I HAVE had an Opportunity to read your Letter, which (you say,) you should have directed to my Brother, if he had been living; but is now directed to me. You mention many bad Consequences, which you suppose are deducible from our Doctrines; especially concerning God's Decrees. But in Or­der to know whether these Consequences are just, or whether they are peculiar to our Principles, it will be necessary, that the Case be fairly stated. I shall therefore present you with a Scheme, of the Principles of each Party; in as plain and as undisguised a Manner as I can. But here I would premise, there are two general Principles, which both Parties are agreed in; that may help us very much in our Inquiry into the Consequences of those Principles in which we differ. viz. 1. That God never acts inadvertently, without any Purpose or Design, and therefore whatever God does, he certainly decreed to do. And, 2. That the Sovereignty of God, is not (alogon) an unreasonable Dominion; and therefore his Decrees are agreeable to all the Per­fections of an infinitely perfect Being. Having premised this; I shall place the Principles, in which we differ, in two opposite Columns, that they may be the more easily compar'd together.

[Page 6] The CALVINISTS believe, con­cerning the Decrees of God, in general,

That the Decrees of God, (so far as they are the subject of this present Inquiry) are his un­changeable Purpose, to act, or suspend acting; as he in his in­finite Wisdom sees fit.

That the Decrees of God do never influence any Event, which he has decreed, any more than his Fore-knowledge, does influ­ence the Thing fore-known.

Concerning Election.

That God from all Eternity, out of his meer good Pleasure, elected a certain Number of the sinful, and miserable Race of Mankind in and through Christ, to be made Partakers of Grace and Glory.

That the Number of the Elect was fixed from all Eternity, with Respect to the Counsel, and Fore-knowledge of God; and can never be increased, or dimi­nished.

The ARMINIANS believe, con­cerning the Decrees of God in general,

That the Decrees of God (ac­cording to Mr. Beach, 2d Reply p. 76) are ‘his Will and Plea­sure, concerning the Event;’ which he hath decreed.

That the Decrees of God do always influence any Event, which he has decreed, more than his Fore-knowledge does influ­ence, the Thing fore-known. See Dr. Whitby upon the five Points p. 475. and Mr. Beach, 2d Reply p. 76.

Concerning Election.

‘That Almighty God by an eternal and unchangeable De­cree ordained in Jesus Christ his own Son, before the Foun­dations of the World were laid, to save all those in Christ, for Christ, and through Christ, who being fallen, and under the Command of Sin; by the Assistance of the Holy Ghost do persevere in Faith and Obedience to the End.’— Append. to Mr. Beach's 1st Reply.

That the Number of the Elect was fixed from all Eternity, with Respect to the Foreknowledge of God; and can never be in­creased or diminished. Dr. Whitby, ut supra. p. 479. and Mr. Beach; 2d Reply. p. 76.

[Page 7] The CALVINISTS believe, Concerning the Non-Elect.

That God does send the Non-Elect into the World, involved in Sin, and Misery; which they contracted by the Fall of Adam their Faederal Head, and leaves them to innumerable strong Temptations; and permits them to live and die in Sin, and Im­penitency; and will finally pu­nish them eternally for their Sins.

Concerning Redemption.

That our Lord Jesus Christ has wrought out a sufficient Re­demption for all Mankind; and has graciously offered the Bene­fits of it to all that are truly wil­ling to accept them; but yet he has designed a particular Ap­plication of this Redemption to some in their effectual Calling; beyond what he has designed for others.

Concerning Grace.

That some Special and Sove­reign Influences of the Spirit of God, (more than what are be­stowed upon all Men in general,) are absolutely necessary in order to our Conversion, and Salvati­on: without which, we can't in­cline our Wills to that which is spiritually Good; nor do what is truly pleasing, and acceptable to God.

The ARMINIANS believe, Concerning the Non-Elect.

That God does send the Non-Elect into the World, involved in Sin and Misery, without any Relation [...] Adam as their Faede­ral Head and leaves them to innumerable strong Temptations; and permits them to live, and die in Sin, and Impenitency; and will finally punish them eternally for their Sins. Mr. Beach, 2d Reply, p. 26. 53, 54.

Concerning Redemption.

‘That Jesus Christ suffered Death for all and every Man, that by his Death upon the Cross he might obtain for all Mankind, both the Forgiveness of their Sins, and Reconcilia­tion with the Lord their God, with this Condition notwith­standing; that none but Be­lievers, should enjoy the Bene­fit of the Reconciliation, and Forgiveness of Sins. — Ap­pend. to Mr. Beach's Reply.’

Concerning Grace.

That God has given sufficient Grace to all Men for their Sal­vation; so that they have it in their Power, and have a Liberty of Indifference, either to comply, or not comply, with the Terms of the Gospel. — Mr. Beach's Serm. p. 21. 28.

[Page 8] The CALVINISTS believe, Concerning Justification.

That we are justified before God, only by the Righteousness of Christ, imputed [...] and re­ceived by Faith alo [...].

Concerning Perseverance.

That all true Believers will persevere in a Life of Faith and Holiness, until they obtain ever­lasting Happiness.

The ARMINIANS believe, Concerning Justification.

That our sincere (tho' imper­fect) Obedience, is the Conditi­onal Cause of our Justification before God, through the Merits of Jesus Christ.—Mr. Beach's 2d Reply, p. 72. &c.

Concerning Perseverance.

That some true Believers, do totally, and finally, fall from a state of Grace, and the Favour of God, and perish in their Sins. Mr. Beach, 2d Reply, p. 67.

This, I suppose, you'll allow to be a fair Representation of the Prin­ciples of each Party. And I am now prepared to confider the Conse­quences, which you think do follow from our Calvinistic Principles. And,

1 ‘The first Consequence (you say, p. 2.) I shall take Notice of as deducible from Calvinistic Principles, is that vulgar one: viz. If I am elected, I am under an absolute, inevitable Necessity, ante­cedent to my Conversion to Faith and Holiness, of being saved: But if I am not elected, I am under an absolute Necessity, antecedent to any actual Guilt, of being damned. Here let us consider, 1. with Respect to the Elect, there is an inseparable Concatenation of Cau­ses; from the eternal Decree, to their final Salvation. If their eternal Salvation is eternally Decreed, all the Means, and steps in Order to it are decreed likewise. As the first Link of a Chain put in Motion, influences and moves all the intermediate Links; so the primary Decree, influences all the intermediate Causes, Means, and Steps to the final Event.’

Upon which I observe, that your whole Argument turns on this Principle; that God's Decrees, do necessarily influence the decreed Event. This Principle, you intimate (p. 5.) you have proved to be true, by strict Demonstration. And thus Dr. Whitby, (upon the five Points; p. 475.) ‘The Fore-knowledge of any Action, that would otherwise be free, cannot alter, or diminish that Freedom, whereas [Page 9]God's Decree of Election is powerful, and active, and comprehends the Preparation, and Exhibition of such Means; as shall unfrustra­bly produce the End. And his Decree of Reprobation is active, as far as Action is required, to render any Man deficient, and there­fore sinful of Necessity.’ And Mr. Beach delivers his Sentiments in the same Words, with the Addition of some very odd Expressions. ( [...] Reply p. 76.) ‘Whereas God's Decree of Election, (is his [...] concerning the Event;) it is powerful, and active, &c. And his Decree of Reprobation; (is his Will and Pleasure,) it is active, as far as Action is required to make a Man deficient, and therefore sinful of Necessity.’ And all Arminian Writers that I have been acquainted with, say there is this Difference between God's Fore­knowledge, and his Decrees, that God's Fore knowledge has no In­fluence upon the Thing fore known; whereas it must necessarily be, that God's Decrees do influence the Thing decreed. Almost all Mr. Beach's long String of Consequences (1st Reply p. 62▪ 63, 64, 65, 66.) are founded upon this Principle, that God's Decrees do influence the Event. If this be true, I must acknowlege his Consequences are just, and his Arguments from God's Decrees, are unanswerable. And to the same Purpose, Dr. Johnson's Defence of Aristocles, p. 12, 13. But after all it is a fatal Mistake. And the Reason that they have been lest to such a strong Delusion, (as far as I can understand it;) is their ill-natur'd Zeal to charge bad Consequences upon the Principles of the Calvinists, which are evidently founded upon the plain D [...]a­tions of the Word of God. But we shall see, whether while you have been digging a Pit for your Neighbours, you have not fallen into it your selves.

A very Child in the Knowledge of Divinity, who is unprejudiced, could have told you that Praedestinatio nihil ponit in praedestinato. The Decrees of God are immanent, and not transient Acts, in the divine Mind. Until God reveals his Decrees, they are known to no Man: no not to the Angels that are in Heaven, nor to Christ himself as he is Man, but to the Father only. What are God's Decrees, but his Purpose to act or suspend acting; when, and where, and how, he in his in­finite Wisdom sees sit? Now does our Purpose to do any Thing give Birth to the Event, which is brought to pass by us? No, it is only our acting according to our Purpose, that has any kind of Influence, in producing the Event. 'Tis true, God does influence every good Event, according to his Decrees. 'Tis in him that we live, and move, and have our Beings: And it is God that works in us that which it well pleasing in his sight. But how does he work in us? By his De­crees! No, but by his Spirit, and Grace. But you'll object, May not [Page 10]the Decrees of God be considered as the Cause, or Motive, why God acts or suspends acting? And if so, ‘then as the first Link of a Chain put in Motion, influences and moves all the intermediate Links; so the primary Decree influences all the intermediate Causes, Means, and Steps, to the final Event?’ I answer, No, God never does any Thing because he has decreed to do it. The Reason why God has decreed to do any thing, is, because it a agreeable to his infinite Per­fections to do so. It is beyond our Capacity many Times, to know the Reason of the divine Conduct: But it is certain, God does not Act in an unreasonable Manner. Wilful and unreasonable Men some­times, do Things for no other Reason, but because they have deter­mined to do them; and that is for no Reason at all. But God for­bid, that we should attribute Folly to our Maker; by imagining, that he will do Things meerly because he will do them. See Rom. xi. 33. O the depth of the Riches, both of the Wisdom and Knowledge of God!

