THE WORKS OF

AUGUSTUS TOPLADY

VOLUME 1

THE

WORKS

OF

AUGUSTUS M. TOPLADY, A.B.

LATE VICAR OF BROAD HEMBURY, DEVON.

_____________________________________

NEW EDITION,

WITH AN ENLARGED MEMOIR OF THE AUTHOR

_____________________________________

IN SIX VOLUMES

____________

VOL. 1

____________

LONDON:

PRINTED FOR WILLIAM BAYNES AND SON,

PATERNOSTER ROW;

AND H. S. BAYNES, EDINBURGH

___________

1825

As Published By Grace-eBooks.com 2015

Book I - Works of Augustus Toplady

Memoirs

MEMOIRS OF THE REV. AUGUSTUS MONTAGUE TOPLADY, A. B.

ON perusing the pages of biography, we find therein delineated the achievements of various persons exhibited to the world, according to the caprice and mutability of human opinion. But when we turn our views to the infallible leaves of inspiration, we discover a just discrimination of characters, with that mark of distinction stamped upon them from heaven, that stands in everlasting force, and admits of no exception. According to Scripture testimony, the righteous and the wicked are the only two classes that mankind are divided into; whatever becomes of the ungodly, the sacred records inform us, that it shall be well respecting the present and eternal prosperity of believers. For, "the foundation of the Lord," or his immoveable purpose respecting his people, "standeth sure, having this seal," this authentic and inviolable sanction, "The Lord knoweth," the Lord loves, and will ever continue to take care of, "them that are his."

We have many striking illustrations of the wonderful preservations experienced by the worthies of the Old and New Testaments, their whole history presents us with little else but a continued chain of miraculous providences. When God has had any particular employment for them to be engaged in, how suitably has he prepared and equipped his workmen for the work he has appointed them for! If, for example, we look at Elijah, we shall perceive a plain, blunt, honest prophet: a stran ger to refinement, and to the blandishments of the world, but formed to speak of God's testimonies before princes, without being ashamed. It was Elijah against all Israel, and all Israel against Elijah. "But his bow abode in strength, and the arms of his hands were made strong, by the hands of the mighty God of Jacob." How eminently is this exemplified in the history of Isaiah, Jeremiah, John the Baptist, and the apostle Paul, who were copiously furnished for that sphere of action unto which they were appointed!

If we descend from Jewish to modern times, many peculiar instances will occur to elucidate this remark. Luther had inflexible enemies to withstand, and he strove with them roughly. His nerves were like steel, his bow like iron; his voice like thunder, and the force of his pen has been compared to the weight of Hercules club. He was destined to engage with dangers and fierce persecutions; and God armed him for the war accordingly. Calvin was a complete gentleman, and a polite scholar, his feelings were fine, and his nerves delicate. He was not appointed of God for such hard public work as Luther: and, comparatively speaking, he met with little violent persecution during the course of his life.

In our own country, Mr. Whitefield was designed of God to be the grand and honoured instrument of restoring the truths and the power of the gospel in England. He was therefore fitted for his employ. He feared the face neither of men nor devils. Like an eagle, he flew from country to country, sounding intrepidly the gospel trumpet as he flew.

Mr. Hervey was not prepared, neither was he called to, the same dangerous and difficult department. The holy rector of Weston was formed more for study than for public action; it was his delight to cultivate the elegant parts of learning in retirement and obscurity; and to speak for Christ rather by his pen, than as an apostolic itinerant.

Mr. Toplady was peculiarly set apart to exhibit and defend the prominent features of revelation. He has pushed his adversaries with more inflexibility, intrepidity and vigour, than was ever done by any preceding champions. His animated warmth was justly pro portioned to the cause he had espoused. The objections that have been reiterated against the doctrines of grace appeared to have been collected into one focus, and held up to his view with an air of triumph, and with the confidence of certain victory, but under the divine auspices, and in the spirit of sincerity and truth, he was enabled to repel those attacks, that were made against the bulwark of Christianity, in such a manner as almost to supersede any eulogium that can be passed upon his uncommon abilities.

