place Chris¬
tian hope on its only true foundation, a de¬
pendence on the merits of Christ. In the
liomily on good works, and the articles on
the same subject, we have this foundation
still prominently and exclusively main¬
tained ; but we have also an explicit en¬
forcement of the duty of evangelical obe¬
dience, (as a requisite to the attainment of
final salvation,) and a clear distinction of
those “ laws of God that lead to everlasting
life,” from those “traditions and laws of
men,” by which Gentile, as well as Phari¬
saic perversion, is said to have “ made the
law of God of none effect.”
I observed, in one of my former letters,
that much of the depreciatory language ap¬
plied by our early Reformers, to “good
works,” referred to those works of super¬
stition, or of supererogation, which pre¬
sumption and will worship, had substituted
fbi true piety and moral obedience j and I
find a passage in one of the homilies on
good works, which confirms this observ-
JUSTIFICATION. 145
lion. Here it is asserted, that “ it is' by
mistaking the nature of good works, that
“ man hath highly displeased God, and
gone from his will and commandment ; ”
and the successive corruptions of idolatry,
Pharisaism, and popery, are adduced, as
successive innovations and ‘‘ devices of men,
“ whereby the laws and commandments of
“ God are overthrown and, to make the
distinction still clearer, it is stated in ano¬
ther place, that “ the works which God
“ would have his people to walk in, are
such as he hath commanded in his Holy
“ Scripture,” (of which a portion of the
decalogue is cited as an example,) “ and
“ not such works as men have studied out
“ of their own brain.”
I need not trouble you with more quota¬
tions, to prove a point of which you make
no question ; viz. that our Reformers held
at once, the freedom of divine grace in the
remission of sin, and the contingency of
final salvation. But, before we proceed, I
must beg of you to distinguish between the
VOL. II. L
146 DOCTRINE OF THE REFORMERS.
Calvinistic doctrines of grace, and the An-
tinomianism which grew out of them, and
against which, much of the strong and con¬
troversial language of our subsequent
divinity, is directed. ‘‘ It is unfair,” (says
Doctor Jortin, who will not be suspected
of much charity to Calvinism,) “ to charge
men with all the consequences which
may follow from their opinions, when
‘‘ they neither draw them, nor perceive
“ them, nor own them.” And this cau¬
tion, whatever men may think of the prin¬
ciples, they should certainly observe, with
respect to some eminent divines in our
Church, who, while they espoused the
Calvinistic doctrines, strenuously disclaimed
and controverted every licentious inference
and interpretation.
But to return to our subject : — It was
not (I think) as a condition of justification,
considered in its initial or primary sense,
(as the privilege of remission of past sin,
through the application of the sacrifice of
Christ,) that our Beformers taught the ne-
JUSTIFICATION.
147
cessity of moral obedience. This original
blessing they annexed, to the simple act of
laying hold on the offered propitiation, with
an entire dependence on its sufficiency,
and an humble acknowledgment of man’s
utter destitution of any claim of right, upon
the divine mercy. They did not teach the
necessity of good works, as contributing to
the initial act of justification, but they pre¬
scribed them as indispensably necessary to
the perfection and fruition of this privilege,
in the attainment of everlasting life ; and
it is evident, from the example of the
penitent thief quoted above, that they con¬
sidered this justifying faith, as the root and
principle of future obedience, and that they
annexed no promise of salvation, to a faith
of any other description.
It seems to have been from an indiscri¬
minate use of the words justification and
salvation, sometimes synonimously, and at
others, in a different sense, that the doctrine
of our Reformers upon this point, has been
brought into question. A similar applica-
L 2
148 DOCTRINE OF THE REFORMERS.
tion of these expressions in Scripture, ap¬
pears to have been at once their example
and authority, and not to have created any
difficulty or dispute, till the high Calvinis-
tic doctrine of election, precluded the no¬
tion of conditions altogetlier from the
Christian covenant, as detractino; from the
free grace and mercy of God.
From this time, we find, in the writings
of our divines, a marked distinction be¬
tween the original act of justification, (an
act perfectly gratuitous,) and the attain¬
ment of final salvation, which they still
held to be conditional ; and towards this
attainment of final salvation, they taught
the indispensable necessity of obedience, or,
in other words, “ good works.”
‘‘ There is,” says Hooker, “ a justifying,
“ and a sanctifying, righteousness :” —
“ that, whereby we are justified, is perfect,
“ but not inherent ; — that, whereby we are
“ sanctified, is inherent, but not perfect.” —
And again — ‘‘ Ye are made free from sin.
I
JUSTIFICATION. 149
“ and are made servants to God ; this is
“the righteousness of justification: — ye
“ have your fruit unto holiness ; this is the
“ righteousness of sanctification. By the
“ one, we are interested in the right of in-
“ heriting ; by the other, we are brought
“ to the actual possession of eternal bliss ;
“ and so the end of both is everlasting
“ life.”
If the distinction here so clearly ex¬
pressed, had been always held in view by
our divines, the Church would have been
spared much unprofitable controversy ; and
the mysteries and duties, the privileges and
obligations of our holy faith, would have been
exhibited in beautiful harmony. But pole¬
mical zeal on either side, appears gradually
to have diverged from the primitive standard,
till the consistent and co-active graces of
faith and holiness were violently separated :
— the gospel doctrine of salvation by grace,
was urged to disprove the requisition of
moral obedience, — and the acknowledged
inability of fallen man, to keep the law per¬
fectly, was pleaded as an exemption, from
j. 3
150 DOCTRINE OF THE REFORMERS.
the obligation to attempt keeping it at
all.
In opposition to this dangerous principle,
which exhibited itself under various forms,
throughout the period we have been so
hastily reviewing, and which was supposed
to be latent in the theology of many who
disclaimed it as a practical consequence, the
pulpit divinity of the subsequent age as¬
sumed a more preceptive character, and
sometimes appears to have exhibited the
morality of the gospel, more prominently
than its peculiar doctrines. Whether, in
so doing, the gospel principle of salvation
by grace, was not occasionally overlooked
by individuals, in their zeal to enforce the
doctrine of responsibility, I shall not at¬
tempt to question ; but I apprehend, that
the standard divinity of this school, which
has come down to us, is not liable to
such an objection; and I think you will
find the doctrine of salvation by works,
under any connection with the presumptu¬
ous notion of merit, as distinctly renounced
by Tillotson, as by Hooker.
13
JUSTIFICATION.
151
Adieu, my dear friend ! my next letter
will bring us to the reign of Charles the
Second, and (I hope) to the end of this long
prefatory review.
Your’s most truly.
152
LETTER XXIII.
PREFATORY SKETCHES RESUMED, — AND CONCL UDED.
PROGRESS OF DISSENTION IN THE CHURCH. - POLITICAL
DISAFFECTION. - FREEDOM OF THE PREACHERS IN STRIC¬
TURES ON THE GOVERNMENT. — RISE OF SOME FARTHER
DOCTRINAL PERVERSIONS FROM THIS PERIOD. — DEPRE¬
CIATION OF LEARNING. - TOLERATION OF CROMWELL. -
FANATICISM. - DEISM. - TWO SCHEMES OF ANTINOMI-
ANISM. THE LATTER UNIVERSALLY OPPOSED ; THE
FORMER MORE PLAUSIBLE, AND COUNTENANCED BY SOME
RESPECTABLE AUTHORITIES. - INFLUENCE OF THESE CIR¬
CUMSTANCES, ON THE DIVINITY OF THE FOLLOWING PERIOD.
- RESTORATION. — RISE OF INFIDELITY. - ADVANTAGE
TAKEN OF THE CALVINISTIC DOCTRINES, TO INCULCATE
ATHEISM AND FATALISM. - CONSEQUENT ENCOURAGE¬
MENT OF THE ARMINIAN PRINCIPLES IN THE CHURCH. -
CONCLUSION.
MY DEAR FRIEND,
I PURPOSELY avoid the political details con¬
nected with the gloomy period of our his¬
tory, when a fierce and undistinguishing fana¬
ticism overthrew at once the Church and
the monarchy of England, — and, despising
alike the tenaciousness of the prelatist, and
the scruples of the nonconformist, and in-
PREFATORY SKETCHES, &c.
153
sensible to the motives of conscience by
which either might have been actuated,
involved them both in one common pro¬
scription. It is foreign to our subject to
trace the excesses of civil discord, and
sectarian extravagance ; which all began,
says Baxter, in unwarrantable sepaia-
“ tion, and too much aggravating the
“ faults of the churches, and common
“ people, and common prayer-book, and
“ ministry.”
While we cannot but perceive, that many
of these results may be traced to the scru¬
ples of our earlier Puritans, and to the
pertinacity with which their successors ex-
aggerated their objections, and enforced
their demands, we must in justice distin¬
guish these men with a very mitigated cen¬
sure, who were first the dupes, and after¬
wards the victims, of the ambition and
hypocrisy ot others; — who, in depaiting
from the discipline of the Church, professed
at least an adherence to her doctrines ;
and, in resisting the encroachments of the
154 PREFATORY SKETCHES RESUMED,
government, laboured for reformation, but
not for subversion.
How long these pure and patriotic mo¬
tives continued to operate, is another ques¬
tion ; and one, which I fear cannot be
answered to the credit of the demagogues
of the long parliament, nor of many of the
ardent and intemperate ministers, who
abused the freedom of the pulpit to the
propagation of sedition, and from this pri¬
vileged sanctuary, at once attacked the civil
and religious institutions of their country,
and directed the arm of popular vengeance,
against those individuals in the Church or
state, who were the objects of their personal
jealousy or displeasure.
From this unhappy period, we must date
the origin of many new perversions of doc¬
trine, against which the scope of much of our
subsequent divinity is directed ; and to the
practice of combining political with scrip¬
tural subjects in preaching, which originated
in Scotland at the time of the Reformation,
and concluded.
155
and was too soon adopted by our noncon¬
formists at home, we may trace the gradual
desecration of the pulpit, till it became too
often the instrument of a faction, or the
organ of an arbitrary government.
From this observation you will suppose
that I exempt, much excellent practical
preaching, by those lights of the Church,
both Episcopal and Presbyterian, who are
still cited as models and authorities ; and
who, except their disagreement upon the
question of Church discipline, and the discre¬
pancy in their views of predestination and
free will, appear to have had little difference
of opinion. Your charge of a dereliction of
fundamental doctrines, does not, however,
extend to these divines ; some of whom, on
the contrary, you cite as examples of a
sounder style of preaching, than that of
their sucessors.
It is here, therefore, that we must bring
into view, some of those religious perver¬
sions, which arose during the progress of
Cromwell’s usurpation ; and which retained
156
PREFATORY SKETCHES RESUxMED,
their baneful operation upon the morals
and temper of the people, long after they
were divested of their political influence, by
the re-establishment of a regular* govern¬
ment.
We cannot notice all the variety of these
perversions, in the ephemeral sects which
disturbed this period ; but we may trace the
origin of most of them, to the depreciation
of all human learning, as derogatory to the
supreme authority of Scripture, (which was
the popular doctrine of the Independents,)
— and afterwards, the subordination of
Scripture itself to a pretended internal light,
illuminating the mind of the believer, —
which naturally led to a contempt of all re¬
gular ministry in the Church, transformed
every fanatic into a prophet, and made way
for the wildest delusions of enthusiasm,
under the presumption, or the pretence, of
spiritual influence and inspiration.
While Cromwell continued to hold the
supreme authority, all these extravagances
met with full indulgence ; and the Episcopal
13
AND CONCLUDED.
157
Church alone was excepted, from the general
toleration which was extended to all other
religious professions. During this period of
anarchy, various denominations of enthu¬
siasts arose ; some of them hostile to all hu¬
man government, and expecting the sudden
appearance of Christ upon earth, to establish
a new and exclusive dominion, — some,
limiting their sytems to religious innova¬
tion ; — some, distinguishing themselves
only by the singularities of mysticism, —
and others, by scruples as to the mode
and form of administering the Christian
ordinance of Baptism.
Amongst the separatists from the Church
at this time, we must include the Quakers,
and English Baptists. The latter appear to
have been generally moderate, both in prac¬
tice and opinion, though some instances of
individual extravagance are recorded ; but
tlie high and visionary enthusiasm of the
early Quakers, exhibits a singular contrast
to the calm and sober character of their
successors. To the principles of both sects,
however, we mav trace many allusions in
158 PREFATORY SKETCHES RESUMED,
the preachers of the following period ; and
must consequently allow something for
their influence upon the national theo-
logy.
We must also keep in view, the rise of
speculative infidelity, which is to be referred
nearly to the same date. Towards the close
of Cromwell’s usurpation, a few strong and
sceptical minds, disgusted with the general
perversion of Scripture, which was pleaded
in defence of every enormity of practice
and extravagance of opinion, and unhappily
neglectino; to distinguish religion from its
abuses, — precipitately rejected both, and
attempted to build a system of morals, upon
the foundation of reason and philosophy
alone.
But the most prominent error of this
time, was the profligate doctrine of Antino-
mianism ; which grounded a licentious free¬
dom of action, upon the doctrine of justi¬
fication by faith, and claimed a privilege
for sin, upon the presumption of per¬
sonal election ; defending its enormities
AND CONCLUDED.
159
upon the plea of natural corruption, and
maintaining, with a blasphemous perver¬
sion of Scripture, that to the pure all things
are pure, even things forbidden.
The propagators of this pernicious system,
who all embraced the Calvinistic doctrine
of the decrees, in its highest rigour, seem to
have been divided into two classes : — the
former, more plausible and popular, and
apparently less hostile to the purity of
Christian morals j the latter, avowedly re¬
jecting every moral restraint, upon the
presumption, that no violation of the divine
law is imputed as a sin to the elect, whose
essential and distinctive character it is,
that they cannot do any thing that is dis¬
pleasing to God, or subversive of the cer¬
tain and irreversible decree, which from all
eternity, has secured their salvation.
Against this last and most profligate
scheme, all pious Christians united in oppo¬
sition ; but the former, by its apparent con¬
nection with the doctrine of justification by
faith, and the certainty of the divine pro-
160 PREFATORY SKETCHES RESUMED.
niises, obtained some able as well as virtuous
advocates, and seems to have partly led to
that ' indistinct and incautious statement,
of the necessity of faith, as the sole requisite
for salvation, and the gratuitous character of
the Christian covenant, — against the abuse
of which it was afterwards found necessary
to guard, by dwelling more emphatically
on the moral precepts of the Gospel.
The opposition to these various errors, we
trace in the Divinity of the following period,
in some of the particulars to which you have
objected. The application of human reason
and learning, to the understanding and elu¬
cidation of religious truth, and the necessity
of a competent share of both, to form the
character of a Christian instructor, are
urged*, to confute the presumptuous self-
sufficiency which would infer its own in¬
fallibility from the acknowledged infallibility
of Scripture : — and the arrogant assertion of
a special illumination, superseding, not only
* By many Divines, Hammond especially.
AND CONCLUDED,
161
the exercise of reason, but even the au¬
thority of Scripture itself, is evidently
glanced at, in many of those discourses in
which the nature and extent of the divine
teaching, are either incidentally or directly
explained.
In opposition to the doctrine of Antino-
mianism, that worst of poisons to the moral
constitution, — which was extracted, plausi¬
bly at least, if not quite logically, from the
strong and unmodified statement of justifi¬
cation by faith only, — the writers of this
period appear to have been led to the more
emphatical enforcement of moral obedience;
and to have sometimes used depreciatory
language, in speaking of a simple and in¬
operative belief, which has been understood
as if intended to apply to the evangelical
doctrine of justification, — a doctrine, which
they strenuously maintained on other oc¬
casions, and especially in their controversies
with Popery.
1
Amongst the various proofs of providen¬
tial wisdom, which occur to the pious stu-
VOL. II.
M
162 PREFATORY SKETCHES RESUMED,
dent of history, it has always appeared to
me, worthy of admiration, that the principle
and spirit of religious toleration and charity,
should have grown out of the intolerance
and bigotry of this period ; and that the
very men, who afterwards laboured so zea¬
lously for the restoration and pacification of
the Church, should have been trained under
the auspices of that government, by which
it had been so arbitrarily subverted ; — that
those members of the universities, who suc¬
ceeded the Episcopalians violently ejected
by the parliament, should have become, as
it were, the founders of a school, so entirely
at variance with the narrow and exclusive
tenets, in which they had been educated, —
and in which, it appears that many of them
sincerely acquiesced, till the experience of
the various calamities, that flowed from the
angry discussion of those deep and recon¬
dite questions, led them to turn away from
a controversy, which it appeared could
hardly be pursued without a sacrifice of
Christian charity, — and, if not to modify or
abandon their sentiments, at least to hold
them as points of private opinion, and in-
AND CONCLUDED.
163
dependent of the essential doctrines of the
Gospel.
This moderate system, adopted by some
of those eminent divines who received pre¬
ferment at the Restoration, gradually as¬
sumed a character more decidely Arminian,
as the course of opposition to various moral
or doctrinal perversions, led to a free ex¬
amination of the tenets of Calvinism, and a
fuller perception of their liability to abuse;
and it is possible that this character was
still farther defined and strengthened, after
the exclusion of many Calvinists from the
Church, by the act of uniformity.
But v/e must advert more particularly to
another circumstance, which gave a new
character, and sometimes almost a new
subject, to the theology of this period, and
exhibited our divines, not merely as the
expositors of Gospel faith, and the advo¬
cates of Gospel morality, but as the cham¬
pions of natural religion, and the defenders
of those great truths, which appear to be
M 2
164 PREFATORY SKETCHES RESUMED,
(leducible by human reason, from the con¬
stitution of created nature.
\
In one of my former letters, I observed
that our early reformers were not called to
any public contest with Atheism, and were,
consequently, at liberty to exert all their
strength, in opposition to the corruptions of
religion : and to this circumstance, I ap¬
prehend it is attributable, that the truths of
natural religion (as it is called) are not con¬
troversially brought forward in their writ¬
ings, but are, as it were, tacitly assumed,
as acknowledged and unquestionable prin¬
ciples.
But this state of things was not of long
continuance. Bolder speculators arose, who,
under the pretence of distinguishing the re¬
ligion of nature from that of revelation, and
bringing men back to the examination of first
principles, artfully discredited all revealed
truths and positive institutions, as uncertain
in their evidence, and arbitrary in their ob¬
ject,— asserted the sufficiency, universality,
AND CONCLUDED.
165
and perfection, of natural religion, — and at¬
tempted to frame a system of Deism ; dis¬
carding all express revelation as unneces¬
sary, and yet retaining some of those fun¬
damental truths, for the knowledge of which
it appears that we are indebted to express
revelation alone.
Upon this scheme, others advanced still
farther, and conducted their opposition to
Christianity, upon principles subversive of
all moral intercourse between man and his
creator, and leading to a system of practi¬
cal Atheism, though covered with the
decency of a verbal acknowledgment of an
abstract and philosophical Deity.
These pernicious principles seem to have
acquired new influence, towards the close of
the civil wars, from the disgust naturally
conceived at the hypocritical or fanatical
excesses which disgraced that period ; and
though the popular profession of religion
was still high, and generally sincere, many
who aspired to the character of philosophers,
appear to have discarded all belief of reve-
166 PREFATORY SKETCHES RESUMED,
lation, and to have retained no more of the
profession of it, than decency exacted, or
authority enforced.
In the violent revulsion of habits and
opinions, which took place upon the Restor-
tion, the jealousy of the religious fanaticism
of the former period, was generally identi¬
fied with a jealousy of religion itself. The
careless profligacy of Charles, encouraged a
neglect of the duties, and even of the de¬
cencies, of morality; and the ideas of Puri¬
tanism and of piety, were associated by the
monarch and his favourites, as topics of
suspicion or of ridicule. The peculiar doc¬
trines, which had been so vehemently con¬
troverted in the late reign, without any
question of the fundamental truths of reli¬
gion, were now brought forward in a new
and extraordinary combination with the
principles of infidelity. The doctrine of
necessity was confidently advanced, upon
the presumption of Scripture authority,
with the insidious view of discreditingf all
o
moral or religious obligation ; and human
depravity was asserted in the strongest
7
AND CONCLUDED.
167
terms, for the purpose of grounding upon
it the pernicious inference, that man is
naturally, and even warrantably> subject to
no law but that of selfishness. All moral
distinctions of good and evil were denied,
or resolved into the conventional regula¬
tions of society j and a conscientious lefer-
ence to any standard of duty, but those
of temporal interest and civil authority ,
was ridiculed as a wild and enthusiastic
delusion.
The impiety of this scheme was veiled at
first from common observation, by its partial
resemblance to the predestinarian doctrine,
while its political character secured its ac¬
ceptance with the arbitrary and licentious
Charles ; and the influence and example of
the monarch produced their natural effect
upon his courtiers, who probably found in
the adoption of his sentiments, the best re¬
commendation to his favour.
In this view of the state of opinions in
the English court, at the period in question,
I think we perceive the origin of that style
M 4
168 rilEFATORY SKETCHES RESUMED
of divinity, which has been charged, (hastily,
as I apprehend,) with a departure from the
doctrine of the Reformation, and a neglect
of the foundation of faith, in building up
the edifice of morality. It appears that
some of those doctrines, which had been at
first abused by the Antinomian, to the sub¬
version of moral obligation, were perverted
by the Atheist, upon a different principle,
to the same purpose, and with still worse
effects. Against each of these classes, the
arguments for human liberty would naturally
be urged, as a necessary ground for the
enforcement of moral responsibility ; and,
as the errors of both, appeared to be built
upon a denial of this liberty, it was also to
be expected, that it would sometimes be
stated without a direct reference to those
Scriptural limitations, which it might have
appeared unnecessary to notice, as they
were not only admitted, but exaggerated,
by each of the parties against whom the re¬
futation was directed.
Whether you will admit this as an apology,
1 know not ; but it seems to me to have
AND CONCLUDED.
169
been the cause of much of the loose and
general statement of this doctrine, which we
find in the writers in question, and also of
the occasional reference to heathen ex¬
amples and authorities, for the enforcement
of those principles of morals, which ap¬
peared to be deducible even from natural
reason.
It is difficult fully to illustrate this sub¬
ject, without referring to some examples ;
and I fear that such a reference would de¬
mand a larger and more critical examin¬
ation, than you probably expect, or I can
accomplish. Indeed, in looking through
some volumes of these discourses, with this
particular object, I find the subjects dis¬
cussed in them, so various, and the line of
argument and illustration in each, so de¬
pendent on local and circumstantial peculi¬
arities, that it would require almost an
historical or biographical analysis of the
times, to account for the particular views
in which the Christian doctrines are ex¬
hibited, and for the occasional prominence
170 PREFATORY SKETCHES RESUMED.
of some of those doctrines, to the apparent
depreciation of others.
Yet it will not be an unedifying exercise,
to select here a few of the more eminent
examples, and to examine them, simply
with a reference to their liability to the
charge in question.
You will observe, however, that I limit
my defence of these divines, to the position,
that they have not deserted, either virtually
or expressly, the fundamental doctrines of
salvation by grace, justification by faith,
and remission of sins through the merits of
Christ alone ; and that these great princi¬
ples of Scripture and of Protestantism, if
they are not always dogmatically urged, are
at least assumed as the ground of their
moral and preceptive discourses, and are
stated explicitly and strongly, in those which
are doctrinal and controversial.
Adieu.
c
171
LETTER XXIV.
TILLOTSON.
BURNEt’s character of archbishop TILtOTSON S PREACH-
jjIG. - SERMONS ON ATHEISM. - CHARACTER AND PLAN
OF THESE SERMONS. - SERMONS ON THE ATTRIBUTES.
THEIR PLAN, AND APPARENT OBJECT. - GENTLE TEMPER
OF TILLOTSON.— MISCONSTRUCTIONS TO WHICH IT EXPOSED
— SERMONS AGAINST SOCINIANISM. SELECTION OF
doctrinal sermons proposed for EXAMINATION.
PROMISES OF THE GOSPEL. - REGENERATION. TILLOT-
SON's view of it. — REMARKS SUGGESTED BY THE PRE¬
SENT CONTROVERSY UPON THIS DOCTRINE.
MY DEAR FRIEND,
I DARE not encounter, with a critical pen,
the gigantic volumes of Tillotson and Bar-
row ; yet it may not be amiss to select from
each a few specimens, to illustrate the fore¬
going observations.
Of Archbishop Tillotson, Burnet says,
that “ he was not only the best preacher of
“ the age, but seemed to have brought
“ preaching to perfection : that ** his
172
TILLOTSON.
“ sermons were so well heard and liked,
‘‘ and so much read, that all the nation pro-
“ posed him as a pattern, and studied to
“ copy after him.”
It is not, however, with a reference to
the qualities of style and manner, which
rendered the sermons of Tillotson so popu¬
lar, that we are now to consider them; — and,
indeed, I am rather inclined to think the
style contributes more than is generally
supposed, to diminish their popularity at
present ; as, notwithstanding all its literary
excellencies, it is too calm and diffuse upon
practical subjects, and too abstract and
argumentative upon questions of doctrine,
to engage the affections and the conscience
with that deep and animating interest,
which a simple and authoritative reference
to Scripture inspires.
Yet we should not forget, that Tillotson
was often called to preach before those who
ridiculed all Scripture authority ; and that
many of his sermons are directed against
the Hobbists, and other infidels of his day.
TILLOTSON.
173
to whom it was necessary first to prove the
abstract truth of revelation ; and who would
have turned with contempt from a demon¬
stration, built upon the simple assumption
of doctrines which they derided, or upon
the authority of a record which they denied.
The chief subjects of Tillotson’s pole¬
mical warfare, were Atheism, Socinianism,
Antinomianism, and Popery ; and it is in
his opposition to these respectively, that we
are to look for the statement of his doc¬
trinal views, and the grounds upon which
he supports them.
His friend Bishop Burnet gives a short
account of the prevalence of libertine and
infidel opinions, which led him first to lay
his foundations in the principles of natural
religion, and from thence to advance to the
proof of Christianity, and of the authen¬
ticity of Scripture. “ He saw,” (says the
Bishop,) “ with a deep regret, the fatal cor-
“ ruption of this age; while the hypocrisies
and extravagancies of former times, and
“ the liberties and looseness of the present,
174
TILLOTSON.
“ disposed many to impiety and Atheism ;
“ so he set the whole strength of his
“ thoughts and studies, to withstand the
progress that this was making. In order
‘‘ to that, he laboured particularly to bring
“ every thing out of the clearest principles,
“ and to make all men feel the reasonable-
“ ness of the truths, as well as of the pre-
“ cepts, of the Christian religion.”
Upon this plan it appears that he framed
many of his discourses, and particularly two
sets of consecutive sermons, which occur at
a considerable distance, in his works ; and
to which only, I shall advert, in connection
with this part of our subject.
In the collection of sermons published
during his life, (which forms the first volume
of the folio edition of his works,) we find
the first eight directed to the confutation of
Atheism, and to the inculcation of religion
chiefly upon principles of reason, as likely
to be most persuasive with those whom he
addressed. In these sermons, he seems to
have the opinions of Hobbes particularly in
TILLOTSON.
175
view, and in the third, he refers expressly
to the “ Leviathan” of that author, as in¬
culcating doctrines subversive of all moral
and religious obligation.
From the demonstration of the truth, he
proceeds to a proof of the advantages, of re¬
ligion, and afterwards goes on to enforce
its obligations ; and he concludes this series
with an animating view of the Christian’s
hopes ana privileges, contrasted with the
vanity, uncertainty, and disappointment of
all earthly pursuits and enjoyments.
This argument he conducts still upon
those rational principles, on which, as ad¬
dressing a particular class, he had framed
his general demonstration ; and urges the
concluding application, with a reference to
the same principles; exhibiting strongly
the folly, as well as the guilt, of preferring
the evanescent pleasures of this world, to
the imperishable glories of eternity.
Yet even here, he builds his reasonings
upon the basis of Christianity ; and having
176
riLLOTSON.
first established the truths of natural religion
by reason and general testimony, and proved
the divine origin and excellence of revela¬
tion, by an appeal to its effects, he enforces
its obligations with all the zeal of a Chris¬
tian advocate, and expatiates upon its great
and precious promises, with all the energy
of devout and joyful anticipation. I cannot
resist quoting from the eighth sermon, his
description of the happiness of a future
state, as illustrative at once of the piety of
his heart, and the soundness of his doctrine;
and surely enough to vindicate even these
discourses from the charge of a cold ration¬
ality. The whole sermon is animated and
beautiful, and, (if you will allow me a popu¬
lar expression,) truly evangelical.
“ When this blessed society is met to-
“ gether, and thus united by love, they
“ shall all join in gratitude to their great
patrons and benefactors ; to Him that
“ sitteth upon the throne, and to the Lamb
“ that was slain, — to God, even our Father,
“ and to our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath
“ loved us, and washed us from our sins
I'lLLOTSON.
177
in his own blood. And they shall sing
everlasting songs of praise to God for all
“ his works of wonder: — for the effects of
“ that infinite goodness, and admirable
“ wisdom, and almighty power, which are
clearly seen in the creation and govern-
ment of the world, and all the creatures
“ in it: — particularly, for his favours to man-
“ kind ; for the benefit of their beings, for
“ the comfort of their lives, and for all his
“ merciful providences towards them in this
“ world : — but, above all, for the redemp-
“ tion of their souls by the death of his Son !
“ — for the free forgiveness of their sins, for
“ the gracious assistance of his Holy Spirit,
“ and for conducting them safely, through
“ all the snares and dangers, the troubles
“ and temptations of this world, to the
“ secure possession of that glory and happi-
“ ness which then they shall be partakers
“ of, and for which they are bound to praise
“ God through all eternity! This, this
“ shall be the employment of the blessed
“ spirits above, and these are the chief in-
“ gredients of our happiness, which the
VOL. II. N
178
TIT.LOTSON.
“ Scripture mentions ; and if there were no
“other — as there may be ten thousand
“ more for any thing I can tell, — yet gener-
“ ous and virtuous minds will easily imder-
“ stand, how great a pleasure there is in tlie
“ improvement of knowledge, and tlie ex-
“ ercise of love, and in a grateful and per-
“ petual acknowledgement of the greatest
“ benefits that creatures are capable of re-
“ ceiving.”
• In his course of sermons upon the divine
attributes, (which occurs in the second
volume of his works,) he appears also to
liave had in his eye the speculative infidel itv
of his time, and to have framed the plan of
them accordingly. He takes up the subject
in two different views — abstractedly, and
relatively ; considering, under the former
view, what he calls the incommunicable per¬
fections of the Deity, (as “ his independency
and eternity,”) and including in the latter,
those perfections which are communicable,
and exhibited in the divine dealino^s with
mankind.
riLLOTSON,
179
In considering the attributes of the Deity
abstractedly, he proves them from reason
as well as from Scripture, and thus fights
the sceptic with the weapons of his own
choice. He is led, indeed, in pursuance of
this plan, to a frequent reference to the
works of Heathen poets and philosophers ;
but he seems to have used them no other¬
wise than as Saint Paul does, in the prose¬
cution of a similar argument, and he
corroborates and clears their vague and
speculative views, by a reference to the au¬
thoritative testimony of Scripture.
In considering the attributes of God rela¬
tively, or as they are actually displayed in
the divine dispensations towards mankind,
he argues almost entirely from Scripture
principles and evidences. Inferring the per¬
fections of the Deity, from their results, he
shows these perfections, first, exhibited in
the creation and providential government of
the world, and secondly, in the new crea¬
tion, or redemption of mankind by Jesus
Christ. The former he argues, not only
from Scripture, but from the principles of
N 2
180
TILI.OTSON.
natural reason, and the traditionary evi¬
dence of antiquity. For the latter he refers
to Scripture exclusively ; and upon the
testimony of Revelation alone, develops this
mighty mystery, which has made foolish
the wisdom of the wise, and brought to
nothing, the understanding of the prudent.
Upon those divine attributes, which were
more especially displayed in the work of
redemption, — justice and mercy, truth and
holiness, patience, long-suffering, and com¬
passion, — he enlarges in a course of moral
and practical application ; and clearly de¬
duces from them, the corresponding duties
to which man is bound, by the acknowledg¬
ment of these attributes, and by their
influence upon his own welfare and hap¬
piness.
“ Goodness,” says he, is amiable in
“ itself, though no benefit or advantao-e
“ should from thence redound to us. But,
“ when we find the comfortable effects of
“ it, — when the riches of God’s goodness,
and long-suffering, and forbearing are
TILLOTSON.
181
“ laid out upon us, — when we live upon that
“ goodness, and are indebted to it, for all
‘‘ that we have, and hope for ; — this is a
‘‘ much greater endearment to us of that
“ excellency and perfection, which was
‘‘ amiable of itself. We can not but love
Him who is good, and does us good ;
“ whose goodness extends to all his crea-
“ tures, but is exercised in so peculiar a
“ manner towards the sons of men, that it
“ is called love : — and if God vouchsafe to
“ love us, well may this be the first and
“great commandment — thou shalt love
“ the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and
“ with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.”^
Upon a similar view of the bearing and
influence of the other attributes of God, he
grounds the moral obligations resulting .
from them ; and shows that the imitation
of these divine perfections, (so far as man’s
corrupt nature, aided by grace, is capable
of imitating them,) is not only a condition,
but a necessary qualification, for the happi¬
ness of a future life.
1
I
182 TILLOTSON.
I should observe, that Tillotson lias at¬
tacked the principles of the self-called philo¬
sophers of his time, rather by insinuation,
than by direct controversy, as they ap¬
peared connected with various other errors,
speculative or practical, which occasionally
called for his animadversion ; and more
particularly, as their consequences were ex¬
hibited, in the gross and shameless immor¬
ality, which was the distinction, and the
disgrace, of the reign of Charles the Second.
t
It is, therefore, necessary to keep these
principles in view, in considering the drift
of some of his practical discourses ; and
even in his opposition to the high Calvin-
istic doctrines, it seems more than probable
that he sometimes meant to combat the
infidel, who built on those doctrines a system
of atheistical fatalism, as well as to confute
the Antinomian, who perverted them to
the encouragement of sin.
It appears that the gentleness of Arch¬
bishop Tillotson’s temper, and his anxiety
to relieve and conciliate the dissenters, ex-
TILLOTSOX.
183
posed him to tlie imputation, of a want of
zeal for the Church, and of partiality to¬
wards those who departed from it. But
any who are now inclined to consider this
as a reproach, should recollect, that many
of those separatists had been his early
friends and associates ; that their controversy
with the Church, related not to essentials ;
and that, if their scruples were sometimes
unreasonable, their piety was eminent, and
their doctrine generally orthodox. Now
that the irritation of mutual jealousy has
subsided, and the remarkable characters ol
that ase have found their level, in a more
impartial judgment, the mildness ol Tillot-
son is remembered to his honour ; and his
friendship for some pious and worthy men,
who differed from him in their religious
opinions, is not, perhaps, the least interest¬
ing part of his character. His panegyric
of his friend Mr. Gouge, (an eminent non¬
conformist divine,) may not improperly be
applied to himself. “ He was of a dispo-
“ sition ready to embrace and oblige all
“ men, allowing others to differ from him,
“ even in opinions that were very dear to
N ‘I
184
TILLOTSON.
him ; and provided men did but fear God,
“ and work righteousness, he loved them
“ heartily, how distant soever they were
“ from him in judgment, about things less
“ necessary.”
But, while this tolerant and catholic spirit
led him to regard every pious Christian as
a brother, and even to enter into personal
intimac}^ with some, whose judgment differ¬
ed essentially from his own, the circum¬
stances of the Church during his ministry,
engaged him in perpetual controversy; and
the difficulties of his warfare were aggra¬
vated by the variety of errors with which
he had to contend. The arguments for the
exercise of reason in religious enquiries,
which he urged, to confute the Popish doc¬
trine of the infallibility of the Church, as
well as to overthrow the infidel principle,
that religion had no foundation but in au¬
thority, were objected to, as subverting all
belief of mysteries in religion, and leading
to the rejection of every Scripture doctrine
that lay beyond the reach of the human
understanding. The preacher himself did
TILLOTSON.
185
not escape the imputation that was thrown
upon the principles he advocated ; and to
this calumny, it appears that we are indebted
for the publication of his sermons against
Socinianism, which he declares that he had
sincerely preached, as he then thought,
and still continued to think, of those
“ points.” A considerable interval (thirteen
years) elapsed, between the preaching and
the publication of those discourses, which
indeed appeared but the year before his
death ; — so that we may look upon them as
his final tribute to the Church, and his
dying declaration of faith in the divinity of
his Redeemer.
In these sermons, however, the doctrine
of the incarnation is necessarily discussed
too polemically, to admit of the practical
and personal use of it, which we look for in
dogmatical or didactic theology. Many
pages are occupied with verbal criticism,
necessary to elucidate the extent and mean¬
ing of those expressions which relate to our
Lord’s office and character ; proofs are ad-
180
TILLOTSON.
ducecl, and objections are refuted, simply
to establish the point in dispute ; and, if
we omit some short applications at the
close of each sermon, the whole series may
be read in connection as one controversial
treatise ; and perhaps they contain as good
a popular refutation of the Socinian tenets,
as is to be found within the same compass
in our lanj^iiaoe.
O O
I will not say that the ingenuity of the
preacher, and his compliance with the
fashion of the times, have not led him some¬
times into digressions, upon the analogies,
and probable reasons, of the divine dispen¬
sations, more free and speculative than may
exactly suit our ideas of the chastised
character of Scripture criticism. Yet, we
may observe that such discussions were in
some degree necessary, to refute the ob¬
jections, which had been raised upon those
very grounds of analogy and probability,
against the Gospel scheme of redemption
founded on the divinity and atonement of
Christ.
TILLOTSOX.
187
I shall take leave ot* these sermons, as
they do not directly apply to our present
purpose, with a beautiful apostrophe at the
close of the first, which shows that the
preacher spoke from his heart, and argued
as a Christian, as well as a polemic.
“ Blessed God and Saviour of mankind 1
“ what shall we render to thee for such
« mio-hty love, for such inestimable benefits
“ as thou hast purchased for us, and art
‘‘ ready to confer upon us ? What shall we
“ say to thee. Oh! thou preserver and lover
of souls, — who wast pleased to assume
“ our mortal nature, on purpose to live
“ amongst us for our instruction, and for our
“ example, — and to lay down thy life for
the redemption of our souls, and for the
“ expiation of our sins, — and to take part
of flesh and blood, that thou mightest shed
“ it for our sakes I What affections should
“ these thoughts raise in us ! what vows and
« resolutions should they engage us in, of
‘‘ perpetual love, and gratitude, and obe-
« dience, to thee, the most gracious and
most glorious Hedeemer ol mankind !
188
TILLOTSON.
But it was not only in the defence of
natural religion, or in vindication of the
fundamental truths of Christianity, that
Tillotson was called upon to exercise his
polemical pen. The unhappy disputes
upon the doctrine of predestination, which
had agitated and divided the Church, for
nearly a century, had gradually led to a
connection of this doctrine, with other
truths of Revelation, more important, be¬
cause more directly bearing upon the hope
of salvation through Christ, and the conse¬
quent obligations of the Gospel. Opinions
had been deduced from it, inconsistent
with the truths, (evident equally from Scrip¬
ture and experience,) of the free agency
and responsibility of man ; and it had been
even made the foundation of a system of
practical licentiousness, utterly subversive
of that holiness and purity, so essential to
the Christian character, and so explicitly
prescribed by the Christian religion.
It is against this last and most destruc-
Cl5
tive perversion, that many of the doctrinal
sermons of Tillotson are directed ; and,
TILLOTSOX.
189
even where he argues more generally
against absolute predestination, as a point
of merely speculative opinion, he seldom
loses sight of the practical abuses which
appear to have arisen from it ; though he
honourably acquits the great majority of its
advocates, from the charge of inculcating
or encouraging such abuses.