But you say (P. 5.) ‘Persons striving after Salvation, does not render it at all more likely that they shall obtain it, than their being for the present utterly careless and negligent:’ And a great deal more to the same Purpose. But there is just thus much in all that you argue upon this Head; that since it is God who works in you both to will, and to do, according to his own good Pleasure; i. e. accord­ing to his Decrees; therefore you will not work out your own Salva­tion with Fear, and Trembling. God has decreed to never work Faith and Holiness in you, before you are brought to see the need of it, and to earnestly seek it, and therefore you need not be concerned about it, since it is God who must work in you according to his De­crees, if ever you are saved; therefore if you are elected, God's De­crees will save you, whether he works in you or not.

But you suggest, ‘There is a necessary Connection between the primary Decree, and the Event.’ I answer, there is none at all, any more than between God's Fore-knowledge, and the Thing fore­known, In a Word, all that can be argued from our Principles con­cerning Election, is no more than this; viz. that if God does not ac­cording to his Purpose and Design, work Grace and Holiness in us, we never shall be saved: for God can't qualify us for Heaven with­out determining to do it. Upon the whole then, if you are elected, God's Decree will do nothing at all to fit you for Heaven. And therefore unless you are made meet for an Inheritance among the Saints in Light, by the Spirit of Holiness, you must lye down in Sorrow.

But I shall consider your Consequences, with Respect to the Non-Elect.

[Page 11] ‘If I am not elected, (you say,) I am under an absolute Neces­sity, antecedent to my actual Guilt, of being damned.’ And ac­cordingly your argue (P. 3.) ‘That God decreed (according to us,) that the Guilt of our first Parents Sin should be imputed to their Posterity; and that an intire and universal Depravity of Nature should be brought upon them as the Punishment of their imputed Guilt. So far then the Decree has a direct Influence and Effici­ency to the putting Mankind into a state of Sin, and the Non Elect into an irrecoverable State, both of Sin and Damnation. And moreover, since that actual sinfulness of Heart and Life, which in­creases the Damnation of those that perish, is the necessary Conse­quence of this original Depravity; there is upon the whole, as evi­dent, inseparable, and necessary a Concatenation of Causes, from the primary Decree to the final Damnation of the Non-Elect, as between the Decree and the final Salvation of the Elect.’

But I answer, it is impossible that this Consequence can follow from our Principles concerning God's Decrees; because we don't be­lieve, there are any Decrees, that have any manner of Efficiency in producing any Event at all; much less any sinful Event. However, let us see whether this Consequence won't naturally, and directly, follow [...] your own Principles. The Arminians all believe, that God does send the Non-Elect into the World involved in Sin and Misery; (which I shall make appear under another Head.) They believe, that God leaves them to innumerable strong Tempta­tions; and that he permits them to live according to their ungodly Lusts, and to die impenitent; and that he will punish them eternally for their Sins. Now you must own, unless you would blaspheme the God who is above, that God never does any Thing without Counsel and Design, and therefore whatever God does, he certainly decreed to do. This Dr. Johnson obeserves, (Defence of Aristocles, p. 21) ‘The right Way of judging of God's Decrees, is by Facts before our Eyes — For what God does, he doubtless decreed to do.’

If therefore God does send the Non-Elect into the World in a sinful and miserable State, and does permit them to live in Sin, and treasure up Wrath, against the Day of Wrath; you must believe, that God has decreed to do so. Now then if the Decrees of God have a direct In­fluence and Efficiency in producing the Event (as you say they have;) the Consequence does necessarily follow, that if your are not elected, you are under an absolute Necessity, antecedent to any actual Guilt, of being Damned. Thus, Sir, you have raised a mischievous and frightful Apparition, which will haunt you Day, and Night, unless you can lay it, by reading backwards.

[Page 12] But you argue, ‘If the Guilt of our first Parents Sin should be imputed to their Posterity, and that an intire, and universal Depra­vity of Nature should be brought upon them as a Punishment of this imputed Guilt, — then the Decree has a direct Influence and Efficiency in putting the Non Elect into an irrecoverable state of Sin and Damnation.’ But pray Sir, how will it help the Case of the Non-Elect, though it be supposed that God decreed to bring them into the World with an intire and universal Depravity of Nature, not as a Punishment for Adam's Sin, but for some other unknown Reason? — Why has not this Decree as direct and Influence and Efficiency to put them into a state of Sin and Damnation as if it was done as a Pu­nishment for the Sin of their first Parents? The Arminians acknow­ledge the intire and universal Depravity of Nature, (as will be further considered.) And it God decreed to leave them to live and die in Sin, and to punish them for it; And if this Decree has a necessary In­fluence and Efficiency in producing the Event; then they are put into an irrecoverable state of Sin and Damnation, sure enough! But you'll tell me, I conclude, that according to your Principles God has given the Non-Elect Grace sufficient to subdue their Lusts and overcome all Temptations; so that it is in their own Power to believe, and repent, and obtain Salvation. Nevertheless you had as good say Nothing: for, supposing that Graceless Men, have Grace sufficient to obtain Sal­vation, yet according to your Principle, that God's Decrees necessarily influence the Event, the eternal State of the Non Elect was fixed, Millions of Ages before they had any Opportunity to exercise their sufficient Grace. If God decreed to send them into the world in­volved in Sin, and to permit their final Impenitency, and punish them for it; and it there be a necessary Concatenation of Causes between the primary Decree and the final Event; then they are in as Remediless a State, as if they were in the Regions of Despair. Is this (Sir) your rational and charitable Scheme! What a wide Door does your Prin­ciple concerning the Necessitating Influence of God's Decrees set open; ‘either to Desperation, or to Wretchlesness of most unclean Liv­ing, no less perillous than Desperation!’

But.

II. "The next general Consequence, (you say, p. 8.) from our Calvinistic Principles, is, that Christ and Salvation were never offered to the Non-Elect. An Offer upon an impossible Condition is no Offer at all. According to my own Doctrine (you say,) all the Offer was upon an Impossible Condition. And hence you argue,

• [Page 13]1. That Christ did not die for the Non-Elect, any more, or in any other Respect, than he died for the Devils.
• 2. That the Non-Elect, do not refuse offered Mercy, and Grace.
• 3. They will not be condemned at last, for having refused an offered Saviour."

Here I observe, your Arguments to prove the Consequences, which you mention under this Head, turn upon. two Points, viz. I. What you suppose we believe concerning human Impotency, and, 2. From what you think to be our Opinion concerning God's Decrees. Accord­ing to us, (you say, p. 9.) ‘'Tis as impossible for Men to convert themselves, as it is for them to create a Word. And it is intirely agreeable with our Doctrine, (you say,) that the Non-Elect shall never have Grace to convert them.’

What concerns your Arguments, taken from our Opinion of human Impotency, will more properly fall under the 4th Head, and shall there be sully considered. But what I shall now consider, is the Force of your Arguments, to prove you Consequences taken from our Opinion of God's Decrees; viz. that it is impossible the Non-Elect should accept of an offered Saviour, because God has decreed not to give them Grace to comply with the Terms of the Gospel. — But as we firmly believe, that the Decrees of God have no more Influence or Efficiency in producing any Event, than if there were no Decrees at all; surely this Consequence can never follow from our Principles. But this very Consequence does directly follow from your Doctrine, that God's Decrees do necessarily influence the Event. If I should ask here, what are the Conditions upon which the Benefits of Christ's Redemption are offered to the Non Elect? You would tell me, Faith and Repentance: and not that universal Grace (or Light) which the Quakers and you talk of. If I should enquire again, whether Faith and Repentance be not the Gift of God? You would answer, Yes: It is God who works in us all the good Pleasure of his Grace, and the Work of Faith with Power. And if I should demand once more, whether God does in Fact leave the Non-Elect to die without Faith, and Repentance? You would answer, yes. Well then, what God does he certainly decreed to do. If therefore God decreed to leave the Non Elect to die without Faith and Repentance; and if there be (as you assert) a necessary Concatenation of Causes between the pri­mary Decree, and the Event decreed, then this Consequence will cer­tainly follow, that Faith in a Redeemer is an impossible Condition. If [Page 14]the Non-Elect have it not, and God decreed to not give it, but to let them die without it, and this Decree had a necessary Efficiency in producing the Event, (as you say it has; then Christ never died for the Non-Elect any more than for the fallen Angels. Christ never was in earnest offered to them (if your Principles are true,) For an Offer upon an impossible Condition is no Offer at all. The Non-Elect never re­fuse redeeming Mercy, (if God's Decrees influence the Event,) and will never be punished for their neglecting the great Salvation! Dear Sir, what monstrous Opinions do you seem to hold! Must the God of Truth, be charged with Insincerity, in all his condescending and gracious Offers, Invitations, and Encouragements, rather than you'll part with your unaccountable Doctrine of necessitating Decrees! — But as we believe, there are no such Decrees; so we believe, the Terms of Salvation are the same for all Men, Elect or Non-Elect. There is but one Faith, one Lord, one Baptism, one Hope of our Calling. He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved: And be that believeth not, shall be damned. Notwithstanding any Influence that the Decrees of God have upon the Non Elect: it is every Whit as easy for them to accept of an offered Saviour as for the Elect. These, Sir, These are our Principles, founded upon all the Declarations of the Gospel. And therefore as Ambassadors of Christ, we proclaim and offer to all Men, Elect, or Non-Elect, Whoso will, let him come, and taks of the Waters of Life freely. — But

III. ‘The third general Consequence (you say p. 11.) is, that the Impenitence of the Non-Elect, or their not complying with the Gospel-Terms of Salvation, is not their own actual Fault, but is purely the Effect of Original Sin. 'Tis all the natural and necessary Effect of imputed Guilt; or the Sin of their first Parents charged upon them, and punished in them; and this in such a Manner, as to take off all actual Fault and Blame from them. And hence you argue, that they will be punished only for Adam's Sin imputed to them, or propagated in them, &c.’