The last illustrious character, who is the subject of these memoirs, was son of Richard Toplady, a major, who died at the siege of Carthagena, soon after his birth. His mother's maiden name was Catharine Bate. She was sister to the late Rev. Mr. Julia Bate, and the Rev. Mr. Bate, rector of St Paul s, Deptford; by whom they were married at the above church, December 21, 1737. They had issue one son named Francis, who died in his infancy, and afterwards our author. He drew his first breath at Farnham, in Surrey, November the 4th, 1740. His godfathers were Augustus Middleton, and Adolphus Montague, Esquires; in honour to whom he bore the Christian name of the one, and the surname of the other. He received the first rudiments of his education at Westminster-school, where he early evinced and increased a peculiar genius. From his studies at that place, he accompanied his honoured parent in a journey to Ireland, to pursue claims to an estate which she had in that kingdom. Notwithstanding the solitary state in which his mother was left, she anxiously watched over him, with the deepest sympathy of affection, and persevered in a plan for his education and future views in life, which were the principal concerns of her maternal solicitude. The son returned her tender care with the utmost affection. Indeed, so great was the obligation which he always conceived he owed her, that he never mentioned her but in words expressive of sensibility and gratitude.

As this son of the prophets was improving those natural talents he was so eminently endowed with, it pleased God in his providence, when he was about the age of sixteen, to direct his steps into a barn, at a place called Codymain, in Ireland, where a layman was preaching. The word of God, then delivering, was fixed upon his conscience, "in demonstration of the Spirit and with power." Let it not rashly be deemed the enthusiasm of a visionist, or the ignus fatuus of religious distraction, when we assert, "That his faith did not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God." There was nothing peculiar in the place, nor instrument, to work upon the fancy or passions: therefore, to attempt to explain the effect, by any logical or meta physical investigation, would be ridiculous, while we have the Scriptures in congeniality with facts, to inform us that "it pleaseth God, by the foolishness of preaching, to save them that believe."

A few years after the above memorable circumstance, Mr. Toplady reflects upon it in the following words: "February 29, 1768, at night, after my return from Exeter, my desires were strongly drawn out, and drawn up to God. I could, indeed, say, that I groaned with the groans of love, joy, and peace; but so it was, even with comfortable groans that cannot be uttered. That sweet text, Eph 2:13, "Ye, who sometimes were far off, are made nigh by the blood of Christ," was particularly delightful and refreshing to my soul; and the more so, as it reminded me of the days and months that are past, even the day of my sensible espousals to the Bridegroom of the elect. It was from that passage that Mr. Morris preached on the memorable evening of my effectual call; by the grace of God, under the ministry of that dear messenger, and under that sermon, I was, I trust brought nigh by the blood of Christ, in August, 1756.

"Strange that I, who had so long sat under the means of grace in England, should be brought nigh to God in an obscure part of Ireland, amidst a handful of God's people met together in a barn, and under the minis try of one who could hardly spell his name! Surely it was the Lord's doing, and is marvellous! The excellency of such power must be of God, and cannot be of man the regenerating Spirit breathes not only on whom, but likewise when, where, and as he listeth."

On the perusal of this event, no doubt but the sceptic will rage, the deist sneer, and the person who assumes the character of a rational Christian will contumaciously ask, How can these things be? Rather let such in a spirit of humility fall prostrate before God, and intreat him to make them recipients of the grace of conversion, which bringeth salvation. For, without this experience, real vital Christianity will appear futile and fallacious, and the Divine Records seem as volatile as the sybil leaves.

Our author early made it appear, that he was not afraid of literary labour; the valuable years of his youth were devoted to useful and honourable studies, rather than to frivolous occupations, such as too often engross the minds of young men at his age. He laid a solid basis for future years, and the superstructure was beautiful. Between the age of fifteen and eighteen, by way of relaxation from his studies, he employed himself in writing little poetic pieces, which were printed in a 12mo. volume at Dublin, in the year 1759. They are by no means deficient in spirit and force; some of the verses are truly poetical, and many of the thoughts new. Amidst the small inaccuracies of these juvenile compositions, there are indubitable marks of genius. The youth and in experience of the writer must be looked upon as an extenuation, so as to preclude every idea of criticism. The ardour of piety and religion, which irradiated the morning of his life, was increased with lustre in his maturer years.

Richly replete with a variety of gifts, and divinely instructed into those doctrines requisite for a Christian and a minister, he received imposition of hands on Trinity Sunday, the 6th of June, 1762. He entered upon the ministerial function, not only as a scholar, and as one professing religion, but as an honest man. He mentions, that he subscribed to the articles, homilies, and liturgy, five separate times, from principle; he did not believe them because he subscribed them, but sub scribed them because he believed them. He was well persuaded, that after such an awful declaration made by every candidate for holy orders, the man that can draw back, or palliate, for any sinister purpose, the doctrines he has subscribed, so as to insinuate himself into the favour of men, to avoid persecution, or for any aggrandisement, must be devoid of every upright principle, and openly prove him self an apostate from the Church, a traitor to the cause he once avowed, and a liar to the Holy Ghost.