AVith this observation in view, let us just
glance at a few of his sermons upon the fun¬
damental doctrines of Christianity ; which,
I apprehend, he neither abandons nor mo¬
difies, — though he labours to separate them
from those deep speculations into the
secrets of the Divine counsels, which cha¬
racterized much of the theology of the pre¬
ceding period, and which can seldom be
pursued to any extent, without sacrificing
the simplicity of Scriptural truth, to the
pride of metaphysical acuteness, or hazard¬
ing the destruction of personal humility and
charity, by a partial and arbitrary applica¬
tion, of the promises and privileges of the
Gospel,
TILLOTSOX.
I9(J
In the sermon “ On the Sacrifice and
Satisfaction of Christ,” which follow's
those upon the incarnation, the doctrine is
still argued polemically ; but the expiatory
nature of the sacrifice is asserted in its
fullest extent : — “ That the Son of God, in
“ order to the effectual expiation of sin,
“ suffered in our stead, and bore the wrath
“ of God /or us ; and made a perfect atone-
“ ment for sin, and obtained for us eternal
“ redemption “ That Christ died for
“ us, and for our sins ; that he was a sacri-
“ fice for us, and a propitiation for the sins
“ of the whole world ; that is, of all man-
“ kind “ That he bore our sins in his
own body, on the tree, and appeared, to
“ take away sin, by the sacrifice of himself :
“ — That we are justified by his blood, and
“ redeemed with the price of it.” — And
this (he adds) is so evidently the scope
“ and meaning of these expressions, that it
cannot be denied, without offering the
“ greatest violence to the Holy Scriptures.”
The practical use of this great doctrine
is briefly, but strongly, inculcated in the
tjllotson.
191
conclusion ; but it is more prominent, in
some of the preceptive discourses, where it
is urged as the highest incentive to holi¬
ness, and indeed as the ground of all Chris^
tian obligation.
I shall now select a few of the sermons,
whose titles may lead to some doctrinal re¬
ferences, connected more particularly with
your observations ; and, without attempt¬
ing any regular abstract or analysis, I shall
merely cite from them some passages illus¬
trative of my general position.
In two sermons, ‘‘ Upon the Nature and
“ Influences of the Promises of the Gos-
pel,” 2 Peter, chap. i. verse 4., these
“ great and precious promises” are stated
as follows :
First, the promise of the free pardon and
forgiveness of our sins, upon our faith and
repentance : —
Second, the promise of God’s grace and
Holy Spirit to assist our obedience
and,
192
TII.LOTSON'.
Third, the promise of eternal life to re¬
ward it.
The mercy of God, and the merits and
sacrifice of Christ, are acknowledged as the
sole foundation of these promises, and the
grace of the Gospel is represented as the
only medium of salvation.
The tenor of these promises is next con¬
sidered ; and their conditional character
asserted, in opposition to the doctrine of
absolute promises and irrespective predes¬
tination, against which the general argu¬
ment of these sermons is directed. The
promise of pardon is only to be laid hold on,
by a sincere faith and repentance ; the grace
of God is to be earnestly solicited, though
(says the preacher) it does often prevent
and stimulate the solicitation ; and eternal
life, (the fruition of the two first,) is to be
sought by repentance, faith, and persever¬
ance (under the grace of God) in good works.
I give you this summary of the doctrine
in these sermons, as expressing, (in mvvievv,)
TILLOTSON.
193
the doctrine of the Reformation ; but we
shall find passages more apposite to our
purpose, in the sermons on regeneration,
faith, grace, and gospel obedience.
The object of the sermons “ On the Na-
“ ture and Necessity of Regeneration,” is
sufficiently expressed in their title ; and the
total change of heart and life, which the
spirit of the Gospel requires and produces,
is strongly and scripturally exhibited. The
term is explained in its various senses, and
afterwards loosely and promiscuously used,
to express the origin, the process, or the
effect, of that great transformation of
character, described by a metaphor so
remarkable.
We have often lamented together, the in¬
jury to practical religion, which has arisen
from treating this doctrine controversially ;
and the obscurity in which it has been in¬
volved, by a neglect of precision in the ex¬
pression of it. Even in these sermons,
notwithstanding their general merit, -we
find this same want of precise definition
VOL. II.
o
194
TILLOTSON.
and application, to which I adverted in a
former letter, as tending generally to em¬
barrass doctrinal discussions, and to create
an appearance of opposition, where no real
or essential difference exists ; and I venture
to make this remark upon them, merely to
' show, that if so acute a reasoner can be made
apparently to differ from himself, by apply¬
ing the same phrase in different senses, a
similar variation in the use of it by others,
(each understanding it in his own sense *
only,) may produce an appearance of dis¬
crepancy in opinion, which a mutual ex¬
planation, or the substitution of another
form of expression, would probably remove.
In the opening sermon, regeneration is
considered, not as the implantation of the
principle of spiritual life, by the power of
the Holy Ghost, but as the change of cha¬
racter, consequent upon it. It is used sy¬
nonymously with repentance, conversion,
renovation, and sanctification ; and is stated
rather as a condition required, than as a
privilege conferred, by the Gospel. Yet
this change of character the preacher as-
TILLOTSON.
195
cribes expressly, to the operation of a
Divine Power, “ of the same kind with
‘‘ that which created the world, and raised
t
“ up Jesus Christ from the dead though
he controverts the opinions (drawn from
the metaphorical term regeneration,) of
irresistible grace, instantaneous conversion,
and the absolute passiveness of the crea¬
ture in the process.
Grace (he admits) may be, and some¬
times is, but is not generally, irresistible ;
“ and though this grace is the foundation
« of all that is good in us, the different im-
“ provement of it, occasions the difference
“ of our attainments in grace and good-
“ ness — and the neglect or abuse of it,
may incur its final forfeiture.
Under this latter view, the same term is
used, to express the Divine operation and
agency, which had been before applied to
the effect; and regeneration is made the
spring and principle of conversion and
sanctification, with which it had been
rather loosely identified. I should not
o 2
196
TILLOTSON.
venture to notice an inaccuracy, in a writer
so eminently above my criticism, but that I
think it confirms what I have elsewhere
said, of the controversy on baptismal rege¬
neration ; and proves, that much of the jea¬
lousy entertained of this doctrine, has arisen
from a generality in the statement of it, and
an application of the same expression, to
designate the spiritual principle, and its re¬
sults. In either of these senses, as used in
the passages I have noticed, and, indeed,
throughout the sermons under this title, it
can have no reference to the sacrament of
baptism ; but is stated on the contrary, as
a subsequent and sensible, and, in some
degree, a voluntary, change ; the rectified
will of the renewed creature, consenting to
the Divine suggestions, and co-operating
(if we may so speak) with the grace of
God.
In confirmation of this view, regeneration
is explained, as strictly synonymous with
sanctification, and descriptive, not only of
the original transformation, but of the per¬
severance and progress in holiness, which
11
%■
TILLOTSON.
197
mark the character of the renewed Chris¬
tian. The evidences and results of the
principle of grace, are identified with the
principle itself ; and, while this principle is
maintained to be virtually the sole cause of
regeneration and conversion, the saving
change is not supposed to be accomplished,
till it becomes manifest in its effects, and
after many struggles and conflicts with sin,
the power of Divine grace is exhibited, in a
signal and effectual reformation. When
this is done, and not before, the man is said
to be regenerate. But while it was yet in
progress, “ the new man was forming, and
“ the work of regeneration was going on ;
“ and it was perhaps a very considerable
“ time, from the first beginning of it, till it
“ came to a fixed and settled state.”
Such, in a few words, is the statement of
the doctrine contained in these sermons ;
referring, not so much to the Divine act of
the new creation, as to the consequent
effect, in the renovation of the creature,
and guarding, apparently, against that indo¬
lent and passive dependence upon the grace
o S
198
TILLOTSON.
of God, which the notion of its effectual
and irresistible operation (independent of
human exertion,) was likely to produce.
As the Gospel allows no credit to repent¬
ance, without its corresponding fruits, and
promises no salvation to faith that is not
made perfect by love, the preacher admits
no evidence of regeneration, but an earnest
endeavour to be conformed to that image,
in which, by the Divine power, we are re¬
newed. Whether the vital principle may
exist, without any visible fruit ; whether it
may be latent, and for a time inoperative,
he does not here enquire. Of the results
only, he speaks : and it is evident, that by
the results only, we can rationally judge of
our participation of the privilege, as effect-
tual to our future salvation.
Nothing can be apparently more at va¬
riance with this statement of the doctrine,
than that which represents regeneration, as
the spiritual grace of baptism ; in which, it
is obvious that the term must be used, to
designate the communication of the principle
TILLOTvSON.
199
exclusively ; and this communication must
be understood as leaving its fruition still
contingent. NoWj if it appear that Tillotson
has used the term in another place, in direct
reference to baptism, I think we can only
reconcile this discrepancy, by allowing such
a variety as I have supposed, in the applica¬
tion of it.
I shall only specify two passages in his
works, (from the 62d and 67th sermons,) in
one of which, he states expressly the doc¬
trine of baptismal regeneration, and in the
other guards and defines it by the very
limitation which I have suggested.
In the 67th sermon (upon the danger ot
apostacy,) referring to the case of those
“ who were once enlightened, and have
“ tasted of the heavenly gift, and were
“ made partakers of the Holy Ghost, he
says, These expressions seem to denote
“ the spiritual benefits and graces of the
« Holy Ghost, conferred upon Christians by
“ baptism; (which
200
TILI>OTSON.
“ is the proper work of the Holy Ghost,}
“ and justification, and remission of sins.”
In another place (sermon 62.) he defines
this grace more precisely ; and Ihnits it, to
the communication of that spiritual aid, by
which we are brought into a capacity for
evangelical obedience, and a hope of future
salvation. “We (says he) who are Chris-
“ tians, have received that grace in bap-
“ tism, by which our natures are so far
“ healed, as, if we be not wanting to our-
“ selves, and do not neglect the means
“ which God hath appointed, we may mor-
“ tify our lusts, and lead a new life.” —
“ But if, instead of mortifying and subduing
“ the evil propensions of our nature, we will
“ cherish, and give new life and power to
“ them, we forfeit the grace which we re-
“ ceived in baptism, and bring ourselves
“ again under the power and dominion of
“ Sin.
And this, I apprehend, is all that the as-
sertors of baptismal regeneration generally
mean, by their statement of the doctrine :
TILLOTSON.
201
and I cannot but think, that many of the
dangerous positions connected with it, arise
from the application of the term, to express,
what may be better called fruits of re¬
generation. Bishop Beveridge, one of the
great champions of the doctrine, marks the
distinction very clearly j and, as far as I
know, most of our divines who have main¬
tained it, are equally careful to guard against
any interpretation that can lead to a delusive
security. It is unnecessary to recur to the
period, when this doctrine first became a
subject of dispute in our Church ; but you
know that the passages referring to it in the
Liturgy, were objected to by the non-con¬
formist divines at the Restoration ; and
Bishop Beveridge speaks of it, as a contro¬
versy of recent origin.
I have been tempted to recur to this sub¬
ject, because it has unhappily been made a
question of party, upon which polemical
jealousy on either side has fastened, as a test
of general orthodoxy ; and because I think
the doctrine has been particularly obscured,
by an arbitrary connexion with others.
202
TILLOTSON.
Its practical tendency has been objected to,
as calculated to lower the spiritual standard
of Christianity ; and its principle has been
controverted, as subversive of the funda¬
mental doctrine of human corruption, or at
least greatly diminishing its extent, and the
consequent necessity of the Divine influence
for its removal. It must, indeed, be con¬
fessed, that these results would follow, from
connecting regeneration, in its full and
final effects, with the ordinance of baptism :
but such does not appear to be the inten¬
tion of the advocates of this doctrine ; and I
believe few of its opponents, have proposed
a higher standard of Christianity, than is to
be found in the writings of Taylor and
Beveridge.
For myself, my dear friend, (I must for
your satisfaction state my own opinion,)
I will confess that I think the polemical
discussion of this doctrine, has involved it in
difficulties upon both sides, which do not
embarrass those,, who receive it in the sim¬
ple enunciation of Scripture ; and that I
hold it a point of more importance, practi-
TILLOTSON.
203
cally to apply and improve the Divine grace,
whenever and however conferred, than
curiously to define its extent, or captiously
to debate about the period of its communi¬
cation.
The length of this letter has exceeded
my calculation, and, I fear, will exhaust
your patience. I shall therefore defer, till
my next, the observations which I propose
to make upon the other sermons I have
specified.
Yours, most affectionately.
204
LETTER XXV.
TILLOTSON.
TILLOTSON’s doctrine of faith. - ORIGIN OF FAITH _
CONSISTENCY OF DIVINE INFLUENCE WITH MORAL LIBER¬
TY. - OBJECTS OF FAITH STATED. — EFFECTS OF FAITH
UPON THE CHARACTER AND LIFE. — OBSERVATIONS. -
INSTRUMENTALITY OF FAITH TOWARDS SALVATION. -
JUSTIFICATION. — WHAT FAITH IT IS THAT JUSTIFIES. -
PARALLEL OF TILLOTSON AND BAXTER, ON THIS POINT.
— TILLOTSOn’s DOCTRINE FREE FROM PRESUMPTION. -
CONDITIONS. - FAITH, A CONDITION. - THE NOTION OF
CONDITIONS, NOT DEROGATORY FROM THE GRACE OF THE
GOSPEL. - DOCTRINE OF GRACE. — EXTREMES. - SCRIP¬
TURAL STATEMENT OF TILLOTSON. - FULL ACKNOW¬
LEDGEMENT OF HUMAN CORRUPTION. - UNION WITH
CHRIST, THE ONLY SOURCE OF DIVINE GRACE.
MY DEAR FRIEND,
I SHALL resume, without farther preface,
the subject of my last letter, and endeavour
to trace briefly, Tillotson’s doctrine of faith,
as to its origin, its objects, its effects, and
the degree of its instrumentality towards
our justification.
TILLOTSON.
205
We find, in the third volume of his works,
a course of sermons upon this subject, ex¬
tending, under various titles, from the
165th to the 193d. I shall only touch upon
two or three of them, as connected with our
present enquiry.
After a discourse upon the nature of
faith, too abstract and general for our pur¬
pose, but containing much excellent matter,
and three sermons on “ Religious Faith,”
or the belief of Divine Revelation, we come
to one, on “ the Testimony of the Spirit to
“ the truth of the Gospel in which the
author defines the belief of it as “ a Divine
“ faith,” “ not only in respect to the object
“ of it, and the argument whereby it is
“ wrought, and the effect of it, but likewise
“ in respect to the author and efficient of
“ it, which is the Divine Spirit.”
Under the latter view, which is applicable
to the subject of our enquiry, he expressly
asserts his belief, that “ this faith does not
‘‘ become an abiding and effectual persua-
“ sion in any person, without the special
206
TILLOTSON
‘‘ operation of the Holy Ghost and he
states one effect of this operation, to be
“ the furthering and helping forward the
“ efficacy of this persuasion, upon our hearts
‘‘ and lives, in the first work of conversion
“ and regeneration, and in the progress of
“ sanctification afterwards ; both which, the
Scripture doth every where attribute to
“ the Spirit of God, as the author and effi-
“ cient cause.”
So much may suffice, as evidence of his
judgement, as to the origin of religious
faith, and the work of the spirit, in awaken¬
ing and improving it. A merely speculative
belief of Christianity, he honours not with
the name, but urges it as an aggravation of
the responsibility of those, who are content¬
ed to rest in it.
It is unnecessary to follow him in his
disquisition, upon the consistency of this
divine influence upon the will, with the
doctrine of moral liberty, and the allowable¬
ness (under a due sense of this influence) of
the exercise of reason, in religion. But we
TILLOTSON
207
cannot here read, without interest, his al¬
lusion to the case of Chillingworth, whom he
vindicates from the reproach of Socinianism ;
from which, indeed, that great man seems
to have sufficiently vindicated himself, not
only by an express and solemn disavowal^ in
one of his controversial papers, but by the
epithets applied to the doctrines of that sect,
in one of his sermons.*
The “ object ” of this faith, is next de¬
scribed : — first, the existence of God, the
immortality of the soul, and the certainty
of a future retribution, which the preacher
includes, consistently with his general plan,
under the head of natural religion ; and,
secondly, the truth of the revelation con¬
tained in the Scriptures, but especially the
doctrine of the Gospel, distinguished by
* The fifth ; — which is worth reading, on many other
accounts ; and particularly, for the caution with which
he treats the predestinarian doctrine, while he argues
against the prevalent abuses of it. It is singular enough,
that Chillingworth’s reputation should have suffered in
his own time, by the malice of his popish opponents,
and at a later period, by the insidious praise of Gibbon.
208
TILLOTSON.
the epithet of tlie Christian faitli ; “ the firm
“ belief of which, is,” (he says,) by way
of eminence, usually called faiths in the
New Testament.”
The proposition, which is the subject of
this faith, he states in the words of St. John :
“ These things are written, that ye might
“ believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son
‘‘ of God ; and that believing, ye might
‘‘ have life through his name.”
In the belief “ that Jesus is the Christ,”
he comprehends the “ belief, of his divinity
“ and incarnation, of the merit and satis-
faction of his death and sufferings, to ap-
“ pease the offended justice of God, and
‘‘ reconcile him to mankind, and to pur-
“ chase for them, the pardon of their sins,
“ and eternal life, upon condition of faith,
“ repentance, and sincere obedience :” —
and in this belief, he further includes “ the
‘‘ hope of salvation, from no other but
“ Christ alone,” — “ as a teacher and a sa-
viour, a sacrifice and propitiation, a legis-
lator and a sovereign.”
'TILLOTSOK,
I have been obliged to collect these pro¬
positions, as they lie scattered in two or
three sermons, and interspersed with other
matter ; and I have omitted many equally
strong, but only corroborative of those here
cited. The references to Scripture, in these
sermons, are particularly selected, with a
view to inculcate the belief in Christ, as a
Saviour; and this article is stated (both
here and in other discourses,) as the funda¬
mental principle of Christianity.
We now proceed to the ‘‘ effects ” of this
faith, or the influence which it is likely to
produce, upon the lives of those who re¬
ceive it. ,
The necessary and genuine effect of this
faith, in the authority and doctrine of
Christ, is a sincere conformity to his pre¬
cepts. — “ And hence” (says the preacher)
‘‘ it is, that true Christians, who did fashion
“ their lives according to the Gospel, are
called believers ; and the sum of all
“ Christianity is usually contained in this
“ word, believing, which is the great prin-
VOL. II. p
^210
TILLOTSON.
“ ciple of a Christian life:” — for none are
A.
truly said to believe in Christ, who do
“ not shew forth the proper and genuine
“ effects of this faith, who do not live as
they believe, and conform their lives to
that doctrine, to the truth whereof they
“ profess an assent.”
Many of the arguments and observations
in the earlier sermons of this series, are
evidently framed under a supposition, that
the preacher was addressing a sceptical au¬
dience ; and on this view, the foundation is
laid in a prefatory disquisition, upon the na¬
ture of faith, its influence as a principle of
action, and its application to natural re¬
ligion ; the proofs of which, are argued
upon the evidence of reason, tradition,
universal consent, and the obvious marks
of beneficence, power, and wisdom, dis¬
played in the works of the visible creation.
I know that you object to such a course,
as foreign to the great object of pulpit in¬
struction ; and I should, perhaps, agree
with you in your objection, if all congrega-
TILLOTSOW.
211
tions were speculatively, as well as nomin¬
ally, Christian. Yet, as the professing
world is now constituted, I am not sure
that such general and prefatory information
is not, in many congregations, beneficial,
as an antidote to the sophistry, which infi¬
delity is ever ready to suggest, and against
which, (under the divine grace,) a firm im¬
pression of these primary truths, affords the
best security. “ He that cometh to God,”
says the apostle, ‘‘ must believe that he is,
“ and that he is the rewarder of them that
diligently seek him.”
To this very course, we find the excellent
Baxter resorting, in the endeavour to es¬
tablish his own faith, under a temptation to
infidelity. “ He blamed himself” (says his
biographer, Calamy,) for so long neglect-
“ ing the well settling of his foundations,
‘‘ while he spent so much time about the
‘‘ superstructure. But he would be now no
“ longer satisfied ; and set himself to ex-
“ amine the reasons of his faith, that it
“ might be, indeed, his own ” — and in
p 2
212
TILLOTSON.
“ the storm of this temptation, it proved a
“ great assistance to his faith, that the
“ being and attributes of God were so clear
to him.”
You must not conclude, from these re¬
marks, that I am an admirer of abstract
reasoning, in the pulpit. I would only sug¬
gest, that there may be circumstances, to
make it not only allowable, but necessary ;
and that the preacher, who would imitate
the apostle, in becoming all things to all
men, for the more effectual accomplishment
of his mission, must sometimes use this
weapon to pioneer the way, to his more
evangelical and authoritative demonstra¬
tions.
To these we proceed, in reviewing the
last division, in which I proposed to consi¬
der Tillotson’s doctrine of faith ; viz. its
instrumentality towards our justification,
and salvation.
The Christian faith, which, according to
the doctrine laid down in these sermons,
TILLOTSON.
213
justifies, sanctifies, and saves, is stated to
include the four points following : —
First, an assent of the understanding to
the divine mission, character, and authority
of Christ :
Secondly, an assent of the understand-
iiio- to all the truths which he has revealed
O
in his word :
&
Thirdly, a reliance and dependence upon
him, and upon no other, for conferring the
benefits, and performing the promises, set
before us in the Gospel :
Fourthly, obedience to all his laws and
commands ; which, if we do not obey, we
are presumed to disbelieve ; for, if we did
truly and heartily believe them to be the
commands of God, we should obey them.
- . \
. To prove that obedience is included in
the Scripture notion of faith, or at least
uniformly stated as the fruit of it, many
strong texts are adduced ; and this doctrine
214
TlLI>OT.SON.
is urged, in opposition to the Solifidian, or
rather Antinomian principles, against which
the general argument in these sermons is
directed.
The doctrine of justification is here
largely discussed, and the distinction, of
initial and final justification, adopted by the
preacher. Your judgment of the soundness
of his argument, must depend upon your
previous view of the subject ; but to my ap¬
prehension, the statement is clear from the
charge of legality ; and the gratuitous cha¬
racter of the Gospel covenant, is fully vin¬
dicated in the assertion, that “ faith ” (a
lively influential faith,) “ is the whole and
“ entire condition required in the Gospel,
“ of our pardon ; upon the performance of
“ which, God hath promised to pardon
« sin.”
This faith is again stated to include “ an
‘‘ assent to the truth of the Gospel, a trust
“ and confidence in Christ as our only
“ Saviour, repentance from dead works,
‘‘ and sincere obedience and holiness of
« life.”
TILLOTSON*
215
It is obvious, that the three first only, can
be urged, as requisite to the present pardon
and justification of the sinner ; but the last,
as the necessary fruit of repentance, and
evidence of sincere conversion of heart, is
as strongly insisted on, by the advocates for
justification by faith only, in what is called
the evangelical sense, as by those who are
supposed to state the condition more ge¬
nerally. I say supposed, — because I really
think there is very little difference of
opinion, if the parties would mutually
agree to define their expressions precisely,
and to use them in the same sense ; or if
each would allow, that those who dissent
from them, may honestly aim at the same
conclusion, though their judgment, or
their prejudices, should lead to it, by a dif¬
ferent process.
' This notion of faith, as including good
works, virtually towards pardon, and ac¬
tually towards final salvation, is so dis¬
tinctly stated by Baxter, (whose authority
I know you respect,) that I cannot resist
quoting his doctrine, as corroborative of
p 4
216
TILLOTSON.
Tillotson’s judgment, and (if I may speak
so presumptuously,) of my own. The pas-’
sase is to be found in his declaration of the
sense in which he subscribed the articles of
the Church, and refers to the eleventh : —
‘‘ Though he that doeth righteousness is
“ righteous, and the Scripture throughout,
“ and frequently, mentioneth an inherent,
“ and personal righteousness, necessary to
“ salvation, yet this is no universal right-
“ eousness, nor such as will justify us ac-
“ cording to the law of innocency or works ;
but is merely subordinate to the merit
“ and efficacy of the sacrifice and righteous-
“ ness of Christ, which only, meriteth for us
“ as a price ; our faith being only the re-
“ quisite (yet given) moral qualification, for
“ the reception of the free gift of pardon,
“ justification, and adoption, and hath not
‘‘ the least part of the office or honour of
“ Christ. Yet are Christ’s words true, that
‘‘ by men’s works they shall be justified or
“ condemned, and all men shall be judged
“ according to their and James truly
“ saith, that by works, a man is justified,
TILLOTSON.
217
“ and not by faith only : — not by works of
perfection, or of Moses’s law, nor any,
“ that as a price or commutation, do make
“ the reward to be of debt, and not of
“ grace ; — but, by a practical faith, or
“ Christianity, — such acts, as faith itself is,
“ and prove our belief — such, as Christ
“ has promised justification and salvation to,
“ — such, as by justifying belief to be sincere,
do justify the person against the charge of
“ infidelity, hypocrisy, impenitence, and
“ ungodliness. Christianity is that faith,
“ which Paul opposes to works.”
Here is not a word of that justification
before men, which some have understood
St. James to intend by this illustration.
The whole of the evangelical system, in¬
cluding belief and practice, is proposed as
the condition, of the promised justification
and salvation ; and the doctrine of St. Paul
is epitomized, in the single, but comprehen¬
sive word, “ Christianity.”
Now, I really believe that many good
Christians, who suppose themselves to difi
218
TILLOTSON.
fer upon this weighty question, are as nearly '
agreed as Tillotson and Baxter ; and I can¬
not but lament the prejudice, which, by class¬
ing them under different denominations,
seems to give Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas,
the pre-eminence which belongs only to
Christ, and precludes many, from Christian
fellowship and friendship with each other,
who are earnestly labouring in the same
cause, and acting (in the main) upon the
same principles.
I shall not, here, enter into the distinc¬
tion which has been made, between faith,
as including, and as producing, good works,
farther than to observe, that it seems little
more than a verbal difference. The prin¬
ciple which necessarily produces any effect,
may be said virtually to include it ; and
I believe, few have inferred more from this
expression, than those who most object to
it, will admit, viz. that “faith, if it hath
“ not works, is dead and that it is not a
mere assent to the truth, but a cordial sub¬
mission to the authority and obligations of
the Gospel, that will be available towards
*1
TILLOTSON.
219
justification, whether considered as initial,
or effectual and final.
That Tillotson held his doctrine of faith,
as including obedience, in complete separa¬
tion from the presumptuous notion of me¬
rit, the following passage will abundantly
prove ; and may, indeed, supersede the
necessity of any farther vindication of him,
on this head.
“ The apostle, in the Epistle to the Ro-
“ mans, doth not only dispute against those,
“ who simply contended for justification by
« the legal dispensation, but were fallen
“ also into the gross error or mistake, that
“ they did 7nerit pardon or justification at
“ God’s hand ; which is impossible ; for
“ pardon is free, and of grace, or else it is
“ not pardon. Therefore, the apostle as-
“ serts, that v/e are so justified by faith,
“ that neither our assent to the Gospel, nor
“ our obedience to the commands of it, do
ijierit this at God’s hands. For this
“ would directly contradict justification by
“ the faith of the Gospel: — for, how can
TILLOTSON.
‘‘ any man possibly think that he ineriU
“ pardon, by his believing and obeying the
“ Gospel, when this is part of the Gospel
“ which we believe, that Christ died for
‘‘ our sins, and purchased our pardon at so
“ dear a rate ? which had been very unjust,
“ if we could have done any thing to have
“ merited it.
I have already observed, that the condi¬
tional character of the Gospel covenant is
as fully established, by the requisition of
faith, as the indispensable preliminary of
justification, as it could be by the claim of
the strictest legal obedience, supposing man
capable of the performance. The consist—
ency of the imposition of conditions, with
free grace, as well as the entire exclusion
of any natural merit in the performance of
them, is well expressed in the following
passage, with which I shall conclude our
extracts from these discourses.
“ God’s grace in pardoning a sinner, is*
said to be free, not because it is not sus-
‘‘ pended upon any condition, for the
TILI.OTSOX.
221
“ Scripture telJs us plainly, that it is upon
“ the condition of faith, and repentance,
“ and forgiving others, and the like ; but,
“ it is free, because God was pleased
“ freely to give his Son, to die for our sins,
and to accept of his sacrifice for the ex-
“ piation of them, and to impose easy and
“ reasonable conditions upon us, in order
“ to our enjoyment of this benefit, -r- and,
“ upon such conditions, though they have
nothing of virtue or merit, of any natural
“ or moral efficacy, to deserve or procure
“ such a benefit as the pardon of our sins,
“ hath vouchsafed, for the sake of his Son,
“ whom he gave to be a ransom for us, to
“ receive us to grace and mercy. And I
“ think this is abundantly enough, to make
‘‘ our justification very gracious and free,
‘‘ though not absolutely free from all con-
‘‘ dition.”
In these passages, surely, we find the
doctrine of justification, strictly accordant
with the language of our article, and suffi¬
ciently free from the charge of presumption
or legality. I have dwelt the longer on this
222
TTLLOTSON.
point, because 1 think that Tillotson’s
earnestness in moral exhortation, and the
argumentative cast of some of his discourses,
have exposed him (however unjustly) to
these imputations ; and that a vague im¬
pression of his latitudinarian principles, (an
epithet, by the way, applied to him and
his contemporaries, in a sense very different
from that which it bears at present,) has
led some to suspect him of underrating the
fundamental doctrines of the Church, and of
exalting the morality of the Gospel, at the
expense of its mysteries, audits mercies.
W e are next to consider the doctrine of
grace ; upon which, the divines of this
school are supposed to have deviated from
the primitive standard, in consequence of
their attachment to the Arminian system.
I have already observed, that the original
doctrine of Arminius upon free will, (tak¬
ing it simply in his third proposition,) dif¬
fers but little from the language of our ar¬
ticle ; while the fourth merely asserts, that
grace is not irresistible, but “ may be re-
sisted and rendered ineffectual, by the
TILLOTSON.
223
perverse will of the impenitent sinner.”
I allowed, however, that these principles
had been much exaggerated, in the progress
of the controversy ; and that in England,
from various causes, but particularly from
the abuses of the Calvinistic scheme, they
had become a part of the popular divinity.
It is not to be denied, that in some
which has come down to us, (and probably,
from the state of the times, in much that
is forgotten,) the doctrine of free will was
inculcated, in terms apparently inconsistent
with the degree of human depravity, an¬
nounced in the Scriptures ; and a natural
and inherent capacity for holiness, was in¬
sinuated at least, if not asserted. From
this objection, the sermons of Tillotson ap¬
pear to me to be entirely exempt, and to
be particularly strong and explicit, in shew¬
ing the absolute necessity of the divine
grace and assistance ; asserting, at the same
time, the consistency of this grace, with
that moral liberty of choice and of action ,
upon which the very idea of religious re¬
sponsibility, must depend.
224
TILLOTSON.
To convey a clear impression of his
doctrine upon this important article, would
require the citation of so many passages, as
must lengthen this letter beyond all reason¬
able bounds ; I shall, therefore, confine
myself to one discourse, and trace, in
his own language, the nature and influ-
ence of this ‘‘ supernatural grace,” from
its first or initiatory communication, to
its full operation and effect, in the gradual
sanctification and final salvation of the
Christian.
“ God, considering the lapsed and de-
“ cayed condition of mankind, sent his Son
‘‘ into the world, to recover us out of that
sinful and miserable state, into which we
“ were fallen, — to reveal eternal life to us,
“ and the way to it, — and to offer it to us,
“ upon certain conditions, to be performed
“ by us. But we, being weak, and without
“ strength, slaves to sin, and under the
“ power of evil habits, and unable to free
ourselves from this bondage by any natural
‘‘ power left in us, our blessed Saviour, in
TILLOTSON.
225
“ great pity and tenderness to mankind,
“ hath in his Gospel, offered, and is ready
“ to afford to us, an extraordinary assist-
“ ance of his grace and Holy Spirit, to
“ supply the defects of our natural power
“ and strength. And this supernatural
“ grace of Christ is that alone, which can
“ enable us to perform what he requires of
us : — and this, according to its several
“ uses and occasions, is called by several
“ names : it is called preventing grace, as
“ it excites us to that which is good, pre-
“ venting any motion or desire on our parts;
“ assisting grace, as it strengthens us ; and
“ persevering grace, as it keeps us constant
“ in a good course ; and it may have several
“ other denominations, — for it is suited to
“ all our occasions and necessities.”
• “ To this grace and assistance of God,
‘‘ the Scriptures constantly attribute our
“ regeneration, sanctification, and persever-
“ ance in holiness ; and plainly express
“ the supernatural assistance of Christ,
“ whereby we become good, and are en-
VOL. II. 0,
226
TILLOTSON.
“ abled to do any thing that is good, and
“ are preserved and continued in a good
“ course. As the Scripture doth every
“ where attribute sin to our own corrupt
“ hearts, and to the temptation and insti-
“ gation of the Devil ; so doth it constantly
ascribe all the good that we do, to the
" grace of Christ ; or, which is all one, to
“ the blessed motions and assistances of
« God’s Holy Spirit.”
I omit the corroborative texts urged by
the preacher, where they are not absolutely
necessary to preserve the connexion of
the sentence ; as my object is merely to
state his view of the doctrine, and not to
argue the truth of it ; upon which you
know that my conviction is as strong as
your own.
In the prosecution of the subject, the
necessity of the divine grace and assistance,
is argued upon various grounds, — the cor¬
ruption of human nature, the power of evil
habits, the fickleness of human resolution,
TILLOTSON.
227
and the malice and activity of the great
enemy of mankind. This grace is not,
however, afforded to exclude, but rather
supjioses the concurrence of, our own ex¬
ertions. ‘‘ The branches of the vine are
“ not merely passive, but contribute their
‘‘ part to the production of fruit, though
“ they derive continual supplies of sap and
“virtue from the vine:” — “The acknow-
“ ledgment of impotency does not exclude
“ endeavour; — ’’and “God’s preventing and
“ assisting grace, his working in us both to
“ will and to do, so far from excluding our
“ own endeavours, is used by the Apostle,
“ as a strong reason and argument to the
“ contrary.”
In attributing to man, the capacity of
co-operating with the divine grace, you will
observe, that Tillotson every where speaks
of that capacity, as derived from grace alone.
This is a point particularly to be remem¬
bered, as it is the hinge upon which
the whole controversy turns. The exercise
of a derived and imparted power, implies no
presumption of natural strength or suffi-
228 _ TILLOTSON.
ciency; and the grace of God is not de¬
preciated, by the acknowledgment of that
moral liberty, to which in fact it may be
said to have restored mankind.
But let us follow him in his account of
the origin and effect, of this blessed privilege
of the Gospel : “ This grace and assistance
‘‘ (he continues) is derived to us from our
‘‘ union with Christ. So soon as we believe
“ in him, and heartily embrace his doctrine,
“ we are united to him; and, if we continue
“ in this faith, we abide in him, and he in
“ us ; and by virtue of this union, the in-
“ fluences of his grace, and the aid and
assistances of his Spirit, are derived to us,
“ to all the purposes of holiness and obedi-
“ ence.”
But, when I say this grace and assist^
“ ance is derived to us from our union with
“ Christ, I do not intend to exclude the
‘‘ necessity of God’s grace and Holy Spirit,
“ to the conversion of a sinner, and his first
planting in Christ. But when we say, that
“ Christians derive the influence of divine
TILLOTSON.
229
“ grace, from their union with Christ, this
“ supposeth them to be Christians already,
and planted] in Christ, and that this
“ likewise is the work of God’s grace ; for
“ if we cannot bring forth fruit, without the
“ aid and assistance of his Spirit, much less
“ without that, could we be planted into
“ him, and united with him.”
“ Here, then, is every reason why we
“ should continually depend upon God, and
“ every day earnestly pray to him, for the
“ aid of his grace, and the influence of his
“ Spirit, to guide, and direct, and strengthen
“ us in all goodness ; and to keep us by his
“ mighty power, through faith unto salva-
“ tion.”
Surely, the advocate of doctrines like
these, cannot fairly be cited, as the preacher
of a cold and self-dependent morality, or a
retailer of the maxims of Pagan or philoso¬
phic virtue : and it would be but candid,
when such maxims occur (as they do oc¬
casionally occur in his writings), to under-
Q 3
230
TILLOTSOxV.
stand them rather as illustrations, or some¬
times as arguments ad hominemi than as
principles intended to supply a sufficient
rule of conduct, or to supersede the pecu¬
liar and humiliating truths of the Gospel.
Adieu.
231
LETTER XXVI.
TILLOTSON.
SERMONS SIXTY-EIGHT AND SIXTY-NINE. - TITLE. CHAR¬
ACTER AND OFFICE OF CHRIST DESCRIBED. - DEFINITION
OF GOSPEL OBEDIENCE. - RECONCILEABLE, OR SYNONY¬
MOUS WITH THAT OF EVANGELICAL FAITH. EXTRACTS.
- OBEDIENCE, VIRTUAL AND ACTUAL. FAITH THE
PRINCIPLE, OBEDIENCE THE RESULT. - POSSIBILITY OF
EVANGELICAL OBEDIENCE, — THROUGH GRACE. NE¬
CESSITY OF THIS OBEDIENCE. — • REMARKABLE APPLICA¬
TION OF THE EPITHET “GOOD WORKS.” - CONSISTENCY
OF THIS METHOD OF SALVATION, WITH FREE GRACE.
FINAL STATEMENT OF TILLOTSON’s DOCTRINE. - PARAL¬
LEL EXTRACT FROM HOOKER.
MY DEAU FRIEND,
I SHALL observe only upon two sermons
more j tlie former of which, tiom its title ,
would appear likely to be obnoxious to the
charge of legality, if such a charge could
be fairly applied to Ruy of these excellent
discourses.
Before we proceed to the examination of
these, allow me to lay before you two ob-
^ Christ the Author, and Obedience the Condition, of
ISalvation.
Q 4
232
TILLOTSOX.
servations, which I extract from a very able
and temperate work, in defence of the
Evangelical principles and preaching^; and
which (I think) can hardly be understood,
without supposing the author to hold (in
some sense) the doctrine of an initial and a
final justification ; and, if not expressly to
limit the former, to the original act of for¬
giveness, at least to distinguish it from that
consummation of redemption, which he still
appears to consider as conditional.
‘‘ Is there, then, no place (he asks) for
“ conditions in the system of Christian in-
“ struction? For the conditions of salvation,
“ there certainly is. When understood to
‘‘ designate that personal obedience, without
“ which we cannot be saved, let them be
“ urged with the utmost zeal.”
‘‘ To the term, so understood (viz. as
‘‘ the circumstance without which an effect
“ will not take place), many of the advo-
“ cates of the doctrine of justification by
* Zeal without Innovation.
7
TILLOTSOX.
283
“ faith, have nothing to object, when used
“ in reference to the final result of justifica-
“ tion. But, confining the xi^ord justification
“ to the simple question to which it relates,
namely, to the being treated as righteous,
‘‘ they know not how to speak of conditions,
“ on such a subject.”
I cite these passages, not to observe upon
any apparent discrepancy between them,
(which is very fairly obviated by the con¬
text), but to show that the doctrine they
contain, differs not essentially (if it differ at
all) from the views of Tillotson, which we
have been considering, and particularly
those, exhibited in the sixty-eighth and
sixty-ninth sermons, to which I have ad¬
verted above.
These sermons open very judiciously, with
a definition of the term “ salvation;” which
is stated to include, “ not only our deliver-
“ ance from Hell, and redemption * from
“ eternal misery, but the obtaining for us
“ eternal life and happiness ;” expressing
(as I understand) the consummation and
234
TILLOTSON,
fulfilment of the covenant of mercy, to
which man is gratuitously admitted by
justification.