I answer, all the Consequences which you mention under this Head, and suppose to be deducible from our Doctrine of Original Sin, does as much follow from the common Belief of every Sect of Men calling themselves Christians; whether Papists, or Protestants, (the Socinians only excepted.) The Doctrine of original Sin has been received, and defended in the Christian Church, in all the successive Ages of it. In the council of Palestine, (Anno 415.) the Opinion of Pelagius and his Adherents who denied Original Sin, was condemned as a grievous Heresy. The Opinion of the Church of Rome with Respect to this [Page 15]Doctrine, may be known by the Decrees of the Council of Trent: By which they pronounce an Anathema, (1.) ‘Against him which confesseth not, that Adam by transgressing hath lost Sanctity and Justice, incurred the Wrath of God, Death, and Thraldom to the Devil: And is infected in Soul, and Body. (2.) Against him which averreth that Adam by sinning, hath hurt himself only, or hath de­rived unto his Posterity the Death only of the Body, and not Sin, the Death of the Soul. (3.) Against him which affirmeth, that Sin, which is one in the Beginning, and proper to every one, transmitted by Generation, not Imitation, can be abolished by any other Remedy than the Death of Christ.’ (See History of the Council of Trent, p. 184.) — The general Opinion of all Protestants may be known, by the Augustan Confession; which Mr. Beach says, ‘his own Con­science tells him he heartily believes,’ 2d Reply p. 37. In which (besides what my Brother cited,) we have these Words, and more to the same Purpose. ‘We mean by Original Sin; that which the holy Fathers, and all of sound Judgment in the Church, do so call; namely, that Guilt whereby all that come into the World, are through Adam's Fall, subject to God's Wrath, and eternal Death: And that very Corruption of Man's Nature derived from Adam. And this Corruption of Man's Nature, comprehendeth both the Defect of original Justice, Integrity, and Obedience, and also Con­cupiscence— Wherefore these Defects, and this Concupiscence, are Things Damnable, and of their own Nature worthy of Death.’ (Harm. of Confess. p. 73.) — And the Arminians profess, that they believe the intire and universal Depravity of human Nature, as much as we do. If you charge the Arminians with denying Original Sin; Mr. Beach (whose Principles you have undertaken to defend,) will tell you; It is an horrid Slander. My Brother having stated the Doctrine of Original Sin, in as strong Terms as any Calvinists believe it; Mr. Beach says, (2d Reply p. 26.) ‘I won't say, I believe this, but I know it by Experience, and though Mr. Dickinson has accused me of denying Original Sin; yet, for ought I can learn from these two Books, I believe Original Sin in a more rigid Sense than he did.’

The Arminians have ('tis true) a different Way of explaining this Doctrine, (which I shall have Occasion to consider;) but yet if they don't really believe it, we must think them some of the most aban­doned Men in the World. Arminius himself, and all the Dutch Di­vines that followed him (as far as I am acquainted with the Case) did all profess their Belief of it. And the Clergy of the Church of England, among which are many in the Arminian Way of thinking, do all of them make the most publick and solemn Profession of their Belief of [Page 16]this Doctrine; and in as strong Terms as any Calvinist can do. If you tell me, that they say a great many Things against it, and endeavour to draw a great many bad Consequences from it, and charge them upon the Calvinists; I can't help that, I am not accountable for their Inconsistences. But if you think, they be not sincere (in their Profession) you ought to look upon it, not only as a sad Instance of the Depravity of human Nature; but likewise of the bad Influence of Arminian Principles. In the 9th Article of the Church of England, they profess they believe; ‘Original Sin standeth not in the follow­ing of Adam, as the Pelagians vainly talk: But it is the Fault, and Corruption, of the Nature of every Man, that naturally is ingendered of the Off spring of Adam; whereby Man is very far gone from original Righteousness, and is of his own Nature inclined to Evil. — And therefore in every Person, born into this World, it deserveth God's Wrath and Damnation — And that Concupi­scence, and Lust hath of itself the Nature of Sin.’ And they pro­fess they believe, that such is the intire, and universal Depravity of Nature, that we have no Power naturally to do that which is Good. As in Art. 10, ‘The Condition of Man since the Fall is such, — We have no Power to do good Works, pleasant and acceptable to God, without the Grace of God by Christ preventing us; that we may have a good Will, and Working with us, when we have that good Will’ And not only so, but they have such an Opinion of the dreadful State of Sin and Wickedness, all Men are naturally in; that they profess they believe, All Works done by Men before they are truly justified, by the Grace of Christ, — are so far from being pleasing to God, that they have the Nature of Sin. Art. 13. Where then is the Propriety of charging Consequences upon our Calvinistic Doctrine of Original Sin, as though it was peculiar to us, when in Fact the Arminians profess they believe it in as strong Terms as we do? And indeed the intire and universal Depravity of human Nature, is what has been complained of in all Ages, and in all Places, not only by the Christians, and Jews, but by the very Heathens themselves. The whole World lies in Wickedness, (notwithstanding what you talk, of their having Grace sufficient for Salvation:) And the original Fountain, from whence springs all that Flood of Wickedness, that covers the whole Face of the Earth, is their natural Corruption. — You don't ex­pect, that I should now undertake to show the Justice, and Equity of God's punishing us for the Sin of our first Parents: Or to prove from the Word of God, that both Jews and Gentiles are all under Sin, and by Nature Children of Wrath; being shapen in Iniquity, and conceived in Sin; which entered into the World by one Man, of whom all have sinned. The Way and Manner how Sin came to be propagated, is not the pre­sent [Page 17]Question. But that Mankind are naturally in a sinful, and depra­ved State, is granted by all Christians: (for I don't think the Socinians deserve that Name.) But whether this will excuse Men in their con­tinuing impenitent, and so living, and dying in a Course of Rebellion against God; I shall consider under the following Head.

IV. ‘The next general Consequence, which you shall take Notice of, (you say p. 20.) as flowing from our Doctrine, is, that the Non-Elect were never in a State of Probation. They never had a Time of Tryal; whether they would comply with the Terms of Salva­tion, or not: For antecedent to their being capable Subjects of such a Tryal, they were laid under an Impossibility of ever being willing to comply.’

I observe here, all your Arguments under this Head turn upon what you take to be our Opinion concerning God's Decrees, and our Opi­nion concerning human Impotency. So far as this Consequence re­spects the Decrees of God; I have to say, this very Consequence does certainly follow from your Opinion, that God's Decrees do necessarily influence the Event. Upon your own Principles, ‘the Non-Elect have no time of Tryal, any more than the fallen Angels, and are no more to blame than if they had no Time of Probation:’ For if God decreed to do what he certainly does do) leave them to live and die in Sin, and if there be a necessary Concatenation of Causes, between the Decree, and final Event, (as you say there is;) what time of Tryal can they have? What must they try to do? Overturn the Pillars of Heaven! And change an Event that is fixed by an Almighty Decree! But as I observed before, with Respect to your other Consequences, so I say now; this Consequence can't in any Respect follow from our Opinion concerning the Decrees; because we do not believe there are any Decrees, that have any manner of Influence, in putting Man­kind into a State of natural Blindness and Hardness of Heart; or to render them in any Respect uncapable to comply with the Gospel.