Shortly after his initiation into the ministry, he was inducted into the living of Blagdon, in Somersetshire, which was procured by friends, in a manner very usual; but so scrupulous was he, when acquainted with the circumstance, that he was not easy until he had resigned it.

In the year 1768, he took possession of the vicarship of Broad-Hembury, near Honiton, in Devonshire, which he held until his death. By the love and lenity he had to his people, the whole produce of the living did not amount to 80l. per annum.---He was by no means sedulous after temporal profits, or desirous of pursuing ecclesiastical preferments. It was his pre-eminence to merit the highest, and to be content with the lowest. In this situation he composed the greatest part of those writings, which will be esteemed and valued, while the genuine principles of Christianity continue to be revered.

To bring the reader more intimately acquainted with this excellent character, we shall insert a Diary found in his manuscript papers, entitled "Short Memorials of God's gracious Dealings with my Soul, in a Way of spiritual Experience, from Dec. 6, 1767," with this motto, "Bethel visits ought to be remembered." They contain an intense union of the most exalted sentiments in the engagement he was dedicated unto, and display the feelings of a soul in devout and ardent desires towards the Father of Spirits, unconnected with a heated imagination, or a stupid stoicism of devotion.

Sunday, Dec. 6, 1767. In the morning, lead prayers and preached, here at Fen-Ottery, to a very attentive congregation. In the afternoon, the congregation at Harpford was exceedingly numerous; and God enabled me to preach with great enlargement of mind and fervour. The doctrine did indeed seem to descend as the dew, and to be welcome as refreshing showers to the grass. O, my Lord, let not my ministry be approved only, or tend to no more than conciliating the esteem and affections of my people to thy unworthy messenger; but do the work of thy grace upon their hearts: call in thy chosen; seal and edify thy regenerate; and command thy ever lasting blessing on their souls! Save me from self-opinion, and from self-seeking; and may they cease from man, and look solely to thee!

Monday, 7 . Received a letter from Mr. Luce, and answered it. Gracious God, dispose of the event, to which it relates, as seemeth best to thee! Choose thou my heritage and my lot! Let it be thy doing, not mine!

This afternoon, I received a letter from my honoured mother, and my chest from London. It is a satisfaction to receive these presents and pledges of an earthly parent's love: but all the relations, and all the good things of this life, are less than nothing, and vanity, when compared with the love of Christ that passeth knowledge, and with one glimpse of thy special favour, O thou gracious Father of spirits.

Tuesday, 8. Was much refreshed, and sensibly comforted, in the evening, while reading Dr. Gill's sermon on the Death of Mr. Fall.

Wednesday, 9. A good deal of company dined here. How unprofitable are worldly interviews! Spent the evening much more advantageously in reading Dr. Gill's sermon on "The Watchman's Answer," and that great man's tract on final perseverance. Lord, grant me more and clearer evidences of my interest in that everlasting covenant, which is ordered in all things, and sure!

Thursday, 10. Heard that Mr. Duke has had a relapse into his fever. Pity, that so amiable a person in other respects should want the one thing needful! How much has he suffered, since I knew him, by drinking too freely; and how many narrow escapes has he had of his life! Yet, I fear, he goes on still as an ox to the slaughter. "It hath set him on fire round about, yet he knows it not: it burneth him, yet he lays it not to heart." I bless God, who has enabled me to be faithful to the soul of my friend; and put it into my mind to write him that letter of remonstrance, from London, above a twelvemonth ago. But, alas! I have only delivered my own soul. Neither experience of present evils, nor the remonstances of friends, will or can have any true effect on a sinners heart, except thou, O Almighty Spirit, vouchsafe to reveal the arm of thy grace, and quicken the dead in sin, by the effectual working of thy glorious power! As overseer of this parish, I went down, in the morning, to view two of the poor-houses, and see what repair they want. Lord, what am I, that thou hast cast my lot in fairer ground, and given me a more goodly heritage! Surely, in a way of providence no less than in a way of grace, thou hast made me to differ; and I have nothing which I did not receive from thee.