Of this salvation, Christ is stated in these
sermons as the author, and obedience is
prescribed, as the indispensable condition;
and the consistency of this condition, with
the doctrine of justification by faith, and
the free grace and mercy of God, is proved
in the concluding observations.
The character and office of our blessed
Lord, as the author of salvation, are de¬
scribed in the following passages, amongst
many others too long to insert :
“ He is the author and cause of our sal-
“ vation ; as a rule and as a pattern, as a
“ price and propitiation, and as an advo-
“ cate that is continually pleading our cause,
“ and interceding with God in our be-
“ half.”
The perfections essential to the character
of an High Priest, who should be qualified
TILLOTSON.
235
to rccovGr iTisn fi’om liis StidstcVtc ot corriip-
tion and condemnation, are shown to have
been united in our blessed Lord, and in
him only; and by these, he is declared to
be “ every way suited, to all our wants and
“ necessities, — to all our defects and infirmi-
u ties,— to instruct our ignorance by his
“ doctrine,— to lead us into the path of
“ righteousness, by his most holy and. ex-
“ emplary life, — to expiate the guilt of oui
‘‘ sins by his death, — and to procure grace
“ and assistance for us, by his prevalent
“ intercession in our behalf.
He is more emphatically described, as “the
“ author of eternal salvation, as he hath
“ purchased it for us, by the merit of his
“ obedience and sufferings.”— “ He was
“ contented to be substituted a sacrifice for
« us.”— “ He died for us ; not only for our
“ benefit and advantage, but in our place
« and stead ; so that if he had not died,
“ we had eternally perished.”
Christ is also stated to be the author
of our salvation, “ in respect of his power-
236
TTLLOTSON.
‘‘ fill and perpetual intercession for us at
“ the right hand of God.” “ And by virtue
“ of this intercession” (it is further said)
‘‘ our sins are pardoned, upon our sincere
repentance ; our prayers are answered;
“ our wants are supplied ; and the grace
“ and assistance of God’s Holy Spirit are
“ plentifully afforded to us.”
These propositions, strong and unequivo¬
cal as they are, in describing Christ alone as
the author and efficient of salvation, we
have seen repeatedly advanced in the other
sermons ; and perhaps I should apologize
for an apparent tautology in again citing
them here. But where the doctrine of con¬
ditions was to be discussed, it was particu¬
larly necessary to exhibit the sole meri¬
torious cause of Salvation, in all its dignity
and distinctness ; and it was essential to our
argument to prove, by citations in direct
connexion with this doctrine, that Tillotson
held and preached it in such a sense, as en¬
tirely to maintain its consistency with the
free grace of the Gospel dispensation.
TILLOTSON.
237
In the definition of that obedience, which
the Gospel requires as a condition, and
promises to accept as a qualification for
salvation, the author exhibits precisely the
view of that evangelical faith, which, as
far as I understand, all Christians who
maintain the doctrine of the atonement
(except the Antinomians,) agree in pre¬
scribing, as the indispensable requisite to
justification ; not a mere outward pro¬
fession of Christianity, nor even a specula¬
tive belief of its truths, — not an external
worship of the Saviour, nor an indolent and
unproductive appropriation of his promises,
— but a sincere acceptance of him in all his
o-racious offices, and an honest and universal
o
submission to all the precepts of his Gospel;
of which, the preacher goes on to prove that
a true Christian faith is necessarily pro¬
ductive. It is, in fact, only a description
of the same condition, under different names ;
and harmonizes equally with the doctrine of
the Apostles, — of the Homilies, which I
quoted in a former letter, — of the public
services of our Church,— and of many re¬
spectable authorities in our own day, who,
238
TTLLOTSON.
from little differences of verbal explication,
may sometimes appear to hold a different
opinion.
To give you my reasons for supposing
this difference to rest upon a mere transmu¬
tation of terms, I must transcribe the de¬
finition of obedience, more fully than I in¬
tended ; but neither your time nor mine
will be mis-employed, if this definition, or
any other evidence cited in my letters, shall
contribute to remove your jealousy of a
writer, whom I cannot but consider as de¬
serving, in the he^t sense, the title of
Evangelical, — impartial in his enquiry after
truth, and though free and independent in
the use of his own understanding, in the
contemplation of every human system, im¬
plicitly submissive to the truth and autho¬
rity of Scripture, and (to use the words of
his own excellent prayer) desirous only to
receive and obey it from the heart, when¬
ever it was discovered to him.
“ That we may more clearly and de-
“ cidedly understand what obedience it is
TILLOTSON.
239
“ that the Gospel exacts, as an indispensable
“ condition of eternal salvation, and a
necessary qualification in all those who
‘‘ hope to be made partakers of it, we may
be pleased to consider, that there is a
‘‘ virtual and an actual obedience to the
“ laws of God. By an actual obedience, I
“ mean the practice and exercise of the
“ several graces and virtues of Christianity,
“ and the course and tenour of a holy life ;
when out of a good conversation men do
“ show forth their works, and by the out-
ward actions of their lives, do give real
testimony of their piety, justice, sobriety,
“ humility, meekness, and charity, and all
“ other Christian graces and virtues, as oc-
“ casion is ministered for the practice and
“ exercise of them.”
“By a virtual obedience, I mean a sin-
“ cere belief of the Gospel; of the holi-
‘‘ ness and equity of its precepts, of the
‘‘ truth of its promises, and the terror of its
“ threatenings, and a true repentance for
“ all our sins. This is obedience in the root
‘‘ and principle ; for he who sincerely be-
240
TILLOTSON.
“ lieves the Gospel, and does tndy repent
“ of the errors and miscarriages of his life,
is firmly resolved to obey the commands
“ of God, and to walk before him in holi-
“ ness and righteousness, all the days of his
“ life ; so that there is nothing to prevent
“ or hinder this man’s actual obedience to
“ the laws of God, in the course of a holy
“ and good life, but the want of time and
“ opportunity for it. And this was the
“ case of those, who upon the hearing of
“ the Gospel, when it was first preached to
‘‘ them, did heartily embrace it, and turn
“ from their sins, and from the worship of
“ idols, to the true and living God, but
“ were cut off soon after : and there is no
doubt to be made, but in this case (and,
“ by parity of reasoning, in all similar
“ cases,) a virtual obedience was a sufficient
“ qualification for eternal life.”
“ But where there is time and oppor-
“ trinity for the exercise of obedience, there
“ an actual obedience to the laws and pre-
“ cepts of the Gospel is necessary, to qualify
“ us for eternal happiness. So that, though
TILLOTSON.
241
“ a man do sincerely believe the Gospel,
“ and truly repent of his sins, and resolve
“ upon a better life, yet if he do not after-
“ wards put this resolution in practice, and
“ bring forth fruits meet for repentance, his
“ first resolution of obedience, though it
were sincere, will not avail him to sal-
“ vation.”
“ The sum of what I have said (he con-
‘‘ tinues,) is this: that a virtual obedience,
“ and sincere faith and repentance, are suf-
“ ficient, where there is no time and op-
“ portunityfor actual obedience; but where
“ there is opportunity for actual obedience,
“ and the continual practice of a good life,
and perseverance therein, they are indis-
“ pensably necessary, in order to our eternal
“ salvation, and a well-grounded hope and
“ assurance of it.”
I know not what you will think of the
above quotation ; but to my mind, it sug¬
gests exactly the same ideas which I derive
from the evangelical doctrine, ofjustification
by a lively faith ; and I am sure the dis-
VOL. II. R
242
TILLOTSON.
crepancj, if there be any, is chiefly in the
expression ; and is not a sufficient ground
of objection, to the advocates of either form
of explication, so long as the substantial
truth is preserved, that we are justified, not
for our own merits, but solely for the merits
of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.
We need not follow the preacher, in his
distinction of perfect and sincere obedience;
or in his observations on the impossibility
of the one, and the acceptability (through
the merits of our blessed Saviour,) of the
other, — not (God forbid !) upon the pre¬
sumptuous claim of personal service, but
upon the impulse of his free grace and
mercy.
In the sixty-ninth sermon, three remain¬
ing points are discussed, upon which I shall
touch very briefly, and still principally in
the way of quotation.
First, ‘‘ the possibility of performing the
condition of obedience, prescribed by the
gospel —
TILLOTSON.
2i3
Secondly, “ the necessity of this obedi-
ence — and
Thirdly, the consistency of this method
“ and means of salvation, with the law of
‘‘ faith, and the free grace and mercy of
‘‘ God, declared in the gospel.”
The possibility of performing this con^
dition, is attributed by the preacher entirely
to the grace and assistance of God, which
is offered, and ready to be afforded to us, by
the gospel. And surely no depreciation of
the power of divine grace, or presumptuous
estimate of human strength and sufficiency,
can be inferred from the followins; states
ment : —
“ The grace of God doth clearly appear
“ in the whole business of our salvation.
“By grace ye are saved, through faith,
“ (says the Apostle) and that, not of your-
“ selves : it is the gift of God. Eaith is the
“ gift of God, and so is repentance : it is
“ God that works in us both to will and to
“ do, of his own goodness ; that is, who both
Inclines and excites \\s to that which is
11 2
244
TILLOTSON.
“ good, and enables us to do it. Without
“ me (says Christ,) ye can do nothing : and —
“ through Christ strengthening me, (says
“ St. Paul) I am able to do all things. With-
“ out the grace of Christ, we are without
“ strength, — and are not sufficient of our-
‘‘ selves, as of ourselves, to think a good
“ thought ; but our sufficiency is of God.”
This divine grace is farther represented
as the only effectual correction of human
depravity : but, as the Scriptures adduced
in proof of this point, have been already
cited, in our reference to the sermons on
grace, I need not here repeat them.
I omit also the arguments for the ne¬
cessity of obedience, except the proposition
of the doctrine ; which is, in fact, a reply to
the objections that appear to charge it with
presumption.
“ Some men seem to be so afraid of the
“ merit of obedience and good works, that
“ they are loth to assent to the necessity of
“ them j and do it with so much caution,
8
TILLOTSON.
^45
as if they were not thoroughly persuaded
“ of it, or did apprehend some dangerous
“ consequences from it. But this fear is
“ perfectly groundless ; for any man surely
can discern a plain difference, between
“ a worthiness of desert, and a fitness of
“ receiving a rebel, being penitent, and
“ sorry for what he hath done. Though he
“ cannot deserve a pardon, he may be there-
“ by qualified and made meet to receive it ;
— though repentance do not make him
“ worthy, yet it may make him capable, of
“ it, which an obstinate rebel, and one
“ that persists in his disloyalty, is not.”
I
I shall leave this part of the subject, with
the remark, that the application of the epi¬
thets “ good works,” and “ obedience,” not
to any actual or material performances, (if
I may so call them,) but emphatically to
a change in the temper and frame of mind,
seems completely to reconcile, if not to
identify, this doctrine, with the evangelical
view of justification ; and, indeed, I am in¬
clined to think, that if Tillotson had been
TILL0T80N.
^24G
called upon to combat the presumptuous
legalist, as often as he was obliged to oppose
the profligate, the infidel, and the Antino-
mian, his doctrine, of justification by the
faith of Christ alone, would have been as
free from ambiguity in the statement, as it
seems to be from error in the principle.
But I have conceded more than I intend¬
ed, in even supposing such an ambiguit}^ ;
the appearance of which, I am persuaded,
arises from circumstances of local applica¬
tion, and would vanish, upon a fair and im¬
partial collation of the sermons in which
the various doctrines are discussed, with a
reference to the times, places, and occasions
of their delivery, and to the probable views
and objects with which they were composed.
But I must restrain my rambling pen,
and turn to the last head of the sermon un¬
der consideration ; viz. the consistency of
this method of salvation (its contingency
on our obedience,) with the law of faith,
and the free grace of God : — and this I
TILLOTSON.
247
shall state in the author’s own language, as
the full and final expression of his judg¬
ment upon this doctrine, and of his reasons
for so earnestly enforcing it.
“ No man,” he says, “ has reason to
fear, that this doctrine, of the necessity
“ of obedience to our acceptance with God,
“ and the obtaining of eternal life, should
be any way prejudicial to the law of faith,
“ and the law of grace, so long as these
“ three things are asserted and secured : —
‘‘ First, that faith is the root and principle
“ of obedience and a holy life, and that with-
out it, it is impossible to please God : —
‘‘ Secondly, that we stand continually in
“ need of the divine grace and assistance, to
“ enable us toperform that obedience, which
“ the gospel requires of us, and is pleased
“ to accept, in order to eternal life; —
“ Thirdly, that the forgiveness of our
“ sins, and the rewards of eternal life, are
“ founded in the free grace and mercy qf
‘‘ God, conferring these blessings upon us ;
“ not for the merit of our obedience, but
‘ ' R 4 ■ “ ' .
248 TILLOTSON.
“ only for the merit and satisfaction, of the
“ obedience and sufferings of our blessed
“ Saviour and Redeemer. — I say, so long
“ as we assert these three things, we give
all that the gospel ^any where ascribes to
“ faith, or to the grace of God revealed in
“ the gospel.
“ I have been careful” (he continues,)
to express things more fully and dis-
“ tinctly, that no man may imagine, that
“ while we assert the necessity of obedience
“ and a holy life, we have any design to
“ derogate, in the least, from the faith and
‘‘ the grace of God; but only to engage
“ and encourage men to holiness, by con-
“ vincing them of the absolute and indis-
“ pensable necessity of it, in order to
‘‘ eternal salvation.”^^
* The doctrine of Hooker, upon the subject of works,
ha%ung been referred to in a former letter, the following
passages may be cited, to prove his agreement with Til-
lotson. Both writers should be read with a recollection,
that the object of the fonner, was to controvert the
Ron^ish doctrine, and of the latter, to oppose that of the
TILLOTSON.
249
In the above propositions, the doctrine
of works is stated more strongly, than in
Antinomian, or to remove the scruples of the Calvinist,
respecting the consequences to be drawn from his en¬
forcement of obedience as a condition of salvation.
“ The best things which we do, have somewhat in
“ them to be pardoned; how then can we do any thing
“ meritorious, or worthy to be rewarded ^ Indeed,
“ God doth liberally promise whatsoever appertaineth
“ to a blessed life, to as many as sincerely keep his law,
“ though they be not exactly able to keep it. Where-
« fore we acknowledge a dutiful necessity of doing well,
“ but the meritorious dignity of doing well, we utterly
“ renounce. We see how far we are from the perfect
“ rif^hteousness of the law. The little fruit that we have
“ in holiness, it is, God knoweth, corrupt and unsound :
“ we put no confidence at all in it ; we challenge nothing
“ in the world for it. We dare not call God to reckoning
“ as if we had him in our debt books. Our continual
“ suit to him, is, and must be, to bear with our infirmi-
‘‘ ties, and to pardon our offences.”
Sermon on Justification.
The following passage from the same sermon, is
equally clear in its agreement with Tillotson’s doctrine.
“ Did they ’’(the fathers of the Romish Church) “hold,
“ that we cannot be saved with Christ, without good
“ works ? W^e, ourselves, do, I think, say as much ; with
“ this construction, salvation being taken ; as in that
“ sentence, Corde crcditur adjusiitiam^ ore ft confcssio
250
TILLOTSON.
any other part of these sermons that I can
discover. I shall leave you to form your
own judgment upon them, and detain you
no longer than while I add a few words upon
the character of Tillotson’s more general
and practical discourses.
In a collection so large and miscellaneous,
it would be a task beyond my ability or
“ ad salutem ; except infants, and men cut off upon the
“ point of their conversion ; of the rest, none shall see
“ God, but such as seek peace and holiness, though
“ not as a cause of their salvation, yet as a way, in which
“ they must walk which will be saved. — Did they hold,
“ that without works we are not justified? Take jus-
“ tification, so as it may also imply sanctification, and
“ St. James doth say as much. For, except there be an
“ ambiguity in the same term, St. Paul and St. James
“ do contradict each the other, which cannot be. Now,
“ there is no ambiguity in the name, either of faith, or
“ of works ; being meant by them, both in one and the
“ same sense. Finding, therefore, that justification is
“ spoken of by St. Paul, without implying sanctification,
“ when he proveth that a man is justified by faith without
“ works ; finding, likewise, that justification doth some-
“ times imply sanctification also with it, I suppose no-
“ thing to be more sound, than so to interpret St.
“ James, speaking not in that sense, but in this.”
TTLLOTSON.
251
your paticncGj to trace the doctrinal expli¬
cations or allusions. It is not enough to
say of these discourses, that the truths of
the gospel are ctssiuncd in them as the
ground of moral obligation ; they are per¬
petually and prominently brought forward :
the character of our blessed Lord, is ex¬
hibited and proposed as a pattein of per¬
fect holiness, while his all-sufficient sacri¬
fice is described as the only foundation of
hope, — the moral purity inculcated by the
preacher, is uniformly connected with purity
of faith, — and the arguments, examples,
and illustrations, are all built upon the prin¬
ciples of the gospel.
Where those “ who do not believe,” are
to be addressed, and the grounds and evi¬
dences of religion are to be proved, the
preacher adopts a more general and philo¬
sophic process in his demonstrations ; and,
if we revert to the circumstances of the
times, and particularly to the prevalent af¬
fectation of separating religion from reason,
and connecting philosophy with the doubt
or disbelief of Kevelation, we shall not (I
252
tillotson.
think) deny, that the preacher, who ably
applies to the support and proof of Chris¬
tianity, those principles of reason which are
insidiously assumed by infidelity to subvert
it, performs a very important service to the
Christian cause.
Upon one point more, it would be unjust
to omit the praise of Tillotson ; — as the
advocate for the universal study of the Bible,
and the zealous patron of religious educa¬
tion. To these, indeed, he refers, as his
favourite topics of instruction, and seems
to take refuge in them, from that “ irksome
and unpleasant work of controversy,” in
which he laments his unavoidable engage-
O O
ment during the earlier part of his ministry.
This circumstance will recommend him not
a little, to your regard, and you will believe
that it does not diminish his merit, in my
estimation.
Tours, very affectionately.
253
LETTER XXVII.
BARROW.
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF DOCTOR BARROW. - HIS LITE¬
RARY CHARACTER. - PECULIAR IMPORTANCE OF THIS
CHARACTER, TO HIS AUTHORITY AS A DIVINE. - GENE¬
RAL REFLECTIONS UPON THE TESTIMONY AFFORDED TO
RELIGION, BY MEN EMINENT IN SCIENCE. - SUBJECTS
SELECTED FOR EXAMINATION IN THIS REVIEW. — BAR-
ROw’s SERMONS ON FAITH. - HIS DOCTRINE OF HUMAN
CORRUPTION.
MY DEAR FRIEND,
1 HAVE often, in the course of our corre¬
spondence, felt the temerity of my under¬
taking ; not from any doubt of the strength
of my cause, but from a consciousness of
my own deficiency ; and I never was more
sensible of this disadvantage, than in ap¬
proaching to the contemplation of the cha¬
racter of Barrow ; — a character so distin¬
guished, both by moral and intellectual ex¬
cellence, that it seems equally dangerous
and presumptuous, to consider it as a sub¬
ject of critical investigation. As he holds.
254
BAR ROW.
however, a prominent place, if not the
highest, amongst our divines of this period,
and has maintained the theological princi-
ciples which are said to have characterised
the school of the Restoration, it is necessary
to look for some evidence of his judgment
upon those fundamental doctrines which
the writers of this school are supposed to
have modified ; and to trace the peculiar
circumstances of his life, which influenced
his style as a public preacher.
Dr. Barrow appears to have entered the
University of Cambridge, while it was un¬
der the government of the presbyterians.
His uncle (afterwards bishop of St. Asaph)
had been one of the ejected fellows ; and
his father had suffered so much by his ad¬
herence to the royal cause, that the young
man’s chief dependence for support, was
upon the liberality of Dr. Hammond. He
was a zealous loyalist and episcopalian ; and
on his election to a fellow^ship in his col¬
lege, finding himself precluded by his prin¬
ciples, from the Church, he turned his
thoughts towards the medical profession.
BARRO^Y.
255
and is said to have made a great progress
in the sciences preparatory to it. On far¬
ther deliberation, however, and from a
sense of duty, he devoted himself to the
study of divinity ; to which he conceived
himself bound by his academical engage¬
ments.
4
)
With his eminence as a mathematician,
we have no concern, farther than as it in¬
fluenced his character as a divine ; and
gave to his sermons, rather the form of
scientific treatises or dissertations, than of
practical expositions or popular harangues.
Yet, we may observe by the way, that there
is something peculiarly encouraging, in the
character of a religious mathematician ; as
the habit of strict demonstration, which the
study of this science produces, seems rather
likely to incapacitate the mind for the due
appreciation of that moral evidence, of
which alone, religion is susceptible ; and it
is the work of a strons; and discriminatinir
O C?
judgment, to resist the tendency to hesita¬
tion and scepticism, .which such habits na¬
turally create, and to ac(piiesce in that
256
BARROW.
moral and general proof, which is all that
can be obtained, on historical or metaphysi¬
cal subjects.
The Arminian principles attributed to
Dr. Barrow, excluded him from the Greek
professorship in his college ; to which he is
said to have had high claims and strong re¬
commendations ; and the next five years of
his life, (from the twenty-fourth to tlie
twenty-ninth of his age,) were passed in
travel and study. In 1659, he received
episcopal ordination ; and his past sufferings
in the cause of loyalty, seemed to entitle
him to the notice of the restored monarch.
He obtained, however, at this time, no
mark of the royal favour, and quietly re¬
sumed his academical studies and duties,
till the year 1669 ; when he resolved to ap¬
ply himself entirely to divinity; and resigned
his mathematical chair (to which he had
been appointed in 1663,) to his friend Sir
Isaac Newton.
Dr. Barrow does not appear to have been
ever engaged in regular parochial preach-
BAUIIOW.
257
ing. On his resignation of his professor¬
ship, he obtained a small sinecure in Wales,
and a prebend in the diocese of Salisbury ;
both of which he resigned, on his appoint¬
ment to the mastership of his College, in
1672.
This preferment he owed to his distin¬
guished merit alone, and meant not (says
his biographer,) to use it as a step to a
higher ; but abated nothing of his diligence
in study, devoting the day to public busi¬
ness, and borrowing from his morning’s
sleep, many hours, to increase his stock of
sermons, and write his treatise on the pope’s
supremacy. He died in 1677, in the prime
of life, and in the zenith of his reputation.
If we compare with this slight sketch,
the traits of character incidentally exhibited
in his writings, we shall find in them (I
think) a high degree of that moral sub¬
limity, which results from the union of deep
Christian principle, with the consciousness
of intellectual strength ; that peculiar
VOL. II.
s
258
BARROW.
mixture of independence and submission,
which arises from a clear discrimination of
the provinces of reason and faith, — the con¬
fidence of a genius rightly estimating its
own powers, and the caution in the use and
application of these powers, which has been
oftenest found in those gigantic minds, that
seem to have almost touched the bound¬
aries of human knowledge. The flippancy
of superficial infidelity, shrinks before the
majesty of an intellect, that has conquered
every vanquishable difficulty in science ;
and, rising to a point of elevation, from
whence the whole prospect of human dis¬
covery is commanded, discerns and respects
the impassable barrier opposed by infinite
wisdom, to the restless curiosity of human
reason.
I believe there is no country, in which
this sublime testimony to the truth and
dignity of religion, has been more eminently
afforded, than our own ; and I think there
is a distinction in the circumstances of our
religious philosophers, and a peculiarity in
BARROW.
259
the character of their speculations, whicli
should place their evidence upon a higher
ground than that of mere authority.
Under arbitrary governments, the freedom
of enquiry is controlled by the strong hand
of power ; and every disquisition upon spe¬
culative principles, is considered with a re¬
ference to its bearing upon established
prejudices and institutions. Accordingly,
we find, under such circumstances, either
a boldness and flippancy of speculation,
that questions indiscriminately all existing
opinions, and shelters itself in the privilege
of a philosophical scepticism, and the dis¬
tinction of metaphysical, from moral and ex¬
perimental truth, — or a cautious and politic
evasion of discussion, which declines, with
professed respect, but real contempt or in¬
difference, the investigation of questions,
supposed to refer to a science altogether dis¬
tinct from temporal objects and interests, —
to rest upon the evidence of authority
alone, — and to be, as it were, cognizable
only by the aid of a commissioned and pri¬
vileged tribunal.
260
BARROW.
This would not, indeed, be the practice
of all, nor perhaps of many, in such cases.
An unreflecting and undistinguishing ac¬
quiescence would often result from the in¬
fluence of habit and authority; — the sepa¬
ration of religious, from secular questions,
would create a distinction in the principles
upon which they were to be investigated, —
and the free use of reason in theological
enquiries, would be considered, if not as
subversive of faith, at least as inconsistent
with Christian submission and humility.
But where civil and religious freedom are
happily understood and established, — where
the Scriptures are received and liberally
circulated, as the supreme and authoritative
standard of truth, and religion is conse¬
quently divested of the obscurity, and pre¬
served from the uncertainty, which a fallible
or fluctuating standard must occasion, —
theology assumes its proper place, as the
most eminent and important of all sciences;
bearing upon all man’s highest interests, in
his moral, intellectual, and spiritual capa¬
city, and exhibiting its peculiar and appro-
BARROW.
261
priate evidences, in successive application, to
his judgment, his conscience, and his heart.
The defect of evidence strictly demonstra¬
tive, which the cautious or compromising
speculatist assumes, as an apology for his
exclusion of religion from the circle of his
enquiries, the sounder philosopher traces
to the nature of the subject. By clearly
markins: the boundaries of demonstrative
O
and speculative science, and pursuing each
upon its proper principles and proofs, he
attains a power of weighing and comparing
the varieties of moral evidence ; of which
he requires no more than the subject ad¬
mits ; — and, from an acquiescence in the
historical proof of the facts connected with
revelation, he rises to the perception of
that higher evidence, which is built upon its
suitableness to his own actual necessities, —
and seeks for direction in the examination
of its doctrines, the aid of that illuminat¬
ing Spirit, through whom alone, as he learns
from express declaration, the things of God
can be effectually manifested to his under¬
standing.
s 3
262
BAR ROW.
This cautious sobriety, which so emi¬
nently distinguished the characters of our
Christian philosophers, while it established
their scientific discoveries upon the basis of
infallible certainty, gave a moral strength
to their testimony in behalf of revelation, by
removing all suspicion of precipitance or
perversion of judgment, of the love of sys¬
tem, or deference to authority ; while their
freedom from ecclesiastical engagements,
exempted them from the imputations of
interest or prejudice. In the evidence of
a Bacon, a Newton, a Hale, a Boyle, and
a Locke, we have an ample vindication of
our religion, against those who would repre¬
sent it as incapable of rational proof, and
maintaining its influence through the imagin¬
ation alone : — and, tracing in Barrow the
same characters of mind which we observe
in these distinguished laymen, we find him,
indeed, freely exercising the privilege of
rational enquiry, upon all subjects within
the scope of human judgment, — yet feeling,
apparently, that thus far he can go, and no
farther, and submitting with humble and
entire acquiescence, to the testimony of di-
BARROW.
263
vine revelation, upon points, to the clear
apprehension of which, he had experiment¬
ally found his own reason incompetent.
Faith,” says he, “ is the highest philoso-
“ phy. The nature of Him, who dwelleth
“ in that light which no man can approach
« unto, — the intentions of Him, who work-
“ eth all things after the counsel of his own
“ will, — the ways of Him, which are more
“ discosted from our ways, than heaven
“ from earth, — the depths of God, which
“ none but his own spirit can search out or
‘‘ discover, — do lie beyond the sphere of
‘‘ natural light, and inquisition of our rea-
« son.” — “But we have, as Saint Peter saith,
“ a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto
“ we do well to give heed, — as unto a lamp
“ shining in a dark place, — guiding us in
“ the obscurities and uncertainties of life.
“ We have a hope, as an anchor of the soul,
“ both sure and stable ; which stay eth and
“ settleth our mind, being tossed with
“ winds and waves of uncertain cogitations,
“ suggested by different appearances of
“ things.”
s 4
264
BARKOW.
But our present object confines us to the
examination of those sermons of Barrow^
which bear upon the fundamental doc¬
trines above mentioned. In this examina¬
tion, we must not lose sight of the consist¬
ency (which I maintain and you admit,) of
redemption by grace in its fullest extent,
with imparted free will, and contingent sal¬
vation : and we must also recollect the
state of the Church, which gave to these
sermons, as to those of Tillotson, a contro¬
versial scope and bearing.
In the sermons “ on Faith,” (with which
the series on the Creed commences,) we
have a clear statement of the author’s judg¬
ment, of the consistency of free agency in
man, with the Gospel doctrine of divine
influence and attraction. It is not fair to
quarrel with this, as Pelagian or Arminian,
unless it can be proved unscriptural. I
quote it, however, only to connect it with
another passage in the same sermon, ex¬
hibiting his view of human corruption: — a
doctrine, which he does not appear to me to
BARROW.
265
have softened or compromised upon any
occasion.
“ There is no man, to whom means are
“ not administered, sufficient to produce in
“ him that measure of faith, which is requisite
“ towards the good management of life, and
“ his rendering; an account for it at God’s
“ tribunal. There is no man also, to whom
“ such means are afforded, whom the grace
“ of God (who desireth that all men should
“ be saved, and should come to the know-
“ ledge of the truth,) doth not in some de-
“ gree incite to the due improvement of
“ them. But in effect the case is varied,
“ because some men do embrace those
“ means, and comply with that grace, while
“ others do reject and neglect them.”
Our Lord saith, that every one who
“ hath heard of the Father, and hath learn-
“ ed, doth come unto him ; but some there
“ are, to whom the Father speaketh, yet
“ they stop their ears, and refuse to hear.
“ Some do hear in a sort, but do not learn;
ill prejudices or depraved affections, bar-
266
BARROW.
“ ring instruction from their minds ; being
“ like those, of whom the apostle saith,
the word preached did not profit thejn,
“ not being mixed with faith in them that
“ heard it.”
“ No man, (saith our Lord again,) can
“ come to me, except the Father draw him.
“ But this drawing is not compulsory: — we
“ may hold back; we may withstand it, and
“ not follow it.”
“ Faith (saith Saint Paul) is a gift of
“ God ; and a favour granted unto us. To
you, saith he, it hath been graciously
“ vouchsafed, not only to believe in him,
but also to suffer for him : and, — to you,
“ (saith our Lord) it is given, to know the
“ mysteries of the kingdom of Heaven. But
“ this gift is not always accepted ; this favour
“ is not always entertained : — God doth not
“ so obtrude it upon us, but that we may
“ reject or decline it.”
“ Faith is a fruit of God’s Spirit ; but
“ such, as will not grow in a bad soil, not
BARROW.
267
“ purged from weeds of corrupt prejudice,
“ of vicious affection, of worldly care ; —
“ which will not thrive, without good care
“ and culture.”
“ God inviteth us to believe, by the pro-
“ mulgation of his Gospel, and exhortation
“ of his ministers. He declareth abundant
“ reason to persuade us. He representeth to
“ our minds, the beauty of Christian truth
“ and virtue. He speaketh from without,
“ unto us, by manifold arguments, able, if
“ we are not very stupid, to convince us.
“ He speaketh within, by strong impres-
“ sions on our consciences, apt, if we are not
“ very stubborn; to subdue us. Behold,
“ (saith he,) I stand at the door and knock :
“ if any man will hear my voice, and will
“ open the door, I will come in unto him. —
“ Such is the case : — God standeth at the
“ door of our hearts, by the ministry of his
“ word ; he knocketh at it by the impulse
“ of his grace ; but to hear, is the work of
“ our vigilance, — to open, is the act of our
“ voluntary compliance.
268
BARROW-
Tlie necessary preparation, for the recep¬
tion of the Gospel, and the attainment of
that faith which is prescribed as indispens¬
able to salvation, is humility : and this
grace, the preacher grounds upon a consci¬
ousness of innate and hereditary corruption.
Observe, that he is not here stating the doc¬
trine polemically, but assuming it as an
evident and acknowledged truth ; and de¬
scribing the frame of mind, which a convic¬
tion of it, ought to produce.
“ The first step into the Christian state, is
“ a sense of our imperfection, weakness,
“ baseness, and misery. We must discern
“ and/cc/, that our mind is very blind, and
“ our reason very feeble ; — that our will is
very impotent, lame, depraved, prone to
“ evil, averse from good ; — that our life is
“ void of merit, and polluted with guilt ; —
“ that our condition is deplorably sad and
“ wretched ; — that of ourselves we are in-
“ sufficient to think, or to do, any good, in
“ order to our recovery or deliverance : —
“ whence we are obliged to sore compunc-
tion of spirit, for our deeds and our case, —
BARROW.
269
“ to humble confession of our sins and
“miseries, — to earnest supplication for
“ mercy and grace, to heal and rescue us
“ from our sad estate. Lord, have mercy
“ upon me, a sinner ! What shall I do to
“ be saved ? Wretched man that I am ! who
“ shall deliver me from this body of death ?
“ Such are the ejaculations of a soul teem-
“ ing with faith.”
I will add one passage more from this
sermon, descriptive of the temper necessary
to an effectual reception of the Gospel, and
indicating (in my mind,) a feeling in the
preacher, very different from that pre¬
sumptuous self-dependence which the pride
of philosophy is supposed to inspire: — and
1 am the rather induced to this, because the
force and copiousness of his genius, appear
to have led him occasionally to an extent of
philosophical illustration, (particularly in
some of his moral discourses,) which may
have lessened their popular usefulness, by
lessening their practical simplicity ; and
which (I believe) has contributed of ^late
years (in conjunction with the fluctuation
270
BARROW.
in our style of divinity,) to expose them to
the charge of a want of spirituality. I can¬
not, however, subscribe to the justice of
this charge. If the term be understood in
its general sense, as descriptive of our re¬
lation to the spiritual world, and of the pe¬
culiar views and duties consequent upon
that relation, I think there is as much
spirituality in these sermons, as in those of
a more devotional and declamatory charac¬
ter, to which the epithet is commonly ap¬
plied. — But I must give you my quotation,
or the length of my preface will make you
forget the object of it.
He that entereth into the faith, must
‘‘ therewith entirely submit his understand-
“ ing, and resign his judgment, to God, as
‘‘ his master and guide; — being ready to be-
‘‘ lieve whatever God declareth, however to
« him seeming unintelligible or incredible,
“ — to follow whither God conducteth, al-
‘‘ though, like Abraham, he knoweth not
whither he goeth, — to approve that which
“ God ordaineth, however distasteful to his
sense, — to undertake that which God re-
11
BA It ROW.
271
“ quireth, however difficult, — to bear that
“ which God imposeth, how burthensome
“ soever: — being content that Divine Wis-
“ dom shall absolutely sway and reign over
“ his wisdom, — that his reason shall be
“ puzzled — shall be baffled in many cases,
“ — that his mind shall be rifled of all its
“ prejudices, its fond conceits, its presump-
“ tuous confidences, — of every thought and
“ device, advancing itself against divine
“ truth.”
“ He must abandon all good opinion of
“himself, — all conceitedness of his own
“ worth, merit, excellency, felicity in any
“ kind ; — slighting his wealth, his power, his
“ dignity, his wit, his wisdom, and the like
“ advantages, natural or secular, (which are
“ so much prized in vulgar and worldly
“ esteem,) as things in themselves of no
“ consideration, nor otherwise valuable, than
“ as talents intrusted by God, or instru-
“ ments of his service, — disowning them
“ from himself, as things freely dispensed
“ by God, and absolutely depending on his
“ disposal ; — saying, with Saint Paul, yea.
BAR ROW.
“ doubtless I count all tliino’s but loss, for
‘‘ the excellency of tiie knowledge of Christ
“ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered
“ the loss of all things ; and do count them
“ but dung, that I may win Christ, and be
“ found in him, not having mine own
‘‘ righteousness, which is of the law, but
‘‘ that which is through the faith of Christ.”
“ Every Christian, as such, immediately
doth admit notions, quite debasing high
“ conceit; — which ascribe all our good things
purely to the Divine bounty, — which allow
“ us to own nothing but evil, springing from
“ our defects, infirmities, and corruptions,
‘‘ from our guilty naughtiness and folly ; —
‘‘ which display our great imperfection, in-
‘‘ digency, impotency, ignorance, error, un-
worthiness, and forlorn wretchedness ; —
“ which assure us, that we do subsist in total
dependence upon God, continually need-
“ ing his protection, succour, and mercy.”
What a striking contrast to the spirit
‘‘ here described, is that of the Heathen
philosopher, who thought it reasonable to
BAIlllOW.
273
“ thank the gods for every gift but virtue!
“ And how far short, the stability and purity
“ of that virtue whose principle was pride,
“ as exhibited in the systems, and exempli-
“ lied in the lives, even of the best and
“ wisest of these sages, of that magnificent
standard, which the Gospel of Christ ex-
“ hibits, which the faith of Christ inculcates,
“ and to which the blessed promise of the
spirit of Christ, encourages and impels !”
Having laid our foundation, in this short
evidence of Barrow’s view of the corruption
of human nature, (which I take to be the
stronger as it is incidental,) I shall notice
only three of his doctrinal sermons, (those
on Justification, and on the Passion of our
Lord,) as directly connected with our sub'
ject. A more general criticism would be
foreign to our purpose ; and I apprehend,
that whatever view of these doctrines we
find explicitly proposed in these discourses,
we may conclude to be assumed on other
occasions, as the basis of that practical
morality, which the prevalence of infidel
VOL. II.
T
274
BARROW
or Antinomian licentiousness, rendered it
necessary, distinctly to enforce.
Do not, however, suppose, that I ac¬
knowledge the exclusion of an express pro¬
position of these doctrines, from the practical
sermons of Barrow. On the contrary, I
find them generally prominent ; and hi&
philosophy, comprehensive as it is, so
thoroughly christianized, that I cannot read
a page of these discourses, without being
recalled to the direction of those great
principles of revealed truth, upon which, I
feel that a knowledge of the true nature of
virtue, and a capacity for- the practice of
it, must be built.
Adieu.
275
LETTER XXVIII.
BARROW.
NATURE OF THE OBJECTION TO THE DIVINITY OF THE
RESTORATION. — REMARKS ON THIS OBJECTION. - BAR-
ROw’s DOCTRINE OF JUSTIFICATION. - NATURE OF JUSTI¬
FYING FAITH. - LIMITATION OF THE TERM JUSTIFICA¬
TION, TO INITIAL FORGIVENESS AND ADOPTION. — FULLER
APPLICATION OF IT. — REFERENCE TO THE ATONEMENT,
AS THE SOLE FOUNDATION OF CHRISTIAN DEPENDENCE. — ■
CONCLUDING CAUTIONS AND OBSERVATIONS.
MY DEAR FRIEND,
It is not so much, a departure from evan¬
gelical principles, as a defect of full evan¬
gelical statement, that seems to be imputed
to the divines of this period, who advocated
the Arminian scheme of doctrine ; — a too
favourable representation of the natural
state of man, and his capacity for spiritual
improvement, and a consequent deprecia¬
tion, by inference at least, ol the value and
necessity of that divine grace, by which
alone his regeneration can be effected.
T 2
276
BARROW.
Yet, if I mistake not, an impartial ex¬
amination of the most eminent of these
writers, would lead to a full refutation of this
charge ; and I think we have seen, in our
quotations from Tillotson, an explicit ac¬
knowledgment of these fundamental doc-
trines, and an assumption of them, as the
basis of his practical exhortations. It is
not, in fact, against the principles them¬
selves, but against the perversion of them
to the support of infidel or Antinomian
systems, that we find the arguments of
Tillotson directed ; and when he appears
(as he sometimes does) to maintain the
sufficiency of the moral sense, and the ab¬
stract dignity of human nature, it is either
in reference to societies living under the
light of Christianity, or in an application
similar to that of the Apostle, — who de¬
scribes the Gentiles, not having the law,
as being (in a manner) “ a law unto them-
‘‘ selves,” showing the work of the law
“ written in their hearts,” and feeling the
impulses, or the checks, of natural con¬
science.