But I shall examine your Arguments, to prove that the Consequence you mention, does follow from our Opinion of our natural Inability to believe and repent. We do believe (as you observe,) that Men are as unable to convert themselves, without the special Influences of God's holy Spirit, as to make a new World. But only there is this Differ­ence: in one Case there is a natural Impossibility, and in the other only a Moral. ‘But (you say p. 23.) what would you think of a System of Religion built upon such an Hypothesis? Suppose you were conveyed to another Race of fallen Creatures, and you should [Page 18]hear one of the Preachers addressing the People in this Manner; O fallen Creatures, fallen through the Imputation of your first Parents Sin! You are reduced to a miserable Condition; you are exposed to Punishment here, and to a greater hereafter: But now I propose it to you, that if you will but only create a new World, you shall be freed from this Misery, and obtain Happiness. You have a Time of Probation allowed you, you have an Opportunity in your Hands of making Tryal. If you let slip this Opportunity, you are infinitely to blame, and will be miserable for ever, with this aggra­vating Circumstance, that you refused Happiness, when offered to you upon the reasonable Terms of making a World.’ You inquire, what I think of such an Offer? I answer, supposing the blessed God had given them sufficient Encouragement, that upon their using suitable Endeavours to make a new World, he would exert a divine Power to enable them to do it; and supposing he had appointed Means that would never fail of being Effectual, if they were not abused; sup­posing also that many of them upon using the appointed Means, had actually been enabled to do it; I would say, they were self-con­demned, if they did not do it; but would perish when so reasonable an Offer was made to them. If God had told Moses, that he and all the People would certainly perish by the Hands of the Egyptians, if he did not comply with the reasonable Condition of stretching forth his Rod, and dividing the red Sea: What if Moses had answered, "The Condition of our Deliverance is an impossible Condition; and an Offer made upon such a Condition, is no Offer at all. The Sea is a Mile wide, and there is a vast Body of Waters; I can't stop the least Brook, without a great deal of Pains, and Labour. But such a Pro­posal as this, was never made to any Man before, since the World began; and I am as able to make a new World as to do it. This is only to insult and tantalize us in our Misery, and Danger." Would Moses have done well, to argue after this Manner; and so neglect the Means by which this Event was to be accomplished? And so in the present Case; though Men are under an utter moral Impossibility to convert themselves; yet it is not impossible for them to use the Means, which God has appointed. And as my Brother observes in the Passage cited by you, (1st Vind. p. 39.) ‘Don't Calvinist Di­vines unitedly agree that God has given common Grace to those to whom he has not given his special and sovereign Influences? Is it not universally allowed, that by Virtue of this common Grace, they have a Power to abstain from open Scandal, to perform the ex­ternal Duties of Religion; to take Pains with their own Hearts to get them in a proper Frame for Duty; and thereby to excite in themselves, some Seriousness, Earnestness, and Diligence; to con­sider [Page 19]of their own Impotency, and continue to lie at the Foot-stool of Divine Grace, for all supplies of Grace and Strength for the sake of Christ the Mediator and Redeemer? Is it not universally allowed, that if this be their Temper and Conduct, they have sufficient En­couragement given them in the Gospel, to hope that they may ob­tain the special and saving Influences of the blessed Spirit.’ And I may here further add, that it is (as far as I know,) universally allowed, that the Means (internal and external,) which God is using with Sin­ners, (at least under the Gospel;) would never fail of being effectual, unless they abuse them. 'Tis true, God did not elect Men to Holi­ness, because he foresaw, they would in any Measure deserve it before their Conversion. Nor do we think, God has obliged himself, by any Promise made to unconverted Sinners, that he will convert them, upon the Condition of some Endeavours of their own, before Conversion. And it is in Mercy to poor Sinners, that he has not done it. But yet it is manifest to me, that when Persons are truly concerned about their Sin and Danger, and earnestly seeking an Interest in the great Salva­tion, they have greater Encouragement given them in the Gospel, than if God had made some certain Promises to them; suspended upon the Condition of some Doings of their own. But you'll inquire, agree­able to your Discourse (p. 21.) ‘Did none of the Non-Elect, never do what might be reasonably expected of Men in their Circumstan­ces?’ I answer; No, never. But you inquire again, (ibid.) ‘What if the Non-Elect and done all this, what would have been the Event?’ I answer, absurd Suppositions admit of absurd Consequen­ces. If they had not abused the Means of Grace, but had done what God might reasonably expect of them, they would not have been Non-Elect. But you say, (p. 24.) ‘That we insist upon it, that it is not Men's doing what they can, that is the Terms of Salvation; but their being willing to submit to Christ, which they cannot do.’— I grant it. But the Means must be used in order to the End. And although it is morally impossible, that we should, without the special Influences of divine Grace, comply with the Terms of the Gospel; yet with these Assistances it is by no Means impossible. And since a divine Blessing would accompany the Means, unless Men hinder their Efficacy, by their own Sloth, Wickedness or Stubbornness; surely they have no Reason to complain; If our Transgressions, and our Sins be upon us, and we pine away in them; how shall we then live? Surely since this is the Case, our natural Impotency to comply with the Terms of the Gospel, will in no Measure, excuse our Neglect of the great Salvation. And according to our Scheme Men will not (as Mr. Beach, and you imagine) have any Thing to plead in the Place of Darkness, that their Misery was not of themselves: That they had no Time of [Page 20]Tryal; because the Condition of their Salvation was an impossible Condition. And I believe my Brother's Reasoning is well founded; and exactly agreeable to our Principles in the Passage which you cite. (p. 25.) ‘What I will Sinners be perfectly easy in their Consciences in the Regions of eternal Despair; when they come to reflect, that Christ wrought out a sufficient Redemption for them; exhibited himself, and freely offer'd his saving Benefits in the Gospel to 'em; but they wilfully rejected both him, and them! And when they re­flect, that God had used all proper Means with them for their Salvation; made known their Duty, and the Way of Salvation to them; laid all proper Motives before them, by the Discovery of their Need of Salvation, by Threatnings, and Warnings, by Pro­mises, and Invitations, that he might excite both their Hopes and Fears: sent them his Ambassadors to beseech them to be recon­ciled to God; excited them to consider, and turn to God, by the common Motions of his Holy Spirit, and long exercised Patience and Forbearance towards them, in the Use of all these Me­thods, and Means of Grace: And after all, they rejected, abused, and sinned away all these Advantages, from no other Necessity than the Indulgence of their Lusts, and the Perverseness of their Wills, and finally perished, because they would not come unto Christ they might have Life! Is it possible, Conscience can be perfectly easy under these Reflections, when awakened by Hell-Fire! surely, Sinners will have another View of Things in the Regions of Despair, than is pretended by Mr. Beach in his Discourse. Their Consciences will not allow them to argue, as this Gentleman now seems to do; that they were excusable in not improving what Power, and Grace they had, because Christ had not purchased greater Bene­fits, or had not bestowed the same upon them, as upon some others.’ Such a Discourse (you say p. 26.) considered by it self is affecting in­deed! And all that you are sorry for, is, that the Doctrine which he and I are defending, intirely undermines such moving Methods of Address. But pray, Sir, what Doctrine? Not our Doctrine of the Decrees as I have proved before: Nor yet our Doctrine of human Impotency; For certainly our not being able to do every Thing, will not excuse us in doing nothing. And since a divine Influence would accompany the Means of Grace, if improved as they ought to be, to enable us both to will and do, can we be excusable if we neglect work­ing out our Salvation with Fear and Trembling? The Husbandman can't make his Crain sprout and spring up, when it is cast into the Ground, any more than he can make a new World: but yet this will not excuse his Negligence, in not breaking up his fallow Ground, and sowing his Seed.

[Page 21] But you say,

V. ‘Our Doctrine intirely overthrows the Notion of Man's being a free, or moral Agent. You confess Indeed (you say,) that our Principles admit of what Writers call spontaneous or voluntary Freedom; which signifies nothing more, than that, when a Man chuses any Object, or Course of Life, this Choice is the Act of the Will. The Mind is willing without any Consideration, whether he can chuse any other Object, or Course of Life. Thus when a Person chuses to pursue a Life of Virtue, or a Life of Vice, this Choice is the Act of the Will; the Person acts voluntarily, in the Matter, although it is utterly impossible for him to chuse the con­trary. Such a voluntary Freedom as this, is all the Liberty which our Principles (you say) allow to Mankind. But if this be all the Liberty which in Reality they have; the rigid Doctrine of Fatality admits of as much. And indeed as much as this, is attributed to Bruits, as well as Men. But it is Liberty of Choice, or Indifference, that constitutes the essential and distinguishing Character of a free, rational, and accountable Creature. And this sort of Liberty, as the very learned and ingenious Dr. WATTS observes, implies a Power to chuse, or refuse; to chuse one Thing, or the contrary, among several Things that are proposed, without any inward or outward Restraint, Force, or constraining Byass or Influence.’

I answer, it appears to me, very absurd, to say, that no rational Being can be a free Agent; unless he has a Liberty of Indifference. GOD himself is infinitely free: but can any Christian suppose, that he has such a Liberty ad utrumque; that he can chuse that which is evil?

And thus Dr. CLARKE argues, (Demonst. p. 120, 121, 122.) ‘From hence it follows, that though God is a most perfectly free Agent; yet he can't but do always that which is best, and wisest, in the whole. The Reason is evident, because perfect Wisdom, and Goodness, are as steddy, and certain Principles of Action; as Necessity it self. And an infinitely wise, and good Being, endued with the most perfect Liberty, can no more choose to act in Con­tradiction to Wisdom, and Goodness, than a necessary Agent can act contrary to the Necessity, by which it is acted. It being as great an Absurdity, and Impossibility in Choice, for infinite Wisdom, to choose to act unwisely, or infinite Goodness, to choose what is not good; as it would be in Nature, for absolute Necessity, to fail of producing its necessary Effect.’ — And how can it be imagined, that the blessed Angels, and glorified Saints, have a Liberty of In­difference; [Page 22]so that they can chuse to be separated from God, and be sent into utter Darkness, where shall be weeping and gnashing of Teeth for ever?

And as to the Case of Mankind, though I freely grant that in many Cases Men have a Liberty of Indifference; yet in many others, they have not such a Liberty ad utrumvis. I have not Dr. WATTS'S Book by me, which you take your Citations from; but I don't doubt, he would allow that in many Cases, our Choice is determined by the Light of our Minds. However, the Question is not so much, what was his Opinion, as what is Truth? There are innumerable Instances, in which, I find it morally impossible for me to chuse contrary to the Light of my own Mind. I can't make myself willing under my pre­sent Circumstances, to be exposed to the most exquisite Torments, that ever were inflicted by cruel Tyrants. And a Thousand Instances might be given, in which we have not a Liberty of Indifference. Dr. CLARKE, who was no Fatalist, (unless an Arminian may be a Fatalist,) argues in this Case, I think, very justly. (Demonstr. p. 100.) ‘Ne­cessity therefore, by which the Power of acting follows the Judg­ment of the Understanding, is only a moral Necessity; that is, no Necessity at all in the Sense, wherein the Opposers of Liberty un­derstand Necessity. For moral Necessity is evidently consistent with the most perfect natural Liberty. For Instance, a Man intirely free from all Pain of Body, and Disorder of Mind, judges it unrea­sonable for him to hurt, or destroy himself; and being under no Temptation, or external Violence, he cannot possibly act contrary to his Judgment: not because he wants a natural or physical Power, so to do; but because it is absurd, and mischievous, and morally impossible for him to chuse to do it. Which also is the very Rea­son why the most perfect rational Creatures superior to Men, cannot do Evil, not because they want a natural Power to perform the material Action; but because it is morally impossible, that with a perfect Knowledge of what is best, and without any Temptation to Evil, their Will should determine it self to chuse to act foolishly, and unreasonably. Here therefore seems at last to lie the fundamental Error; both of those, who argue against the Liberty of the Will, and those who but too confusedly defend it.’ And in Matters of Religion, in some Cases, I grant, Men have a Liberty of Indiffer­ence; but in others it is manifest they have not. The very Citations which you take from Dr. WATTS, to prove that we have in all Cases such a Liberty, without being influenced, or byassed by the Light of our Minds, do evidently prove the contrary. ‘When the Christian Revelation is proposed to a Man, as coming from God; [Page 23]It becomes Man as a rational Creature, to consider the Proofs, and Evidences brought to confirm it: The Prophecies, the Miracles, the internal Excellencies, and all external Testimonies that come with it. And it is the Will, that must employ the Mind, to dwell upon these Inquiries, diligently, and faithfully, in proportion to the Merits of the Cause.’