In the evening wrote to my mother. Some particulars, in her last letters to me, obliged me, in my answer, to make the following observations, among others: "God has fulfilled his promises to me, so often, and in so many ways, that I think, if we could not trust his faithfulness and power, we should be doubly inexcusable. That he works by means, is certain; and I hope to try all that he puts into my hands. In the meanwhile, let us cast our care on him; and remember that he that believeth shall not make haste. There is one thing that pleases me much, about Broad-Hembury, and makes me hope for a blessing on the event, viz. that it was not, from first to last, of my own seeking: and every door, without any application of mine, has hitherto flown open, and all seems to point that way. As a good man somewhere says, A believer never yet carved for himself, but he cut his own fingers. The all-wise God, whose never-failing providence ordereth every event, usually makes what we set our hearts upon unsatisfactory; and sweetens what we feared: bringing real evil out of seeming good; and real good out of seeming evil; to shew us what short-sighted creatures we are, and to teach us to live by faith upon his blessed self. If I should really exchange my present living for Broad-Hembury, it will, I believe, be soon after Christmas. In the mean while add your prayers, that God himself would be pleased to choose my heritage and fix my lot; command his gracious blessing on the event; turn the balance, as seemeth good in his sight; and make it entirely his own doing, not mine. Do not let your tenderness for me get the better of your confidence in God; a fault, I fear, too common, even with believing parents. Poor Mr. D. is relapsed, and his life is despaired of. Alas! what is wealth, with its usual attendants, the lust of the eye and the pride of life, when death stares us in the face! An interest in the covenant of grace is of more value than all the worlds God hath made. Riches profit not in the day of wrath: but righteousness, even the obedience, blood, and intercession of Christ, delivereth from the sting of temporal, and from the very possibility of Buffering eternal death. In him may we be found, living and dying!"

In my chamber, before I went to bed, was much comforted while singing praise to the great Three-One, the author of all the blessings I enjoy, and of all I hope for. I can testify, by sweet and repeated experience, that singing is an ordinance of God, and a means of grace Lord, fit my soul to bear part in that song for ever new, which the elect angels, and saints made perfect in glory, are now singing before the throne and before the Lamb!

Friday, 11. Rode to Broad-Hembury, on a visit to Mr. Luce, where I spent the day, and stopped all night. Before I went to bed, God was with me in private prayer.

Saturday, 12. After breakfast, left Broad-Hembury, and returned home to Fen-Ottery, taking Ottery St. Mary in my way, where I called on my friend Mr. Johnson. In the evening read bishop Newton on the Prophecies. At night, was earnest with God, in private prayer,for a blessing on my tomorrows ministrations; and received an answer of peace. Lord, evermore increase my mental dependance on thy Holy Spirit. I am less than nothing, if less can be: and O! I am worse than nothing, for I am a vile sinner. But thou art infinitely gracious, and all power is thine.

Sunday, 13. The Lord was with me both parts of the day. Water, O God, the souls that heard; and the seed of thy word, sown in weakness, do thou raise in power.

Between morning and afternoon service, read through Dr. Gill's excellent and nervous tract on predestination, against Wesley. How sweet is that blessed and glorious doctrine to the soul, when it is received through the channel of inward experience! I remember a few years ago, Mr. Wesley said to me, concerning Dr. Gill, that "he is a positive man and fights for his opinions through thick and thin." Let the doctor fight as he will, I am sure he fights to good purpose: and I believe it may be said of my learned friend, as it was of the duke of Marlborough, that he never fought a battle which he did not win.

Monday, 14. This morning, one William Towning, about nineteen years old, was brought here before Mr. Penny, for breaking open and robbing farmer Endicott’s house yesterday afternoon, in time of service, while the family were at church. My honest parishioner, it seems, just before he went out, stepped back into his room, he knew not why, and put away a considerable sum of money into a more secret place than where it had lain for some time past; by which means he was only robbed of little more than thirty shillings in money. How evidently providential! Just before the unhappy young man was going off from Mr. Penny's for Exeter Jail, his father, who had heard of his sons situation but an hour or two before, came up to the house with a look that too plainly declared the agonies of his heart. Unable to face his parent, the young man burst into tears, and retired into the orchard, whither his guard and his father followed him. Lord, if it be consistent with the counsel of thy will, be the comforter and the salvation of this sinner and his afflicted family! Bad as he is, thy grace can melt him down. By nature, I am as vile as he: yet I am, I trust, a monument of mercy, and a trophy of thy redeeming power. Blessed be the Lord, my New-Creator! Blessed be the Lord my faithful keeper! On all occasions of this sort, I would recollect that excellent line, "

"Aut sumus, aut fulmus, vel possumus esse, quod hic est."

Before I came out of my chamber today, I was too hasty and short in private prayer. My conscience told me so at the time; and yet, such was my ingratitude and my folly, that I nevertheless restrained prayer before God. In the course of the day, I had great reason to repent of my first sin, by being permitted to fall into another. It is just, O Lord, that thou shouldest withdraw thy presence from one who waited so carelessly on thee. May I never more, on any pretext whatever, rob thee (or rather, deprive my own soul) of thy due worship; but make all things else give way to communion with thee!