BARROW.
277
The extracts from Barrow in my last
letter, sufficiently show his estimate of
human corruption ; with which, a sense of
the necessity of spiritual influence is so in¬
separably connected in a Christian mind,
that either is established, by the evidence
adduced in proof of the other. It would
lead us too far, to remark, in his writings,
and those of Tillotson, the distinction of this
moral sense, or perception of good and evil,
— which they seem to consider as natural
and universal, — from that influential deter¬
mination of the will, on the simple ground
of obedience to God, which they describe
under the epithet of faith, and to which
they uniformly refer, as the principle of
Christian virtue. Allow me to recommend
to your attentive perusal, the second of
Barrow’s Sermons on Faith ; in which you
will And as noble a description of this evan¬
gelical grace, and as earnest a persuasion
to the cultivation of it, as the whole range
of modern divinity can furnish.
In the sermons which follow next in the
series, we have the doctrine of justification
278
13 All now.
by faith, so fully and explicitly stated, as to
leave to many of its later advocates, little
more than the task of repetition. I do not
say, that Barrow considers the question here
in every possible light, or says every thing
that might be said upon it. On the con¬
trary, he seems purposely to avoid this
wide and generalizing view, and to restrict
the phrase, to its simple and primary accep¬
tation, that of “ remission of sins.”
The acknowledged excellence of these
two discourses, and the mutual appeal to
* them, by our religious parties, might pre¬
clude the necessity of a more particular
consideration : yet, as the precise viev/ of
justification, has been made and justly
made — an essential distinction in religion,
it may not be useless to trace the agreement
of this able divine, with each of the parties
who have been supposed to differ so
widely, and the consequent consistency
and harmony, of principles which have
been (perhaps hastily) deemed irrecon-
cileable.
BARROW,
2li)
The points proposed for discussion in the
Hrst of these sermons, [Romans 5,~-ve7-se 1.)
or, as it is called, the explicatory part, are,
— first, what is that faith whereby we are
said to be justified ? — secondly, what being
justified doth import? — thirdly, how by
such faith we are so justified? — fourthly,
what the peace of God is, which is here ad¬
joined to justification ? — fifthly, what re¬
lation the whole matter bears to our Lord
Jesus Christ ?
Under the first head, the various senses
of the word Faith, are considered: — the-
simple belief of the truth of any proposition;
the connection of this belief with any
specific object ; the rational deductions
drawn from this belief ; and the consequent
desires, affections, and resolutions excited
by it. All these are comprehended by the
preacher, in the definition of religious or
Christian faith ; a faith, which is expressly
stated to be “ an especial instrument of
“ our salvation, and a necessary condition
“ prerequisite to our partaking the benefits
T 4
2S0
BAKROW.
“ and privileges, conferred by the Divine
“ favour on Christians.”
‘‘ The result” (or rather the comprehen¬
sive description of that faith, which the above
process would establish) is thus stated : —
“ The being truly and firmly persuaded in
“ our minds, that Jesus was, what he pro-
“ fessed himself to be, and what the apos-
“ ties testified him to be; — the Messias, by
“ God designed, foretold, and promised to
“ be sent into the world, to redeem, govern,
“ instruct, and save mankind, — our Re-
deemer and Saviour, — our Lord and
‘‘ Master, — our King and Judge, — the
“ great High Priest and Prophet of God ; —
“ the being assured of these, and all other
“ propositions connected with them ; — or,
“ in short, the being thoroughly persuaded
“ of the truth of that Gospel, which was
“ revealed and taught by Jesus and his
“ apostles.”
“ That this notion is true, those descrip-
“ tions of faith, and phrases expressing it,
do abundantly show ; and the nature and
BAKKOW.
281
“ reason of the thing doth conhnn the
“ same i — for that such a faith is in its
“ design and order, apt and sufficient to pro-
« mote God’s design of saving us, — to
“ render us capable of God s favour, — to
“ purge our hearts, and work that change of
“ mind which is necessary in order to the
“ obtaining God’s favour, and enjoying
“ happiness, — to produce that obedience
“ which God requires of us, and without
“ which we cannot be saved, — these things
“ are the natural results, of such a persua-
sion concerning those truths ; — as na-
“ tural, as the desire and pursuit of any
“ o'ood doth arise from the clear apprehen-
“ sion thereof, or as the shunning any
“ mischief, doth follow from the like ap~
‘‘ prehension.”
You will observe that the discussion in
this place, is limited to the natural effects of
Christian faith upon the character. The ne¬
cessity of divine grace to produce this faith
and its fruits, — the power of God working
in us both to will and to do, the in¬
strumentality of faith to our salvation, only
282
BARROW.
under the inliuence and aid of the Holy
Spirit, — liad been acknowledged in a former
. discourse, and will be again brought for¬
ward. The object here is only to prove the
peculiar fitness of this grace of faith, for the
office assigned to it, and the wisdom of
making it the preliminary qualification, for
admission to the privileges of the Gospel.
“ So strong a persuasion” (he continues)
“ that the Christian religion is true, and the
“ way of obtaining happiness, and of escap-
“ ing misery, doth naturally produce a sub-
“ jection of heart, and an obedience there-
“ to ; and accordingly we see the highest of
“ those effects which the Gospel offers or
“ requires, assigned to this faith, as results
“ from it, or adjuncts thereof; — regenera-
“ tion, — spiritual re-union with God, —
“ the obtaining God’s love, — victory over
“ the world, — freedom from spiritual
“ slavery, — becoming true disciples of
“ Christ, — and obtaining everlasting life; —
rising with Christ, (that is, as to capacity
“ and right ; — ) being saved, — ■ being jus-
BARROW.
283
This justification, I have already re¬
marked, he liiTiits here, to its initial sense,
the forgiveness of sins, and admission to the
Christian covenant. “We may also ob-
“ serve” (he says] “ in the history concern-
“ ing our Lord and his apostles proceeding
“ towards persons whom they had convert-
“ ed to Christianity, and did admit to a
“ participation of the privileges thereof,
“ that no other faith was required in order
“ thereto. Upon such a persuasion ap-
“ pearing, they received them into the
“ church, baptized them, pronounced unto
“ them, an absolution from their sins, and a
“ reception into God’s favour ; or, in Saint
“ Paul’s language, did justify them, accord-
“ ino' to their subordinate manner, as mi-
o
“ nisters of God.”
But even this faith, this original persua¬
sion of the mind, he expressly ascribes to
the influence of Divine grace and inspira¬
tion, and rejects the notion of any inherent
or natural capacity in man, to leceive or
understand the truths of the Gospel, with¬
out the drawing and the teaching of God.
284
J{ ARROW.
That the faith here supposed to be re¬
quired, even for the privilege of initiation,
is a lively and operative faith, not yet in¬
deed actually producing, but necessarily
productive in its nature, of all Christian
graces and virtues, is evident from the fol¬
lowing observations.
“ This faith doth not only denote pre-
“ cisely and abstractedly, such acts of
“ mind, such opinions and persuasions con-
“ cerning the truth of matters specified,
“ but doth also connote and imply (and
“ indeed comprehend, according to the
“ meaning of those who use the word,)
“ such acts of will, as, supposing those per-
“ suasions to be real and complete, are na-
“ turally consequent upon them, and are in
“ a manner necessarily coherent witii them ;
“ — a firm resolution, constantly to profess
“ and adhere to the doctrine, of which a man
“ is so persuaded ; — to obey all the laws
“ and precepts which it contains ; — forsak-
ing, in open profession, and in real prac-
“ lice, all principles and customs inconsist-
“ ent with those doctrines and laws : — that
BARROW.
285
“ which is called conversion, or returning
“ unto the Lord.” — The word faith is
“ there extended, beyond its natural and
“ primary force, to comprehend such a com-
“ pliance of 'will, or purpose of obedience,
“ because this doth naturally arise from a
“ persuasion concerning the truth ot the
“ Gospel, if it be real, and strong enough,
“ in that degree which Christianity requires
and supposes, to the effects mentioned in
‘‘ the Gospel.” — In short, this faith is
“ nothing else, but a true, serious, resolute,
“ embracing Christianity ; not only being
“ persuaded that all the doctrines of Christ
“ are true, but submitting to his will anti
“ command in all things.”
This faith is farther described by tiie
preacher, in its peculiar reference to the
doctrine of the atonement, and emphati¬
cally called, ‘‘ belief in the blood of Christ ;”
and the importance of this inestimable doc¬
trine, v/ith the value of the propositions and
promises connected with it, set forth in the
fullest manner. ‘‘ Yet are not these pro-
positions and promises the adequate and
BARROW.
28(i
“ entire object of this faith ; for otlier arti-
“ cles of faith are often proposed in a colla-
“ teral order with these ; — yea, sometimes
“ they are expressed, when that is not men-
“ tioned, but only understood : neither, if
“ any one should believe all the doctrines
“ of that kind, if he did not withal believe
“ that Jesus is his Lord, and shall be his
“ Judge, — that there shall be a resurrection
“ of the dead, and a judgment to come, —
“ with the like fundamental verities of our
“ religion, — could he be a believer, in
“ this sense.”
In the next section, he distinguishes this
general faith and trust in the certainty of
God’s declarations and promises, from that
special and personal appropriation, which
was taught in what was called the doctrine
of assurance, and which Hooker had com¬
bated a century before, nearly in the same
language. He also controverts the doc¬
trine of absolute predestination, and, by
consequence, the certainty of final perse¬
verance ; or, perhaps I should rather say,
that he controverts, the personal application
HARliOW.
287
of these doctrines to the case of the indivi¬
dual believer: for, though evidently not
lioldins them himself, he is by no means
dogmatical upon the general questions ;
and the “ new and harsh notion,” to which
he alludes, seems rather to refer, to the ex¬
clusive prejudice entertained by some advo¬
cates of these opinions, against those who
rejected them.
The closing observations, upon the “ new
“ and mystical,” or rather metaphorical
phraseology, are as applicable to our own
times, as to those for which they were in¬
tended. I have already expressed my
conviction, that many sincere Christians
amongst us dilfer, rather in modes of expli¬
cation, than in principle ; and there seems
no prospect of a mutual approximation, so
promising, as the use of a common lan¬
guage, and the precise definition of those
terms, whether Scriptural or conventional,
which are employed to express the opinions
of the respective parties. If some of the
expressions here quoted by Barrow (and
similar phrases now in use) were to be thus
288
BAIIROAV.
Strictly analysed, the obscurity and uncer¬
tainty, if not the fallacy, of the notions
grounded on them, would probably appear;
and though there still might, and would, be
differences of opinion, (as there must be,
until faith shall be lost in sight,) there would
be less pertinacity of dispute, and a clearer
view, upon all sides, of the more important
questions in discussion.
Having come to the end of the first of
these sermons, I shall here bid you farewell,
and reserve the examination of the second,
for my next letter. I must remind you
that my remarks upon both, are limited to
the elucidation of their doctrinal character,
and that I do not attempt any general criti¬
cism, either upon these discourses, or upon
any others wliich I may have occasion to
notice, in the course of our correspondence.
Adieu.
289
LETTER XXIX.
BARROir.
«
ORIGIN OF THE CONTROVERSIAL DISCUSSIONS ON JUS¬
TIFICATION, — VARIOUS SENSES OF THE WORD, IN
SCRIPTURE, AND IN THE WRITINGS OF THE REFORM¬
ERS. - OBJECT OF THE REFORMERS IN STATING THIS
DOCTRINE. — HOMILY ON SALVATION. — REMARKS ON
THE WORD JUSTIFICATION, AS THERE USED. - DIS¬
CREPANCIES IN THE STATEMENT OF THIS DOCTRINE,
RECONCILEABLE. - OPINION OF BARROW. - HIS ACCOUNT
OF THE ORIGIN OF THE CONTROVERSY. - A PACIFICATORY
REMARK. — FARTHER EXAMINATION OF THE DOCTRINE.
— CONSISTENCY OF FREE GRACE WITH CONTINGENT SAL¬
VATION. - STATEMENT OF THE DOCTRINE IN THIS SER¬
MON - EXCLUDES ALL BOASTING, OR PRESUMPTION OF
MERIT. - CONNECTION OF JUSTIFICATION WITH BAPTISM.
— OPINIONS OF LUTHER, OF CALVIN, AND OF BARROW.
MY DEAR FRIEND,
I PROCEED to offer the remaining observ¬
ations which occur to me, on these cele¬
brated Sermons of Barrow; and shall enter
upon them without farther preface, as what
I have yet to say, will not easily be com¬
pressed within the space which your pa¬
tience may be willing to allow me.
VOL. II. u
290
BARROW.
Of the five points proposed for consider¬
ation in these Sermons, two only appear to
be fully discussed ; — the nature of justify¬
ing faith, — and the exact import of the
word “ justification.”
In approaching to this latter question, I
feel the difficulty even of stating the opi¬
nion of another, without assuming a tone
more controversial, than suits either my
object or my character ; but it is important
to our purpose to show, that the definitions
now viewed with so much jealousy, are
not of recent introduction in our Church;
and that the distinction of initial and final
justification, — or rather the limitation of the
phrase to the former sense, — may be held
consistently with a full impression of the
gratuitous character of the Gospel dispens¬
ation, and of the necessity and continued
agency of divine grace, in the first conver¬
sion, the progressive sanctification, and final
salvation, of the sinner.
In every case, the necessity of strict de¬
finition, has arisen from the experience of
BARROW.
291
misapprehension. Where an agreement in
substance is understood, there is little con¬
tention about the precise meaning of ex-^
pressions. In the early history of our
I’eligion especially, we find none of those
strict analyzations of doctrine, which subse¬
quent dissensions and heresies have occa¬
sioned. The short propositions of the
Apostles’ creed, or of some similar form,
were sufficient to fix the faith of the early
Christians j and it was not till the perverse
ingenuity of Gentile philosophy, had intro¬
duced a presumptuous curiosity into the
Church, that it was found necessary to
guard these fundamental articles by more
strict and minute definition.
The practice of considering the doctrine
of justification, as a distinct question in
theology, appears to have taken its rise from
an experience of similar corruption in this
great article of the Christian Faith ; — a cor¬
ruption the more dangerous, as it seems to
have had its origin in pride ; and, under the
plausible formalities of penitence, to have
led to a virtual rejection of the doctrine of
u 2
292
BARROW.
the atonement, — and an exaltation of some
personal and meritorious claim on the part
of the individual, to a participation, at least, ,
with the office of the Saviour in the work
of justification.
If we examine the various applications
of this remarkable phrase, in Scripture, we
shall find it often used incidentally and
generally, for the expression of ideas more
clearly stated elsewhere, in other terms ; as,
forgiveness of sins, remission, reconciliation,
&c. It is also used to express the certain ,
promise of final salvation, but obviously
under an implied condition, of compliance
with the Gospel covenant : and, that it was
understood in this general sense by our
Reformers, is evident from their indiscrimi¬
nate use of the words “justification” and
“ salvation,” in the Homily on this im¬
portant article.
Under all, or any of these definitions, the
prominent object of these excellent men
was, to separate the doctrine, from the scho¬
lastic and popish abuses with which it had
I
BARROW,
293
been incumbered ; — to represent justifica¬
tion as an act of the Deity exclusively j as a
gratuitous extension of mercy to man,
solely on account of the merits and media¬
tion of the Redeemer ; — to mark emphati¬
cally, man’s utter destitution of any meri¬
torious claim to salvation ; — and to refute
the presumptuous notion, of desert prepara¬
tory to justification, (or, as it was called,
merit of congruity,) against which, we find
the doctrine of a subsequent article still
more expressly directed.
In this view, the question seemed to rest,
not so much upon the sense of the word
“ justification,” as upon the principle, or
effective cause, through which the privilege
so designated, was to be obtained; whether
as consequent upon a predisposition in man,
rendering him capable, or, in the presump¬
tuous phrase, worthy, of an infusion of
Divine grace, — or, as resulting from the
mercy of God alone, and attainable only
through the propitiatory sacrifice of Christ,
applied, in humble faith, and entire self-
renunciation, to the soul of the penitent
u 3
294
BARROW.
sinner. It was the object of our Reformers
to teach, that “ the blood of Christ cleans-
‘‘ eth from all sin “ that through his
“ name, whosoever believeth in him shall
“ receive remission of sins — and, that we
are justified, or our sins so remitted, by
God’s free mercy and the merits of Christ
alone, — ‘‘ and by no virtue or good work of
“ our own, that is in us, or that we may be
“ able to have, or to do, for to deserve the
“ same.”
It is remarkable, that the Homily on Sal¬
vation, — the title of which has been very
fairly adduced to prove the identity of ini¬
tial, with final justification, in the judgment
of our Reformers, — begins with a definition
which seems strictly applicable to the initia¬
tory act of remission. — “ Because all men
“ be sinners, and offenders against God,
“ and breakers of his laws and command-
“ ments, therefore can no man, by his own
“ acts, works, and^ deeds (seem they never
“ so good,) be justified and made righteous
“ before God ; but every man, of necessity,
“ is constrained to seek for another ri^ht-
O
BARROW.
295
“ eousness or justification ; that is to say,
“ the forgiveness of his sins and trespasses,
‘‘ in such things as he hath offended.”
And this justification, purchased by Christ,
and ministerially consigned in baptism (as
appears by the reference to the case of bap¬
tized infants, in the same Homily), is re¬
newed, to them, “ who in act or deed do
“ sin after their baptism, when they turn
“ again to God unfeignedly.”
In this sense, I should conceive justifi¬
cation to imply a state of present acceptance
with God, — or, rather, of acceptability: and
I should think it might be fairly inferred
from the tenor of the Homilies on this sub¬
ject, that, — as the privilege of justification
is inseparably connected with a true and lively
faith, through every period of the Christian's
life, till its accomplishment in his final salva¬
tion, — the continuance of it, must depend
on his perseverance in this faith ; — and,
though the debt of sin once cancelled, is no
more remembered against him, yet a new
and heavier debt may be incurred ; and the
blood of the covenant wherewith he was
u 4
296
15 ARROW.
sanctified, may mark him with a stain of
deeper condemnation, if, “ after having es-
“ caped the pollutions of the world, through
“ the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour
' “ Jesus Christ, he is again entangled there-
“ in, and overcome.”
I am aware, that this view is inconsistent
with the supposed certainty, and extent, of
the privilege now commonly understood by
the word “justification ; ” yet I think it is
agreeable to the general principle of those,
who maintain the contingency of final salva¬
tion. In fact, wherever this contingency is
admitted, — so long as the sole dependance
is placed on the meritorious efficacy of the
atonement, — I cannot but think the dis¬
crepancies upon the doctrine of justification
are rather formal and verbal, than essential ;
and easily reconcileable, either by a more
precise definition of the term, or by the
substitution of some equivalent expression
(of which the Scripture furnishes many) to
designate the divine act of forgiveness or
acquittal.
BARROW.
297
In this opinion I find myself supported
by Barrow, in the sermon under our con¬
sideration ; and I cannot resist quoting the
passage, as at once corroborative of my own
sentiment, and expressive of the peaceable
and liberal spirit, in which this sound divine
and excellent Christian engages in the en¬
suing discussion.
Having observed, that the early Christian
writers did not enter into nice disquisitions
on justification, nor, in fact, consider it as
a distinct point of doctrine, he goes on to
state the origin of the controversies concern¬
ing it, and his own judgment as to the course
most likely to lead to their termination. —
“ In the beginning of the Reformation,
“ when the discovery of some great errors
“ (from the corruption and ignorance of
“ former times) crept into vogue, rendered
“ all things the subjects of contention, and
“ multiplied controversies, there did arise
“ hot disputes about this point, and the
“ right stating thereof seemed a matter of
“ great importance ; nor scarce was any
298
BARROW.
“ controversy prosecuted with greater zeal
and earnestness; — whereas, yet, (so far
“ as I can discern,) about the real points of
“ doctrine whereto this word (according to
“ any sense pretended) may relate, there
“ hardly doth appear any material differ-
“ ence ; and all the questions depending
“ chiefly seem to consist, about the manner
“ of expressing things which all agree in,
“ or about the extent of the signification of
“ words, capable of a larger or stricter ac-
“ ceptation. Whence, the debates about
“ this point, among all sober and intelligent
“ persons, might (as I conceive) easily be
‘‘ resolved or appeased, if men had a mind
“ to agree, and did not love to wrangle ;
“ if, at least, a consent in believing the
‘‘ same things, though under some differ-
“ ence of expression, would content them,
“ so as to forbear strife.”
\
In proof of this observation, he proceeds
to consider the several divine acts, to which
the term “justification,” is applicable; — re¬
mission of sins, restoration upon repentance,
13
BARROW.
299
renewing of the Holy Ghost, sanctification^,
&c. “ All these acts ” (he continues,) “ are
“ acknowledged and ascribed unto God ;
“ but, with which of them, the act of justi-
“ fication is solely or chiefly coincident, —
‘‘ whether it signifieth barely some one of
them, or extendeth to more of them, or
“ comprehendeth them all, — are questions
“ coming under debate, and so, eagerly
‘‘ prosecuted : of which questions, whatever
« the true resolution be, it cannot, me-
“ thinks, be of so much consequence, as to
“ cause any great anger or animosity, see-
“ ing that all conspire in avowing the acts,
“ whatever they be, meant by the word
“ ‘ justification,’ although in other terms.”
Though thus desirous to fix the attention
rather on things than words, he acknow¬
ledges the advantage of precise definition,
* It will be recollected, that Hooker, in his admir¬
able sermon on this doctrine, has carefully distinguished
justification from sanctification. In the sequel of this
discourse, Barrow makes the same distinction, though
he here appears to consider them as synonimous.
300
BARROW.
for the clearer interpretation of Scripture,
“ and the satisfaction of persons considerate
“ and peaceable and goes on to examine
the various senses of the word “justifica¬
tion,” and to enquire which of them is most
consonant to the general scope and object
of the Apostle.
“ Following this method,” as he says,
he fixes the signification of the word, in
St. Paul’s use of it, to the simple act of re¬
mission ; and observes, that “ God’s justi-
“ fying, solely or chiefly, doth import, his
“ acquitting us from guilt, condemnation,
“ and punishment, by the free pardon
“ and remission of our sins ; accounting us,
“ and dealing with us, as just persons,
“ upright and innocent in his sight and
“ esteem.”
Of this dispensation he exhibits a view,
which clearly reconciles the free grace of
God, with the doctrine of a future probation
and responsibility ; and while he describes
justification, or remission, as a privilege en¬
tirely gratuitous and unmerited, he omits
HARROW.
301
not the condition (or, if you prefer the
word, the circumstance,) which must pre¬
cede or accompany the individual applica¬
tion of this privilege. I note the passage,
chiefly, to observe the consistency of the
doctrine of contingent salvation, with that
of justification by free grace ; and to show,
that faith, in the preacher’s opinion, should
include resolutions and purposes of amend¬
ment, and, therefore, may not improperly
be described by Tillotson’s epithet, of a vir¬
tual obedience.
“ God’s proceeding with man according
“ to the Gospel, the general tenor thereof
“ doth set out to be this ; that God, out
“ of his infinite goodness and mercy, in
“ consideration of what his beloved Son,
“ our blessed Lord, hath performed and
“ suffered, in obedience to his will, and for
“ the redemption of mankind, (which, by
“ transgression of his laws, and defailance
“ in duty towards him, had grievously of-
“ fended him, and fallen from his favour,
“ was involved in guilt, and stood obnoxious
to punishment,) is become reconciled to
302 KAUKOW.
“ them (passing by and fully pardoning
“ all offences by them committed against
“ him,) so as generally to proffer upon
“ certain reasonable and gentle terins^ to all
“ that shall sincerely embrace such over-
“ tures of mercy, and heartily resolve to
“ comply with those terms required by him; —
“ namely, the returning and adhering to
“ him, forsaking all impiety and iniquity,
“ and constantly persisting in faithful obe-
“ dience to his holy commandments.”
“ This ” (he adds) “ is the proceeding of
“ God ; which the Christian Gospel doth
“ especially set forth, and which, accord-
“ ing; to our Lord’s commission and com-
mand, his apostles did first preach to
“ man ; as whosoever will consider the
“ drift and tenor of their preaching, will
‘‘ easily discern ; — which, therefore, St.
“ Paul may reasonably be supposed here
“ to assert, and vindicate against the Jews,
“ and other adversaries of the Gospel ; con-
“ sequently, the terms he useth should be
“ so interpreted as to express that matter.
“ Whence, — being justified, will imply,
HARROW.
303
‘‘ that which a person embracing the Gospel
“ doth immediately receive from God, in
“ the way of grace and mercy ; viz. an ab-
“ solution from his former crimes, an ac-
“ quittance from his debts, a state of inno-
“ cence and guiltlessness in God’s sight,
“ an exemption from vengeance and punish-
ment.”
The above position he proves, by the
apostolic argument of the universal sinful¬
ness of man, and the insufficiency of the
law, for the justification of a sinner ; or, ra¬
ther, of its contrary effect, as a ministry of
condemnation ; and thence infers, with
St. Paul, that “ a man is justified by faith
“ only ; or hath absolute need of such a
“ justification as that which the Gospel de-
clarethandtendereth: — which justification
“ must, therefore, import, the receiving that
free pardon which the criminal and guilty
“ world did stand in need of ; — which
“ the forlorn and deplorable state of man-
“ kind did groan for ; — without which, no
“ man could have any comfort in his mind,
“ any hope, or any capacity for salvation.”
304
BARROW.
Here, surely, is a statement, vvliich ex¬
cludes all ‘/boasting, or the ascription of a
meritorious efficacy to any possible per¬
formance of man. Here, justification is
plainly described as “ the result of Christ’s
“ redemption, and the act of God conse¬
quent thereon and remission of sins, is
also used indifferently or synonimously, to
express the proper and immediate effect of
our blessed Saviour’s passion.
We need not follow him in his enumer¬
ation of the “phrases equivalent to justifica-
“ tion,” farther than to observe, that he
includes the imputation of righteousness
amongst the number ; thus opposing alike,
the Popish doctrine of “ infusion,” and that
of an actual transfer or substitution, which
seemed to be implied by some Protestant
explications of the term.
On the whole, it appears, that justifica¬
tion is here considered, as the act of admis¬
sion into the Christian covenant ; and, in
this sense, it is coupled by the preacher
with the doctrine of Baptismal Begener-
BARROW.
305
ation. On this latter subject, I have already
observed, that recent jealousies have created
a difference, where, probably, little real
distinction exists ; and that if the precise
doctrine were separated from the conse¬
quences sometimes attached to it, and the
general system of the divines who have held
it, fairly taken into consideration, a mutual
allowance, if not an approximation of judg¬
ment on either side, might ensue ; except,
perhaps, in those extreme cases, (if any
such there be,) where the sacrament has
been invested with an absolute and uncon¬
ditional efficacy, or reduced to the charac¬
ter of a rite merely initiatory and external.
Perhaps it will surprise you, as it did me,
to find that Luther states this doctrine of
baptismal regeneration, — not argumenta¬
tively, but expressly, — as a fundamental
article of the Christian faith. I mean not to
draw from hence, any evidence in its favor,
but simply to observe, that it is not a no¬
velty in the history of the Reformation ;
and that from Luther’s well known situation
and sentiments, he must have held it in a
VOL. II.
X
306
BARROW.
sense reconcileable with tlie possibility, and
very general necessity, of a subsequent re¬
novation and conversion. The passage
occurs in his commentary on the epistle to
the Galatians, chap. 3. ver. 6.
I may also refer you to Calvin’s Institutes,
(Book 4. chap. 15.) for some observations
on this subject, as consistent with the doc¬
trine of our own divines, as they could be,
on his principle of special predestination.
* As some proof of this assertion may be agreeable
to those readers who have not Calvin’s work at hand,
the passages referred to are cited below. They are
taken (for more general satisfaction,) from the old trans¬
lation, mentioned in a former letter.
‘‘ Baptism is a sign of the entering, wherewith we
are received into the fellowship of the Church, that
“ being grafted into Christ, we may be reckoned among
the children of God. Now it was given us of God
‘‘ to this end, (which I have taught to be common to
“ all the mysteries,) first, that it should serve to our
“ faith in him, and to our confession before men.
‘‘ We will orderly declare the manner of both pur-
poses. Baptism bringeth three things to our faith,
“ which also must be severally entreated of. This
“ is the first which the Lord setteth out unto us, that
“ it should be a token and proof of our cleansing; or
BAUROW.
307
The conclusion of the sermon we have
been examining, clearly exhibits the view
“ (to express my mind better,) it is like to a certain
“ sealed charter, whereby he confirmeth to us, that all
“ our sins are so defaced, cancelled, and blotted out,
that they may never more come in his sight, nor be
‘‘ rehearsed, nor be imputed. For he willeth, that all
“ they that believe, should be baptized into forgiveness
“ of sins. Therefore, they which thought that baptism
‘‘ is nothing else but a mark or token whereby we pro-
“ fess our religion before men, as soldiers bear the con-
“ usance of their captain for a mark of their profession,
“ ^iioeigh not that, which was the chief thing in haptism ;
that is, this ; that we should receive it with this pro-
“ mise, that whosoever believeth, and is baptized, shall
be saved.
“ In this sense is that to be understood, which Paul
“ writeth, that the Church is sanctified of Christ, her
“ spouse, and cleansed with washing of water by the
“ word of life ; — and, in another place, that we are
“ saved according to his mercy, by the washing of re-
“ generation, and the renewing of the Holy Ghost ; —
“ and, that which Peter writeth, that baptism saveth
‘‘ us. For Paul’s will was not, to signify that ourwash-
“ ing and salvation is perfectly made by water, or that
“ water containeth, in itsef, the power to cleanse, re-
“ generate, or renew. Neither did Peter mean the
“ cause of salvation, but only the knowledge and cer-
“ tainty of such gifts to be received in this sacrament'*
Inst. Book 4. Chap. 15. Sec. 1 Sc 2.
X 2
BARROW.
:i08
of justification in its two-fold sense, as ab¬
solute for the past, and conditional (if I
“ Neither is it to be thouglit, tliat baptism is applied
“ only to the time past, ami that for new fallings, into
“ which we fall back after baptism, we must seek new
remedies of cleansing, in I wot not what other sa-
‘‘ craments, though the force of ha'pthm’noere '■j^orn out
of use. But thus we ought to think, that at w/if/Z thnc
“ soever wc he baptised, we are at once washed and clea7i3cd
‘‘ for all our life. Therefore, so oft as we fall, we must
go hack to the remembrance of baptism, and therewith
“ we nmst arm our mind, that it map be always certain
and assured of the forgiveness of sms.”
Chap. 15. Sec. iW
“ It” (baptism) “bringeth also another fruit, because
“ it sheweth us our mortification in Christ, and new
“ life in him. — For, as the apostle saith, we are bap-
tized into his death, that we may walk in newness of
“ life. By which words, he doth not only exhort us to
“ the following of him, (as though he did say, that after
“ a certain example of the death of Christ, we should
“ die to our lusts, and after the example of his resur-
“ rection, we should be raised up to righteousness,) but
he setteth the ^natter much deeper ; — that is to say, that
“ by baptisTU, Christ hath made us pa^'takers of his death,
that we may he grafted into it ; — and, as the graft
recciveth substayice and nourishment, of the root into
which it is grafted, so they that receive baptism, with
“ such faith as they 07(ght, do indy feel the effect 7ial~
“ 7iess of the death of Ch'ist, in the mortifying of their
19'
BARROW.
309
may so speak,) for the future ; — as placing
the individual in a state of actual and pre-
Jlcsh, and therewithal^ also^ they feel the effect of his
resurrection^ in the quickening of the spirit”
Book 4. Chap. 15. Sec. 5.
In the 16th Chapter, which treats of infant baptism,
after an elaborate defence of the practice, by a parallel
with tile rite of circumcision, we find the following re¬
markable sentence ; which, however inconsistent it may
be thought with the general scheme of Calvin’s doctrine,
seems fairly to warrant the assertion made above, as to
his judgment on this particular question.
“ Though infants, at the same time that they were
“ circumcised, did not comprehend in understanding
“ what that sign meant, yet they were truly circumcised
“ into the mortification of their corrupt and defiled na-
“ ture ; in which mortification they should afterwards '
“ exercise themselves, when they were grown to riper
“ age. Finally, it is very easy to assoile this objection,”
(viz. the incapacity of infants to believe and repent,)
“ by saying, that they be baptized into repentance and
faith to come ; 'which ^ although they he not formed in
“ them, yet, by secret working of the spirit, the seed of
“ both lieth hidden in them. With this answer at once
“ is overthi’own whatever they wrest against us, which
they have picked out of the signification of baptism.”
Book 4. Chap. 16. Sec. 20.
310
BARROW.
sent salvation, “ by the remission of sins
“ that are past,” — “ and assuring his con-
“ tinuance in that state, so long as beholds
“ fast the profession of his faith, without
“ wavering,” — “ so long as he does not for-
“ feit the benefit of that grace, by making
“ shipwreck of faith, and a good con-
‘‘ science.”
Whether this justification import pre¬
cisely what is now understood by the phrase
“ regeneration,” — whether the grace here
spoken of, be simply the dispensation of
pardon, or the implantation of that spiritual
principle which is necessary to the new crea-
It will not be supposed that I cite Calvin, here, as an
advocate of the doctrine of Baptismal Regeneration, as
it is understood by some of those writers who have op¬
posed it in recent controversies : yet I think the fore¬
going passages prove, that he associated regeneration in
some sense, and even as denoting the principle, or in¬
strumental cause, of a spiritual change of character, with
the ordinance of baptism ; and, that though he denied
the inherent power or virtue of this ordinance, he clearly
maintained its sacramental efficacy.
BARROW.
311
lion of the sinner, — are questions which
I am not competent to determine, and
which, indeed, I should think not very
easily determinable. Yet, so far as the
preacher’s opinion can be inferred from his
association of the terms, he seems to be
fairly quoted as an authority, by the later
advocates of this doctrine ; and his judg¬
ment is very decisively stated, wlien he
comes to treat expressly of the sacrament
of baptism.
But our concern is with the more im¬
portant question, of his general doctrine of
justification : and I think we have seen,
that whether considered as an initiatory, or
a final absolution, he has been equally care¬
ful to represent it, as proceeding from the
impulse of the divine mercy alone, and un¬
attainable, either meritoriously or effectively,
by any act or eftbrt of man. The very capa¬
city for salvation he has declared to be con¬
ferred by redemption, and obtained through
faith given us of God; and to this faith
only, evinced (where there is time and
X 4
312
BARROW.
opportunity,) by its necessary fruits, has
he ascribed any instrumentality towards
justification or salvation, from the com¬
mencement, to the close, of the Chris¬
tian life.
313
LETTER XXX.
BARROW.
SERMON ON THE PASSION. - ITS PECULIAR CHARACTER —
EXTRACTS. - FULL STATEMENT OF THE DOCTRINE OF
HUMAN CORRUPTION, REPEATED. - NECESSITY AND
SUFFICIENCY OF THE ATONEMENT MADE BY CHRIST. —
APPLICATION. — USES OF THE CONSIDERATION OF THIS
DOCTRINE. - EXTRACTS. - BARROw’s USE OF PHILOSO¬
PHICAL AND CLASSICAL AUTHORITIES. - HIS MILD¬
NESS. - AVERSENESS TO POLITICAL CONTROVERSY. —
CONCLUSION.
MY DEAR FRIEND,
In the sermon on justifying faith, Barrow
had observed, that this faith hath a peculiar
reference to that part of Christian truth,
which concerns the merciful intentions of
God towards mankind, and the gracious
performances of our Saviour, in order to
their accomplishment ; and I have selected
his memorable sermon upon the passion of
our Lord, as exhibiting at once, his view
of this stupendous sacrifice, and the feelings
314
barrow.
excited in his mind by the contemplation
of it.
In this noble discourse, we find the perfec¬
tion of Christian eloquence : — not the mi¬
nute and verbal accuracy of the rhetorician,
but the “ thoughts that breathe, and words
that burn,” in the productions of the true
and natural orator ; or rather, the ardent
effusions of a heart overflowing with divine
love, the holy inspirations of a tongue
touched with a coal from the altar. It not
a little increases the effect of this fine burst
of pious feeling, to observe that it seems in
a manner involuntary ; and is strikingly
contrasted with the habitually calm and ar¬
gumentative style of the preacher ; and it
awakens a delightful, though deeply solemn
interest, to reflect that it was his lasV^ minis¬
terial exertion ; — that the eye of faith, which
under all its present mysteriousness, could
so intensely fix upon the cross, was so soon
* This sermon was the last composed by Dr. Barrow,
and was preached not quite three weeks belore Ins
deatli.
BARROW.
315
to be purged of its mortal film, and admitted
to behold, “ face to face,” the glory of that
Redeemer, whose humiliation it had so
lately contemplated.
Under such an impression, it is, perhaps,
impossible to consider this sermon, abstract¬
edly from the strong personal feeling which
it excites. Our object, however, limits us
to the examination of its doctrinal charac¬
ter, and will be best attained by a simple
statement of the plan, and the citation of a
few extracts.
The plan includes an enquiry into the
object of this dispensation of redemption,
with its peculiar fitness to accomplish that
object, (which is traced minutely in the
various circumstances of our Lord’s charac¬
ter and sufferings;) — and closes with a view
of the practical efficacy of “ the doctrine of
the cross,” as a source of spiritual comfort,
an incentive to holiness and virtue, and an
excitement to the devout and benevolent
affections.
S16
HARROW.
In tli€ fine exordium, the doctrine of
human depravity is stated without reserve
or palliation, as the very ground and found¬
ation of the Christian system ; and from
hence is deduced a proof of the necessity of
redemption, and of the agency of God him¬
self, to effect it.
After a Scriptural demonstration of this
fundamental truth, that man, in his natural
state, was lost, and alienated from God,
and unable to effect, or even to seek, a re¬
conciliation, he thus describes the stupen¬
dous scheme which it pleased the divine
mercy to devise for his recovery.
“ When this was our forlorn and despe-
“ rate case, then Almighty God, out of
“ his infinite goodness, was pleased to look
“ upon us, with an eye of pity and mercy,
“ so as graciously to design a redemption
“ for us, out of that woeful distress ; and
“ no sooner by his incomprehensible wis-
“ dom, did he foresee that we should lose
“ ourselves, than by his immense grace, he
did conclude to restore us.”
DAllKOVV.
tni
“ But how could this happy design well
“ be compassed ? How, in consistence with
“ the glory, with the justice, with the truth
“ of God, could such enemies be recon-
“ ciled, such offenders be pardoned, such
“ wretches be saved ? Would the omnipo-
“ tent Majesty, so affronted, deign to treat
“ with his rebels immediately, without an
“ intercessor or an advocate? Would the
“ Sovereign Governor of the world suffer
“ so notoriously his right to be violated,
“ his authority to be slighted, his honour
‘‘ to be trampled on, without some notable
“ vindication or satisfaction ? Would the
“ great Patron of justice relax the terms of
‘‘ it, or ever permit a gross breach thereof
“ to pass with impunity ? Would the im-
“ mutable God of truth expose his veracity
“ or his constancy, to suspicion, by so re-
‘‘ versing that peremptory sentence of
“ death upon sinners, that it should not in a
“ sort eminently be accomplished ? Would
“ the most righteous and most holy God
“ let slip an opportunity so advantageous,
“ for demonstrating his perfect love of in-
‘‘ nocence, ' and abhorrence of iniquity ?
318 BARROW.
Could we, therefore, well be cleared from
our guilt, without an expiation, or re-
instated in freedom, without a ransom, or
“ exempted from condemnation, without
“ some punishment ?”