If it be necessary that we take so much Pains, that we may see the Evidence of the Truth of the Gospel, in order to our believing it, then it must unavoidably follow, that we can't believe it without seeing the Evidences of its Truth, or even contrary to the Conviction of our own Minds. And I May add, if we have such a Liberty of Indiffer­ence, that we can believe the Gospel, without seeing the Evidence of its Truth; and even contrary to the Conviction of our own Minds; then we might believe it, if there were no Evidences of its being true: No Prophecies, no Miracles, no internal Excellencies, and no external Testimonies, to incline our Minds to believe the Truth of it. We could (according to your Doctrine;) have believed it, without any Conviction of its being true; and therefore all the Evidences of its Truth are needless, to Influence our Belief. And what you cite from my Brother, (p. 31.) appears to me to be to the Purpose. ‘Suppose a Sinner, while he could not receive the Things of the Spirit of God; but they appeared Foolishness to him, while his Affections were pla­ced upon his Lusts, and Pleasures, and these appeared much the most desirable to him; could determine his Will, to the Choice of those gracious Habits, and Exercises, which were his highest Aver­sion, and in which he could see nothing desirable, and eligible; would this render him a moral Agent? Would he be a moral Agent, by chusing not only, without any sensible Motive in View; but even contrary to the Motives he had in View?’

But you say, (ibid.) ‘What is this to the Purpose; did ever any Body dream of any such Thing?’ I answer, it is directly to the Purpose. And all your Discourse under this Head, is sounded upon such a Dream. Is not this the very Thing, that you would prove; that a Man is not a free Agent, unless he has a Liberty of Indifference; so that he can chuse and refuse without being influenced by the Light of his Mind? And don't you argue all along, that we join with the Fa­talists, because we deny that we can in many Cases, incline our own Wills ad utrumque, to chuse one Thing, or the contrary?

But you say, it is not to the Purpose; (p. 31.) because ‘the Arminians unitedly agree, that God has by the glorious Revelation [Page 24]of his Spirit, set forth in the View of Mankind, the infinite Evil of Sin, and the Divine Amiableness of Holiness; and that he has given to Men a Power of Consideration; whereby with the con­stantly concurring Influences of his Holy Spirit, they can freely examine, and bring home to their Minds, the Truth, Excellency, and Importance of Religion; and the Deceit, Evil, and Bitterness of Sin; and upon such a View, they have a Power to embrace the one, and refuse the other, by the free Choice of their Wills.’ I answer, if this be indeed the Case; if it be necessary that God by his Spirit, should discover to Men the Truth, and Excellency of Religion; and that we must examine, and bring home to our Minds this Evi­dence of the Truth, Excellency, and Importance of it, in order to our receiving it; then we have not a Liberty of Indifference, to receive, or reject the Gospel, without being influenced or byassed by the Evi­dence of Truth, let into our Minds. And I would further observe, if it be Fatalism, to believe that a Man has not a Liberty of In­difference to believe, and repent, without a glorious Revelation of God's Holy Spirit, to set the infinite evil of Sin, and the divine Amiableness of Holiness, in such a Light, at to influence our Choice; then the Arminians are as much Fatalists, as the Calvinists; and all your Consequences under this Head, follow as much from the Doctrine of one Party, as the other. And all the Question between us upon this Head is; Whether Persons when they do truly believe, and re­pent, have not some further, and more special Illuminations of the Spirit: Some more powerful, and sovereign Influences; than they had before, when they were in a State of Impenitency? And whe­ther they have such a Liberty of Indifference, that they can believe, and repent, without these further Illuminations and Assistances? And that you may be satisfied of your Mistake, I would intreat you to seri­ously consider the Texts of Scripture brought by my Brother; to prove the Necessity of some special Influences, of the divine Spirit, to convert the Souls of Men; and make them meet for an Inheritance among the Saints in Light; more than what are common to all Men in general. And particularly, JOH. vi. 44. No Man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him. Mr. BEACH says, (2d Reply p. 43.) ‘God has drawn Millions, who never were actually drawn so as to come to Christ. So God drew the whole Body of the Jewish Nation — JER. xxxi. 3. With Loving-kindness have I drawn them.’ But can you imagine that our Saviour meant nothing more than the drawing of his common Grace, and Providence, when he expresly tells us, what his meaning was? Viz. That no Man could come to him, except the Father draw him in such a manner, as that there would be an actual Fulfilment, of the Prophecies of the Old [Page 25]Testament, spoken concerning such as believe in the Messiah. As in the next Verse, It is written in the Prophets, And they shall be all taught of God: every Man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me. The Places, in the Prophets, which our Savi­our refers to, are ISAI. liv. 13. And all thy Children shall be taught of the Lord; and great shall be the Peace of thy Children. And, JER. xxxi. 34. For they shall all know me, from the least of them, unto the greatest of them; saith the Lord. For I will forgive their Iniquity, and I will remember their Sin no more.

But I had like to have forgot, that it is not so much my present Bu­siness to prove the Truth of our Principles, as to rescue them, from the bad Consequences, which you imagine are deducible from them. And thus I have, I think, fairly entered into the Merits of the Cause: And whether it does not evidently appear, that every one of these Consequences which you have mentioned; do as much follow from your Principles, as from ours; and most of them vastly more; I must leave it to you, and others to judge.

Mr. BEACH mentions a great Number of bad Consequences, which he thinks are deducible from our Principles; but upon looking over them; I can't find any of them, but what have been fairly considered under some of the foregoing Heads: except a general one, which he mentions (1st Repl. p. 66.) in these Words, ‘I verily believe, this horrible Notion of the ever blessed God, propagated by the Calvi­nistic Doctrines; is the principal Cause of that Malice, and ill Na­ture, which appears in many New-Light People.’ But is it from the Abundance of his own good Nature, that he endeavours to load the Memory of my Brother, with personal Reproaches, though at the same Time, he professes that he believes he is rejoicing in Glory? The Pharisees (who he says were Calvinists,) shewed more good Na­ture than this comes to; for though they persecuted good Men when they were alive; yet to make them Amends, they built Tombs for them when they were dead. And I believe, I could give some such Instances of Uncharitableness among some of the noted Arminians, as could hardly be found among any others that profess Christianity. ‘DANIEL TILENUS (in the Words of a celebrated Author,) became so heated in Favour of Arminianism, that he declared, were he obli­ged to change his Religion, he would turn Turk, sooner than Calvi­nist; for he denyed that the Calvinists believed in God; but owned that the Truks did.’ This was the Man that Mr. BEACH depen­ded upon for his Voucher; who, he says, was a Friend to the Synod [Page 26]of Dort. And other, Instances might be found nearer home; but I take no Pleasure in mentioning these Things.

I must now beg leave in my Turn to mention some of the bad Con­sequences, which I think do peculiarly slow from ARMINIAN Prin­ciples. — And

I. I shall consider some of the bad Consequences that follow from this Principle; that God's Decrees do necessarily influence every Event; which he has decreed. All your Arguments, or at least the most of them, are founded upon this Principle; And all the Arminian Writers that I have observed, go upon the same Principle. And indeed if they did not think, that God's Decrees do influence the decreed Event; more than his Fore knowledge; what Pretence could they have to fasten bad Consequences upon our Doctrine? But upon this their Principle, they must believe the Doctrine of God's necessitating De­crees of Reprobation. It is true, we do believe as well as they (and not at all more than they) that God did Decree to send the Non-Elect into the World involved in Sin and Misery, and to leave them to live, and die in Sin; and to punish them for their Sins: But then we don't believe, that God's Decrees have any Manner of Influence upon us, we are as much at Liberty, and act as freely, as if there were no Decrees at all.

But they think, there is some Influence; some Efficiency in God's Decrees, to produce the Event. And hence; though they leave the Elect of shift for themselves; yet this Principle consigns over the Non-Elect to Sin, and Damnation without Remedy. ‘They have no Offer of Christ and Salvation; for an Offer upon an Impossible Condition is no Offer at all! They have no Time of Tryal.’ For to what Purpose is it for them to try to counteract the Influences of the Decrees of the Almighty? And besides, does not this Doctrine charge all the Sin, and Wickedness of Men, upon the Holy Decrees of the blessed God?

I hope, you'll not think to answer this by "Put-offs," as though the Arminians don't believe God's Decrees; but only that God has an infallible Fore-knowledge of future Events.—For, I suppose, there is not an Arminian of any Sense upon Earth; who will deny, that God has decreed to permit Sin. Arminius himself says, (Exam. in TWISS. Vind. Lib. 2. p. 172.) Quod Deus volens permittit Peccatum, certum est. That it is certain, that God does willingly permit Sin. And in the next Page, you will see what he means by the Permission [Page 27]of Sin. Permissio Peccati generatim considerati, est Suspensio Impedimen­torum omnium, quibus positis Peccatum not fieret à Creaturâ. That it is a Suspension of all those Things, that would otherwise hinder the Com­mission of Sin. Now if God has decreed to suspend, or with-hold all those Things that would hinder the Commission of Sin, and this De­cree does necessarily influence the Event; how is it possible to vindi­cate the Decree of God, from being the Cause of Sin? If you should think upon a Review of the Case; that Dr. WHITBY, and Mr. BEACH, and you, have gone too far, in asserting that God's Decrees do neces­sarily influence the Event, which he has decreed; but yet do still re­tain the Opinion, that God's Decrees have some kind of Influence, or Efficiency in producing the Event; (more than the Fore-know­ledge of God has in producing the Thing fore-known,) how is it pos­sible for you to clear the Decree of God, from being in some Measure, the Cause of the Sin, and Damnation of the Non-Elect?