The Lord, however, was pleased, in a few hours, sensibly to heal my backslidings; and open the intercourse of love between himself and me. I never so feelingly wonder at my own depravity, nor so deeply abhor myself, as when the fire of divine love warms my heart, and the out-pourings of God's Spirit enliven my soul. Surely, the knowledge of salvation is the most powerful incentive to repentance; and not only the most prevailing, but an absolutely irresistible motive to universal holiness!

Began Le Clerc's "Ars Critica." A most learned, and, in many respects, useful performance: yet sadly interlarded with scepticism and profaneness. God keep me from being a mere scholar. As a specimen of this learned Frenchman's religion, I transcribe the following passages, from that part of his book I have hitherto read. Page 52, "--------In N. T. omnia fere pietatis officia, sacrificii nomine, interdum indigitantur. Mors Christi sacrificium quorque vocatur, quod fuerit pæcipua ejus pietatis pars; & quædam habeat sacrificiis similia." Page 106, "Religio Christiana non est ita coelo integra delapsa, ut nullam rationem habeat religionum, quæ antea erant; sed omnia nova hominibus afferat: contra est veluti religionis Judaicæ surculus, at ipso trunco major ac viridior:" which latter clause is no more than a cold, paltry compliment, added, I suppose, to qualify, in some measure, the rudeness of what goes before. But, surely, primitive Judaism and Christianity are not two religions, but one and the same religion, under two different dispensations. Page 122, he positively asserts, that there are very many things in the Old Testament, "quæ intelligi nequeunt:" for proof of which, he assigns six reasons: but such as even I, with my little knowledge, can see through the fallacy of, and, to my own satisfaction, at least, refute. Page 125, he does, in fact, deny that Hebrew can be understood at all with certainty; some Jews, says he, did about a thousand years after Christ, begin to compose Grammars and Commentaries on Scripture. "Sed quum quicquid Judæi recentiores dixerunt hanc in rem, nitatur vel authoritate Massoretharum, vel veteribus versionibus, vel eorum conjecturis; necesse est eos" [i. e. the Christian writers] "non minus fluctuare ac cæteros interpretes. Massorethæ enim --- Menda sui codicis consecrarunt." The preceding part of the citation represents the language itself as hardly intelligible: but the latter is such a home thrust at the Scriptures, as, I am apt to think, never fell from the pen of any other writer that called himself a Christian. Presently after, he tells us, that the Samaritan Pentateuch is preferable to the Hebrew; as being free from many smaller blunders, with which the latter "passim," everywhere, abounds. He ranks it among Rabbinical conjectures, to suppose "Codicem hodiernum carere mendis, [&] linguam Hebraicam perfectissimam esse." Page 126, he falls foul on Grammars and Lexicons: as things in which very little confidence can be reposed: adding, by way of crown to all the rest, "Itaque fatendum est, eum conari Xedih peraan mega kuma qalasshv qui sperat se, subsidiis memoratis" [namely, the Hebrew Scripture itself; all commentators, whether Jewish or Christian; and all Grammars, Lexicons, &c.] "adjutum, mediocrem adepturum cognitionem linguæ Hebraicæ." If so, farewell to all knowledge, not only of the Hebrew, but of every dead language whatever. Even Lexicons and Grammars are not to be trusted. But is not this the very quintessence of scepticism? And should not such a critic, with all his pomp of literature, be hissed out of the learned world? I mean, so far as he endeavours to sap the foundation of learning itself, and (which will always, in some measure, stand or fall with it) sound religion. Yet this is the writer, whose theological works (which I never desire to see) were so strenuously recommended to me, some years ago, by my friend, the present bishop of Clogher!

Friday, 18. Rode to Honiton; when I bought Whitty's Sermons, the excellent professor Walæus's Works, and two volumes of the Cripplegate Lectures. In the evening, on my return to Fen-Ottery, had some short but sweet rays of comfort from above.

Saturday, 19. Was afflicted with wanderings in private prayer. Lord, melt down my icy heart, and grant me to wait upon thee adiaspazwv. O, when, to use the language of the seraphic Mr. Hervey, will my devotions be no longer "like the motes, which fluctuate to and fro in the air, without any vigorous impulse or certain aim; but like the arrow, which springs from the strained bow, and, quick as lightning, flies to the mark! My God, I want the densiv energwmenh, the inwrought prayer (as Mr. Henry justly translates Jas 5:16), the prayer of the heart, wrought in the soul by the Holy Ghost.