“ No ! God was so pleased to prosecute
“ his designs of goodness and mercy, as
‘‘ thereby nowise to impair or obscure, but
rather to advance and illustrate, the
“ glories of his sovereign dignity, of his
“ severe justice, of his unchangeable steadi-
“ ness in word and purpose. He accord-
“ ingly would be sued to for peace and
“ mercy ; nor would he grant them abso-
“ lutely, without due compensation for the
‘‘ wrongs he had sustained ; yet so, that
“ his goodness did find us a mediator, and
“ furnish us with means to satisfy him. He
“ would not condescend to a simple remis-
“ sion of our debts ; yet so, that, saving
“ his right and honour, he did stoop still
“ lower for an effectual abolition of them.
“ He would make good liis word, not to
“ let our trespasses go unpunished ; yet so,
“ that by our punishment we might receive
BAR now.
319
advantage. He would manifest ins de-
“ testation of wickedness, in a way more
illustrious, than if he had persecuted it
“ down to hell, and irreversibly doomed
it to endless torment.”
But how might these things be effected?
“ Where was there a mediator proper and
‘‘ worthy to intercede for us ? Who could
“ presume to solicit and plead in our be-
half? Who should dare to put himself
“ between God and us, or to offer to screen
“ mankind from the divine wrath and ven-
“ geance ? Who had so great an interest
“ in the court of heaven, as to ingratiate
such a brood of apostate enemies thereto?
“ Who could assume the confidence to pro-
“ pose ter ms of reconciliation, or to agitate
“ a new covenant, wherewith God might
“ be satisfied, and whereby man might be
“ saved? Where, in heaven or earth,
“ could there be found a priest fit to atone
“ for sins so vastly numerous, so extremely
“ heinous ? And whence should a sacri-
“ fice be taken, of value sufficient to ex-
plate for so manifold enormities, com-
KAR«OW.
fm
“ mitted against the infinite Majesty of
“ Heaven ? Who could find out the ever-
“ lasting redemption of innumerable souls,
“ and lay down a competent ransom for
them all ? Not to say, who could pur-
“ chase for them eternal life and bliss ?”
“No creature might aspire to so august
“ an honour. None could achieve so mar-
“ vellous a work, as to redeem from infinite
“ guilt and misery, the noblest part of all
“ the visible creation ! None could pre-
“ sume to invade that high prerogative of
“ God, or attempt to infringe the truth of
“ that reiterated proclamation, — ‘ I, even I,
“ am the Lord, and beside me there is no
“ Saviour ! ’ ”
The excellence of this extract, makes
any apology for the length of it, unneces¬
sary. I must refer you to the volume, for
the farther detail of our Lord’s incarnation,
ministry, and death, with the observations
upon the wisdom and propriety of the
scheme of redemption in all its parts, and
proceed to the practical application.
BARROW.
321
No abridgment could do justice to this
admirable portion of the discourse, and de¬
tached extracts will weaken it by breaking
the order and connection. Yet a little of
both must be attempted, as it is here, es¬
pecially, that we trace the personal feelings
and character of the preacher.
The consideration of the doctrine of the
cross, as applicable to Christian practice,
he describes, as useful for the excitement of
gratitude, of faith, of spiritual joy, of hu¬
mility, of trust in God, of hatred of sin, of
penitence ; — and farther, as an incentive
to the practice of love and charity, to an in¬
difference and contempt for worldly vani¬
ties, a cheerful submission to the divine
will, a patient endurance of afflictions, and,
above all, an open and magnanimous ac¬
knowledgment of this stupendous mystery
of our religion, which was “to the Jews a
“ stumbling block, and to the Greeks fool-
“ ishness but “ is the power of God un-
“ to salvation, to every one that believeth.”
VOL. I[. Y
322
BARROW.
Under each of these heads, in directing
the meditations of his reader, he seems to
pour out the fulness of his own pious soul ;
and exhibits such an exquisite view of the
graces and consolations of Christianity, as
nothing less than a deep and personal ex¬
perience could convey.
If, even upon a general principle of cri¬
ticism, evident to natural taste and good
sense, it was thought necessary to be a vir¬
tuous man, in order to be a great orator, it
is eminently necessary to be a pious man, in
order to deserve the character of a Christian
orator ; and nothing more strikingly illus¬
trates this, than the instinctive discrimina¬
tion, with which we often infer the per¬
sonal characters of writers on religion, from
the peculiarities of their respective compo¬
sitions. I am, perhaps, a little enthusiastic
in the application of this principle, to Bar-
row ; and I allow, that it is dangerous to
establish such an instinct, as a general cri¬
terion of sincerity, where other sources of
information are defective. Yet it is, in
BA II ROW.
323
most cases, an in voluntary impression, and
anticipates, if it does not preclude, the de¬
liberate exercise of the judgment. Like
the electric power, it operates instantly and
irresistibly ; and, with a moral force more
mighty than this first of physical agents, it
not only elicits the spark of congenial virtue,
but seems to awaken the dormant principle
of spiritual life and feeling, even when
benumbed by constitutional apathy, or
sometimes perhaps apparently extinguished
by sensual or careless habits.
But I must proceed to our extracts ; or
Barrow will occupy a larger portion of our
c'ime, than even my partiality would allow
him. I shall take the subjects as they oc¬
cur in the above enumeration ; and first,
the efficacy of the doctrine of the cross, in
the excitement of love and gratitude to
God.
“ That God the Father should desimi
“ such a redemption for us, — not sparing
“ his own Son, the Son of his love, dear to
“ him, as himself, but delivering him up
¥ 2
324
BARROW.
“ for US, to be so dealt with for our sake, —
“ that God would endure to see his Son in
“ so pitiful a condition, to hear him groan-
“ ing under so grievous pressures, to let
“ him be so horribly abused ; — and that, —
“ for us, who had deserved nothing from
“ him, — who had demerited so much
against him ; — for us, who were no
“ friends to him, (for even when we were
“ enemies, we were reconciled to God by
“ the death of his Son,) — who were not
“ any way commendable for goodness or
“ righteousness, (for Christ did suffer for
“ sinners, the just for the unjust; and God
“ commended his love towards us, that
“ while we were yet sinful, Christ died for
“ us ;) — that God should thus love us, send-
“ ing his Son to be a propitiation for our
“ sins, in so dismal a way of suffering, —
“ how stupendous is that goodness ! how
vast an obligation doth it lay upon us to
“ reciprocal affection !” — “ If a Jew were
“ commanded by law, if a Gentile were
“ obliged by nature, to love God with all
“ his heart, and with all his soul, — what
“ affection doth a Christian, under the
BARROW.
325
‘‘ law of duty and grace, owe unto him!
“ By what computation can we reckon that
‘‘ debt ? What faculties have we, sufficient
“ to discharge it ? What finite heart can
“ hold an affection commensurate to such
“ an obligation ?”
“ And how can it otherwise than inflame
“ our hearts with love toward the blessed
“ Son of God, our Saviour, to consider,
‘‘ that merely out of charitable pity toward
“ us, he purposely came down from heaven,
“ and took our flesh upon him, that he
‘‘ might therein undergo those extreme
“ acerbities of pain, and those most ugly
“ indignities of shame, Jbr usf' — “ If love
“ naturally be productive of love, if friend-
“ ship justly meriteth a correspondence in
“ good will, what effect should the con-
“ sideration of so ineffable a love, of so
“ unparalleled a friendship, have upon us?”
And — “ What surer ground can there be
“ of faith in God, what stronger encourage-
“ ment of hope, than is suggested by this
consideration? For, if God stedfastly did
Y 3
326 HA R ROW,
“ hold his purpose, and faithfully did ac-
“ accomplish his word, in an instance so
distasteful, how can we ever suspect his
“ constancy and fidelity in any case? How
can we distrust the completion of any
“ Divine promise?” — ‘‘ What higher kind-
“ ness could God express, what lower
“ condescension could he vouchsafe ? By
“ what pledge, could he more clearly or
“ surely testify his willingness and delight
to do us good ?”
“ If the greatness of our sins discou-
“ rageth us from entertaining comfortable
“ hopes of mercy, will it not rear our hearts
“ to consider that such a punishment hath
“ been inflicted, to expiate them, which
“ might content the most rigorous severity?
“ — that such a price is laid down to redeem
“ us from the curse, which richly might
“ suffice to discharge it? — that such a sa-
“ crifice hath been offered, which God hath
“ avowed, for most available, and acceptable
“ to himself?” — “ Whatever the wounds
“ of our conscience may be, is not the
“ blood of the cross, tempered with our
BARROW.
327
“ hearty repentance, and applied by a lively
“ faith, a sovereign balsam, of virtue suffi-
“ cient to cure them ? And may we not
‘‘ by his stripes be healed ? And have we
not abundant reason, with the apostle,
“ to joy in God, through our Lord Jesus
“ Christ, by whom we have received the
“ atonement?
“ It may indeed yield great joy and
“ sprightly consolation to us, to contemplate
our Lord upon the cross, exercising his
‘‘ immense charity and love toward us ;
“ transacting all the work of our redemp-
“ tion, defeating all the enemies, and
“ evacuating all the obstacles, of our sal-
vation.”
“ To the external view and carnal sense
“ of men, our Lord was then indeed ex-
“ posed to scorn and shame ; but to
“ spiritual and sincere discerning, all his
“ and our enemies, did there hang up as
“ objects of contempt, utterly overthrown
“ and undone.”
328
BARROW.
The fine prosopopoeia that follows, is too
long to extract, and would be spoiled by
curtailing : we will therefore proceed to the
next grace (that of humility,) to be derived
from this contemplation of the cross.
“ This consideration is most useful, to
“ render us very humble, and sensible of
“ our weakness, our vileness, our wretched-
“ ness. For how low was that fall, from
“ which we could not be raised, without
“ such a depression of God’s only Son !
“ How great is that impotency, which did
“ need such a succour to relieve it ! How
abominable must be that iniquity, which
“ might not be expiated without so costly
“ a sacrifice ! How deplorable is that misery,
“ which could not be removed without com-
“ mutation of so strange a suffering! Would
“ the Son of God have so emptied and
abased himself for nothing? Would he
“ have endured such pains and ignominies
“ for a trifle ? No, surely. — If our guilt
had been slight, if our case had been
“ tolerable, the Divine wisdom would have
“ chosen a more cheap and easy remedy 1”
BARROW.
329
“ Is it not madness, for us to be con-
“ ceited of any worth in ourselves, to con-
“ fide in any merit of our works, to glory
‘‘ in any thing belonging to us, to fancy oiir-
“ selves brave, fine, happy persons, worthy
“ of great respect and esteem, — where-
“ as our unworthiness, our demerit, our
“ forlorn state, did extort from the most
“ gracious God, a displeasure needing such
“ a reconciliation, — did impose on the
“ most glorious Son of God, a necessity
“ to undergo such a punishment in our'
“ behalf?”
Of the other virtues, religious, personal,
and social, which this doctrine of the Cross
is calculated to foster and excite, we have
a delineation equally animated: but so much
only, is applicable to our present object, and
I must hasten to the close of these observ¬
ations, which have already exceeded the
proposed limits.
The acknowledged authority of Barrow
as a ilivine, may seem to have made any
introduction of his name, in the way of
330
E ARROW.
vindication, superfluous. But, as he holds a
distinguished rank amongst our philosophi¬
cal preachers, and is at once an advocate,
and an example, of the free use of reason in
religious discussions, and the application
of human learning, to the illustration of his
sacred subject, I have been anxious to bring
him forward, as an example of the compati¬
bility of these practices, with an implicit
submission to Scripture, upon those high
and mysterious doctrines, which are utterly
inscrutable to the human faculties, and
must rest for their evidence, upon the divine
testimony alone.
Of Barrow’s truly Christian use of the
philosophical and classical authorities, to
which he occasionally refers in the way of
illustration, instances might be cited from
many of his practical discourses. I shall,
however, only refer you to two, upon ‘‘ The
Profitableness of Godliness where he
proves the superiority of piety to philoso¬
phy, as it were upon the evidence of philo¬
sophy herself ; and prefaces the citation of
various axioms of heathen or natural wis-
15 ARROW.
doni and morality, with the remarkable
%/
observation, that in its fruit, as well as in its
principle, piety is the only true wisdom,
the only source of rational happiness, or of
independent and consistent virtue.
“ The pious man is the exquisite phi-
losopher.” — “ All the philosophical bra-
“ vados concerning a wise man’s being
“ only rich, only honourable, only happy,
“ only above fortune, are verified in the
“ ‘pious man. To him alone, as such, with a
‘‘ sure foundation, without vanity, and with
“ evident reason, those aphorisms may be
“ applied. They are paradoxes oxidi fictions
“ abstracting from religion, or considering
“ man only under the light and power of
“ nature. But, supposing our religion to
“ be true, a good Christian, soberly, with-
“ out arrogance, in proportion, and ac-
“ cording to, the measure of his piety, may
“ assume them to himself, as the holy
“ apostles did. — I possess all things ; — I
‘‘ can do all things ; — he may in a sort say
“ with St. Paul.”
332
BARROW.
Of the body of doctrinal and practical
instruction, which the expositions of the
Creed and the Decalogue contain, I shall
only observe, that it is entirely in accord¬
ance with the principles laid down in the
foregoing extracts ; and may be considered
as an admirable text-book for private in¬
struction or public admonition. I would
notice more particularly (if our limits per¬
mitted,) four excellent discourses on the
Doctrine of Universal Redemption ; in which
this great truth is vindicated and explained
with equal force and clearness, and without
the polemical asperity which we find in
some other doctrinal discussions of that
period.
It is, in fact, a peculiarity in the charac¬
ter of Barrow, that he seems to stand, as it
were, above the controversial atmosphere ;
and in the explication of Christian princi-
ciples, to fix his eye entirely upon Scrip¬
ture; adverting but incidentally, and always
unwillingly, to polemical differences or di¬
visions.
BARROW.
333
One farther observation I must make, as
illustrative at once of the dignity of his
mind, and the meekness of his character.
At a period when political and theological
controversy appeared to be almost insepar¬
able, and under the impression of personal
recollections which must have strongly
biassed his political principles, he seems to
have carefully avoided all allusion to this
irritating subject. Even in a sermon
preached on the anniversary of the Restora¬
tion, where it appeared to be almost called
Tor, by the service of the day, it is remark¬
able, that, in alluding to the sufferings of
good kings, under the divine judgments for
the sins of the people, he makes no refer¬
ence to the case of Charles the First : an
omission, which clearly is not attributable
to any want of respect for the memory of
that unfortunate monarch. Towards the
close of the sermon, indeed, he states his
principles explicitly, in his thanksgiving for
the re-establishment of civil and ecclesias¬
tical order ; and adverts to the misde¬
meanors of persons in the late times, ’ but
in very calm and moderate language. His
334
BARROW.
allusions to the existing domestic divisions,
chiefly bear upon the general immorality
and impiety, by which the period subsequent
to the Restoration, was disgraced.
It cannot, indeed, be denied, that he
speaks of the reigning monarch, in terms
more laudatory, than the evidence of history
has warranted. But it should be recollected,
that the worst features in the character of
Charles the Second, did not unfold them¬
selves, till towards the close of his reign ;
and that, throughout the whole of it, his
insinuating and popular qualities rendered
it difficult to judge him with impartiality.
Barrow’s high respect for the civil au¬
thorities of his country, upon a principle of
religious duty, may also have contributed
to give strength to these closing observ¬
ations. But does it not make his forbear¬
ance upon other occasions, the more admir¬
able, to observe that it was not the result
of any indecision of principle, but the
genuine fruit of a pacific and Christian
spirit ?
BARROW.
335
Of the other divines who immediately
succeeded the Restoration, and who have
maintained some portion of their popularity,
to the present times, (for with such only
we are concerned,) it would be impossible,
within the compass of a moderate corre¬
spondence, to attempt either an enumera¬
tion or an analysis. I will try, however,
so far as our documents allow, and my ac¬
quaintance with them, enables me, to trace
in my next, the influence of the then exist¬
ing controversies, in forming the style, or
determining the subjects, of our popular
divinity.
Adieu.
S36
)
LETTER XXXL
SOUTH.
REASONS FOR HAVING OMITTED THE NAME OF SOUTH. -
CHARACTER OF HIS PREACHING. - REMARKS ON THE
PRACTICAL APPLICATION OF SCRIPTURE-DOCTRINES. -
DEFICIENCY OF SOUTH IN THIS POINT. - HARSHNESS OF
HIS PRACTICAL STYLE. - TENDERNESS OF THE GOSPEL,
ITS GREAT CHARM. — APPROPRIATE PULPIT-STYLE. -
CIRCUMSTANCES MAY REQUIRE A VARIATION. - THIS DE¬
FENCE APPLICABLE TO SOUTH, BUT NO EXCUSE FOR HIS
SEVERITY AND PARTY SPIRIT. - CHARACTERISTIC DIF¬
FERENCE, IN THE SERMONS OF SOUTH AND TILLOTSON. -
EFFECT OF THE RECENT DIVISIONS, UPON PULPIT-COMPO¬
SITIONS AT THIS PERIOD. — CONCLUSION.
MY DEAR FRIEND,
I CANNOT allow you to tax me with an un¬
fair or Jesuitical proceeding, in not having
mentioned the name of South, with those
of Tillotson and Barrow ; though I do not
deny that the omission was intentional;
and am, moreover, obliged to confess, that
his writings do not, in my judgment, (any
more than in yours,) support the cause
SOUTH.
SSI
which I am anxious to establish. I must,
however, beg of you to recollect, that I
proposed only a partial vindication ol the
divines to whom you indiscriminately ob¬
jected ; and meant not to enter into a
general criticism, nor to attempt a regular
enumeration of them.
f ■
The observations upon Tillotson and
Barrow, have extended to a length so much
greater than I expected, that I shall not be
able to afford many niches for their vener¬
able contemporaries ; ^ind must leave you
to pursue the more general examination
(if you shall feel so inclined,) upon the
principles which I have there suggested.
As I dare not, however, after your charge,
omit the name of South, I cannot place him
better, than next to his celebrated asso¬
ciates : — not, indeed, with any design of
instituting a comparison between them ;
much less of representing him as one of
those divines, who have been (in my mind)
rather arbitrarily charged, with preaching
a philosophic and diluted Christianity.
z
VOL. II.
338
SOUTH.
Plausibly, and perhaps justly, as the
sermons of South might be defended, upon
the ground of doctrine, I confess that there
is much in the general character of his
preaching, which, on our principles, I can¬
not vindicate. Yet, that you may not infer
from this acknowledgment, a larger con¬
cession than I intend to make, I will give
you, as concisely as possible, the observ¬
ations which occur to me upon his general
character, and upon the defects, which, in
my opinion, diminish the usefulness, and
obstruct the popularity, of these very able
discourses.
In truth, though I believe the keen wit
and scholastic acuteness of South, adapted
him particularly for the times in which he
lived, and qualified him for the exposure
of vice, and the confutation of infidelitv, in
a court where milder tempers and more
evangelical arguments would have failed to
command attention, I must freely resign
him to you, as open to all the objections
which you have stated ; — if he be not liable
to the still more serious charge, of having
SOUTH.
339
borrowed his divinity rather from the schools,
than the Scriptures ; — not that I mean to
impute to him any intentional perversion of
Scripture, or deviation from the principles of
the Church — (for, on the contrary, I believe
he is studiously orthodox in his doctrine,) —
but that I think his writings exhibit peculi¬
arly, that want of spirituality, in practical
application and inference, which arises from
the habit of considering the doctrinal truths
of Christianity as subjects of merel}^ specu¬
lative or critical discussion, and dwelling
rather upon the abstract principle, than
upon its relative influence and application.
It is an excellent observation (I forget
whose), that “ the mysteries of our religion
should always be viewed, in connection with
their bearing upon our spiritual wants and
necessities.” He, who learns to consider the
doctrine of the Trinity in conjunction with
his own hopes in time and in eternity, —
whodaresto approach the offended justice of
his Maker, only under the protecting media¬
tion of his Redeemer, — and, in the deep
consciousness of hereditary and actual pollu-
z 2
340
SOUTH.
tion, feels the inestimable value of that
grace which it is the office of the Holy
Spirit to bestow, — will be little disturbed
with metaphysical subtilties of explication,
upon the essence and subsistences of an
infinite, an incomprehensible Deity. Turn¬
ing from speculations in which his under¬
standing is bewildered, as well by the im¬
mensity of the object, as by its abstraction
from all those mediate ideas with which he
endeavours to assist his feeble apprehension,
he will humbly contemplate ‘Hhe unknown
God,” through the medium of his revealed
attributes and appellations. Leaving “ the
secret things which belong unto the Lord,” —
the deep and mysterious spiritualities of his
essence, which ‘‘ eye hath not seen, nor
ear heard, neither hath it entered into the
heart of man to conceive,” — he will view his
almighty power and wisdom, in the wonders
of creation and of providence ; — he will trace
his peculiar mercy to man in the gracious
manifestation of a Saviour, — and adore his
transcendent purity and holiness, in the re¬
velation of that sanctifying Spirit, on whose
influence he depends for consolation here,
SOUTH.
341
and meetness for the promised glory here¬
after. In the variety of these divine exhi¬
bitions, he will mark the reality of those
distinctions in the Godhead, which he finds
revealed in the Scriptures ; — in their har¬
mony, he will discover that sublime charac¬
ter of unity, which belongs emphatically to
the God of revelation, and which the boasted
light of philosophy has never so explicitly
disclosed, and probably would never have
so clearly discerned, without the aid of an
express and traditional communication, — -
and finally, in their close and intimate con¬
nection with his own wants, and hopes, and
aspirations, he will see and grasp the golden
chain, that links him with the invisible
world, and removes at once the mysterious
incongruity of his more spiritual and dis¬
cursive faculties, with the gross and mate¬
rial necessities of his animal nature.
The great deficiency which we find in
perusing the doctrinal sermons of South, is
the total absence of this relative applica¬
tion. The mystery of the Trinity, is, indeed,
asserted as a fundamental doctrine of Chris-
z 3
342
SOUTH.
tianity ; but it is discussed rather as a meta¬
physical problem, than as an authoritative
truth ; and a scheme of illustration is pro¬
posed, which would go near to annihilate
the personality of the Son and the Holy
Spirit. It is not, indeed, as the author
confesses, “ offered as a full explication,
much less as a just representation, of this
great mystery which he acknowledges
to be inconceivably above the reach of every
human intellect, and to rest exclusively
upon the testimony of Scripture. It is,
therefore, more fair to judge him by his
final declaration, “ that there are three
above the rank of created beings, the
‘‘ Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost
and that “ as for such high mysteries, as
“ the Trinity, and the subsistence of one
“ nature in three persons, and of three per-
“ sons in one and the same individual na-
“ ture, these are to be reckoned in the
number of such sacred and secret thin os,
as belong to God alone perfectly to know,
but to such poor mortals as we are, hum-
‘‘ bly to fall down before and adore.”
SOUTH.
343
The practical deductions, from the various
offices and attributes ascribed to the respec^
tive persons in the Holy Trinity, are evi¬
dently more appropriate subjects for the
pulpit, than the depths of this mysterious
doctrine : and I look upon it to have been
a great disadvantage attending the divinity
of the period in question, that the necessity
of arguing this doctrine polemically, some¬
times superseded its practical use; while the
fashion of pulpit controversy, familiarized
the popular mind with cavils and objections,
which the preacher was forced to state, in
order to refute them, and which would
never have disturbed the tranquillity, nor,
perhaps, occurred to the imagination, of the
pious and practical reader of his Bible. In
the sermons of Tillotson, we have found
this disadvantage much abated, if not alto¬
gether obviated, by the fervency of his de¬
votion, and the frequency of his practical
deductions and exhortations. In the few
amon2:st those of South, which relate to this
doctrine, we have little more than the scho¬
lastic argument of a scholastic question, re¬
stricted to its metaphysical and abstract
z 4
344
SOUTH.
form, and apparently separated from those
moral inferences, which a view of its bear¬
ing upon some other doctrines of Revelation
would suggest.
On the sacrifice and satisfaction of our
blessed Lord, — that inestimable truth which
blends itself so intimately with every princi¬
ple of Christian duty, — the same deficiency
of application is observable. The full and
implicit admission of this truth, as a point
of speculative belief, is, indeed, earnestly in¬
culcated : but its reception into the heart
as a principle of holiness, — its influence
upon the affections as a motive to grati¬
tude, — its humbling, and corrective, and
purifying efficacy, — its pre-eminent import¬
ance, as the only anchor of hope, the only
sure ground of dependance for salvation, —
all these legitimate and necessary deduc¬
tions, are either omitted, or very cursorily
marked ; and moral obligation is too often
built, on the principles of reason and of
natural religion : — both, necessary, indeed,
and excellent in their place, but rather to
be urged as corroborative, than funda¬
mental.
SOUTH.
345
Connected with this deficiency in the
statement of the doctrine of redemption,
or rather in the practical use of it, we
find (I think) a very low view of the office
and influence of the Holy Spirit ; and a
strong insinuation of a remaining suffi¬
ciency in man, to perform his duty with
much less of supernatural help, than the
Scriptures declare to be necessary. This
defect is particularly to be observed as per¬
vading the practical sermons, and may have
arisen from a zeal to oppose some prevalent
exaggerations. Yet I do not recollect that
the doctrine is any where stated, otherwise
than incidentally and generally ; and I am
inclined to believe, that no preacher, who
held it in what we are accustomed to con¬
sider as its full and Scriptural extent, would
be satisfied with such a statement. This
seems a very uncharitable conclusion, and
inconsistent with my favourite principle of
lenient interpretation : but I feel so deeply,
the importance of this great truth to the en¬
couragement of all moral exertion (though
I acknowledge the facility of its abuse), that
I would always see it clearly and promi¬
nently exhibited.
846
SOUTH.
But the peculiarity which will most for¬
cibly strike the reader, who opens the
volumes of South, in search of Christian in¬
struction, is the infrequency of Scripture
citations and references, — the exhibition
of the principles of religion, in the language
of a cold and systematic theology, — and the
expression of its precepts and prohibitions,
in the harsh and antithetical style of disput¬
ation ; — his absence of that deep and affec¬
tionate sensibility, which wins the heart,
while it awakens the conscience ; — and the
appearance of a sort of contemptuous in¬
difference to the spiritual v/elfare of those,
who shall remain unconvinced by his de¬
monstrations.
It is its exquisite tenderness of feeling,
that renders the character of the Gospel so
interesting, and at once strikes conviction
and compunction to the callous heart of the
sinner. It is this feeling, that uniformly
pervades the specimens which remain to
us of apostolic preaching, and softens the
severity of necessary and faithful reproof,
with the tear of pity, and the urgency of
SOUTH.
347
affectionate entreaty. It is this feeling, that
eminently distinguishes the divinity of
Taylor and Baxter, and has maintained
the popularity of their practical writings,
with all classes of Christian readers to
whom they are known. And it is, perhaps,
the observation of this feeling alone, that
can sooth the irritability of wounded pride,
and reconcile it to the friendly severity of
an honest and uncompromising preacher of
the Gospel.
The deficiency of the sermons of South,
in this endearing, and (as I may call it)
evangelical quality, may be traced, I think,
to two causes: — first, the fashion of specu¬
lative and polemical theology, which the
recent divisions in the Church had intro¬
duced ; and, secondly, to the fact, that most
of these sermons were delivered, either be¬
fore the university, or the court, where a
more argumentative and elaborate style of
composition might have been expected,
than would suit a mixed, or generally illite¬
rate, congregation. As there is, however,
much of this quality in many of the ser-
848
SOUTH.
iiions of Tillotson, preached nearly at the
same time, and, probably, to the same audi¬
tory, we must also trace the deficiency in
South, to those peculiarities of character and
temper, which are recorded of him in the
biography of that period, and which, indeed,
are sufficiently exhibited in his writings.
It is a principle of true taste, as well as
of piety, that precludes all display of wit or
humour in the pulpit ; and banishes from
its solemn and sacred offices, even the
lighter and more imaginative graces of
composition. A mind duly impressed with
the awfulness of eternal things, will gene¬
rally treat them with a corresponding se¬
riousness ; and will even, as far as circum¬
stances permit, reject the enticing words
‘‘ of man’s wisdom” or fancy, which, how¬
ever applicable to subjects of inferior dig¬
nity and interest, are here, not only unne¬
cessary, but injurious. Independently of
the religious associations connected with it,
the transcendent excellence of the Scrip¬
ture style, consists in the union of sublimity
of thought, with simplicty of expression and
SOUTH.
349
illustration : and, in proportion to the dili¬
gence with which this style is imitated,
(not in the affectation of a peculiar phraseo-
logy, but in the transfusion of its chaste and
dignified simplicity, and strict subordin¬
ation of expression, to sense, of form, to
substance,) will be the excellence, and
generally the success, of the Christian
preacher.
There are, however, circumstances, in
which this excellence may be less appre¬
ciated, and consequently less successful,
than a style of a more mixed 'and secular-
character : and, if we may defend upon this
ground, much of the classical and metaphy¬
sical illustration which has been objected to,
in some of the divines of this period, we
may, perhaps, suggest the same apology, for
the indulgence of that sarcastic wit which
distinguished the character of South, and
often marks his discourses. In a court,
where the truths of Christianity were too ge¬
nerally disregarded or disbelieved, — where
religion was commonly identified with the
imputation of dullness, and profligacy was
350
SOUTH.
united with the character of wit and spirit, —
it may have been useful sometimes, to show
that these were not necessary associations ;
and that it was possible to be a Christian in
principle, and a moralist in practice, with¬
out renouncing the reputation, or the exer¬
cise, of that intellectual superiority, which
infidelity is so apt to arrogate to itself.
And, let me add, that the strong and poig¬
nant satire which exhibited the folly, as
well as the turpitude, of sin, may have
sometimes operated upon the pride, of those
whose hearts were inaccessible through the
avenues of the conscience, or the under¬
standing.
1 would not be understood to defend
even the occasional use of a style, which I
think scarcely in any case, allowable : and,
however this peculiarity of character in
South, may have fitted him for the peculiar
exigencies of his time, I am inclined to think
it unfits him in a great degree for general
perusal, and weakens his authority as a
practical guide, as much as it diminishes
his usefulness as a literary model. I must.
SOUTH.
351
moreover, observe, that a certain coarseness
of expression and imagery, pervades his
moral expostulations ; which, if it does not
indicate in the preacher, a mind but imper¬
fectly purified by Christianity, is not likely
to improve, and will too often offend, the
feelings and taste of a delicate reader.
But the great objection to the sermons of
South, and the character which most unfits
them for permanent usefulness and popula¬
rity, is the acrimonious spirit in which they
are generally composed. Whatever be the
subject under discussion, whether a heresy
or a vice, the application is invariably made
to particular persons or parties ; and, even
where neither vice nor heresy can be im¬
puted, the unfortunate question of con-
foimity affords an endless topic of vituper¬
ation. We should, perhaps, be more
inclined to excuse this indiscriminate seve¬
rity in South, if he had been one of those
who had suffered under the recent usurp¬
ation. But we cannot forget the panegy¬
rist of Cromwell, in the eulogist of a church
which Cromwell subverted j nor reconcile
352
SOUTH.
the consistency of his early acquiescence,
with his subsequent and bitter enmity to
the principles of its opponents. You will
not suppose me to question here, the possi¬
bility of a conscientious change of opinion,
or the imperative duty of avowing it : but
the Gospel presents so different a view of
the temper and feeling with which such a
change should be attended, that while we
contrast the severity of the preacher, with
the tenderness of the Apostle, (who could
bear witness to the zeal of his brethren,
though he could not approve their judg¬
ment,) we are led to recollect, and to ap¬
ply, the remarkable reproof of our Lord, —
“ Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are
of.” Oh, may we apply it in meekness !
and may we recollect it to our own edifica¬
tion, when the prejudices of early associ¬
ation and attachment, would lead us to a
monopoly of the knowledge of divine truth,
and the privileges of salvation !
The difference of character, in Tillotson
and South, is remarkable in the difference
of their controversial sermons. Tillotson
SOUTH.
25S
seems to have breathed with pain in the
atmosphere of controversy, and to have
been perpetually struggling to escape from
it, to the safe and firm ground of vital and
practical Christianity. South appears to
expatiate in it, as his native and favourite
element ; and, however general or practical
his ostensible subject may be, seldom fails
to combine it with some point of polemical
jealousy : and (what is peculiarly symp¬
tomatic of this controversial spirit,) dwells
with as much energy and emphasis, upon
questions of local and domestic division, as
upon those vital and fundamental truths,
which are the main pillars of Christianity,
and might be made the ground of Christian
and catholic unity, without any desertion
from the national Church, or any dereliction
of the natural and hereditarj^ preference
for the worship and the discipline of our
fathers.
You are not to understand me here, as
pleading the cause of non-conformity ;
which I lament, not only in its direct, but
in its more remote and collateral, effects :
VOL. II.
A A
354
SOUTH.
and ill which, with much piety and up¬
rightness of intention, I cannot but acknow¬
ledge a general pertinacity of opinion, and
an excessive scrupulousness in matters of
little importance. How far the irritability
of perpetual controversy, will gradually lead
to the exaggeration of such scruples, on the
one hand, and of the system opposed to
them, on the other, it is curious to trace, in
the history of our Church, from Cranmer
and Hooper, to the disputants of the Com¬
monwealth and the Restoration.
A distinction in the style and character
of preaching — the establishment, as it were,
of different schools, — I have already noticed,
as one of the common results of divisions
of religious party. From various unfortu¬
nate associations at this time, it appears,
that the familiar use of Scripture language,
even in the explication of Scripture doc¬
trine, had been brought into discredit with
the zealous friends of the government ; as
liable to perversion, and as having been re¬
cently made instrumental to factious and
seditious designs. Under this impression
SOUTH.
3^
perhaps it is, that in some of the more hfa-
borate sermons of South, where he forms
his doctrine into any regularity of scheme^
we find a reference rather to human sys¬
tems and compilations, than to the simple
authority of Scripture : and in his view of
the qualifications necessary for the minis¬
terial office, an acquaintance with the
Bible holds but a secondary place, to an
intimacy with councils, schoolmen, and
“ fathers.”
In this prejudice, his great contempo¬
raries whom I have named, do not appear to
have participated : and Tillotson particu¬
larly, urges the diligent reading of the
“ Scriptures,” as more likely to establish
‘‘ right notions of religious doctrines, than
“ all the controversial writings of divines.”
I did not intend to have said so much of
a writer, whom, on our principles, I cannot
praise, and dare not very minutely criticise.
Yet it would be unjust not to add, that his
sermons abound in bright and striking ideas,
forcible illustrations, and convincing argii-
A A 2
356
SOUTH.
ments ; and are said to have been eminently
instrumental, in the exposure of the corrupt
principles and profligate practice, against
which they were commonly directed.
Adieu !
S51
LETTER XXXIL
BEVERIDGE.
REASONS FOR HAVING OMITTED THE NAME OP BISHOP BEVE¬
RIDGE. - CHARACTER OF HIS SERMONS. - PARTICULAR
LESSON TO BE DRAWN FROM THEM. — CHARACTERISTIC
DISTINCTION BETWEEN BEVERIDGE AND BARROW. - BIO¬
GRAPHICAL REMARKS. - LABORIOUS MINISTRY OF BISHOP
BEVERIDGE. - REASONS FOR DWELLING UPON HIS PER¬
SONAL CHARACTER - INJURY ARISING, FROM THE POPU¬
LAR APPLICATION OF THE TERM EVANGELICAL. - THE
TERM FAIRLY APPLICABLE, TO EVERY FAITHFUL MINISTER
OF A SCRIPTURAL CHURCH ; AND DESCRIPTIVE OF CHA¬
RACTER, RATHER THAN OP OPINION. - CONCLUSION,
MY DEAR FRIEND,
It was not uridesignedlj, that I omitted to
specify the names of Taylor and Beveridge,
in conjunction with those of the eminent
preachers who have been the subjects of
our late observations ; but because I con¬
sidered the former, as belonging to an earlier
period, and the latter, as excepted, by an
almost universal consent, from the censure
which has been thrown upon some of his
A A 3
358
BEVERIDGE.
most celebrated contemporaries. I am not,
however, sorry to be led, by your notice of
this omission, to a nearer consideration of
the character of this excellent prelate ; in
which, indeed, I discern such truly evange¬
lical features, as I think must recommend
it to the love and imitation, of the pious of
all parties and professions.
I find, naoreover, in the admirable ser¬
mons of Beveridge, a strong confirmation of
the septinient which is so deeply impressed
upon my mind, (and which in truth first led
me into this discussion,) — that we know not
what manner of spirit we are of, when we
quarrel for differences of explication, or
opinion, upon points obscure, indefinite, or
unimportsant ; and still less, when we jaaea-
sure the faith of our brethren, considered
as a vital principle, by the preciseness of
their agreement with our favourite authori¬
ties, or question their belief of the funda¬
mental doctrines of our religion, because
they do not see them exactly with our eyes,
or receive them through the medium of
our understandings.
BEVERIDGE.
359
This confirmation I draw not from the
perception of any doubt or diffidence in our
author, respecting the soundness of his own
conclusions, or the correctness of his own
explications. Diligently as he appears tp
have searched the divine records, and ear¬
nestly as he may be supposed to have prayed
for divine guidance in the enquiry, it is not
surprising that he should have stated the
result of this enquiry, in very decisive
terms ; nor that he should have been
urgent, in the inculcation of principles of
which he was so deeply convinced. But it
is observable, that his doctrinal discourses
sometime^ contain n combination of ptopq-
sitiqns, which subsequent controversies
have represented as irreconcileable ; and
that either side of the questions, to which I
have adverted in the course of this corre¬
spondence, as the subjects of our present
religious differences, might be plausibly
argued from his writings. * No author
* It will be recollected, that the observations in these
pages, refer only to pulpit compositions ; and chiefly to
those which are of a hortatory character. In contro-
A A 4
360
BEVERIDGE.
whom 1 know, has more clearly asserted
the doctrines of free grace, and moral re¬
sponsibility, — the certainty of God’s pro¬
mises, and the contingency of salvation, —
justification by faith, and the requisition of
obedience, not only as an evidence, but as
a condition of acceptance, — the power of
divine grace, and the free agency of man, —
baptismal regeneration, and the general
necessity of a subsequent renovation and
conversion.
In so large and desultory a collection of
sermons, and where almost every doctrinal
statement is applied to some point of prac¬
tical instruction, it would lead us too far, to
versial or expository treatises upon the doctrines of
Scripture, less caution may perhaps be necessary ; and
candour requires a decided statement, of principles de¬
cidedly entertained. The Calvinism of Bishop Beve¬
ridge has been inferred from his exposition of the 39
Articles : yet even here, he seems to avoid any conti'o-
vetsial discussion, and states the doctrine of predestina¬
tion so cautiously and concisely, that few who conscien¬
tiously subscribe to the Article upon that subject, will
very seriously object to this explanation of it,
BEVERIDGE,
361
cite particular examples ; and it would re¬
quire an attentive collation and comparison,
to trace the scriptural consistency of prin¬
ciples, successively urged in their insulated
form, and balanced (if I may so speak) in
their juxta-position. If you are inclined to
make this comparison for yourself, the titles
of the several discourses will direct you in
the selection.
While I would draw from this combin¬
ation of principles, an authority for my own
conviction, that the volume of Scripture
* In addition to the various republications of pious
works, to which the zeal of the present times has given
rise, it strikes me, that a compilation, formed upon the
plan here suggested, from the writings of our eminent
divines, and of Bishop Beveridge in particular, would be
of infinite service. It is too much the practice of advo¬
cates on either side, to select only what is favourable to
their own cause ; and thus these high authorities have
sometimes been partially quoted, as inculcating opinions,
which it seems to have been rather their object to oppose,
or which at least they did not hold in the strong and un¬
qualified sense imputed to them. Indeed, of all the dif¬
ficulties in controversy, the difficulty of strictly impartial
quotation, is perhaps the greatest.