If God decreed to suspend, or with-hold all those Things, that would hinder the final Impenitency, and Damnation of the Non-Elect, and this Decree has some Kind of Influence upon the Event, then the Decree must in some Sense be the Cause of it. But indeed there is no Medium in this Case; God's Decrees must either necessarily influ­ence the Event, or not at all, any more than his Fore-knowledge.

II. The Arminian Doctrine of Original Sin, appears to me to be very dishonourable to God, and hurtful to the Souls of Men. The Arminians profess, that they believe the intire, and universal Depravity of Nature; as much as we do: As I have proved before. But yet they deny, that we derived our corrupt, and sinful Disposition from Adam, as he was our Faederal Head, or Repre­sentative, in the first Covenant. That we were to stand, or fall by Adam's Obedience, or Disobedience as our legal, or Faederal Head, Mr. BEACH says (2d Repl. p. 54.) is but a Fable. But does not this Doctrine, directly charge God with being the Author of Sin? Dr. JOHNSON seems in some Measure to be sensible, that this Consequence is unavoidable. He says (Pref. to Mr. Beach's 2d Repl. p. 10.) ‘You ask, what I assign as the true Cause of the Creature's moral Imperfection. I answer, if by moral Imperfection, you mean (as you must) if you speak of the imperfect, or less perfect Condition, in which it is made, or born, before it is capable of moral Action; it is no Imputation upon the Almighty, to say, he is the Cause of it.’ He owns (p. 9.) that Infants are born with material Sin; and yet thinks it is no Imputation upon the Almighty, to say that he is the Cause of it. If Mr. Beach joins with Dr. Johnson in this; I [Page 28]don't wonder he says (2d Repl. p. 26.) ‘that he believes Original Sin, in a more rigid Sense than my Brother did.’ For it is a more rigid Sense, sure enough! to charge our Original Corruption, and sinful Depravity upon the Almighty! — But to go on,

III. The Arminian Doctrine of Universal Redemption, (as they ex­plain it,) represents the Merits of Christ's Sufferings, and Death, as being but of little Efficacy, and Value. They deny, that ever Christ purchased Faith, or Holiness, for any one Person Elect, or Non-Elect. So that if Persons ever arrive to Heaven, it must be without Faith, or Holiness; notwithstanding any Efficacy, that there is in the Merits of Christ. The Scriptures every where represent Christ's Death, as meritorious not only to procure Pardon, and Life for us; but likewise, to purchase the Gifts of the divine Spirit to purify our Souls, and qualify us for Glory. And hence the Apostle says, TIT. 2.14. He gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all Iniquity, and purify to himself a peculiar People, zealous of good Works.—

But if the Arminians should allow that there is any Efficacy in the Blood of Christ, to cleanse us from the Pollution, and Defilement of Sin; it would totally demolish their Scheme: because, if Christ pur­chased Holiness for any Persons, it would be necessary in the Nature of Things, that they should have it. And therefore they absolutely deny this. Thus Dr. WHITBY says, (upon the five Points, p. 108. 109.) ‘No Sacrifice for Sin; as such, no, not that of our Lord Jesus Christ, can sanctify a Soul, or endow it with that divine Na­ture; that inward Purity, and Likeness to God; and all those other christian Virtues, which alone make us capable of the Enjoy­ment of God.—Christ therefore by his Death alone, cannot be said to have procured that Faith, which purifies the Heart; or that Re­pentance, which renews the Mind, the Will, and Affections; but only to remove that Guilt, which doth obstruct God's Favour.’ He that can receive such Doctrine, let him receive it!—

Again, according to their Doctrine, there was no Efficacy in the Death of Christ, to render the Salvation of any one Person certain. As some do refuse the Benefits of redeeming Mercy; so all might do it, and his Death might have been wholly in vain; notwithstanding any Intention, that Christ had to save any one Person: or notwithstanding any Efficacy in his Merits. When Christ made his Soul an Offering for Sin, he could not have this Comfort, and Satisfaction, arising from any Efficacy in his Sufferings, (according to this Doctrine;) to see his Seed, and the Travel of his Soul, to justify many; because it was uncer­tain, [Page 29]notwithstanding his Agonies, and Death, whether any would be justified.

IV. Your Doctrine, that all Men have sufficient Grace for Salvation: contains a Swarm of bad Consequences. You say (p. 31, 32.) ‘Don't the Arminians unitedly agree, that God has by the glorious Reve­lations of his Spirit, set forth in the View of Mankind, the infinite Evil of Sin, and the divine Amiableness of Holiness; and that he has given to Man, a Power of Consideration, whereby with the constantly concurring Influences of his Holy Spirit, they can freely examine and bring home to their Minds, the Truth, Excellency, and Importance of Religion; and the Deceit, Evil, and Bitterness of Sin; and that on such a View of Things, they have a Power to re­fuse the one, and embrace the other, by the free Choice of their Wills?" And in (p. 43.) You say, "It is (according to Arminans,) intirely in your Power, through the constant Concurrence, and In­fluence of divine Grace, to chuse and obtain eternal Life.’

1. According to this Doctrine, GOD is not to be acknowledged, as the Author of all that is spiritually Good in us. According to the scripture Account, it is God that works in us both to Will and to Do. He works all the good Pleasure of his Grace in us, and even the Work of Faith with Power. Hence the Apostle prayed for the Ephesians, that they might know what is the exceeding Greatness of his Power, to us-ward who believe according to the working of his mighty Power. Eph. i. 18, 19. But according to your Doctrine, good Men have no other Influ­ences of the Spirit of God, than what are common to all Men. Every Man has such constant Assistances of the Holy Spirit, that he has it intirely in his own Power to believe, and repent; and no other As­sistances are necessary. So that if there be any good in us, more than in some others, we ourselves are the Cause of it.

2. Your Doctrine, has a direct Tendency to lead Men into a wrong Notion, concerning that great Change, which the Scriptures call Re­generation, or Conversion. A saving Conversion to God, is a great, and a mighty Change; so that when we do experience it, we are cre­ated anew in Christ Jesus to good Works, and become new Creatures, in all spiritual Respects. And those Persons, who have not thus passed from Death, to Life; but live and die in an unregenerate State; they will find themselves awfully disappointed, notwithstanding all their Self-flattery, and deluding Hopes, when they come to appear, before the Bar of impartial Justice. And alas! How apt are Persons to delude them­selves with false Hopes! How prone to imagine, that they are in a [Page 30]state of Grace, and Favour with God, when they have not so much as the Seeds of true Holiness! ‘Fight not (says Mr. BAXTER) with small, or great, but against the false Hopes of christian Professors.’ And what a sad Tendency has your Doctrine, to make People easy, and settle them upon their Lecs? They are told, that as they have Grace suf­ficient for Salvation, they have it intirely in their Power, to comply with the Gospel; and therefore they think but little of the Importance, of laying a good Foundation in a saving Conversion to God.

3. This Doctrine, tends to keep poor Sinners in a state of carnal Security, without any concern about their Salvation. A sense of our own Impotency, and perishing State, unless God in his infinite Mercy will cast his Skirt over us, and say unto us, Live; is almost the only Thing, that excites a Concern in the Souls of Sinners, about eternal Things. When a Person is fallen into the Water, so long as he thinks it is in his own Power to help himself, he is easy enough; but when he finds he must unavoidably perish, unless he can obtain some Help, this Reflection, will make him concerned,: so in the present Case, if Persons had but a suitable sense, of the miserable State that they are in, whilst under the Dominion of Sin, and their utter Inability, to help themselves; and that if God does arise and save them, it must be owing to nothing, but his meer Mercy; they would not be so little concerned, about the Means of obtaining the divine Favour. You say, ‘Some think that all unconverted Men are Arminians!’ And indeed I think, all secure Sinners, are in this Respect too much tinged with Ar­minianism; They have too much Self-Confidence, which is the grand Cause of their carnal Security. But,

4. If unconverted Sinners are under some Concern about their Sal­vation; this Doctrine if received, would effectually stifle the Convic­tions of their Consciences; and incline them, to put off their Conver­sion until a further Opportunity. As men imagine, that their Conver­sion, is a Thing that is within the Compass of their own Power; they think, it will be time enough afterwards. There are but few that are so hardened in their Wickedness, as to have no thoughts of Death, and Eternity. And the most abandoned Sinner, however he may say to God, Depart from me, and will even venture, to meet God in his loudest Thunder; yet at Times he says in his Heart, Let me die the Death of the Righteous, and let last End be like his: But then he de­pends upon a future Repentance and drives away the Convictions of his own Conscience, with a Go thy Way for this Time.—He feels himself in Health, he thinks he has a Prospect of living many Years; and he had learned from your Doctrine; that he has a Liberty of In­difference, [Page 31]and a Power to believe, and repent, when he pleases. And if he could but convince himself of one Thing further, that though he does all his Life time mock God, and trample under Foot, the Blood of the Convenant as an unholy Thing; yet the Priest can absolve him, when he comes to lie upon a Death Bed; and then he may die in Peace: I say, if he is convinced of these Things; it is no Wonder, if he does think it will be time enough to repent, when Old Age has cooled the Heat of his Lusts; or when he must part with his sinful Pleasures, at the Approaches of Death.