Sunday, 20. Was indisposed the former part of the day. Read prayers and preached in the morning, but languidly. In the afternoon God renewed my strength; and I read prayers and preached, at Harpford, with much freedom of soul, to an exceedingly large congregation. O the difference, the inexpressible difference, between enjoying God's presence, and pining in its absence! This day, my soul has been like a chariot without wheels; and, afterwards, mounted as on eagles wings. Blessed be God, for tempering distress with joy! Too much of the former might weigh me quite down; too much of the latter might exalt me above measure. It is wisely and kindly done, O God, to give me a taste of both.

Monday, 21. In the morning, married John Court and Susanna Carter, at Harpford. On my return hither, spent the after part of the day, reading the late Mr. Whitty's Sermons; not without some sensible comfort and joy in the Holy Ghost: yet, evangelical as the matter of these discourses is, the style in which they are written will not suffer me to think that the worthy author himself ever intended them for publication. It is a pity but the editor had first let them pass under the file of some able friend. Nevertheless, the inaccuracies of composition are greatly over-balanced by the sweet savour of that precious name and adorable grace, which, to the believing soul, are as ointment poured forth.

Tuesday, 22. All day within. The former part of it I was considerably out of order: and experienced something of what it is to have a body without health, and a soul without comfort. But, while I was musing, the fire kindled, and the light of God's countenance shone within. I found a particular blessing in reading Mr. Mayo's Sermon (Morning Exercises, vol. iv. serm. iv.) on our "Deliverance by Christ from the fear of death." Heb 2:15. Several things, in that choice discourse, struck me much; among the rest, the observations that follow: "The apostle says, (1Th 4:14.) that Jesus died; but that the saints sleep in him: the reason why the phrase is varied, is, because he sustained death with all its terrors, that so it might become a calm and quiet sleep to the saints. Satan desired to have Peter, that he might sift him as wheat; and with what did he sift and shake him? Why, it was with the fear of death. Peter was afraid they would deal with him, as they were dealing with his master It was his slavish fear of death, that made him deny Christ; but anon, he recovered himself, and got above this fear; how came this about? It was by means of faith. Christ had prayed for him that his faith should not fail. It may be said of those who are fearful of death, that they are of little faith.---It is usual with God to give his people some clusters of the grapes of Canaan here in the wilderness; to give them some drops of that new wine, which they shall drink in the kingdom of their Father. This sets them a longing to have their fill thereof; even as the Gauls, when they had tasted the wines of Italy, were not satisfied to have those wines brought to them, but would go to possess the land where the vines grew."

In the afternoon, my indisposition was, in great measure, removed. Surely the shedding abroad of divine love in the heart, and a good hope through grace, frequently conduce as much to the health of the body as to health of soul. This is not the first time I have found it so.

Thursday, 24. My faith was weak, and my comfort small, this whole day; especially in the evening. Yet, this is my rock of dependance, that the foundation of the Lord standeth sure; his love is unchangeable; his purpose according to election, cannot be overthrown; his covenant is from everlasting to everlasting; and he girdeth me when I know it not.

Friday, 25. Read prayers, preached, and administered the holy sacrament, here at Fen-Ottery, in the morning.---Farmer T____e (whom I happened to meet at Miktam, no longer ago than last Wednesday evening, so drunk that he could hardly sit on his horse) presented himself at the Lord's table, with the rest of the communicants; but I past him by, not daring to administer the symbols of my Saviour's body and blood to one who had lately crucified him afresh, and had given no proof of repentance. He appeared surprised and abashed. Lord, make this denial of the outward visible sign, a means of inward and spiritual grace to his soul! In the afternoon, read prayers and preached to a very large congregation at Harpford. Drank tea at Farmer Carter’s. Spent part of the evening at Mr. Leigh’s, at Hayne. Thence, returned home, to Fen-Ottery.---A day of most intense cold.

I would observe, that I have, through the blessing of God, been perfectly well through this whole day, both as to health, strength, and spirits; and gone through my Church duties with the utmost ease, freedom, and pleasure, yet I have experienced nothing of that spiritual comfort and joy, which I sometimes do. A demonstration this, that they are prodigiously wide of the mark, who think that what believers know to be the joys of the Holy Ghost are, in fact, no other than certain pleasing sensations, arising from a brisk circulation of the blood, and a lively flow of the animal spirits. In this light the consolations of God are considered by those who never experienced them But if what the regenerate declare to be the sweetness of divine fellowship, is, in reality, no more than, what the cold formalist imagines, the mere result eueziav swmatikhv; it would follow, that every person when in full health and spirits, actually enjoys that inward complacency and sweetness. But this is very far from being the case. I myself am a witness, that spiritual comforts are sometimes highest, when bodily health, strength, and spirits, are at the lowest; and when bodily health, strength, and spirits are at the highest, spiritual comforts are sometimes at the lowest; nay, clear gone, and totally absent. Whence I conclude, that the sensible effusions of divine love in the soul, is superior to, independent of, and distinct from, bodily health, strength, and spirits. These may be, where that is not; and vice versa.