362
I3EVERIDGE.
furnishes evidence of them all, and assigns
to each, its proper place in the beautiful and
consistent scheme of Christianity, I would
learn, where I found hut one chain of these
propositions exhibited, to consider the sys¬
tem rather as defective than corrupt; — and,
instead of abruptly discarding the principles
thus exaggerated or misapplied, I would
endeavour to trace their compatibility with
other doctrines of equal evidence and im¬
portance, and to show, that a full and im¬
plicit admission of the one class of truths,
does not necessarily involve a rejection of
the other. I acknowledge, that the truths
of either class, assume a more exclusive
character, under soine forms of proposition :
but I conceive that this very circumstance,
sufficiently indicates the proportion in
which they may be scripturally stated; and
that a prominence of either part of the sys¬
tem, which obscures or destroys the other,
is so far erroneous as it violates this pro¬
portion.
The sermons of Bishop Beveridge, are
perhaps more calc4lated for general and
BEVPJIIPGE.
363
pe]^’manent usefulness, than any others of his
day, as being more entirely popul^p. This
eharacter they partly derive, from his long
service as an active parpchial minister in
Lpndon, and partly (I think) froip the
priniitive piety of his mind, which led him
to rejept all extrinsic and adventitious or¬
nament, and to adopt a plainness and sym-
plicity of style, suited to the sublimity of a
subject that requires no verbal decorations.
But the great beauty of these sermons, is
a tender and pathetic earnestness, — a strong
and affectionate appeal to the heart apd
cpnscience, — a close and personal applica¬
tion of the doctrines an4 precepts of the
Pospel 5 which, iipwever powerful in their
nature to save or to reform, are actpally
effective, through this personal application
alone : — such an exhibition of the great
truths of revelation, as warms while it en¬
lightens, and kindles the flame pf devption
with the torch of knowledge.
It is a pretty thought, or quotation, in
one of the Spectators, that the cherubim
364
BEVERIDGE.
are a class of angels who know most, — and
the seraphim a class of angels who love
most. However fanciful the distinction
may be, it has often struck me that it might
be applied, in the way of analogy, to the
varieties of character in Christian writers ;
and the names of Barrow and of Beveridge,
have more than once occurred as illustrative
of the observation. I would not impute to
either of these eminent men, a defect of the
qualities which distinguished the other ;
but 1 think each was strikingly marked by
a peculiar and characteristic feature, which
has created a difference in their style of ex¬
pressing the same principles, and illustrat¬
ing the same subjects. While the acute and
powerful intellect of Barrow, leads him to a
habit of calm and close investigation, and
enables him to exhibit his principles in
every variety of light and position, and to
enforce them with the whole weight of
rational and scriptural proof, — the warm
sensibility of Beveridge, enters with a deep
and affectionate personality, into the deli¬
very of his sacred message, and gives to his
expostulations and instructions, a power and
BEVERIDGE.
365
authority almost apostolic. It is not, per¬
haps, every reader, who can reason and in¬
vestigate with Barrow ; but all can feel with
Beveridge ; and the conscience will often be
awakened through the alfections, when all
the force of rational demonstration might
have been applied in vain.
\
I have often wished that tlie fashion of
private, or of religious biography, which in
our time has descended to such unnecessary
minuteness, had existed, when the memorv
of those venerable lights of our Church was
still recent. The scanty notices of their
private lives and labours, which remain to
us, afford little knowledge of their personal
and pastoral habits; and even that little, we
owe rather to their connexion with the
secular history of their country, or the
public history of their Church, than to their
eminence, or peculiar devotedness, in the
exercise of their spiritual calling.
To this remark Bishop Beveridge appears
an exception. The memorials of him, in¬
deed, are concise, and we are left in a great
366
BEVERIDGE.
measure to collect his character, from de¬
tached and incidental notices. But this
character is exclusively pastoral. He owed
nothing of his celebrity to any secular ex¬
ertion ; nor does it appear from history, that
he took an active part in the ecclesiastical
controversies of his time, though he seems
to have expressed his judgment upon them,
as a minister of the Church of England,
with uncompromising plainness and sin¬
cerity. His appointment to the care of a
large and populous parish, took place at a
very early period of his life ; and we are
told, in a short biographical memoir pre¬
fixed to his sermons, that in this situation,
“ he earnestl}^ desired and endeavoured to
“ render his flock a pattern to others, for
“ true piety and holiness. He revived
“ the primitive practice among them, of ad-
“ ministering the sacrament every Lord’s-
day; and was so diligent and faithful in
“ the discharge of every part of his office,
“ and had his labours crowned with such
remarkable success, that, as he himself
was deservedly styled the great reviver
and restorer of primitive piety, so his
BEVERIDGE.
361
parish, becoming by this means very ex-
“ emplary for holiness, and a Christian con-
“ versation, was justly proposed as the best
“ model and pattern for the rest of its
“ neighbours to follow.”
We are also informed by Bishop Burnet,
of the great exertions of Doctor Beveridge,
in encouraging the revival of religious feel¬
ing, which took place in London towards
the close of King James’s reign ; and it is
remarkable, that the exertions of a minister
so zealous and orthodox, were at that period
a subject of jealousy, not merely to the
popish or interested adherents of the court,
but to some of better principles, who feared
that the encouragement of such a spirit
might lead to a renewal of past dissensions.
“ In King James’s reign,” (says the
Bishop,) “ the fear of popery was so strong,
“ as well as just, that many in and about
“ London, began to meet often together,
“ both for devotion, and for their farther
‘‘ instruction. Things of that kind had
“ been formerly practised only among the
S68
BEVERIDGE.
“ Puritans and Dissenters j but these were
“ of the Church, and came to their minis-
“ ters, to be assisted with forms of prayer
“ and other directions. They were chiefly
“ conducted byDoctorBeveridge andDoctor
“ Horneck. Some disliked this, and were
“ afraid it might be the original of new
factions and parties ; but wiser men, and
‘‘ better, thought, that it was not fit nor
“ decent to check a spirit of devotion at
“ such a time. It might have given scandal,
“ and it seemed a discouraging of piety;
and might be a means to drive well-mean-
ing persons over to the Dissenters.”
I need not remind you, that these circum¬
stances led to the establishment of the noble
institutions, which are now considered as
the bulwarks of our national church. The
zeal of Bishop Beveridge in the promotion
of these good works, it appears, did not ter¬
minate with his power of personal activity;
as he bequeathed the greater part of his
fortune “ to the Societies for the propaga¬
tion of the Gospel, and promoting Christian
knowledge, at home, as well as abroad.”
BEVERIDGE.
S69
To appreciate justly the character of this
truly evangelical prelate, we must recollect
his long and active services in subordinate
stations in the Church, and the late period to
which, through his own choice, his advance¬
ment to its highest dignities was retarded.
Scrupulous, it appears, of filling an office,
fiom which a conscientious, though perhaps
mistaken, principle had excluded its former
possessor, he declined the offer of a bishop¬
ric, soon after the accession of King William;
and continued for thirteen years to discharge
his more private and laborious duties, with
an assiduity, best evinced by the great and
general success which attended his ministry.
It was not till within three years of his
death, and at a very advanced age, that he
accepted the episcopal chair; and here, as
the sphere of his pastoral duties extended,
his care and diligence are said to have in¬
creased in proportion. The advancement of
his Divine Master’s glory, appears to have
been the great object of his life, and he was
permitted to witness, in a very eminent
degree, the effects of his faithful services.
VOL. II.
B B
370
BEVERIDGE.
I have been led to these few remarks
upon the personal character of Bishop Beve¬
ridge, not only because it is one which I
contemplate with peculiar pleasure, but be¬
cause I think it affords a very important
instruction. In the study of his writings,
if you follow the plan of comparison which
I have suggested, you will find that he held
such a system of doctrinal opinions, as,
while it connected him with both parties in
the Church, assimilated him in fact with
neither : — or, I should rather say, that,
careless of human schemes and systems, he
pursued, with a single eye, and a candid,
though fallible judgment, the light of Scrip¬
tural truth ; carefully maintaining the fun¬
damental doctrines of free grace, and moral
responsibility, and leaving it to the more
systematic expositor, to substitute his own
notions of the Divine consistency, for the
express testimony of Scripture. To this
testimony the good Bishop bowed with im¬
plicit submission : and in the wide range of
his doctrinal and practical illustrations, he
opens his principles with a primitive sim¬
plicity ; indifferent, it appears, as to the
BEVERIDGE. ^ 371
opinion which men might form of a doc¬
trine, that he considered as not his own,
but His who had sent him;
It you are inclined to except from this
praise, the sermons on Church union and
Church authority, I would venture to ob¬
serve, that they stand (in one sense at least,)
on a different ground, and should be judged
by a different standard. The question of
Church government, is confessedly, in some
degree, a question of tradition ; and in pro¬
portion as it is so, it must be considered as
a point of opinion, rather than as an article
of faith. In this view, our apprehension of
the merits of the question, must follow the
weight of evidence upon it, and our estimate
of the judgment and impartiality with which
that evidence is investigated; and it is
natural that we should also be influenced,
by those arguments of a more remote and
collateral bearing, which lead us to infer
the value of a system, from the perception
of its beneficial effects, or from the observa-
tion of evils which have followed upon its
subversion.
B 13 2
S72
BEVERIDGE.
Under the influence of this double ex¬
perience, as well as upon the clearest prin¬
ciples of scriptural and traditional proof,
Bishop Beveridge and some of his venerable
brethren, defended the established govern¬
ment in the Church : and under this same
influence, while the records of history re¬
main to us, may it be strenuously and effec¬
tually defended, even by those who do not
consider it as a matter of indispensable and
perpetual obligation ! —
But, however you may be inclined to with¬
hold your assent from some of the Bishop’s
strong positions on this subject, or even to
hesitate upon those doctrinal views, which
seem to militate against your favourite
principles, you will not, I am persuaded,
deny him the character of a truly primitive
and evangelical minister: and you will agree
with me in lamenting the prejudice, which
seems of late years, to have transferred this
title, from pious individuals in the Church, to
a class j and, applying it, not so much to the
description of character, as to the designa¬
tion of opinion, appears to have attached it
BEVERIDGE,
SIS
chiefly, if not exclusively, to those of our
clergy who hold the Calvinistic view of pre¬
destination, or preach the doctrine ofjusti-
flcation by faith, under a particular form of
proposition. May we not ask, (without any
disparagement to the great proportion of
this class, whom we acknowledge to be truly
and eminently evangelical,) does not such an
epithet, thus applied as a mark of doc¬
trinal distinction, appear to divide the
Church against herself? — and is it not evi-
O
dent, and deeply to be lamented, that while
this primitive and honourable title, whether
affixed as a reproach, or assumed as an ap¬
pellation, describes one party of her minis¬
ters, and another is designated by the ap¬
pellation of orthodox, a dangerous and
invidious distinction is established in the
public opinion, between the minister of the
Church, and the minister of the Gospel ?
This is, indeed, one of those cases, in which
words, from a change of use, seem to lose”
(as Barrow somewhere remarks,) “ their
original signification;” and terms which
ought to be considered as nearly synoni-
mous, are placed in an injurious opposition
B B 3
374
BEVERIDGE.
to each other. If the doctrine of the English
Church be evangelical, — if her discipline
be evangelical, — if this primitive title was
the boast of her early martyrs, — it still ap¬
plies, in my apprehension, generally to all
her faithful ministers ; and it belongs em¬
phatically to those, who have distinguished
themselves in the defence of her doctrines,
the support of her discipline, or the enforce¬
ment of her pure and beautiful morality.
To my apprehension, it describes the minis¬
ter of Christ, bearing upon his lips the
testimony of his Divine Master, and ex¬
hibiting in his conduct, the influence of the
law which he proclaims : — the willing
messenger of the glad tidings of salvation, —
the faithful guide through the narrow way
that leads to everlasting life ; — rightly di¬
viding the word of truth, and not hesitating
to declare the whole counsel of God, as
well in the stupendous mystery of gratuitous
redemption, as in the conditions on which
he has been pleased to suspend our final
hope of acceptance. This, my friend, I
conceive to be evangelical truth ; and this
I hold to be the evangelical character ; and
BEVERIDGE.
S15
I trust that you have anticipated me, in ap¬
plying the epithet to this truly excellent
prelate, and in praying that our Church
may long be blessed with guardians of a
similar spirit.
But it is time to bring this digression to
a close, and return to our more general
enquiry. I will however release you for the
present, and reserve the prosecution of it
for my next letter.
Yours, most affectionately.
B B 4
(. >■. »i
LETTER XXXIII
GENERAL RETROSPECT.— BOYLE'S LECTURES.
POLEMICAL DIVINITY IN THE REIGNS OF QUEEN ANNE AND
GEORGE THE FIRST. - INFIDELITY. - HOBBES. — DANGERS
and artifice of his SYSTEM. - LINE OF OPPOSITION
ADOPTED BY THE ADVOCATES OF REVELATION. - INFLU¬
ENCE OF THIS, UPON THE NATIONAL THEOLOGY.' — PRO¬
GRESS OF INFIDELITY. — ZEAL OF CHRISTIANS AWAKENED
TO ARREST IT. - BOYLe’s LECTURE - ITS OBJECT LIMITED
TO THE GENERAL DEFENCE OF REVELATION. — CONSE¬
QUENCE OF THIS. - SUBJECTS OF SOME OF THESE LEC¬
TURES. — CONFUTATION OF ATHEISM. - EVIDENCES OF
CHRISTIANITY. - OBJECTION DRAWN FROM THE IMPER¬
FECT PROMULGATION OF THE GOSPEL. — REPLY TO THIS
OBJECTION, FROM BISHOP BRADFORD.
MY DEAR FRIEND,
In touching upon the period of our polemi¬
cal history at which we are now arrived in
our retrospect, (including the reigns of
Queen Anne and George the First,) 1 must
first notice the active and systematic hos¬
tility, displayed in the successive attacks
upon revelation ; and especially the artifice
of fighting Christianity, as it were, with
her own weapons, and urging some of the
EOYLE’S LECTURES.
377
peculiar doctrines of the Gospel, to dis¬
prove its evidence, and subvert its authority.
In the writings of Hobbes, to which I
have already alluded, and which, though
they did not expressly attack revelation,
seem to have done as much to undermine
its influence, as any other productions of the
infidel school, the natural distinctions of
good and evil were annihilated : and while
the Divine Law was formally admitted as
the rule of human conduct, the evidence of
this law, was ridiculed or disputed; its
sanctions were neutralized by the disbelief
of a future life, and its moral influence upon
the will, was destroyed by the denial of
human liberty.
We are informed by Bishop Burnet, that
the mischievous tendency of the writings of
Hobbes, was not perceived on their first
publication, from the partial resemblance
which his system bore to the Calvin istic
scheme. His artifice, of identifying the
doctrine of necessity with that of predesti-
878
GENERAL RETROSPECT.
nation, and, admitting, or exaggerating, the
depravity of human nature, was calculated
to deceive, or to disarm, the Christian
reader ; and the line of argument to which
his opponents were necessarily led in refut¬
ation, in the assertion of natural law, free
agency, and the office and power of con¬
science, combined the general vindication
of religion with a free examination of the
Calvinistic doctrines, and an exhibition of
the evil consequences of their abuse,
whether under the influence of infidelity or
enthusiasm. Hence it followed, that many
of the opponents of Hobbes maintained a
double controversy; and appear alternately
to have had in view, the principles of the
infidel and the fanatic; or rather the ap¬
plication of principles apparently similar, to
the defence of enthusiasm or impiety. From
this circumstance, it appears, has arisen the
practice of enlarging the foundations of
natural religion ; and referring to certain
abstract principles of morals, as inherent in
the human mind, and necessarily and ob¬
viously resulting from the nature and re-^
BOYLE’S LECTURES.
379
lations of things. Admitting, however, the
existence of these principles, and even their
afxreeableness to natural reason, there is
still a distinction to be made, between the
abstract fitness of an action, and the obli¬
gation of an agent to perform it : and this
obligation can never be proved, but upon
the admission of some authority competent
to impose it. The law of nature, therefore,
cannot strictly be alleged as binding upon
rational and moral agents, unless there be,
on the part of the legislator and the subject,
the mutual sanctions of power and respon¬
sibility. So that, after all, the whole scheme
of human duty, must rest upon the belief of
a Creator and a Providence, and of a prefer¬
ence in the Divine Mind for certain modes
of conduct, — founded, indeed, upon their
abstract fitness, and consistency with the
order and relations of things established by
his infinite wisdom and goodness, but con¬
stituting in itself, the only tie that binds
man to obedience as a moral agent. God
approves the action, because it is right ; man
is bound to the action, because God ap¬
proves it. Under any other view, the most
380
GENERAL RETROSPECT.
enlightened observance of the law of nature,
might be the result of wisdom or prudence,
but could not be the exercise of virtue or
religion.
If this distinction is not always exhibited
as prominently as it ought, it seems to
have been rather because it was overlooked
than disputed ; or perhaps it is by the
omission, or rather the transposition, of
one link in the moral chain, that the ap¬
parent obscurity is occasioned. The es¬
sential difference in the nature of things, is
represented as constituting, not only the
ground of the law, but the law itself ; and
the system of creation is made to stand, as
it were, between man and his Creator. I
would not vindicate this mode of defend¬
ing religion, but merely assign the proba¬
ble cause of its adoption ; and observe, that
as the scheme of Hobbes and his school,
was calculated to overthrow all moral dis¬
tinctions, the establishment of these dis¬
tinctions upon the principles of reason, (for
revelation would have been no medium
of proof, to those who denied its authority,)
BOYLE’S LECTURES.
381
seems to have been the great object of their
opponents. The versatile genius of infi¬
del ity, however, soon turned these argu¬
ments to its own advantage ; and pleaded,
that if the evidence of natural law and re¬
ligion was so obviously agreeable to reason,
there was little need of a revelation to con¬
firm it. To this objection, we owe some
admirable Treatises and Sermons, upon the
necessity of revelation in general ; and to
the more direct attacks which followed in
the course of the infidel combination, we
are indebted, for those excellent defences
of the Jewish and Christian Scriptures,
which have triumphantly established our
religion, upon the very evidence adduced
to subvert it.
The succession of libertine and deistical
publications which rapidly followed each
other, at this period, awakened the zeal of
some eminent friends of religion ; and, in
addition to the efforts of individuals, socie¬
ties were formed, and public lectures were
instituted, for the propagation and defence
of Christianity. Of these, I shall only no-
382
GENERAL RETROSPECT.
tice the lecture founded bj the Honourable
Robert Boyle; whom I have already men¬
tioned, as one of those distinguished lay¬
men^', to whose characters the friends of
* The writei* ventures here to transcribe a part of the
character of this eminent man, as given by his friend
and biographer, Bishop Burnet. Though it is already
very generally known, through the medium of cheap
and recent editions ; it contains instruction so important,
and example so excellent, that it cannot be too ex¬
tensively circulated. '
“ Soon after the Restoration, in the year 1660, the
“ great minister of that time pressed him, both by himself
“ and another, to enter into orders. He did it not
“ merely out of respect to him and his family, but out
‘‘ of his regard for the Church ; that he thought would
“ receive a great strengthening, as well as a powerful
“ example, from one, who, if he once entered into holy
“ orders, would be quickly at the top. This, he told
“ me, made some impression on him. His mind was,
“ even then, (at three and thirty,) so entirely disengaged
“ from all the projects and concerns of this world, that
“ as the prospect of dignity in the Church could not
“ move him much, so the probability of his doing good
“ in it was much the stronger motive. Two things de-
“ termined him against it; one was, that his having no
“ other interests, with relation to religion, besides those
“ of saving his own soul, gave him, as he thought,
“ a more unsuspected authority, in writing or acting on
“ that side. He knew, the profane crew fortified them-
BOYLE’S LECTURES.
383
religion may appeal for proof of her rational
influence. This excellent Christian and
“ selves against all that was said by men of our profes-
“ sioii, with this, that it was their trade, and that they
“ were paid for it ; he hoped, therefore, that he might
have the more influence, the less he shared in the
“ patrimony of the Church. But his main reason was,
“ that he had so high a sense of the obligations of the
“ pastoral care, and of such as watch over those souls,
“ which Christ purchased with his own blood, and for
“ which they must give an account at the last great day,
“ that he durst not undertake it ; especially not having
“ felt within himself an inward motion to it by the Holy
“ Ghost; and the first question, put to those wflio come
“ to be initiated into the service of the Church, relating
“ to that motion, he, who had not felt it, thought he
“ durst not make the step, lest otherwise he should
“ have lied to the Holy Ghost, so solemnly and se-
“ riously did he judge of sacred matters.”
“ He was constant to the Church, and went to no
“ sejjarate assemblies, how charitably soever he might
“ think of their persons, and how plentifully soever he
“ miffht have relieved their necessities. He loved no
O
“ narrow thoughts, nor low or superstitious opinions in
“ religion ; and therefore, as he did not shut himself up
“ within a party, so neither did he shut any party out
“ from him. He had brought his mind to such a free-
“ dom, that he was not apt to be imposed on; and his
“ modesty v^^as such, that he did not dictate to others ;
‘‘ but proposed his own sense with a due and decent
“ distrust ; and was ever very ready to hearken to what
384
GENERAL RETROSPECT.
philosopher, not only defended oiir holy
Faith by his writings, and adorned it by his
life, but bequeathed, at his death, a liberal
benefaction, for its vindication against the
attacks of infidelity, in the institution of an
annual (or triennial) course of lectures, the
particular object of which is thus specified
in his will : — “ for proving the Christian
religion against notorious infidels ; viz.
atheists, theists, pagans, Jews, and Maho-
metans; 7iot descending loxvei^, to any con-
“ was suggested to him by others. When he differed
“ from any, he expressed himself in so humble and ob-
“ liging a w^ay, that he never treated things or persons
“ with neglect ; and I never heard that he offended any
“ one person in his whole life, by any part of his de-
“ portment. For if at any time he saw cause to speak
‘‘ roundly to any, it vvas never in a passion, nor with
“ any reproachful or indecent expressions. And as he
“ was careful to give those who conversed with him, no
“ cause or colour for displeasure, so he was yet more
“ careful of those who were absent, never to speak ill of
“ any ; in which he was the exactest man I ever knew.
“ If the discourse turned to be hard on any, he was
“ presently silent ; and if the subject was too long dwelt
“ on, he would at last interpose, and between reproof
“ and raillery, divert it.”
BOYl-K’S LECl'UUKS.
385
“ troversies that are among Chrktiam them-
“ selves.^'
In the })iiblication of’ the sermons preach¬
ed at these lectures, from the period of
their institution, to the year 1739, we have
a large and valuable body of divinity; ne¬
cessarily limited, however, to the defence
of the general evidences of religion, and
precluded from the discussion of peculiar
doctrines, or questions in debate between
Christians of different persuasions. It is
important to keep this circumstance in view,
as one which has not only restricted the sub¬
ject of these lectures, but has also con¬
tributed, perhaps, to influence the general
style and habits of thinking, of the divines
successively employed in their composition.
Amongst these, we observe the names of
many eminent ornaments of our Church and
country ; and if we are contented to look
for no more than may be reasonably expect¬
ed in such discourses, we shall find in this
collection, a full and triumphant accom¬
plishment of the object to which they were
directed. It is obvious, however, that we
\
VOT,. IT.
C C
386
GENERAL RETROSPECT.
cannot here expect any prominent enforce¬
ment, of the peculiar doctrines of Chris¬
tianity ; and if we connect the subjects of
these lectures, with the literary and polemi¬
cal history of the times, as well as with the
regulations of the founder, we shall at once
perceive the necessity of such a line of de-'
fence, and be enabled to account for the
variety of posts, which the writers in this
great controversy have successively main¬
tained.
Of the infidel publications opposed in
these lectures, many are happily consigned
to oblivion, or at least known to the Chris¬
tian reader, only through the medium of
such refutations. And this, by the way,
(as I have observed elsewhere,) is one un¬
fortunate effect of pulpit-controversy. While
the preacher is labouring for the conviction
of the sceptic, he may be undermining the
faith of the ’humble disciple ; suggesting
doubts which would never have occurred,
and obviating difficulties, which would
never have embarrassed him. This incon¬
venience, however, was unavoidable, at the
BOYLE’S LECTUllES.
387
period to which our observations refer ;
when the popular taste revolted from serious
studies, and the pulpit was almost the only
channel, through which the defences of
revelation could be effectually and ex¬
tensively circulated ; and from whence, the
infidel who came to Church for fashion or
decency, (for many of the infidels of that
day, professed a respect for religion, and
even prefaced their attacks with such pro¬
fessions,) could be made to hear the refut¬
ation of his pernicious doctrines.
The shortest way to understand the
principle, upon which I think that many
omissions in these lectures may be at once
accounted for and excused, would be to
examine the titles prefixed to them ; which
at once indicate the subject to be discussed,
and suggest to the polemical reader, the
name and system of the objector whom the
preacher designs to refute.
The more general sermons in confutation
of atheism, are chiefly directed against the
principles of Hobbes and Spinoza, (a conti-
c c 2
388
GENERAL RETROSPECT.
nental atheist,) sometimes by name, and
oftener by implication or allusion. Against
these principles, or rather against the ob¬
jectors who maintained them, any arguments
drawn from the authority or evidence of
revelation, would have been excepted to,
as an assumption of one of the points in dis¬
pute ; and it was consequently necessary, to
argue upon principles and evidences ad¬
mitted, or appealed to, by the objectors
themselves. The adoption of the very re¬
velation in question, as the instrument of
the demonstration, would not have been
allowed by these objectors, and would have
left them still in possession, of the general
ground of rational and philosophical argu¬
ment, from whence the present manage¬
ment of the controversy has eflfectually dis¬
lodged them.
In some of these lectures, the divine ori¬
gin of Christianity is proved, by the evidence
of prophecy, miracles, and extraordinary
success ; and notwithstanding the captious
objections of infidelity to this evidence, its
strength has increased, and is progressively
BOYLE’S LECTURES.
389
increasing, with every attempt to overthrow
it. The appeal to prophecy by the advo¬
cates of Christianity, has been objected to
by infidel writers, as requiring, in the first
instance, a confidence in the prediction,
and an admission of the record in which it
is contained. “ The prophecies,” (says
Mr. Gibbon, whom I may quote as an ac¬
tive member of this school, though much
later than the period we are reviewing,)
“ are now one of the strongest arguments
“ in favour of Christianity, because it is
“ one of the fundamental parts of the
“ Christian faith, to acknowledge the aii-
“ thority of the Jewish Scriptures.” But
why, my friend, is it so ? — Because the
Jewish Scriptures contain those very pre¬
dictions, — which announced the miraculous
birth and actions of our Saviour, hundreds,
nay thousands of years, before the event
took place, and still continue interwoven
in the body of the Old Testament, though
in the hands of the Jews, the most bitter
and inveterate enemies of Christianity ;
who certainly, if the authority of these pre¬
dictions had not been too well established
e c 3
390 GENERAt RETROSPECT.
l:)y their age and publicity, would have ex¬
punged passages which so pointedly foretell
tt^eir wicked and fatal obduracy, and so
particularly describe the innocent Person,
who was to fall a sacrifice to their obstinate
incre(iplitj.
But prophecy cannot strictly be said to
forrn ‘'1 distinct branch of the evidence of
Chrigtiapity. — It is, in itself, ^ miraculous
evidences and a corroborative proof of those
early rnir£|cles which are become the subject
of historical testimony. It is, if I may be
allgwed the expressiqn, a standing and per¬
petual, indeed a progressive miracle ; — a
miracleji to which po deception can be im¬
puted, the. strength of its proof, depends
op tl^e severity with which it is canvassed; —
a miraele, subniitfed? not to the hasty, and
possibly erroneous decision, extorted from
ignorance by surprise, (a favourite charge
against the miracles of the Gospel,) — but to
the cool and severe examination of the critic
in his closet, to be sifted in all its parts, to
be judged by the collation of historical
evidence, with present observation and ex-
BOYLE’S LECTUBES.
391
perience, and, by the proofs which that ex¬
amination produces, of authority or imposi¬
tion, to stand or fall.
The wide and rapid progress of Chris¬
tianity in the early ages, without the aid of
human power or influence, indeed in direct
opposition to both, has been urged as an¬
other proof of its divine authority ; and is
well enforced in some of these lectures. It
i
appears to me, that a reference to the con¬
trast which later times exhibit, will afford a
confirmation of this argument ; for how,
but upon the suppositio^ of a miraculous
power, accompanying the testimony of the
first Christians to their faith, can we ac¬
count for the stupendous effect produced
by their preaching ? Whatever secondary
causes might have originally contributed to
this success, would still equally operate in
similar cases ; yet, so far from observing
similar results, we find not, in the history
of later missions, with all the aid of human
means which the first preachers wanted, as
many converts to Christianity in half a
c c 4
392
GENERAL RETROSPECT.
century, as a single apostolical sermon pro¬
duced.
But infidelity, with singular perverseness,
while it would account, from natural causes,
for the early and extensive diffusion of the
Gospel, which is pleaded by its advocates as
a proof of miraculous evidence, objects to
its limited and partial promulgation, as in¬
consistent with the character of a divine and
universal religion. Upon this subject, I
am tempted to quote a few passages from
a sermon of Bishop Bradford, appended to
his lectures, in this collection.
“ Such was the fidelity and industry of
“ the apostles, and their immediate succes-
“ sors, and so conformable were their lives
“ to the excellent doctrine which they
‘‘ preached, that Christianity had incredi-
ble success in those early times ; inso-
‘‘ much, that in about three hundred years,
“ it prevailed against all the false religions,
“ which had been so long received, and
“ became the established religion of the
Roman empire,
BOYLE’S LECTUllES.
393
This was the course which Providence
took, for the dispersion of the knowledge
“ of our Saviour and his religion through
‘‘ the world ; which, as it was the most na-
. “ tural and most reasonable means to that
‘‘ end, so, I can hardly doubt, that if the
“ Christians of the ages following, had con-
“ tinued to recommend their profession, by
the exemplariness of their lives, and had
“ retained that zeal which their predeces-
“ sors showed, for propagating it in the
“ world, it had long before this, been the
‘‘ established religion of mankind. So that
“ if the Gospel be not published to the
“ world universally, it proceeds not from
any defect in the provision which God
“ hath made for that purpose, but from the
fault of those to whom God hath com-
“ mitted so great a trust. Had Christian
“ princes been as zealous to promote the
“ religion of our Lord, (I mean not by
“ violence, but by means suitable to the
‘‘ nature of this religion,) as to extend their
“ empire, — had Christian subjects been as
eager to advance the knowledge of our
Maker and Redeemer, in foreign parts.
394
GENERAL RETROSPECT.
“ as they have been to settle trade and
commerce there, — if all of us, who call
‘‘ ourselves Christians, had shown forth, in
Christian tempers and practices, the vir-
tues of Him that hath called us, and the
‘‘ excellency of the religion he hath taught
“ us, — there would, probably, have been
“ no occasion for enquiring, as we now do,
“ why the Gospel of our Lord is confined
within such narrow bounds.”
• ’ i {
“ If the love of God towards mankind, be
“ so extensive, it becomes us then, instead
“ of cavilling at the Divine Providence, on
‘‘ account of the Gospel not being published
to all the world, to do our part towards
the propagation of it.”
“ The princes and great men of the
“ earthy may do very rnuch to this purpose,
“ as I have already observed, Others also,
“ ^specially those bodies and societies
“ of men which have converse with the
Gentile world, might contrive methods
“ for propagating their religion, together
with their trade ; and all of us might
BOYLE’S LECTURES. 395
'N - r •
contribute to this generous design, by
‘‘ our earnest prayers to God for the en-
‘‘ larffino; of bis Son’s kingdom, and that it
would please him to excite the spirits of
“ those who have power and interest, to
“ advance this noble work.” — This, the
‘‘ pious founder of these lectures had a
“ great sense of, when, by a clause in his
will, hy; obliged those who should preach
‘‘ them, ^ to be aiding and assisting to all
companies, and encouraging them in any
“ V^n^ertaking, for propagating the Chris-
tian religion in foreign parts.’ ”
tQ return from this digression : —
The prominent doctrines of infidelity, at the
period under our review, were, materialism
and necessity.'^ In these, the whole school
* Bishop Butler, in his admirable “ Analogy,” has
driven the infidel even from this ground ; and shown,
that whatever difficulties or absurdities the doctrine of
necessity may contain, it cannot fairly be employed to
destroy the proof, or invalidate the obligations, of reli¬
gion.
“ The proof from final causes, of an intelligent Author
“ of nature, is not affected by the opinion of necessity ;
396
GENERAL RETROSPECT.
(except, perhaps, Lord Shaftesbury,) seem
to have agreed ; and consequently, against
“ supposing necessity a thing possible in itself, and re-
“ concileable with the constitution of.things. And it is
“ a matter fact ^ independent on this, or any other
“ speculation, that he governs the world by the method
“ of rewai’ds and punishments ; and also that he hath
“ given us a moral faculty, by which we distinguish be-
“ tween actions, and approve some, as virtuous and of
“ good desert, and disapprove others, as vicious and of
“ ill desert. Now this moral discernment implies, in
“ the notion of it, a rule of action, and a rule of a very
“ peculiar kind; for it carries in it authority, and aright
“ of direction ; authority, in such a sense, as that we
“ cannot depart from it, without being self-condemned.
“ And, that the dictates of this moral faculty, which are
“ by nature a rule to us, are moreover the laws of God,
“ laws in a sense including sanctions, may be thus
“ proved. Consciousness of a rule or guide of action,
“ in creatures who are capable of considering it as given
“ them by their Maker, not only raises, immediately, a
“ sense of duty, but also a sense of security in following
“ it, and of danger in deviating from it. A direction
“ of the Author of nature, given to creatures capable of
“ looking upon it as such, is plainly a command from
“ him ; and a command from him, necessarily includes
“ in it, at least, an implicit promise in case of obedience,
“ or threatening in case of disobedience. But then the
“ sense or perception of good and ill desert, which is
“ contained in the moral discernment, rendex’s the sane-
tion explicit, and makes it appear, as one may say,
BOYLE’S LECTUUE5.
397
these, the advocates of revelation were led
chiefly to direct their opposition. Hence
“ expressed. For since his niethod of government is
“ to reward and. punish actions, his having annexed to
“ some actions, an inseparable sense of good desert, and
“ and to others, of ill, this surely amounts to declaring
“ upon whom his punishments shall be inflicted, and
“ his rewards bestowed. For he must have given us
“ this discernment and sense of things, as a presenti-
“ ment of what is to be hereafter, that is, by way of
“ information beforehand, what we are finally to expect
‘‘ in his world. There is then the most evident ground
“ to think, that the government of God, upon the
“ whole, will be found to correspond to the nature
“ which he has given us ; and that, in the upshot and
“ issue of things, happiness and misery shall, in fact
“ and event, be made to follow virtue and vice respec-
“ tively ; as he has already, in so peculiar a manner,
“ associated the ideas of them in our minds. And from
“ hence might easily be deduced the obligations of re-
“ ligious worship, were it only to be considered as a
“ means of preserving in our minds, a sense of this
“ moral government of God, and securing our obe-
“ dience to it ; which yet is an extremely imperfect view
“ of that most important duty.”
“ Now, I say, no objection from necessity can lie
“ against this general proof of religion: — none, against
“ the proposition reasoned upon, that we have such a
“ moral faculty and discernment ; because this is a mat-
“ ter of fact, a thing of experience, that human kind is
“ thus constituted ; — none, against the conclusion, be-
398
GENERAL RETROSPECT.
would naturally arise, (as I have before ob¬
served,) an earnestness in the vindication
of human liberty, which might sometimes
lead these writers, imperceptibly to them¬
selves, to trench upon the Scripture limit¬
ations of this doctrine ; and hence would
also be derived the abstruse and metaphy¬
sical character, which has been objected to
the divinity in question. On either of these
points, I shall remark no farther; but limit
“ cause it is immediate and wholly from this fact. For
“ the conclusion, that God will finally reward the
“ righteous, and punish the wicked, is not here drawn,
“ from its appearing to us Jit that he should, but from
“ its appearing that he has told us he will. And this he
hath certainly told us, in the promise and threatening,
“ which, it hath been observed, the notion of a com-
“ mand implies, and the sense of good and ill desert,
“ which he has given us, more distinctly expresses.
“ And this reasoning from fact, is confirmed, and in
some degree even verified, by other facts ; by the na-
“ tural tendencies of virtue and vice, — and by this, that
“ God, in the natural course of his providence, punishes
“ vicious actions, as mischievous to society, and also
“ vicious actions, as such, in the strictest sense. So that
“ the general proof of religion is unanswerably real,
“ even upon the wild supposition we are arguing upon,”
Butler’s Analogy, p. 167.
BOYLE’S LECTURES.
399
mjself to a few observations, on two or three
of the preachers of these lectures, whose
names are still familiar to the theological
o
reader, and whose eminence in this sort of
philosophical divinity, obtained for them, at
a later period, a number of imitators and
admirers.
I shall, however, reserve these observ¬
ations, for my next letter ; and trespass no
longer, at present, upon your patience, than
while I subscribe myself.
Yours, very faithfully.
400
LEITER XXXIV.
nOCTUJi flAMUEL CLxlBKE.
DOCTOR SAMUEL CLARKE. - IIIS SERMONS AT BOALe’s
LECTURE. - OBJECTIONS MADE TO THE LINE OF ARGU¬
MENT PURSUED IN THEM. — IILS APOLOGY. - REMARKS
ON THIS METHOD OF DEFENDING RELIGION. — DOCTOR
CLARKe’s CJENERAL and PRACTICAL SERMONS. — MO¬
DIFIED VIEW OF HUMAN CORRUPTION. - PROBABLE REA¬
SON OF THIS. — DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. — JUS¬
TIFICATION. — INFLUENCE OF THE HOLY SPIRIT. -
CONCLUSION.
MY DEAR FRIEND,
W HEN I look back upon the length of a
correspondence, which I intended to have
limited to a few sheets, I am almost afraid
to renew my promise of conciseness ; yet,
without some such encouragement, I can
hardly expect that you will encounter any
more giants,” or be inclined to proceed
farther in an enquiry, which seems to ap¬
proach so slowly to its end.
DOCTOR SAMUEL CLARKE.
401
I proposed, in rny last, to offer a few re¬
marks upon two or three of the preachers
of Boyle’s lectures, whose eminence in what
we may call 'philo^o'phical divinity, had con¬
tributed to form the taste, and to influence
the practice, of their successors in the
Church.
The first place in this class, is due to the
celebrated Doctor Samuel Clarke ; who, as
a philosopher, a practical preacher, and an
expositor, held, perhaps, the first place in
the public estimation, of all the writers of
his time ; and whom it seems now the
fashion to load with a censure as indiscri¬
minate, as the praise of his contemporaries
was excessive."^^
* The reader will perhaps recollect, here, the con¬
troversy respecting Doctor Clarke’s Scripture Doctrine
of the Trinity,” and hesitate, on that account, to sub¬
scribe to any favourable estimate of his general charac¬
ter as a divine. But, agreeing (as the writer does fully)
in the objections made to his statement of this doctrine,
it does not follow that we should withhold from him
that credit, upon other points, to which his scriptural
fidelity and sound judgment may entitle him, I have
VOL. II. D D
402
DOCTOR SAMUEL CLARKE.