5. Your Doctrine, (if received,) will effectually prevent the Humi­liation of a Sinner. God rejecteth the Proud, but giveth Grace to the humble. There is hardly any one Thing that unfits the Souls of Men to receive Christ by Faith so much as a Principle of Self-suffi­ciency. A Belief that they are Something, when they are Nothing. An Imagination that they have something that is Good, and pleasing to God; though they are Unbelivers, and their very Minds and Consci­ences are defiled. How can Men see Christ to be All, and in all, when they have something else to rely upon? Among Men every Body can see, that a Malefactor convicted of a Capital Offence, against a merci­ful Sovereign, can't take beter Course, than a Noble man did of late, acknowledge his Offence, with its aggravating Circumstances, and cast himself intirely upon the Mercy of his Sovereign. And if poor Sin­ners would, from a real sense of their Sin, and Misery, cast themselves wholly upon the Mercy of God in Christ; humbly waiting at the Mercy-seat, in the diligent Use of the Means that God has appointed, this is the Way to obtain Mercy and find Grace to help in time of need. But your Doctrine, teaches poor Sinners that they have sufficient Grace already, if they do but improve it, (let them be ever so graceless;) and it is intirely in their own Power, to secure their Salvation; what need is there then that they should be lost in themselves, that they may be found in Christ?

6. Your Principles tend to make Men think, that the Doctrine of our Union to CHRIST is needless. The Scriptures assure us that there is a spiritual Union between Christ and Believers, as he is the Head of the Body which is the Church; and they Members of the same Body. Faith is the Band of Union between Christ and Believers. And hence Christ is said to dwell in our Hearts by Faith. And such as be­lieve, are in Christ. If any Man be in Christ, he is a new Creature.— This Union is the Foundation of our Justification, Adoption, and Sanctification, (in the Beginnings, and progrestive Growth of it;) as well as of eternal Glory. Our Saviour says, Without me (or out of me) [Page 32]ye can do nothing. But what need is there of such a spiritual Union with Christ, if all Men have a Liberty of Indifference, to bend their own Wills, to that which is Good; and have it intirely in their own Power, to secure their Salvation, though they have no such special Relation to him? Thus your Doctrine leaves us without any Foun­dation for a christian Hope: For Christ is in us the Hope of Glory, if we have fled for Reluge, to lay hold on the Hope that is set before us.

7. Your Doctrine, tends to sap the Foundation of a Life of holy Obedience. All external Obedience, if it don't spring from a new, and vital Principle of Grace, and Holiness, is but meer Hypocrisy. And therefore Persons that are truly converted to God, are said, to have new Hearts. — Their Hearts are circumcised to love, and fear God. And God's Law is written upon their Hearts. They act from a new Principle of supreme Love to God, and Faith in a Redeemer. And hence their Obedience flows in an unconstrained Manner, as Waters from a Fountain; Our Saviour compares it, to a Well of living Water springing up to everlasting Life. But according to your Doctrine, there is no need of such a new Principle of Action: for every Man has it in his Power, to incline his Heart, to a true and unfeigned Obedience to God's Commandments; and his Commandments will not be grievous unto him.

8. Your Principles (if really received,)would prevent a Life of Faith, and Dependance upon Christ. Christ is said to be our Life. And the Life (says the Apostle,) that I now live in the Flesh, I live by the Faith, of the Son of God The Believer has his Dependance upon Christ, not only for Pardon, and Justification; but for continual sup­plies of Grace; that of his Fulness he may receive, even Grace, for Grace. He is sensible of his own Emptiness and of Christ's Fulness. He knows, that he has no Sufficiency of himself; but that all his Suffi­ciency is of Christ. And he always finds by Experience, that when he has the greatest sense of his own Weakness; then he is strongest; for he can do all Things through Christ strengthening him. But by your Doctrine, Men are taken off from Christ, to depend upon themselves. They have a Liberty of Indifference, and a sufficient Power to hate Sin, and love Holiness, and this is interwove in their Natures, as mo­ral Agents; What need then have they of fresh supplies of Grace from Christ.

9. Your Doctrine, tends to hinder Men from using any Endeavours, to obtain any special, or sensible Communion with GOD. Our Minds are naturally exceeding dark, and blind, with Respect to any realizing [Page 33]View, or Apprehension, that we have of the glorious Perfections of God. Men ben't sensible of the Darkness and Blindness of their own Minds, until they have been in some Measure, divinely illuminated. I have often thought, that our Case may very well be compared, to that of a Man tha is born, and brought up in a dark Dungeon. He knows no Difference between Darkness, and Light, until he sees some Gleams of Light, shine through a Chink; which for the present ravish his Heart; but when these are intercepted, he sits and bemoans him­self, in his dark, and uncomfortable State. God is pleased to enlighten the Minds of good Men; especially at some Seasons, and give them an inward Apprehension of his glorious Perfections, in such a Manners, as to draw forth their whole Souls after him, as their Portion, and only Happiness: so that the Love of God is shed abroad in their Hearts, and they can rejoice in God, with Joy unspeakable and full of Glory. So David says, Lord, lift thou up the Light of thy Countenance upon us. And our Saviour says, He will manifest himself to true Believers.— But according to your Doctrine, there are no such special Sealings of the Spirit. Every Man can know enough of God, by the constantly concurring Influences of his Spirit, and Grace, so that he has it intirely in his own Power, to love God supremely, and delight in him.

10. Your Principles are directly Opposite to true Thankfulness. When a Christian has a View of his own Vileness, and Unworthiness, so that he appears loathsome to himself; and yet at the same Time, has a Sense of the Riches of God's Grace, in plucking him as a Brand out of the Fire, this will excite true Thankfulness. He knows, that he was no better by Nature than other Men, and he has such a Sense of the Aggravations of his own Sins, which he committed against God; that he looks upon himself to be less than the least of all God's Mercies. He can say therefore as the Apostle, It is by the Grace of God that I am what I am. He wonders at, and admires, the Riches of God's Grace; in bringing him out of the horrible Pit, and miry Clay, when he might have been left, as well as many others, to treasure up to him­self, Wrath against the Day of Wrath. The Language of his Heart therefore is; What shall I render to the Lord for all his Benefits? Be­cause thy loving-kindness is better than Life; my Lips shall praise thee. And he desires above all Things, that he may be more, and more, conformed to God; and that he may be more, and more, devoted to his Service. But according to your Principles, he is mistaken, after all: God has not distinguished him, from any others, by any special Influences of his Grace; and therefore it is owing to himself, and not to God, that he is in a State of Grace, and going to Heaven, while many others are going to Destruction; and he may thank him­self for it.

[Page 34] 11. Your Doctrine, renders the great Duty of Prayer, especially for spiritual Assistances, of little or no Importance. Let a Man be converted, or unconverted; what Influences of the Holy Spirit must he pray for? If he be wicked, and ungodly, what divine Influences can he ask for, more than he has already received? He can (it is true,) upon your Principles express his Thankfulness, (such as it is,) to God, that he has made him a moral Agent; and endowed him with such Faculties; that he has a Liberty of Indifference, to chuse that which is well pleasing in his Sight; and has granted to him "the glorious Revelation of his Spirit, to discover to him the in­finite Evil of Sin, and the divine Amiableness of Holiness:" And though he loves Sin and rowls it under his Tongue as a sweet Morsel, but sees no Beauty in Holiness, and has not only the strongest Aversion to it, but looks upon the Gospel as a Delusion, and upon all those who make any serious Profession of it with Scorn, as a Pack of whining Hypocrites or over heated Enthusiasts, yet he has it in his own Power to love, and delight in it, when he pleases. What now has he to ask for more? Must he pray, that God would open his Eyes by the illu­minating Influences of his Spirit, to discover to him the odious Nature of Sin, the Amiableness of Holiness, and the divine Glory, and Pre­ciousness of a crucified Saviour? No; this would be as Mr. BEACH expresses it, "to gape for New-Light." Must he pray, that God would bow his stubborn, and rebellious Will, and incline his hard, and impenitent Heart, to a willing Obedience, to the Gospel of his dear Son? No: This would "destroy his moral Agency." What then! Must he pray, that God would deliver him from the reigning Power, and Pollution of Sin, by the purifying, and cleansing Efficacy of Christ's Blood? No; "Christ never died to procure Sanctification for any Man; he died only to obtain Pardon." Well, if he died to obtain Pardon, man't he pray that God would pardon and justify him, by the Imputation of CHRIST'S Righteousness, as he died our Surety and is the Lord our Righteousness? No: for "Christ's Righteousness is infinite, and therefore can't be applied to a finite Creature." In a word then, may he pray, that God would give him a new, abiding Princi­ple of Faith, and Holiness, whereby he may without fail, persevere unto eternal Life? No: for then he must "turn Calvinist:" And he had as good be what he is; as to "worship Fate, under the No­tion of a God."

And upon your Principles, what spiritual Blessings can we pray for in the Behalf of others? When Ministers Pray, that God would con­vert their wicked People; what do they hope that God will do for them more than he has done? Or when Parents pray for the Repen­tance, [Page 35]and Conversion of their wicked Children, what can they mean by it? According to your Principles, they have Grace sufficient already, if they would but improve it: And if God should influence their Wills, and incline their Hearts by the insuperable Efficacy of his Grace, what would become of their free Agency?—But once more, and to omit many other Things,

12. Your Doctrine tends to depreciate the Gospel, and the Means of Grace. The Gospel is "The Power of God unto Salvation, to every one that believeth." And the Means of Grace are divine Institu­tions, and do never sail of producing their salutary Effects, from any Inesticacy in them, as such; but from their being abused.

And every sensible Christian, must needs prize and value the Gos­pel, and Means of Grace, as they are appointed by God, and effectual by his Blessing, to promote their Salvation. But instead of depending upon the Blessing of God, in the Use of these Means; your Doctrine, teaches Men to depend upon their own Power, and their own Wills; which must from the very Nature of their free Agency; have a Li­berty of Indifference, to Good, and Evil; whether they have or have not, the Means of Grace.—But to return,

V. Your Arminian Doctrine, that we are not justified by the Righ­teousness of CHRIST, imputed to us; and received by Faith; is of very dangerous Consequence.