His celebrated sermons, preached at these
lectures, and afterwards connected into the
form of treatises, on “ The Being and At-
tributes of God,” and “ The Evidences
“ of Natural and Revealed Religion,” come
said already, (and I repeat it,) that our confidence in the
efficacy of our blessed Saviour’s death, as a satisfaction
for the sins of mankind, must rest upon our belief of his
essential divinity ; and this Doctor Clarke himself has
strongly enforced, in the sermons that treat of the doc¬
trine of the atonement. In fact, his deviation from the
doctrine of the Church was much less than is commonly
supposed, by those who take his character upon trust,
either from his admirers or his enemies. The praise of
Hoadly, whose orthodoxy on this point is more justly
questioned, has done Doctor Clarke no service : and
the Arian and Socinian dissenters, are too ready at all
times to claim the alliance of eminent Churchmen, and
to wrest insulated or unguarded positions, to the support
of principles which the authors never maintained, to be
entitled to implicit credit on this subject. If is much to
be lamented, that any aberration from the doctrine of
the Church, should have lessened the usefulness, and
lowered the theological character, of this zealous and
laborious minister. Yet, as this aberration appears (if
we except a very few of his sermons) but in one con¬
troversial work, it would be unjust to him, and unfair
to the reader, to withhold from his writings the general
praise to which they are entitled.
DOCTOR SAMUEL CLARKE.
403
under our notice, only in connection with
the charge, of reasoning d pfiori, and of
subordinating the divinity of the Bible, to
the principles, and the judgment, of hu¬
man science, — which has been brought
against this class of divines, and against
Doctor Clarke in particular, and has been
recently revived * by a very powerful
preacher of authoritative and evangelical
divinity, f But if we hear Doctor Clarke,
* Doctor Chalmers. — Evidence and Authority of the
Christian Revelation, p. 248, 249.
f The writer is here led, by the course of the subject,
to the unavoidable introduction of a reference to alivino-
preacher, whose vigorous and original genius has elicited
a new, but irresistible demonstration, of the awful and
humbling doctrine, which lies at the foundation of the
Christian scheme ; viz. the corruption of human nature.
In placing this corruption in a natural averseness to re¬
ligion, he has stamped it with one striking and universal
feature, to which every human being must, at one pe¬
riod or other, acknowledge a resemblance; and has
forced from their refuge of pride and self-complacency,
all who would triumph in the Pharisaic boast, “ that
f/^eiy are not as other men are.” If his character may
be comprised in a few words, he is at once the most com-
prehc7isive^ and the most personal^ of modern preachers.
In his strong and faithful delineations of the species,
D U 2
404
DOCTOR SAMUEL CLARKE.
himself, upon the subject, in reference to
the first of these treatises, we shall find that
this line of argument, was rather forced
upon him by his opponents, than adopted
by his own choice. It was not so much for
the instruction of the Christian convert, as
for the confutation of the infidel, and the
conviction of the sceptic, that these dis¬
courses were composed ; and they are 'pre¬
faced with an apology for the line of argu¬
ment pursued in them, which is more fully
repeated by the author, on another occasion.
“ There being already published, many
“ and good books, to prove the Being and
“ Attributes of God, I have chosen (says
he) to contract what was requisite for
“ me to say, into as narrow a compass, and
to express what I had to offer, in as few
“ words, as I could with perspicuity. For
“ xt'hich reason, I have also confined my-
every individual recognizes his own picture ; and can
only shut out the perception of the resemblance, by
closing the volume, or closing his eyes — an awful ex¬
pedient, if the volume speaks truth ; and the testimony
of conscience confinns it.
DOCTOR SAMUEL CLARKE.
405
self to one only method, or continued
“ thread of arguing ; which I have endea-
“ voured should be as near to mathematical,
as the nature of such a discourse would
“ allow; omitting some other arguments,
“ which I could not discern to be so evi-
dently conclusive ; became it seems not to
‘‘ he at any time for the real advantage of
truth , to urge arguments in its behalf
founded only on such hypotheses, as the ad-
“ versaries apprehend they cannot be com-
“ pelled to grant.^^*
In another place, he says, “ the argument
‘‘ a posteriori, is indeed by far the most
“ generally useful argument, and most easy
to be understood ; and is, in some de-
‘‘ gree, suited to all capacities ; and there-
fore ought always to be insisted on. But,
“ forasmuch as atheistical writers have
“ sometimes opposed the being and attri-
butes of God, by such metaphysical rea-
‘‘ sonings, as can no otherwise be ol nated
* Preface to the Demonstration, &c.
D D 3
406
DOCTOR SAMUEL CLARKE.
“ than by arguing a 2^'^^iorh therefore this
manner of arguing also, is useful and ne-
“ cessary, in its proper place.”
I cite this, as Clarke’s apology, not as my
own opinion ; for, to my mind, Whiston’s
answer to a similar defence, (a reference to
the first flower he saw in his walk,) affords
a better confutation of infidelity, than all
the subtilties of metaphysics.
I need not remind you, of the noble proofs
of the being and attributes of God, which
have been drawn from the works of crea¬
tion, or what is called above, the argument
a 2^osferiori. This method of demonstra¬
tion has been ably and successfully employed,
by some of the preachers of these lectures,
and by other eminent divines of our coun¬
try ; whose labours possess an additional
value, in the antidote which they furnish
against the infidelity of the French natural¬
ists and mathematicians. Yet the distin¬
guished writer to whom I have alluded, in¬
volves this latter argument, in his objection
to the former, and seems to consider the
DOCTOR SAMUEL CLARKE.
407
application of it in divinity, as superseding
the authoritative testimony of Scripture. It
is not, however, to the peculiar doctrines
of revelation, or even to its evidences, that
this argument is, or can be, applied ; but
to the proof of that great truth, which is the
foundation of all religion, and from the firm
establishment of which, revelation must
derive its authority. “ He that cometh to
“ God, must believe that he is.” Scrip¬
ture, to speak strictly, does not prove the
existence of God, but supposes it : — a fact
which we may infer from the practice of
St. Paul himself ; who, while he employs
Scripture, as amediumofproof with the Jews,
who admitted its authority, — yet, with
a divine and miraculous power in his hands,
for the irresistible conviction of the Gentile
infidel, urges this very argument d posteriori,
as leaving his infidelity without excuse;
and deems it not inexpedient, on some oc¬
casions, to appeal to reason and analogy, in
support of the doctrines of revelation.^
* Acts xiv. 17. — Romans . 20-
D D 4
408
DOCTOR SAMUEL CLARKE.
We may farther observe, that this argu¬
ment d posteriori, is the very same induc¬
tive process, which the writer in question
applies so ably to the proof of Christianity.
Establishing by evidence, its miraculous in¬
troduction, he thence infers its divine
original. Proving the deviation from the
ordinary operations of nature, for the ac¬
complishment of a moral object, he thence
demonstrates the interference of the Author
of nature, and his absolute sovereignty over
the system, which he has been pleased ge¬
nerally to regulate by the intervention of
second causes. In like manner, the pious
naturalist and philosopher, by a survey of
this wonderful system, and a view of the
exquisite adaptation of all its parts, to some
assignable purposes, (at least, so far as the
weak reason of man can discern them, — for
the perfection of such knowledge is too
wonderful and excellent for him,) — endea¬
vours to trace the footsteps of the Deity, in
the order and harmony, the beauty and
usefulness, of his works ; and, through the
study of the wonders of nature, to lead to
the adoration of nature’s God.
DOCTOR SAMUEL CLARKE.
409
It is not without much diffidence and he¬
sitation, that I have introduced any position
of this admirable writer, as a subject of
animadversion ; but, as his authority in the
censure alluded to, has contributed to ex¬
tend the prejudice against reasoning in
divinity, much farther than he probably
intended, the notice of it could not fairly
be omitted.
I dare not, however, vindicate from this
censure, the second of the treatises above-
mentioned, (the Evidences of Natural and
Revealed Religion ;) in which, it must be con¬
fessed, that the author has been led, by
his anxiety to refute his opponents upon
their own ground, into some very question¬
able positions upon the internal evidences
of revelation.
In forming an estimate of Doctor Clarke’s
more general and practical sermons, it is
necessary to recollect the double controversy
to which I have adverted above. The per¬
nicious consequences of the doctrine of
necessity, as held and inculcated by the
410
DOCTOR SAMUEL CLARKE.
atheistical objector, appearing to follow
equally the doctrine of absolute predestina¬
tion, — and each of these doctrines being
connected with that of the utter worthless¬
ness and depravity of man, described in the
system of the former, as a state of uncon-
trouled selfishness, and natural warfare of
every man with his fellow, and in the latter,
as a total enslavement of the human will to
the dominion of evil, and attaching a sen¬
tence of future and eternal condemnation,
apparently to an original corruption, inde¬
pendent of choice, and incapable (without a
miracle,) of removal, — these consequences,
I say, of reckless immorality to the infidel,
of presumption to the enthusiast, and of
desperation to the timid and humble be¬
liever, appear to have been constantly held
in view at this period ; and to have led, as
I have already observed, to a prominent
enforcement of the doctrine of free will, as
the only ground of moral responsibility. In
arguing this point with the philosophical
necessarian, {hefact of man’s free agency has
been abundantly proved: ■ — in maintaining
it against the high predestinarian systeoi?
DOCTOR SAMUEL CLARKE
411
there seems to have existed a groundless
fear, of admitting the full extent of human
corruption, lest it should be pleaded as an
apolocjy for the breach ol the divine laws,
and a natural propensity to sin identified
with a necessity of sinning. From this
difficulty, a recurrence to the scheme of the
Gospel, relieves us. There, we learn to de¬
pend upon that supernatural aid which
helpeth our infirmities, and are taught at
the same time, the necessity of our own
voluntary co-operation, to bring to good
effect, those good desires which the Divine
Grace has infused: and the certainty that
this grace, freely offered to us through
Christ, is absolutely necessary to all men,
— that by it, and with it, we may be
saved if we will, though without it, we
shall infallibly be lost, — removes all objec¬
tions to the mercy of God, drawn from the
supposed severity of his requisitions from
feeble and fallen creatures. '
Upon this great truth, it cannot be de¬
nied, that an aberration from the bold and
412
DOCTOR SAMUEL CLARKE.'
Scriptural statements of Hooker, and Bar-
row, and Tillotson, had already begun ;
and though Doctor Clarke often refers to
the doctrine, either incidentally or expressly,
as an acknowledged principle of Scripture,
it must be confessed th^t his vindications of
reason and natural liberty, appear sometimes
to trench upon the Scriptural limitations ;
or at least that he does not sufficiently mark
(what, from many hints contained in his
writings, I cannot doubt that he believed,)
the derivation of this moral freedom, from
our restoration to the grace of God through
Christ.
Upon the doctrine of the atonement,
however, the statement of Doctor Clarke is
full and explicit*: and though he does not
* The following extracts are selected, as short and
full, upon this fundamental doctrine : but many others
equally strong, might be produced. Doctor Johnson’s
testimony to the merit of these sermons upon this im¬
portant point, is well known.
“ From the doctrines herein explained, we may learn
“ the true nature of Christ’s satisfaction : namely, that
“ his death was truly and properly, in the strictest
DOCTOR SAMUEL CLARKE,
413
treat the doctrine of justification so ex¬
pressly, nor exhibit it so frequently, as
“ meaning of the word, an expiatory sacrifice. For, if
sinners, by having diminished the honour, and de-
spised the authority of God’s laws, were become
“ liable to the justice and vengeance of God, — if the
“ Son of God in our nature, by vindicating the honour of
“ God’s laws, hath discharged this obligation, and ob-
‘‘ tained remission for us, — and if the obtaining this
“ remission was by the shedding of his blood, which is
“ called the price of our redemption, — it follows, that
“ the wrath of God was appeased by the death of Christ,
“ and that God was pleased to accept this vicarious
suffering of his Son, in the stead of the punishment
“ that was due to the sinner, in his own person ; which
“ is the express and proper notion of an expiatory sacri-
“ fice. For so we read, that, under the law, the sinner
“ laying his hand upon the sacrifice, to signify the trans-
“ ferring upon it, the punishment due unto himself, the
“ sacrifice was slain, and it was accepted for him, to
“ make an atonement for him.”
“ He has vindicated the honour of God’s laws, by
“ taking upon himself, the punishment of their sins, who
“ repent, and embrace the Gospel. He condescended
to be made sin for us, who himself knew no sin, that
“ we might be made the righteousness of God in him.
“ To be made sin for us: — that is, to be made a sacri-
“ fice for our sins, that we through that expiation, might
“ become subjects capable of the mercy of God. Fie
“ took upon him our nature, and was clothed in our
414
DOCTOR SAMUEL CLARKE.
might be wished, he obviously refers the
hope of salvation, to a lively faith in the
blood of Christ, and points to his merits, as
the only medium through which man can
hope for the remission of his sins, or the
acceptance of his person in the sight of
God.
flesh, partly indeed that he might preach the will of
“ God to mankind in a nearer and more condescending
“ conversation with them, but j)Tincipally^ that he, who
“ in the form of God could not sulfer, might become
“ capable of suffering, by being made in the likeness of
“ man. He lived a most innocent and spotless life, that
he might indeed set us an example, that we should
“ follow his steps ; but chiejly^ that because, as it was
“ required that the typical sacrifices under the law
“ should be whole and without blemish, so it was neces-
“ sary, that he, who was to be the 7'eal expiatory sacri-
“ flee for the sins of others, should have none that
“ needed expiation, of his own. For such an high priest
“ became ns, who is holy, harmless, undejiled, separate
from sinners, and made higher than the heavens. (Heb.
“ vii. 26.) He suffered a shameful and ignominious
“ death upon the cross, that he might give us an ex-
“ ample of patience, and readiness to suffer : hut the
“ principal design of it was, that he might put away sin
“ by the sacrifice of himself , and obtain eternal redemption
for ns, through faith in his blood'’
DOCTOR SAMUEL CLARKE.
415
The Scriptural doctrine of the influence
of the Holy Ghost, and of the absolute
necessity of this influence, to conversion and
sanctification, has been sometimes supposed
to be much under-rated by this class of Di¬
vines : and it will not be denied, that at a
later period, the desire of clearing this doc¬
trine from exaggerations, led some of them
into an opposite extreme, and gave rise to
a modified and diluted statement, which
almost reduced it to a power of rightly ex¬
ercising the natural faculties, in the pursuit
of truth, and the practice of virtue.
Though Doctor Clarke constantly asserts
this power, and earnestly contends for the
use of it, he clearly maintains, not only the
early miraculous effect of the influence and
operation of the Holy Ghost, in the esta¬
blishment and propagation of Christianity,
but the perpetual necessity of this influence,
(not indeed in its miraculous, but in its
moral force,) to conversion, sanctification,
and salvation. “ When the miraculous
effect ceased, (he says,) yet still the re-
“ ceiving of the Holy Ghost, was as con-
416
DOCTOR SAMUEL CLARKE.
slant and necessary as ever: because, ea:-
“ cept a man he horn of the spirit as well as
“ of water, he cannot enter into the Kingdom
“ of Heaven. It is nov) true, as well as it
“ was then, that if any man have not the
spirit of Christ, he is none of his ; and
“ that the spirit of Christ dwelleth in us,
except we be reprobates.”
If I were not afraid of exhausting your
patience, by lengthened quotations, I might
give you some specimens of Dr. Clarke’s
view of this doctrine, which 1 think would
induce you to acquit him here, at least, of
any deviation from the principles of Scrip¬
ture, and of the Church.*
* The following extract is subjoined for the farther
satisfaction of the reader who may think the above quo¬
tation too general or ambiguous. It must be remembered
that we are vindicating here, Doctor Clarke’s doctrine
upon the reality and necessity of the influence and aid of
the Holy Spirit, not his disquisitions or conjectures
upon the medium or mode of its operation ; one of those
inscrutable mysteries, to which reason ever has been, and
ever will be, unequal.
“ The way to know whether any person has this
“ spirit dwelling in him or no, is by the fruits of the
DOCTOR SAMUEL CLARKE.
417
I shall not attempt any observation upon
the general style of these discourses, farther
“ spirit ; for the tree is known by its fruit. Now the
“ fruits of the spirit are either temporary, or 'perpetual.
“ Temporary, such as are the miraculous gifts of speak-
‘‘ ing with tongues, prophesying, healing diseases, and
“ the like : — or perpetual, such as are the moral dis-
positions and habits of the mind, worked in us hy the
“ spirit of God, improved in us hy his continual assistance,
“ and acceptable to him in the performance: namely,
“ goodness, righteousness, and truth, as Saint Paul
“ reckons them up, (Ephes. v. 9.), — and more largely,
“ (Galat. V. 22.), — the fruit of the spirit is love, joy,
“ peace, long suffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,
“ meekness, temperance. These are the permanent
“ fruits of the spirit, necessary to be found at all times
“ in every baptised person; otherwise his baptism is
“ nothing else but merely washing away the filth of the
“ flesh : so that, being born of water only, and not of
“• the spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
“ In whomsoever these moral fruits of the spirit are
“ found, the other miraculous and extraordinary ones
are now unnecessary; and even these, at the first
“ preaching of the Gospel, when they were the most
“ needful of all, yet were they useless and unprof table to
“ those very persons in whom they most abounded, if the
“ moral fndts of the spirit were not found in corijimction
“ with them. By the habits of piety and true holiness,
“ men may now shew themselves as full of the Holy Ghost
“ as ever, without any miraculous gifts, with the greatest
“ abundance of xihich, they were still void, of the Holy
E E
VOI-. II.
418
DOCTOR SAMUEL CLARKE.
than that their close and argumentative
form renders them more suitable to the
closet than to the pulpit, and better adapted
for the conveyance of instruction to the
mind, than for the excitement of devotional
affections. The preacher seems to wave
“ Ghost, even then, if not endued voith piety and true
“ holiness. For, miraculous gifts voere but the signs of
“ the Holy Spirit, voorhing by them, not in, and. upon
“ them. And therefore, such gifts were useful, rather
“ to others, than themselves; to convince beholders,
“ rather than to sanctify the persons. Tongues, saith
“ Saint Paul, are for a sign, not to them that believe,
“ but to them that believe not. But moral virtues are
‘‘ eviderices of the syirids dvoelling in men, and sane-
“ tfying their hearts and lives, which to themselves
“ is the end and the effect of that belief, the producing
“ but the frst beginnings whereof, in others, is all that
“ is intended by miraculous gifts. These extraordinary
“ gifts, therefore, were only operations of the spirit,
“ while righteousness and holiness are properly called
“ its fruits. Fruits of the spirit; because worked, not
“ as the others, extrinsically, necessarily, and without
“ the concurrence of the persons themselves, but worked
“ in the mmd, and with the free choice and will of the
‘‘ person, by the approbation, assistance, and help of
‘‘ the spirit of God, concurring with him, not barely
“ operating by him.”
Flote. — The term moral virtues” used above, re¬
fers obviously to the catalogue of Christian graces before
enumerated, from Saint Paul.
DOCTOR SAMUEL CLARKE. 4l9
his character of an ambassador, in assuming
the office of an advocate, and appears to be
rather enforcing a system, than delivering
a divine communication or command. From
this exclusive application to the understand¬
ing, these sermons derive a certain cold¬
ness of character, which would very much
lessen their usefulness in ignorant or pro¬
miscuous congregations, or in cases where
it was necessary, as it almost always is, to
touch a hard heart, or awaken a dormant
conscience.
You will say that I have offered a very
qualified vindication ; and that even if
Doctor Clarke’s philosophical habits, might
be pleaded in apology for his own aberra¬
tions from the simplicity of Scripture doc¬
trine,* they do not make those aberrations
less real, or less dangerous in their influ¬
ence and example. In this I entirely con¬
cur ; and I am far from desiring to see this
writer resume his place, as a popular guide
in divinity. Yet I cannot but lament the
indiscriminate censure, which seems likely
to deprive the orthodox theologian, of the
E E 2
420
DOCTOR SAMUEL CLARKE.
aid of his piercing and powerful intellect,
and still farther to extend that prejudice
against reasoning in religion, which has
furnished infidelity with a pretence for re¬
presenting religion and reason, as necessarily
hostile to each other.
421
LETTER XXXV.
GENERAL RETROSPECT. BOYLE'S LECTURES.— BISHOP
BRADFORD.
PROMINENT DOCTRINES OF INFIDELITY AT THIS PERIOD. _
MATERIALISM. - INFLUENCE OF THIS, ON THE DIVINITY
UNDER REVIEW. — SERMONS OF ARCHDEACON GURDON.
- VERSATILITY OF THE INFIDEL WARFARE. - ANECDOTE
OF VOLTAIRE. - SUCCESSIVE TOPICS OF INFIDELITY. _
VARIOUS SUBJECTS OF THESE LECTURES. - EVIDENCE OF
REVELATION IN ALL ITS BRANCHES. - CHRISTIAN DOC¬
TRINES FULLY STATED. - INSTANCE IN THE SERMONS OF
BISHOP BRADFORD. — MANY OTHERS TO THE SAME PUR«
POSE, MIGHT BE PRODUCED,
MY DEAR FRIEND,
I HAVE already observed, that the promi¬
nent doctrines of infidelity, at the period
under our consideration, were, materialism,
and necessity : and I noticed in my last, the
double view under which the latter doctrine
had been combated, whether as a philoso¬
phical tenet, or a deduction from some
E E 3
422
GENERAL RETROSPECT.
parts of the scheme of revelation. No
such association, however, could be pleaded
in favour of materialism ; which seems to
have been the favourite ground, on which
the atheist framed his metaphysical objec¬
tions, and where he could be refuted by
metaphysical argument alone. Though 1
shall not here contend for the prudence of
introducing disquisitions of this kind, into
the pulpit, (and indeed, I confess, that, ex¬
cept under the regulations of these lectures,
they are absolutely inadmissible,) I cannot
help referring you to one series of the ser¬
mons in this collection, (those of Archdeacon
Gurdon,) which appear to me quite satisfac¬
tory upon the subject; and I am the rather
induced to specify these sermons at present,
because the pernicious doctrine refuted in
them, has been revived within the last few
years, with all the plausibility of physical
science, and all the ornament of poetical
genius; and the danger appears to be rather
increased than diminished, by the attempts
which have been made, (by persons well
intentioned, perhaps, but imprudent,) to
abstract the question altogether from reli-
BOYLE’S LECTURES.
423
gion, and to represent this doctrine as in¬
dependent of, yet still compatible with, the
truth of revelation.
I have noticed the versatility with which
the enemies of religion varied their modes
of attack, and sometimes drew, even from
their defeat, new weapons of warfare against
her. For nearly half a century, these attacks
were continued almost without intermission j
and there seems to have existed a combin¬
ation not less real, — nor animated, (in
some cases,) with a spirit less virulent, —
than that of the conspiracy of the continental
atheists, so clearly proved by Barruel, from
the evidence of their own letters.
It is remarkable, that Voltaire’s determi¬
nation to dedicate his life to the overthrow
of Christianity, was formed after hi. vi.slt
to England, and his intimacy with the
English philosophers j a name with which
he compliments the adepts of this school,
and which he is not so ready to apply to
those who better deserved it.
E E 4
424
GENERAL RETROSPECT.
Though the positive evidence of an
infidel combination in England, is not so
decisive^, there is strong presumptive proof,
in the variety of operations, all directed,
with unvarying harmony and unrelaxing
zeal, to the uniform object of subverting
revelation. The disproof, or the exaltation
of natural religion, — the depression, or the
deification of reason, — the establishment of
ridicule as a test of truth, — the attempt to
confute the Mosaic history, by the objection
of chronological discrepancies, or of later
improvements in astronomical science, —
the pretended deficiencies in the scheme of
Christian morals, (when in truth it was the
very perfection of this scheme, that render¬
ed it obnoxious to most of these writers, — )
* It is asserted by a contemporary writer, that the
opponents of Christianity, in England, at this period,
formed themselves into clubs, in which the plan of every
operation was concerted, and sometimes the whole per¬
formance compounded of matter, to which every mem¬
ber contributed his share. Do not the present times ex¬
hibit a similar association, and prove at least the unity
of principle and spirit, that actuates the enemies of the
Gospel ^
BOYLE’S LECTURES.
425
the endeavour to invalidate the genuineness
of the Scriptures, and the still more insidious
endeavour to prove, that even their ac¬
knowledged genuineness would be insuffi¬
cient to establish facts inconsistent with ex¬
perience, and incapable of proof by human
testimony, — the identification of Chris¬
tianity with its corruptions, and the appeal
from its authenticated records, to the prac¬
tice of its degenerate or hypocritical pro¬
fessors, — all these, and innumerable other
expedients, have been resorted to in the
course of this warfare ; and the very order
in which they have been employed, as they
appeared necessary to the support of infi¬
delity, driven from post to post in the con¬
troversy, clearly evinces to the reflecting
mind, a harmony of operation, quite incon¬
sistent with the notion of detached and de¬
sultory opposition.
From all these circumstances I would de¬
duce the origin of that style of preaching,
in which some of our Divines at this period,
appear to have sunk the theologian, in the
philosopher ; and, in their anxiety to defend
426
GENERAL RETROSPECT.
the general truth of revelation, to have been
less explicit in the proof of some of its pe¬
culiar doctrines. I do not dispute, that in
some instances, and at a later period,
omissions of this kind were carried still
farther ; and the sanctions of Scripture were
almost forgotten, in enforcing morality upon
principles of reason. How much of this
effect, was connected with preceding con¬
troversies, and how much, with the apathy,
that towards the close of this period, had
confessedly crept into the Church, I shall
not enquire : nor shall I attempt to be¬
speak your indulgence, for any of those
“ Apes of Epictetus,” as Bishop Horsley
called thems who substituted the husks of
heathen ethics, in place of the bread of
life.
But before we take leave of these lectures,
I must observe, that they are not limited to
philosophical defences of revelation. Against
the various opponents to be refuted, diffet-
ent arguments are necessarily employed ;
and the truth of the Gospel is proved from
external^ as well as internal, evidence. The
BOTLE’S LECTURES.
427
Divine authority and mission of the blessed
Jesus, are demonstrated to the Jews out of
their own prophecies j which, though it has
been sneeringly called an argument ad
hominem, is a fair and universal medium of
proof, to all who compare the authenticated
date of these predictions, with the several
periods of their accomplishment. The
genuineness of the Books of the New Testa-
O
ment is proved, by such evidence, as we do
not possess for that of any other ancient
writings. The fidelity of the Evangelical
historians, is demonstrated by the double
argument, that the whole system which it
was their aim to enforce, is inimical to false¬
hood of every description, and that, if it
had been their object to forge a revelation,
they would not have framed one, which pre¬
cluded themselves from temporal ease and
emolument, which bound them to a life of
labour and suffering, and promised them
(what in many instances they actually en¬
dured,) a death of ignominy and torture.
I must here interrupt our review, for a
moment, to observe upon the unfairness of
428
GENERAL RETROSPECT.
those enemies of the Gospel, who would
stain the glory of the first Christian martyrs,
by comparing their readiness to suffer for
the faith, with the frenzy of Indian fanatics,
or even with the zeal which afterwards led
Christians to expose themselves unneces¬
sarily to danger and death, when martyr¬
dom had become a fashion. The difference
in the case of the apostles, (and one which
infidelity carefully omits to notice,) lies in
the origination of the practice. The records
of pagan heroism, anterior to the times of
Christianity, convey to us no names of
voluntary martyrs to piety. The pride of
patriotism and of integrity, did indeed pro¬
duce some instances of self-devotion ; but
these originated in human motives alone,
and looked only to human praise, for their
recompense : and in fact, the only case of
ancient martyrdom, that can be fairly cited
as parallel with that of the apostles, is that
of the prophet Daniel, and the three Jews, in
the court of Nebuchadnezzar. The extra¬
ordinary coincidence of motive and practice,
in the faithful servants of God, under each
of these Divine dispensations, marks at once
BOYLE’S LECTURES.
429
the identity of the cause for which they
suffered, and of the principle by which they
were sustained.
Another point, and a very important one,
discussed by some of the preachers of these
lectures, is the preparatory character of the
Jewish revelation ; and the gradual develope-
ment of the grand scheme of redemption,
from the promise in Paradise, to its consum¬
mation on Mount Calvary. In fact, the
adaptation of the whole Jewish economy, to
authenticate a system which was to supei-
sede it, is a circumstance so remarkable,
and so strikingly different from the general
practice, and inconsistent with the objects,
of human legislation, that, as we cannot
suppose any community thus \oluntarily
anticipating its own dissolution, so we can¬
not conceive the exercise of a power or pre¬
science, less than divine, in constructing a
system, containing within itself the portrai¬
ture and promise of a new dispensation, and
in the fullness of time, and m defiance of
every obstacle that national prejudice and
jealousy could oppose, exhibiting the per-
430
GENERAL RETROSPECT.
feet original of this picture, and the minutest
completion of this promise.
But the demonstration of Christianity, in
many of these lectures, is not confined to
its more general proof, or historical evi¬
dence. The characters ascribed in Scrip¬
ture, to our Lord, as well as his divine
mission, are proved from the facts of his
history ; the promise of remission of sin,
through his blood only, is stated as the
primary proposition to be established ; and
this doctrine, with those of the Trinity and
the incarnation, the corruption of man, and
the necessity of Divine grace for his renewal,
are expressly maintained as the funda¬
mentals of the Christian scheme.
I have not room to enlarge much farther,
upon this part of our subject ; but I cannot
leave it, without noticing particularly, the
sermons of Bishop Bradford, on “the credi¬
bility of the Christian Revelation, from its
intrinsic evidence — not so much, because
they confirm the above observations, more
than many others of these lectures, as be-
BOYLE’S LECTUBES.— BISHOP BRADFORD, 431
cause they are the only writings of this pious
and excellent Divine, which I happen to
have at hand ; and 1 would not omit the
mention of his name, amongst the worthies
of our Church.
In the first of these discourses, upon the
text(Johnvi.45.)“and they shall be all taught
of God,” &c. &c. he explains the nature of
that divine teaching, which he considers as a
necessary preparative for the reception of the
Gospel. There are several ways, (says he,)
in which men may be said to be taught of
God, in order to their receiving any farther
revelation from him. They are taught of
God, (in order to this end,) by the wonders
of creation and of providence, — by the sug¬
gestions and dictates of conscience, — by
extraordinary persons raised up by pro¬
vidence, and qualified to teach others, —
and by the motions and influences of the
Holy Spirit upon the minds of men.
The qualities (he adds,) which are requi¬
site to the reception of this divine teach-
432
GENERAL RETROSPECT.
ing, are, seriousness* of spirit, humility of
mind, and purity of heart : and he goes on
to illustrate in their order, the advantages of
these several dispositions, and to describe
the prejMratory tempers which it is man’s
duty to cultivate, and which, being his
duty, the Divine grace has placed within
his power. “ Therefore,” (he infers very
justly in the close,) “ if any person who is
“ not furnished with the qualifications
“ above-mentioned, and for want of them
“ hath not been taught of God, shall yet
“ take upon him to deny the truth of the
Christian religion, he is to be neglected,
as one that is no competent judge in the
“ dispute.”
From this introduction, the preacher pro¬
ceeds to a general survey of the Christian
scheme ; in which he begins with the apos-
tacy of man, and the great object of our
blessed Lord’s mission, the salvation of
* By seriousness, (it appears) is here meant a steady
and considerate temper; careful in examining, and
candid in admitting, the evidences of divine truth.
BOYLE’S LECTURES. — BISHOP BRADFORD. 433
sinners. On the first of these topics, he is
very diffuse in the description of man’s
natural capacities, both for intellectual and
moral improvement ; and expressly asserts
his freedom or liberty of choosing, and
his power, consequently, of acting accord-
“ ing to such choice, without which, liberty
would have been given to him in vain.’^
Yet shall we call this,” (he says) a
“ perfection, or an imperfection ?” His
reply to this question, chiefly refers to the
liberty enjoyed by our first parents in
Paradise, and is therefore unconnected with
our subject ; but his subsequent observ¬
ations upon the nature of sin, and its conse¬
quences to mankind, whether generally or
individually, prove that he did not consi¬
der this faculty as wholly lost, though
miserably depraved by the fall.
“ The very first act of sin,” (he observes}
speaking of the case of every individual
sinner,) “ is a mighty disorder, as being an
“ abuse of that liberty with which he was
entrusted, and a contradiction to the
VOL. II. F F
434
GENEIIAL RETROSPECT.
natural inclination with which he was
“ endued by his Maker. By this means,
‘‘ the tone of his spirit is, as it were, imme-
‘‘ diately relaxed, - — the will corrupted, —
the natural propension of the soul towards
God and goodness weakened, and a con-
trary disposition perhaps introduced, —
“ the appetites and passions, which were
made to be ruled, having once broke
‘‘ loose from the government they were
“ placed under, are apt thenceforward to
become impetuous and arbitrary, — the
“ understanding, having been once misled
“ or over-ruled, is for the future less able
to discern clearly, or to judge impar-
tially : — in a word, innocence and inte-
grity are lost.”
“ Every repeated act, strengthens the
“ evil habit, and increases the disorder
“ which is thus unhappily begun in all the
faculties.”
“ If the man continues to be a sinner
only in a lower degree, he will find a
perpetual struggling and conflict within
BOYLE’S LECTURES. — BISHOP BRADFORD. 435
“ his breast ; his understanding, and rea-
son, and conscience, directing and leading
“ him one way, whilst his appetites and
“ passions hurry him the other ; the law
in his members, warring against the law
of his mind, and for the most part bring-
ing him into captivity ; he neither ap-
“ proving what he does, nor finding him-
“ self at all disposed to do what he approves,
cc Wretched man that he is ! And if he be
grown a hardened sinner, he is still the
more wretched, because more incurable,
though at the same time less sensible of
his evil condition.
And all this while, he is exceedingly
“ estranged and alienated from God, the
author of his being, and the fountain of
all good ; — he is ashamed and afraid to
“ approach him on whom he entirely de-
pends, or to address himself to him
“ whose aid he stands in need of every
“ moment ; he is conscious of having
“ given him offence, and therefore justly
apprehends his displeasure.
F F 2
436
GENERAL RETROSPECT.
“ This is livelily represented by Moses, in
“ the case of oiir first parents, who, imme-
“ diately upon their disobeying the com-
‘‘ mand of God, hid themselves from his
“ face, being ashamed and afraid to see or
‘‘ hear of him, whom just before they had
conversed with, to their great satisfaction
“ and comfort. And every sinner, that is
‘‘ not past feeling, may find something
« very like this, within himself.”
The nature of the salvation, offered by the
Gospel, through the sacrifice and mediation
of Christ, is stated, in the third of these dis¬
courses, to consist — in his delivering men
“ from the just displeasure of their Maker,
“ and all the terrible effects of it, together
“ with a complete restoration to the divine
‘‘ favour, and giving them a title to all
those blessings, which are proper for hu-
“ man nature, when accepted of God ; — in
setting them free from all that disorder
“ and irregularity, which had been intro-
“ duced into the several faculties of their
‘‘ souls, together with the dissatisfaction
BOYLE’S LECTURES. -BISHOP BRADFORD. 437
\
and uiioasinoss of mind which nccossarily
“ followed In a word, salvation con-
“ sists, (he adds,) in reconciling God to
men, and men to God, and in all the
blessed fruits of such a reconciliation
■ and, as this is the salvation which the
‘‘ Gospel offereth to every particular man
to whom it is preached, so it assures us^
“ that all those who shall embrace the offer
shall be thus saved ; though by the
“ craft of their subtle enemy, and their
“ own weakness and folly, they had once
“ fallen from God, and the state in which
“ he had placed them, ’ and been in immi-
“ nent danger of utter perdition.”
The reasonableness of this mediatorial
scheme, he then proceeds to demonstrate ;
and the expiatory nature of our Saviour’s
sacrifice, he asserts in the same discourse, in
terms the most explicit : and, as if deter¬
mined not to shrink even from those parts
of the system, to which the pride of philo¬
sophy was most hostile, he closes tne fourth
lecture, with a vindication of the Trinitarian
doctrine.
F F 3
438
GENERAL RETROSPECT.
The reconciliation of sinners to God
through Christ, — the removal of their na¬
tural fears and disabilities, — the motives
and assistances to evangelical obedience, in
the offer of salvation, the example of our
Saviour’s life, and the promise of the Holy
Spirit, — are detailed in the remaining lec¬
tures. Any extracts from these, would too
much lengthen my letter, and are unneces¬
sary to the point I proposed ; viz. to prove,
that neither his own philosophy, nor his
fear of the philosophy of his hearers, mo¬
dified the opinions or the statements of
Bishop Bradford, upon the fundamental
doctrines of the Gospel.
In my next, I shall return to our more
general retrospect, as illustrative of the last
period on vdiich I propose here to offer any
observations. The awful history of the
close of the last century, and the subsequent
renovation of the religious spirit in the
world, which exhibit so stupendous a view
of the power of Divine Providence, in elicit¬
ing good from evil, are subjects of too
much magnitude and importance, to be
BOYLE’S LECTURES.— BISHOP BRADFORD. 439
compressed within the limits of a few
pages ; and, if you wish for a farther pro¬
secution of the enquiry, must be reserved
for a future correspondence.
Adieu ! my dear friend !
F F 4
440
LETTER XXXVL
GENEli AL OB SEE VA TIONS.
POPULAR CHARGES AGAINST THE CHURCH, IRRELEVANT TO
THE PRESENT SUBJECT. - CONDUCT OF AN IMPARTIAL
ENQUIRER, WITH RESPECT TO THESE CHARGES. — PRO¬
BABLE DECISION OF SUCH AN ENQUIRER. - A RULE OF
JUDGMENT SUGGESTED. - APPLICATION OF THIS RULE, TO
THE COMPOSITION OF HISTORY, AND INQUIRY HOW FAR
IT HAS BEEN OBSERVED BY SOME POPULAR HISTORIANS,
MY DEAR FRIEND,
I SHALL not attempt to disprove, or to pal¬
liate, (though I cannot but think them too
indiscriminately applied,) the charges of a
relaxation of discipline and zeal, which
have been brought against the national
Church, at this period of her history. Hap¬
pily, it does not belong to our object, to en¬
ter farther into the discussion, than as it
relates to the influence of these circum¬
stances (to whatever degree they may have
existed,) on the style and subjects of our
pulpit divinity.
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS,
441
I may, however, observe, that certain
precautions and limitations are necessary
in the investigation of these charges ; an at¬
tention to which, would probably produce a
censure less severe and undistinguishing,
and perhaps, in more cases than are com¬
monly supposed, a complete and trium¬
phant acquittal,
Instances of partial, or of individual neg¬
ligence, a fair inquirer will not urge, as a
ground of general reproach : and while he
traces in the history of the times, and per¬
haps in the constitution of the Church ^5
* The large endowments enjoyed by the Church, and
the unequal division of its revenues, and, above all, the
independence of clerical income upon the rate of clerical
exertion, have been assigned, with some reason, perhaps,
and more plausibility, as causes of occasional supineness
in the clergy. Yet it would be fair to take into account
the advantages resulting from this constitution ; and to
recollect, that the evil complained of is, in fact, insepar¬
able from a competence of temporal provision, under any
circumstances, where professional exertion is supposed
to be stimulated by any human motive. It is an evil re¬
sulting from the corruption of our nature, and which
nothing but personal piety will remove : and the esta-*
442
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS.
the causes of an occasional declension, he
will still feel the value of an Establishment,
which has proved, in its general conse-
blisliment of a contingent remuneration, whether depen¬
dent on the government or the people, might introduce
the still worse evils, of servility or faction, hypocrisy or
extravagance. Though the labourer in the spiritual
vineyard, is confessedly worthy of his hire, it is not for
his hire that he should labour ; and it is, perhaps, expect¬
ing too much from human nature, to expect that avarice
will always resist the temptation of progressive or con¬
tingent acquisition.
Into the very complicated and difficult subject, of the
nature of Church property, and the administration of
Church patronage, the writer of these pages pretends not
to enter. It has already exercised some of the ablest
pens, and occupied some of the best informed minds, in
the community : and every succeeding enquiry has but
contributed to prove, that its inconveniences, obvious
and palpable as they are, result rather from the abuse of
the system, than from the system itself: and that, al¬
though partaking necessarily of the imperfection insepa¬
rable from every human institution, its principle is equit¬
able and wise, and equally calculated to prevent the
minister from sinking into a dependence on the caprice
of his congregation, and to preserve that connection be¬
tween the church and the government, which is necessary
to secure some important advantages of a national reli¬
gious establishment. The Church, under her present
hierarchical constitution, is the natural ally of legitimate
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS.