For,

I. It tends to depreciate, or undervalue the meritorious Sufficiency of Christ's Sufferings, and Death. There is an infinite Value and Suf­ficiency in the Merits of Christ: And therefore he is able to save to the uttermost all that come to him. What your particular Opinion in this Case, is, I can't say; but Mr. BEACH, whose Principles you have undertaken to defend, has freely expressed his Sentiments upon this Head. Having mentioned my Brother's Opinion, that Adam was our faederal Head, by whose Obedience, or Disobedience, we were to stand, or fall, according to the Tenor of the first Covenant: He says, (2d Reply, p. 54.) ‘This I did then, and do still call a Fable. It has not only no Foundation in the Word of God; but is there plainly contradicted.—Besides, it is in many Respects, a most absurd Scheme. To name but one. This Hypothesis makes Adam's Righteousness, infinitely more valuable, and efficacious than that of Christ the Lord from Heaven. For according to Mr. Dickinson, if Adam had kept but one Precept, and that for a short Time, that Obedience would have been of such infinite Virtue; as to secure [Page 36]eternal Happiness to himself, and to every single Child of his for ever: Whereas Christ's most holy Life, and dreadful Death, could save but a Part of Mankind.’ Mr. BEACH could not mean accord­ing to my Brother's Opinion, with Respect to the Extent of Christ's Redemption; for he says (p. 38.) ‘Mr. DICKINSON contradicts them, (i. e. other Calvinists,) and joins with me, in asserting that he died for every individual of the human Race. What I would observe is, that he asserts that Christ wrought out a sufficient Re­demption for all Mankind.—I never taught universal Redemption in any other Sense, or in stronger Terms.’ And besides Mr. BEACH confines his Meaning, to my Brother's Opinion, concerning the Effect of Adam's Obedience; and the Advantage that would have accrued from it, to his Posterity: And accordingly asserts, if all Mankind would have been in a confirmed State of Happiness, by Adam's Obe­dience; then his Righteousness would have been infinitely more suffi­cient, than the Righteousness of Christ; ‘for Christ's most holy Life, and dreadful Death, could save but a Part of Mankind.’ So that according to him, Christ's Righteousness is so infinitely defective, that it can save but a Part of Mankind! Is this, Sir, agreeable to the Scripture-Doctrine, that there is such an infinite Sufficiency, in Christ's Righteousness, that the greatest Sinner may flee to him for Shelter, from impending Wrath? But

2. This Doctrine, teaches Men to trust, at least in Part, to their own Obedience, for their Justification before God. And hence they are in infinite Danger, of not attaining to the Law of Righteousness, because they seek it not by Faith, but as it were by the Works of the Law. ‘Men may think they do Honour enough, to the great Redeemer, whilst they acknowledge him, to be the meritorious Cause of Salva­tion;’ though at the same Time they trust to their religious At­tainments, imagining that they have some real Worth, or Value, (not to say Merit,) in them, to procure their Justification. But alas! our best Duties are but as filthy Rags, there is so much Sin mixed with them, that our very Tears have need of Washing in the Blood of Christ.

VI. Your Arminian Doctrine, that true Saints may totally and finally fall from Grace, gives Men a wrong Notion of the Covenant of Grace, and of the Mediator of it. The Word of God assures us, that those whom God loves, he loves to the End. That they who are justified, shall he glorified. That true Believers, will be kept by the Power of God, through Faith unto Salvation. That when Men are born of God, their Seed remains in them; and therefore they cannot Sin unto Death. And [Page 37]that they who do sin, (i. e. live in Sin,) have not seem Jesus Christ, neither have they known him. And therefore it follows, that they who do see, and know Jesus Christ, will never be in such a State of Sin. But according to your Arminian Doctrine, a Person may be a good Man to Day; and in the Love, and Favour of God; but to morrow he may die, and go to Hell. But this Principle supposes, that the Co­venant of Grace, is as precarious as the Covenant of Works, and Christ the Mediator of it, as mutable as Adam. According to the Tenor of the Covenant of Grace, God will write his Laws in the Hearts of his People, and he will be unto them a God, and they shall be unto him a People. And hence, this Covenant is well ordered in all Things and sure. And as Christ is an unchangeable Mediator; so the Promises are in him all Yea, and Amen. And hence, true Believers have the greatest Assurance, of the future Enjoyment of that great Good, which is promised: since they know him, whom they have trusted, and that he will keep that which is committed to him.—God is willing in the Covenant of Grace, more abundantly to shew unto the Heirs of Promise the Immutability of his Counsel, and accordingly, has confirmed it with an Oath: That by two immutable Things, in which it was impos­sible for God to lie; we might have a strong Consolation who have fled for Refuge, to lay hold on the Hope set before us.

Thus, Sir. I have considered some of the Consequences, which ap­pear to me to be deducible from your Principles, taken separately; I might mention others that flow from them taken together; but as I have already exceeded the Bounds of my intended Brevity, I shall mention but one; and that is, that your Principles tend to make Per­sons believe, that it is vastly easier to obtain eternal Happiness, than the Scriptures represent the Case. And hence, how naturally do Men content themselves with a meer Form of Godliness; while they deny the Power of it? Our Saviour (who knews what is in Man) says, Luke xiii. 24. Strive to enter in at the strait Gate; for many, I say unto you, shall seek to enter and shall not be able. And Matth. vii. 13, 14. Enter ye in at the strait Gate;—Because strait is the Gate, and narrow is the Way, that leadeth unto life; and few there be that find it. But you say (P. 43.) ‘It is (according to the Arminians,) intirely in your Power, through the constant Concurrence, and Influence of divine Grace, to chuse, and obtain eternal Life.’ If you have it intirely in your own Power to obtain eternal Life; what need is there, that you should work out your Salvation with Fear and Trembling? I must acknowledge, your Doctrine that God's Decrees do necessarily influence the Event; does eternally block up the Way against the Non Elect; otherwise all Men might obtain eternal Life with all [Page 38]imaginable Ease. And therefore it is no Wonder, if Men who em­brace these Principles, say, We shall have Peace, though we walk in the Imagination of our own Hearts, to add Drunkenness to Thirst.

These Consequences which I have mentioned, do naturally follow (as I firmly believe,) from your Arminian Principles. But how­ever, if the People who embrace these Principles, don't appear generally, to be less concerned about their Salvation than other Men, I must confess, I shall have Reason to question; whether I am not mistaken. For the Effect, will bear some Proportion to the Cause, by which it is influenced. You say, (p. 8.) ‘That you are un­qualified to hold the Ballance, to weigh the actual Effects of the respective Doctrines.’ But Mr. BEACH seems to be more inge­nuous, and to freely own, that the Calvinists do for the present live better Lives than the Arminians. His Words are (2d Reply p. 78.) ‘And if any of you are wicked, (as I hope not,) yet this is not so much the Fault of the Man, as his Principles; whereas if we are vi­cious, (as it is too true,) it is the Man, and not his Principles, that is to be blamed.’ His meaning must be, that the Calvinists are either better by Nature, or have better Advantages to be religious, than the Arminians; and that it is this, and not their Principles, that makes the Difference in their Lives. I grant, some Allowance ought to be made, upon the Account of the superior Advantages, which the Calvi­nists generally have, more than the Arminians: But it is manifest, this is not the only Thing, that makes the Difference, for there are some Arminians that enjoy the same Advantages with others; and yet are vicious.

But he intimates that the Calvinists were not always the most reli­gious; ‘The Pharisees (he says, ibid.) were rigid Proedestinarians, or Calvinists, as they are now called.’ And to prove this, why could he not say as Mr. Dodwell? ‘St. Paul being bred a Pharisee, spake and is to be interpreted, ex mente Pharisaeorum, according to the Doctrine of the Pharisees.’ But be it so, that the Pharisees held the Doctrine of Predestination to eternal Life. Then it will follow, that this was the Doctrine of the Jewish Church. For they were not only, the most strict in their Morals; but the most orthodox in their Principles, of any Part of the Jewish Church. There were a great many of them Hypocrites, it is true; and they held one grand Error; for being ignorant of the Righteousness of God, they went about to establish their own Righteousness: and in this Respect they were Arminians. And their Hypocrisy, and Wickedness, was chiefly owing to this Prin­ciple; and not to their believing the Doctrine of Predestination, any more than their believing the Resurrection.

[Page 39] But Mr. BEACH brings one Instance more, (p. 79.) ‘Look back (says he,) upon the State of our Nation, just one hundred Years past, in the Time of the grand Rebellion, never did these Principles pre­vail so much-before, nor since, and never, was there so much Wick­edness in the Nation.’ The grand Rebellion! I acknowledge the Propriety of the Expression.

For to rebel against the Sovereign Authority of the Law, and set up the lawless Will of a misguided Prince as the Standard of Government; is as grand a Rebellion as can be against any earthly Authority. But Mr. BEACH is mistaken, when he thinks that our Principles prevailed chiefly in the Time of that grand Rebellion: For Archbishop LAUD, (who was no small Instrument in that Rebel­lion,) and a number of the Clergy of the Church of England, did openly profess the Arminian Principles at that Time; which they would not dare to have done some Time before. Dr. JOHNSON (Pref. p. 11.) owns, that Calvinism prevailed in the Church of England, from within the Marian Persecution, to the Restoration; i. e. until about 100 Years after the Reformation. So that it was these Principles, that com­forted, and supported the holy Martyrs, when they were called to pass through the fiery Tryal, when they could rejoice with Joy unspeakable and full of Glory. And Mr. BEACH is likewise mistaken, when he thinks, that there was more Wickedness in the Nation before the Resto­ration, than there has been since: for it is manifest, that the People in general were much more sober, and serious at that Time, than after the Restoration; when a Flood of open Wickedness covered the Na­tion; the Dregs of which, have not been purged off until this Day.

Thus, Sir, I have finished the Task, which you have assigned me. And may the God of Truth, lead us into all Truth.