443
quences, a great national blessing ; which
lias resisted political anarchy, without desert¬
ing the principles of liberty ; — and which,
equally removed from spiritual tyranny and
licentiousness, has restrained the rage of
innovation, without violating the rights of
conscience. He will acknowledge the ex-
cellence of a church, which has built her
faith upon the rock of Scripture, and illus¬
trated that faith, with instructions to assist,
but not to over-rule, the judgment of her
children."'^ He will farther confess, that the
Church, even at the period to which this
censure refers, had many burning and shin-
aiul hex'editary monarchy ; and it seems essential to the
preservation of this alliance, that the disposal of her high
and confidential offices, should be vested in the person of
the sovereign, whom she acknowledges as her supreme
temporal head. But it is also necessary, — awfully and
imperiously necessary, — that this great pidvilege should
be wisely and conscientiously exercised; and that the
advancement of the interests of religion, should be the
sole consideration in the appointment of those ministers,
who are invested with the high trust and deep responsi¬
bility, of providing “ faithful men” for the farther in¬
struction of the people.
* See Article 6.
444
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS.
ing lights, not less exemplary in practice,
than eminent in knowledge ; and in the
monuments of their pastoral and literary
labours, he wdll find that professional dig¬
nities or emoluments, did not relax their
zeal in professional duties. He will sepa¬
rate what is Scriptural, and fundamental,
and permanent, from what is occasional
and temporary, in their writings, as well as
from what is personal and characteristic ;
and he will examine, by a careful reference
to the prejudices and controversies of their
day, the ground of any apparent aberrations,
with which the judgment, or the prejudice
of his own times, may charge them.
For real aberrations from the standard of
Scripture doctrine, he will, indeed, make no
farther allowance, than a consciousness of his
own fallibility may suggest ; yet, if he con¬
siders the indefatigable diligence, with
which many of these writers appear to
have searched the Scriptures, he will per¬
haps hesitate, even on such points, to urge
his own judgment dogmatically against
theirs, till he shall have studied as deeply.
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS.
445
and prayed as earnestly, and laboured as
zealously, as they have done. If his religi¬
ous principles or pursuits, lead him to a
particular investigation of their errors, he
will undertake this investigation with diffi¬
dence, and conduct it with charity : and in
the act of obviating opinions which he con¬
ceives to be erroneous, he will be careful
not to trace those opinions, to any principle
which he would not himself acknowledge,
if he could suppose himself placed in the
situation, and holding the sentiments, of
those from whom he differs.
This principle of justice naturally leads
us to a recollection of the verv different
treatment, which Churchmen collectively,
have received at all times, from the pen of
the secular historian ; and especially, since
the fashion of what is called philosophical
history, has rendered it necessary to trace,
or to assume, some latent metaphysical
cause, as the foundation of the facts to be
related, or the peculiarities of character to
be described. You will not suppose me to
object to the fair exercise of a philosophical
446
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS.
spirit, in any branch of literature ; nor to
dispute the peculiar advantage of its appli¬
cation to the study of history ; a science
which has been very elegantly and justly
defined, to be philosophy teaching by ex¬
amples.” But I would object to that par¬
tial philosophy, which, instead of framing
its theory from facts, labours to adapt facts
to a theory ; or by unwarranted and arbi¬
trary inferences from facts not unfaithfully
related, endeavours to establish a favourite
system, or to infuse a characteristic pre¬
judice.
The indications of this partiality in some
of our most popular historians, cannot have
escaped your notice ; and would hardly re-
cpiire any observation here, if the period of
history directly connected with our subject,
did not afford an exemplification of the re¬
mark, and exhibit, as the invidious distinc¬
tion of a class, a spirit which is common to
the species, and conquerable only through
the influence of that faith, which it seems to
have been the object of these philosophers,
to extinguish.
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS.
44Y
Allow me here to extend this digression
a little, and by way of example, to notice
one charge against the Church, and the
ground upon which I think this charge
might be refuted, or shown to be at lead as
applicable to the secular, as to the ecclesias¬
tical character : I mean, the charge of a
vindictive and interested spirit.
We have seen the Church, emergino: from
the depression of Cromwell’s usurpation,
and participating in the universal revulsion,
which seems to have marked a new era in
English manners and opinions. Smarting
under the recollection of recent injuries and
deprivations, and empowered by the re¬
establishment of her legal rights, to reclaim
her alienated property, it would not, per¬
haps, be matter of surprise, if this power
had been sometimes strictly or precipitately
exercised. How far the Establishment is
deserving of the charges which have been
urged against her, on this head, I shall not
enquire ; but I cannot omit to notice a cir¬
cumstance, which appears to have rendered
these charges more prominent, by exhibit-
448
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS!
ing the hardship of the subsequent depriv¬
ations, chiefly, if not entirely, in clerical
cases, and thus exposing the clerical cha¬
racter to an unfounded or gratuitous impu¬
tation of peculiar vindictiveness or rapacity.
The subversion of the English monarchy,
upon the murder of Charles the First, was
not attended with any general confiscation
of property ; nor marked by those changes
of the relative position of the different or¬
ders in society, which distinguished a later
and more atrocious revolution in another
country. The lords and gentlemen who
had adhered to the royal cause, yielded
upon the death of their sovereign, to a
power which they could no longer resist ;
and generally availed themselves of the
liberality, or the prudence, of Cromwell, to
resume the quiet possession of their estates,
(a possession which, indeed, had hardly been
interrupted,) and to return to their private
avocations, under a sort of tacit compact of
submission to the new government. The
democratic spirit which had grown during
the civil wars, was subdued or appeased by
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS.
449
the powerful genius of the Protector : the
national dignity was sustained, and the na¬
tional pride was flattered, by the strength
of his foreign administration, while the tur¬
bulence of disappointment and discontent
was controuled by the firmness of his do¬
mestic policy. For discontent, indeed, there
was little ground, (unless in the depression
of the Church,) so far as the great body of
the people was concerned. If we except
the arbitrary impositions upon the royalists,
after their last struggle in 1655, private
property appears to have been generally in¬
violate. Commerce was protected ; the
forms of a free constitution were employed
to cover the strength of a military despotism ;
and as great a regard to justice was retained,
in the administration of the government, as
the consciousness of usurpation, and the
jealousy necessarily attendant upon it,
would permit.
So desirous was Cromwell, to secute the
services, and to avoid offending the princi¬
ples, of the loyal and virtuous part of the
VOL. II, G G
450
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS.
nation, whom necessity had forced to sub¬
mit to his authority, that he never appears
to have required any express test or pro¬
mise of allegiance, except on the admission
to a seat in Parliament. Trusting to the
vigilance of his government, or to the in¬
tegrity of those with whom he had to deal,
he advanced the conscientious royalist, and
republican, to places of confidence and im¬
portance, and endeavoured to engage the
talents and the virtues of both, in the de¬
fence of the country, and the administra¬
tion of the laws.
But in the ecclesiastical constitution, a
violent change had been effected, some
years before the death of the unhappy
Charles. The Episcopal order had been
abolished, and the Episcopalian clergy dis¬
possessed, to make way for the establish¬
ment of the Presbyterian discipline. The
revenues of the former, had been confiscated
for the use of the state, and those of the
latter, transferred, with their benefices, to
the ministers who succeeded them in their
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS.
451
several charges. Throughout the subsequent
convulsions, and during the usurpation of
Cromwell, the clergy alone, seem to have
suffered, as a body, the severities of per¬
sonal and pecuniary oppression. Their
property alienated, and their functions sup¬
pressed, or at least executed with difficulty
and peril, they appear to have been marked
as the sole victims of a revolution, which
left all the other orders of the state, in the
full enjoyment of their possessions, while it
gratified them with an apparent enlargement
of their political liberties. I say apparent ;
for no real enlargement of liberty took
place, either during the government of the
parliament, or the protectorate of Cromwell.
Despotism had only changed its form, and
at the latter period, modified its proceed¬
ings, under the influence of a wise ambition :
— but it was despotism still ; and it was
an honour reserved for a second revolution,
to establish liberty upon its true basis, and
to restore the laws to that supremacy, which
had been successively invaded and inter¬
rupted, under the regal, the popular, and
the military government.
G G 2
452
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS.
As the confiscation or transfer of pro¬
perty, in the rebellion, had been confined to
ecclesiastical cases, or, I should rather say,
had been exercised collectively, against the
clerical order alone, the resumption of their
rights and temporalities at the Restoration,
though no more than might have been ex¬
pected to follow the legal re-establishment
of the Church, has naturally stood out in
the page of history, as a prominent instance
of compulsory restitution ; and the clergy
have been charged with a peculiar alacrity
in resuming their alienated possessions,
while it seems to have been forgotten, that
no other class of men in the community, had
been provoked to the exhibition of such a
spirit, by the experience of similar depriv¬
ations. Yet the restitution of the prefer¬
ments of which they had been violently dis¬
possessed, to those of the sequestered clergy
who survived the Restoration, was no more
than a restitution of legal rights, which the
interruption of legal authority had sus¬
pended ; and the first act of resumption by
the Church, was as fair an exercise of these
rights, as would have been the resumption
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS,
453
of any other property, if other property had
been equally invaded.
If the subsequent controversy in the
Church, exhibited in some instances, a spirit
which the best friends of the Church must
lament, this warrants no general charge
upon a profession, which furnished, at the
very same period, the most eminent exam¬
ples, of liberality on the one hand, and of
conscientious firmness on the other ; — a
firmness, which we must admire in its prin¬
ciple, however we may regret its exercise
upon some points too trivial to afford a
reasonable subject of division.
I little expected when I began this letter,
to have been drawn back to the Restoration ;
but even if the digression has not brought
us forward in our inquiry, I trust it will not
be without effect, in its application to our
general principle.
G G 3
454
LETTER XXXVII.
GENERAL RETROSPECT CONCLUDED.
VARIOUS ASSOCIATIONS OF DOCTRINE. - DOCTRINE OF NON-
RESISTANCE, INCULCATED IN THE HOMILIES. - EXPLODED
OR MODIFIED, AT THE REVOLUTION. — INFLUENCE OF THIS,
UPON THEOLOGY. - FRIENDS OF THE REVOLUTION. -
NON-JURORS. - JACOBITE PARTY. - PROBABLE CAUSE OF
THE GRADUAL DISUSE OF THE HOMILIES AS A TEXT
book. - NON-CONFORMISTS BECOME A DISTINCT SOCIETY.
- GRADUAL AND GENERAL PROGRESS OF TOLERATION.---*
PARTIAL SECULARITY OF THE CHURCH, ACKNOWLEDGED.
- GENERAL REMARKS. - THE INQUIRY CONCLUDED.
MY DEAR FRIEND,
It is a singular anomaly in the history of
human opinions, that the doctrines of Cal¬
vinism, associated with its discipline, should
have been the distinction of the republican
party in England, or at least generally com¬
bined with republican principles ; and that
the same doctrines, under a different asso¬
ciation, should have been held, by some
strenuous advocates of non-resistance and
passive obedience. Yet, to those who dis¬
cover the doctrines of Calvin, in the Homi-
GENERAL RETROSPECT CONCLUDED, 455
lies of our Church, this will not appear
inconsistent. In the same volume, the
principles of loyalty, and submission to
established government, are inculcated, in
terms so unqualified, as to preclude, if liter¬
ally understood, opposition to authority
under any form, or any attempt to resist,
or to remove, the powers “ appointed of
“ God.” I have already observed, how¬
ever, that the Homilies cannot fairly be
cited as auxiliaries to Calvinism, though
subsequent associations have created an
apparent connection between them. As
these associations existed in their full
strength, at the period of the Revolution,
and the accession of the House of Hano¬
ver, we may discover in them, another clue
to the origin of the change in the style of
our national theology.
The statement of the doctrine of human
corruption, in the Homilies, adopted rather
in its dogmatical, than in its controversial
bearing, was received and exaggerated, by
two very different classes of men, upon dif¬
ferent grounds, and in a different spirit.
G G 4
456
GENERAL RETROSPECT
By the former, the doctrine was deduced
from Scripture, and proved by experience,
though expressed in hyperboles, and ac¬
companied with inferences, which Scripture
did not seem so clearly to warrant. By the
latter, the same doctrine, adopted as a phi¬
losophical principle, was urged, to annihilate
the distinctions of morality, to countenance
the practice of vice, and to sanction the
free indulgence of evil passions, supposed to
be inveterate and unconquerable. By both,
the claims of established government were
asserted, and unreserved obedience to the
sovereign authority, enforced. The infidel,
indeed, carried his principle farthest, and
extended the obligation even to matters of
religion ; while the Christian deduced the
prerogative of the sovereign, from the divine
appointment, and held, with the apostle,
that in matters pertaining to salvation, “ we
ought to obey God, rather than man.”
While the doctrine of human depravity,
in its connection with predestination, and
with the Calvinistic principles of church
government, v/as adopted by the enemies
CONCLUDED.
457
of monarchy, it seems to have been the ob¬
ject of our loyal and moderate divines, to
separate it from these adventitious associ¬
ations, and to distinguish the substantial
truth, from exaggerations or inferences by
which it was distorted or obscured. By
taking the doctrine, under the disguise of
philosophy, into an alliance with despotism
and profligacy, Hobbes awakened a new
conflict, and engaged the friends of liberty,
as well as of virtue, in the endeavour to
ascertain its true scriptural extent and
foundation.
The weariness of political anarchy, and
the fear of its recurrence, when the death of
Cromwell had relaxed the strong reins of
the executive government, combined with
a general preference of monarchy, and a
personal affection for the memory and the
family of Charles the First, to incline the
people to the Restoration ; and the enthu¬
siasm with which the returning monarch
was welcomed to the throne of his ances¬
tors, precluded all thought of conditions or
securities. The result was, unhappily, an
458
GENERAL RETROSPECT
extension of despotism, such as England
had not felt, even under the most tyrannical
of the Tudors, and of licentiousness, such
as had seldom, disgraced a Christian, and
never, a Protestant, country.
The resentment of oppression, the grow¬
ing principles of freedom, (now better un¬
derstood and more prudently applied,) and
finally, the apprehensions for the integrity,
and even the existence, of the national re¬
ligion, produced at last the legal expulsion
of the Stuarts, and the establishment of a
new dynasty ; — for, as such, the Revolu¬
tion must in fact be considered, though it
restrained the direct entail of the crown, to
the issue of the Protestant daughters of
James, and founded upon its relation to
the exiled family, the introduction of the
House of Hanover, into the succession ;
thus acknowledging the principle of here¬
ditary monarchy, even in the act of its vio¬
lation, and clearly distinguishing between
the aberrations of caprice, and the alter¬
ations of necessity.
CONCLUDED.
459
As the security of religion by the Revolu¬
tion, had been identified with the re-esta¬
blishment of liberty, the maxims of civil
freedom and political right, began to be as¬
sociated with the national theology. The
doctrine of passive obedience, which had
been held conscientiously, by the Episcopal
clergy, in the reign of Charles the First,
and slavishly, by some of those under his
successor, began to be very generally mo¬
dified ; and upon the actual covenant be¬
tween William the Third and the nation,
which rendered the rights and obligations
reciprocal, and consequently by implication,
conditional, was founded the abstract no¬
tion of an original compact, the principle
of all government, and the basis of all civil
society. To this system, the clergy who
were friendly to the Revolution, inclined ;
and in their discussion of the doctrine under
our notice, (which from this period, began
to be treated rather incidentally, than di¬
rectly,) they seem to have had in view, the
republicanism of Calvin, the servility of
Hobbes, and the conscientious, but exces-
460
GENERAL RETROSPECT
sive, loyalty of some of their own contem¬
poraries.
There was, at this period, a strong and
a very respectable party in the Church, who
could not adopt, in their full extent, the
free principles of government introduced at
the Revolution. Accustomed to hereditary
monarchy, and impressed with the notion
of divine right, they considered the new
doctrine of an original compact, rather as a
bold and ingenious theory, than as a de¬
monstrative truth ; and some who reasoned
upon the subject, could perceive, even at
this period, the licentious excesses to which
this doctrine might be carried. But the
majority of these divines, felt themselves
bound by a stronger tie than the calcul¬
ations of reason, or even the general im¬
pressions of religion. They dared not in¬
fringe an oath, which they had voluntarily
taken, and which they could not conceive
to be abrogated, by a breach of duty on the
part of their sovereign. His abdication
they held to be involuntary, and his rights
CONCLUDED.
461
unalienable ; and though their principles
of civil obedience, secured their peaceable
submission to the new government, and
their attachment to the Protestant religion
naturally recommended it to their prefer¬
ence, this prior obligation precluded any
active co-operation in its measures, or any
express acknowledgment of its legitimacy.
There was also a strong political party in
the nation, who, upon other views and
principles, adhered to the interests of the
exiled family ; and either pleaded the rights
and necessary security of the Church, in
opposition to the newly established toler¬
ation, or, by reviving the doctrine of non-re¬
sistance, tacitly impeached the Revolution,
and exposed the existing government to the
charge of usurpation and rebellion.
Principles like these, objectionable or
doubtful at all times, were peculiarly dan¬
gerous at the period to which we refer ;
when the legal settlement of the constitu¬
tion was still recent, and the friends and
emissaries of the House of Stuart, were ac-
462
GENERAL RETROSPECT
tive in exciting the scruples, and the pas¬
sions of the people, to overthrow the fair
fabric of national freedom and charity,
which had been reared with so much zeal
and labour.
From these circumstances it probably
arose, that the authority of the Homilies as
a text book, was gradually superseded by
later expositions ; and as the admission of
this authority, was not a matter of obligation
in the Church, (these discourses having
been compiled for a temporary purpose,
and the use of them required only in de¬
fault of preaching,) the exercise of their
liberty upon this point, by the clergy,
cannot fairly be charged as a breach of their
engagements, even by those who may con¬
sider it as an error in judgment.
It should also be recollected, that, at
this period, the principles which had been
before considered only as the distinction of
a party in the Church, were, by the separ¬
ation of the non-conformists from the Es¬
tablishment, brought more particularly im-
CONCLUDED.
463
der the notice of Churchmen, as subjects of
explanation or of self-defence ; and that
such discussions were, from henceforward,
considered rather as a vindication of the
Establishment against dissenters, than as a
division of the Church against herself.
I must farther observe, in favour of the
divines whose character we are now con¬
sidering, that whatever may be thought of
their judgment upon doctrinal points, their
principles and practice were eminently to¬
lerant. The Romanist, the rigid High
Churchman, and the Calvinist, had been
equally zealous in the enforcement of their
respective systems, and equally intolerant
towards those who dissented from them.
The Episcopalian, and the Puritan, had been
mutually taught charity in the school of
persecution, and had learned, from their
own sufferings for the faith, to compassion¬
ate the scruples, and respect the fortitude,
of their brethren. Retaliation, indeed,
had been provoked and had been exercised
on both sides, with little scruple or mercy ;
but the evil at last worked its own remedy.
464
GENERAL RETROSPECT
and the persecutor felt, in the injuries he
sustained, the punishment of those which
he had been instrumental in inflicting. If
a natural pride or partiality, restrained the
express acknowledgment of this feeling, it
was not the less evident, in the general
change of sentiment, and progressive de-
velopement of the principles of toleration,
in the writings of Puritans as well as of
Churchmen ; and I have .remarked else¬
where, that to the Presbyterian heads of
the universities, introduced under the Par¬
liamentary government, we owe the edu¬
cation of that class of divines, who, under
a more regular administration, vindicated
at once the purity of the Church, the su¬
premacy of the Bible, and the right of
private judgment, in points of individual
belief or opinion.
This right, (asserted indeed at the Re¬
formation, though not subsequently allow¬
ed by the Reformers themselves, inestim¬
able as were their services to the cause of
religion,) had not hitherto been maintained
as a general principle, though it had been
CONCLUDED.
465
practically taught by experience. The
honour of its firm and final triumph, upon
the broad ground ol reason and Scripture,
was reserved for the writers of the Revolu¬
tion ; and was largely participated by those
eminent Churchmen, whose philosophy had
widened their charity, without contracting
their faith, and who, while they refused to
desert an establishment whose general doc¬
trine they approved, on account of requisi¬
tions which they held to be indifferent, la¬
boured indefatigably, to reconcile their
more scrupulous brethren, on the one hand^
and to propitiate their less complying rulers,
on the other.
I will, however, confess, that I do not
love to contemplate our divines, as secular
or political characters ; and I fear, that at
this period, the mixture of politics with re¬
ligion, contributed too often to secularize
the tone of our divinity. But I would ra¬
ther distinguish these instances, as unhappy
exceptions, than refer to them as proofs of
any general dereliction of Church principles,
or pastoral habits, in the clergy.
H H
VOL. II.
466
GENERAL RETROSPECT
You will say, perhaps, that such a re¬
ference to local and personal history? as I
have here suggested, is not within the
reach of every reader ; and if it were, that
it would not excuse, in the writers under
our I’eview, any deviations from the stand¬
ard of Scripture doctrine, however fairly it
might account for them. This I readily
acknowledge ; and where such deviations
actually appear, I trust that I should be
one of the last to defend them. But I
must protest against the sweeping censure,
that either condemns this whole class of di¬
vines unexamined, or examines them, with¬
out a reference to principles and rules of
judgment, confessedly necessary in every
other branch of criticism.
Yet, while I would endeavour to vindicate
these divines, from indiscriminate censure,
or to rescue them, from unmerited neglect,
I would not plead for the general revival of
a similar style of preaching ; nor wish to
substitute their remains, for those more en¬
ergetic and awakening addresses, which are
necessary to arouse the careless sinner, to a
CONCLUDED.
46Y
sense of his guilt, and a perception of his dan¬
ger. The earnest expostulation, — the fre¬
quent repetition, — the direct interrogatory,
— the authoritative appeal? ^ — cojistitute, in
fact, the only style of teaching, that is always
intelligible or interesting to the bulk of the
people ; and the plain and familiar exposition
of Scripture, is more suited to the pulpit,
than the critical or polemical essay. While
I would recommend, therefore, a careful
perusal of these writers, or at least a liberal
selection of them, as a rational and useful
exercise for the Christian, and especially
for the clerical student, I would not pro¬
pose an imitation of their style, nor an ac^
quiescence in their opinions, farther than
as his own taste shall approve, and his own
judgment assent to them.
I would, however, suggest to you, here,
that a conscientious reader and inquirer,
who takes the Bible for his supreme guide,
and, in humble dependence on the aid of
divine grace, endeavours to learn from it
the way of salvation, — if he considers it as
no breach of this dependence, to consult his
H H 2
468
GENERAL RETROSPECT
own reason, in the examination of Scripture,
(and by reason alone, can he ascertain where
inquiry should end, and absolute submis¬
sion begin, — ) may safely avail himself of
the reason of others, more exercised by use,
more improved by study, and perhaps as
much enlightened by divine grace, as his
own. The implicit adoption of any human
system, or reliance on any human author¬
ity, is indeed carefully to be avoided ; but
you will agree with me, my dear friend,
that such a reliance is not less to be appre¬
hended, in the preference of a single preacher
or commentator, or of the divinity of a par¬
ticular school, than in a more free and im¬
partial examination.
If we had time, or documents, to trace
the various innovations, and even occasional
improvements, in religious practice and
opinion, which have so rapidly succeeded
each other, in the course of the two last cen¬
turies, we should find many of them de¬
riving their origin, from circumstances of
local influence or impression, though con¬
fidently, and in many cases, conscientiously,
CONCLUDED.
469
attributed by their authors to the divine
suffffestion. It seems, indeed, to have
been the plan of Providence, in the reli¬
gious and moral, as well as in the natural,
world, to work by instrumental and second¬
ary causes ; and to have reserved the stu¬
pendous exhibition of direct and super¬
natural agency, for the evidence and
establishment of that covenant of mercy,
which God has been pleased to make with
his rational and intelligent creatures.
And if such be the divine plan, it is ob¬
viously the prudence (may we not say the
duty ?) of the religious inquirer, carefully to
cultivate his reason, and to avail himself of
the reason of others, — to employ both, as
instruments confided to him by his Creator,
to assist him in attaining a knowledge of his
duty, and a fuller capacity for the perform¬
ance of it, — and to receive the instruction
communicated through his understanding,
with candour and readiness, though, from
his knowledge of the weakness of the in¬
strument, he dares not trust for a moment
to its operation, without the aid of that in-^
H H 3
470
GENERAL RETROSPECT
vigorating Spirit, on whom alone he de¬
pends for knowledge, and counsel, and
strength.
The course of our inquiry, now brings us
to the rise of a new controversy in the
Church ; which, in its influence upon our
pulpit divinity, has not been Jess important
than those that preceded it. I mean, the
introduction of Methodism. This is, how¬
ever, a subject so copious, that I dare not
engage in it at the close of so long a corre¬
spondence ; and shall content myself with
observing, in general, that I fear not even
here, to apply my principle, to the defence
of a great portion of our divinity ; though
I acknowledge that a spirit of secularity, a
compliance with fashion, or a fear of the
imputation of disaffection or enthusiasm,
have contributed, in some cases, to reduce
its strength, to modify its strictness, or to
corrupt its Scriptural simplicity.
I did intend, at the beginning of our cor¬
respondence on this subject, to have selected
some later preachers) for examination ; and
CONCLUDED.
471
not to have carried you back to the early
history, and internal controversies, of our
Church. I found such a retrospect, how¬
ever, indispensable to the foundation of my
argument ; and I hope it will not be with¬
out its use, in the determination of your
judgment, on the merits of our more re¬
cent, as well as of our earlier divines. You
have probably had quite enough of the dis¬
cussion ; but .you will find me still at your
command, if shall be inclined to pur¬
sue it at any future period.
Yours, very faithfully.
H H 4
472
LETTER XXXVIII.
CONCLUDING LETTEIl.
MY DEAR FRIEND,
1 THOUGHT you would willingly dispense
with the farther prosecution of an inquiry,
which has extended so much beyond my
expectation, and sometimes (I fear) be¬
yond your patience. I cannot, however,
take leave of the subject, without remind¬
ing you of the practical instruction, which it
has been my object to draw from it,
throughout the whole of our correspond¬
ence.
In laying our foundation, in a view of the
general advantages of religion, and of its
necessity to the temporal happiness and im¬
provement of communities, as well as to
the eternal salvation of individuals, I have,
of course, confined myself to its influence
upon the conscience as a rule of action.
CONCLUDING LETTER.
473
and upon the heart, as a motive to gratitude.
This influence is inseparable from the sin¬
cere profession of Christianity, under any of
its forms ; and is the result of a full and
cordial admission, of the authority and evi¬
dence of the Gospel. It may consist with
differences of opinion, or discrepancies of
practice, in religion ; but it is the essential
and indispensable character, by which the
spirit of religion is distinguished from the
spirit of unbelief. The infidel has no rule
of action but his interest, and no principle
of conscience but his inclination. He finds
himself, indeed, often compelled to sacrifice
both, to the interests and inclinations of '
others : and, in a country governed by the
institutions, and partially pervaded by the
principle, of a Christian morality, the force
of example, of education, of general opinion,
and of decency, may awaken within him a
sort of spurious conscience, or of senti¬
mental virtue, — which will operate in pro¬
portion to the strength of the impressions
upon which it is founded, and lead him to
consider his moral obligations, (if he ac¬
knowledge any such,) rather with a refei>
474
CONCLUDING LETTER.
ence to the society with which these im¬
pressions have connected him, than with a
reference to the God who made, and who
will finally judge him. This distinction is
clearly evinced, in the standard of social, or
of honourable, morality, admitted by infi¬
delity itself, and commonly received amongst
the careless or sceptical professors of Chris¬
tianity ; — a standard, so widely different
from the morality of the Gospel, that it is
utterly impossible to bring them to any
assimilation or consistency.
By the Christian, another rule of action is
proposed, and another principle of obliga¬
tion is acknowledged. Whatever be the dif¬
ferences of interpretation or apprehension,
in which some doctrines of the Gospel are
received, all who believe in its divine ori¬
gin and inspiration, refer to its precepts, as
the standard of morality, and to its sanc¬
tions, as the sole authority on which the
moral duties can be effectually enforced.
Whether the capacity for these duties be re¬
garded as inherent, or imparted, — whether
the performance of them be considered as
CONCLUDING LETTER.
475
the result, or the condition, of justification,
— the judgment with respect to their nature,
is the same, as well as with respect to their
necessity ; and there is an universal and un¬
alterable agreement, as to the source from
whence they are derived, and the great
principle upon which they depend*
But, whatever system of Christian belief
may be in its tendency, more or less favour¬
able to morality, no system, however prac¬
tical in its object, or precise in its defin¬
itions of Christian duty, will be operative
upon a heart that is not Christian ; and
whatever difference of opinion may exist,
between those who participate in the spirit
of Christianity, the influence of this spirit
will invariably produce, in exact proportion
to its degree, the fruits of righteousness,
and peace, and patience, and charity, and
candour.
Whether there be a natural tendency to
produce this spirit, in one system of doc¬
trines, more than in another, is a question
476
CONCLUDING LETTER.
of which I shall not attempt the solution.
The best proof of this tendency, which the
adherents of the several systems can give,
is the exhibition of its actual influence.
This is a proof, which will at once assuage
our jealousies, remove our misunderstand¬
ings, and moderate, if it cannot reconcile,
our differences ; — a proof, which will at once
distinguish the Christian advocate (whatever
be his doctrine,) from the polemical sophist,
and will take from the infidel, one of his
strongest weapons of opposition to the
Gospel.
Wherever the true doctrine of Chris¬
tianity is to be found, we may be sure that
it is not, where the spirit of enmity is pre¬
valent. “ He that hateth his brother, is in
“ darkness, and walketh in darkness, and
“ knoweth not whither he goeth.” The
very test of Christian vitality*, is —
the spirit of brotherly love : — love.
* First Epistle of St. John, chap. 3., ver. 14,
CONCLUDING LETTER.
477
“ not in word, nor in tongue,” says the
venerable apostle, ‘‘ but in deed and in
“ truth — love, which is the only attri¬
bute of the Godhead, in which the conscious
sinner can look for peace, as it is the only
one in which he can aspire to imitation ; —
love, which another apostle has so com¬
prehensively described, as the fulfilling
of the law, — including within it all that
is just in practice, all that is candid
in opinion, all that is gentle, and be¬
nevolent, and merciful, in temper and af¬
fections.
In my remarks upon your censure of our
divines, I have been led into a farther ex¬
amination of doctrines, and a fuller dis¬
closure of my own sentiments upon some
disputed points, than may appear quite con¬
sistent with the original object of our cor¬
respondence. But you will recollect, that
it has not been my purpose, to plead for in¬
decision of principle in religion, nor for any
suspension of opinion, upon controverted
points of doctrine, to which we have given
a fair and careful examination. On the con-
478
CONCLUDING LETTER.
trarj, I am convinced that such a suspen¬
sion is neither desirable nor possible. To
some conclusion, the understanding must
come, (where it is exercised at all,) in the
examination of every question presented
to it : and although there will naturally be
diffidence and hesitation, in proportion to
the difficulty of the subject, and the vari¬
ations of sentiment upon it, which we observe
in persons whom we deem more competent
than ourselves, this diffidence, though it
may lead us to examine our opinions, and
to be less tenacious in maintaining them,
will not prevent the formation of a negative
or affirmative judgment, upon the abstract
proposition before us. It will, however,
teach us modesty and candour, and an
allowance for the judgment of others,
generally in proportion to the care with
which we have exercised our own.
In our retrospect of the controversies,
which gradually formed the style of our
pulpit divinity, to the character it had as¬
sumed at the period to which your objec¬
tions refer, you cannot have failed to trace
CONCLUDING LETTER.
479
a resemblance to similar controversies in
our own day, and to perceive in them, the
origin of much of the jealousy, with which
the preachers of that period and school are
regarded. I shall not here enter farther
into the subject, than to remind you of
what J have elsewhere observed, that from
these recent controversies, has arisen a dis¬
tinction in the style of public preaching,
which appears again to have divided the
Church against herself ; and in the adoption
of which, each of the parties, anxious to
avoid the supposed error of the other, may
have been said to preach but half the
Gospel.
It may indeed be replied, that as faith
was generally urged by the one party, as the
root and principle of obedience, and obedi¬
ence was described by the other, as the re¬
sult and evidence of faith, — their consist¬
ency in the Christian scheme was preserved
by both ; only the one or the other was
rendered more or less prominent, according
to the temper or habits of the preacher : and
480
CONCLUDING LETTER.
this I believe to be the true account of the
nature of the distinction, in many instances.
Yet, it must be confessed, that it has some¬
times assumed a more decisive character ;
and that if the preachers of the former class,
have appeared to undervalue the importance
of faith, in their enforcement of the moral
duties, those of the latter, in their anxiety
to magnify divine grace, have not at all
times sufficiently insisted upon the condi¬
tional nature of the Gospel promises. The
necessity of a holy and virtuous life, as the
fruit, and the only certain evidence, of that
faith, to which the promise of salvation is
annexed, has indeed been always supposed:
but it has been pressed with so little urgency,
and so taken, in a manner, for granted, as the
inseparable consequence of the believer’s
spiritual convictions, that little practical
instruction was drawn from such discourses ;
and the hearers were sometimes in danger,
of being led to mistake the fervours of the
imagination, for the impulses of the Spirit,
or the terrors of superstition, for the sug¬
gestions of conscience.
CONCLUDING LETTER.
481
Experience, however, appears to have
convinced many very pious and respectable
ministers, who seem to have fallen originally
into this style of preaching, through a deep
sense of the value of the atonement, and a
fear of under-rating that great and only
cause of a sinner’s justification, — of the ne¬
cessity of clearly and invariably combining,
with their display of the Divine grace, an
enforcement of the obligation to personal
holiness, and of giving to good works, (to
moral duties performed upon Christian
principles,) a more prominent place in their
discourses. It has shown also, I would hope,
the danger and unsoundness, as well as the
uncharitableness, of an opinion, which was
too often expressed in an earlier stage of the
controversy, that a preacher’s earnestness
in pressing the duties of morality, not only
as an evidence of faith, but as a condition
of final acceptance and reward, (a condition,
however, be it remembered, utterly desti¬
tute of all meritorious efficacy,) indicated
either an erroneous apprehension, or a cul¬
pable abandonment, of the essential doc¬
trines of the Gospel.
482
CONCLUDING LETTER.
To US, my friend, who are called to the
knowledge of tliis blessed Gospel, under
circumstances of peculiar favour and ad¬
vantage ; — to us, who have our lot in the
fair ground of freedom, and civilization,
and social and literary improvement ; — to
us, who have free access to the oracles of
truth, and, in the history of past errors and
dissentions, may find the warning of ex¬
perience, while we learn to escape its penal¬
ties ; — to us, who, amidst the turbulence of
a stormy horizon, are permitted to behold
the Sun of Righteousness again throwing
wide his beams over the world, — to see the
Angel of the everlasting Gospel, rising tri¬
umphant from a struggle with the powers
of darkness, which seemed to have threat¬
ened, and certainly proposed, little less
than its utter extinction, — to hear the
trumpet of salvation, again vocal in the land
where atheism and blasphemy had silenced
its breathings, — and to send from the shores
of our own island, the glad tidings of a
Saviour, to the farthest ends of the earth; —
to us, who have been made partakers of
such blessings, witnesses of such events,
CONCLUDING LETTER.
483
and trustees of such a dispensation, — what
remains, but to fall down in humble and
grateful adoration, before Him who sitteth
on the Throne, and to unite with the angelic
host, in proclaiming ‘‘ Glory to God in the
highest, and on earth, peace, good-will to¬
wards men?”
I I 2
. tr ■' "■
4
fUi {ii ^^^iiOJyi‘^ , ^ ' ^ -
•• '’ ' ^'f!^<»V' ' ^ ^:,' ' 'j ', • :- ' ; ■' ■ • -I' '• i f ■ -M >V ^q\ .
=vV ♦‘•*iip*'4liii<^,^>/i4^ri;ffn i»iu
, **’ ' • ' ,|<<''" " * w*»4*fi|‘*.VM >
.-^•■'Aj-^ r:/ ■*■ I L.;l ’^-t '‘V-'j ••
‘'.^iH*^> '-.■.^f;^,- r'“ ■ ■' ;;■ ^ ,, '".ttUyb cJOfi •♦
. I 1*: *♦*’* '* » iTd oimi **
Tf ij ‘ ,\>i.i!' ■4uu ‘i» ^y;
*^[»/> ti>'iJr^ :i(H;»// 3id> >|W^*J<| :>iU »*
>;', .* - . ' ‘‘qiAiwitf-j ix>^^ /*
‘ qJv;Ui4r.t>l>'5!'j '-jiT **^, *^*
'r* •j' ' /I >/l{ ^ , • . ■Jihut ' «iU ^
.;;4'.^':
‘ ‘ ^ ^ .* ♦ w #
• i »>.»>* >tj^ i*■
-'■(^■|i^'‘4’i' '/ ItFf;' **4lj .i*. j|?uu^i *•, , :.v «.,Uir.';(U. ■ '
' •4?|- 3''- hill ,Yfc-.d >■ ‘ .V
•Ji»)’l f ii* >OM ^i ♦T T;'.q‘'»sj;^^ %S^
. * ♦ ♦»< f\kf*t-^ tUun:* ti n linii *■
.|. .f ., . ;:' ;,,. 'it .'
-:'. . ^ 1 i -vz«aB5 ■
NOTE
Referring to Page 118. Vol. II.
The insertion of the Lambeth Articles, here, may be
satisfactory to some readers who have them not at hand,
and may wish to compare them with those of the Church
of England.
1. “ God from all eternity hath predestinated certain
“ persons unto life, and hath reprobated certain persons
“ unto death.”
2. The moving or efficient cause of predestination
« unto life, is not the foresight of faith, or of persever-
“ ance, or of good works, or of any thing that is in
“ the persons predestinated; but the alone will of God’s
“ good pleasure.”
3. “ The predestinate are a predetermined and cer-
“ tain number, which can neither be lessened nor in-
“ creased.”
4. Such as are not predestinated to salvation, shall
“ inevitably be condemned on account of their sins.
5. “ The true, lively, and justifying faith, and the
“ Spirit of God justifying, is not extinguished, doth
“ not utterly fail, doth not vanish away, in the elect,
“ either finally or totally.”
486
NOTE.
6. “A true believer, that is, one wlio is endued
“ with justifying faith, is certified by the full assurance
“ of faith, that his sins are forgiven, and that he shall
“ be everlastingly saved by Christ.”
7. “ Saving grace is not allowed, is not imparted, is
“ not granted to all men, by which they may be saved
“ if they will.”
8. “ No man is able to come to Christ, unless it be
“ given him, and unless the Father draw him: and all
“ men are not drawn by the Father, that they may come
“ to his Son.”
9. “ It is not in the will or power of every man, to be
“ saved.”
.-■j
■' ‘A
. . f'
•7^
: V , nj
->*■
^4^
7,4
#/■
< >
^^.'1
‘.V^'
' ■ Vi
,t:-.
it
'J.^. ' . ' ' ■
, ■■ ^ ■■• ■ r;J7 <|’'owr<1 ..-.'U'.i* . . ■, .,
' ' ■■• ' ' -■.■^•K'* '■-■ 'l^ '•»^••4 'f>y V''.J^• I >‘/ij£.v t-irt'-j;
' i;s'.';' 'jl, 1 ,
vC
-7 'V
.(''■<'■■/< -, , . 'J.iy : ‘•' .t,,.t ,
... ' ; . • ’■ . ' . ^
. l-ff-
K
•IW
K I
i
• ^
*
1
'v:
i
}
i
(
.j .■>
?r
»
V
-t
/
i
I
i
#
#
I
f'’.
%
c
#
«
/
(