At night in my chamber, God was with me in my private waiting upon him; and I could indeed say, from a heart-felt sense of his love, that it is good for me to draw nigh unto the Lord. Thy visitation, sweet Jesus, is the life and joy of my spirit.

Saturday, 26. Gave Dr. Gill's tract on Justification, another reading; not without much edification and comfort. I do think, that this great man's arguments for the proper eternity of this blessing, ex parte Dei, are unanswerable. Glory be to thee, O Lord, for my sense of special interest in thy everlasting love! Were all the treasures of ten thousand worlds displayed to my view, the sight of them, the mere sight, would not make me the richer nor the happier; it is the knowledge of peculiar property in any blessing, that felicitates the soul. In this the comfort lies. And, thanks to divine grace, I can look upon all the unsearchable riches of Christ, as my own. Lord, increase my faith, and add to my thankfulness more and more.

Sunday, 27. In the morning, read prayers and preached, at Harpford, to a congregation tolerably large, and very attentive. Afterwards administered the Lord's Supper to some who appeared truly devout communicants. It was indeed an ordinance of love to my own soul. I experienced the favour and presence of God. I sat under his shadow with great delight, and his fruit was pleasant to my taste.

In the afternoon, read prayers and preached, with great liberty and enlargement of mind, here, at Fen-Ottery. My subject was Ac 13:39. The sermon itself (excepting a few additions here and there) was what I had formerly wrote in Ireland, in the year 1760, a little before I quitted College. I can never be sufficiently thankful, that my religious principles were all fixed long before I ever entered into orders. Through the good hand of my God upon me, I sat out in the ministry with clear gospel-light from the first; a blessing not vouchsafed to every one. Many an evangelical minister has found himself obliged to retract and unsay what he had taught before in the days of his ignorance. Lord, how is it that I have been so signally favoured of thee! O keep me to the end steadfast in thy truths. Let me but go on experimentally and sensibly to know thee; and then it will be absolutely impossible for me to depart from the precious doctrines of grace; my early insight into which I look upon as one of the distinguishing blessings of my life.

In the evening, received a letter from Mr. Andrew Lacarn, of London, wherein he gives me this account of his late sister, Mrs. Carter, who died last month: "She had, for some time, left the fountain of living waters. I had two different conferences with her during her illness. I assured her, that I did not come to lord it over her; but, in love to her soul, put the question, How stand matters between God and you? Her attestation was, with sighs and tears, as follows: I am truly sensible that I have run away from God, and it is my heart's burden. But it is written in God's word, "Whoso cometh unto me I will in no wise cast out." I will, therefore, upon his promise, venture to cast my soul, without reserve, upon Jesus Christ; and there I am sure I can never perish. Upon this, we went to prayer," &c.

I could not forbear answering my friend’s letter almost as soon as I received it; and, among other things, observed to him as follows:

"The account you give of dear Mrs. Carter’s decease, is a ground for hope in Israel concerning her. It is a great and blessed thing when we are enabled to cast ourselves on the promises. It cannot possibly be done without faith: and he that believeth shall be saved. Adored be the free grace of God, which, I trust, healed the backslidings of your sister, and brought her again within the bond of the covenant. His Spirit alone can drive the plough-share of penitential conviction through a sinner’s heart, and give us to mourn at the spiritual sight of him whom our sins have pierced. The Lord give us to mourn more and more, until we have mourned away our unbelief, our carelessness, and hardness of heart! The soul, I verily believe, is never safer than when, with returning Mary, we stand at the feet of Christ, behind him, weeping. I read lately of a minister it: the last century, whose departing words were, "A broken and a contrite heart, God, thou wilt not despise." Nor can I think such a state to be at all inferior, in point of real safety, to that of a good man who died a few years ago in London, with these triumphant words in his mouth, "Now, angels, do your office." Of some it. is written, "They shall come with weeping, and with supplications will I lead them;" while others of the Lord’s people enter the haven of everlasting life, as it were, with full sails and flying colours: they "return with singing unto Zion.” But this is our comfort, that of all whom the Father gave to Christ, he will not lose one. However the joy of faith may decline, the grace itself shall never totally fail; having, for its security, the Father’s covenant-love, which is from everlasting to everlasting; the blessed Mediator’s intercession, which is perpetual and all prevailing; and the faithfulness of the Holy Ghost, who, when once given, is a fountain of living water, springing up in the believer’s heart to life eternal. May he, in all his plentitude of saving grace and heavenly love, descend upon our souls as dew, and make us glad with the light of his countenance! When I consider the goodness of God to me, the chief of sinners, I am astonished at the coldness of my gratitude and the smallness of my love. Yet, little and cold as it is, even that is his gift, and the work of his Spirit. An earnest, I cannot doubt, of more and greater. The Lord Jesus increase the spark to a flame, and make the little one become a thousand! My health, after which you are so kind as to enquire, was never better. And, which is greater still, I often experience the peace that passeth all understanding, and the joy that is unspeakable and full of glory. Not that I am always upon the mount. There are seasons, in which my Lord is "as one that hideth himself." But he only hides himself. He never forsakes the sinner he has loved. And, blessed be his name, he has engaged that the regenerate soul shall never totally forsake him; else, there would never be a saint in heaven. I rejoice to hear of Mrs. W.’s temporal welfare; and pray God to make her, spiritually, such as he would have her to be. She and I have much chaff to be burnt up; much tin to be consumed; may the blood of the Lamb be upon us both, for pardon; and the sacred Spirit be to us as a refining fire, for sanctification. It you write to her, do present the captain and her with my Christian respects: and let her know from me, that except she comes to Christ as a poor sinner, with the h liter of self-abasement round her neck, and the empty vessel of faith in her hand; as a condemned criminal, who has nothing to plead; and as an insolvent debtor, who has nothing to pay; she is stout hearted, and far from righteousness. The way to be filled with the fulness of God, is to bring no money in our sack’s mouth. If you see my old friend, Mr. I,tell him, that he will not be able to find any rest for the sole of his foot, until he returns to the doctrines of grace, and flies back to the ark of God's election."

Tuesday, 29. At night, before I betook my self to rest, I was enabled to act faith very strongly on the promises. It was as if I had held a conversation with God. He assured me of his faithfulness, and I trusted him. It was whispered to my soul, "Thou shall find me faithful:" my soul answered, "Lord, I believe it: I take thee at thy word." This, I am certain, was more than fancy. It was too sweet, too clear, and too powerful, to be the daughter of imagination. There was a nesclo quid divini, attended with joy unspeakable, as much superior to all the sensations excited by earthly comforts, as the heavens are higher than the earth. Besides, in my experience of this kind, when under the immediate light of God's presence within, my soul is, in great measure, passive; and lies open to the beams of the Sun of righteousness. These acts of faith, love, and spiritual aspiration, are subsequent to, and occasioned by, this unutterable reception of divine influence. I bless my God, I know his inward voice; the still, small whisper of his good Spirit: and can distinguish it from every other suggestion whatever. Lord, evermore give me this bread to eat, which the world knoweth not of!

Wednesday, 30. Held my tithe dinner at Harpford. The greater part of both parishes attended: they seemed greatly satisfied; I had as much reason to be satisfied with them. Busy as I was myself, in receiving my dues, and numerous as the company was, Mr. Powell, of Ottery (who made one), and myself, had several opportunities of conversing on the best subjects, particularly the decrees of God, and the spiritual impotence of man’s will.

Paid farmer Carter for four bushels of wheat, to be distributed among the poor, as follows John Churchill, Robert Bishop, Henry Wilson, James Bedford, jun., Joseph Wescoat, James Wey, Sarah Hare, John Churchill of Southertown, Charles Redwood, Patience Hall, William Perry, William May, jun., Elias Tews, Richard Haddon, and Richard House, one peck each; and half a peck each, to Elizabeth Critchard, and William May, sen.

Before I went to bed, God gave me such sense of his love as came but little short of full assurance. Who am I, O Lord? The weakest and the vilest of all thy called ones: not only the least of saints, but the chief of sinners. But though a sinner, yet sanctified, in part, by the Holy Ghost given unto me. I should wrong the work of his grace upon my heart, were I to deny my regeneration: but, Lord, I wish for a nearer conformity to thy image. My short-comings and my mis-doings, my unbelief and want of love, would sink me into the nethermost hell, was not Jesus my righteousness and my redemption. There is no sin which I should not commit, were not Jesus, by the power of his Spirit, my sanctification. O when shall I resemble him quite, and have all the mind that was in him? When I see him face to face; which God will hasten in his time.

Thursday, 31. All day within, reading. The thought of how many acquaintances I have lost by death, within the course of this year, dwelt with great weight upon my mind. The following persons are some of them: Rev. Mr. Piers, (rector of Killishee, in Ireland), Sir Robert Long, Lord Tavistock, Rev. Mr. William Anderson, Mr. Davis, of Hatton-garden, my aunt Bate, at Deptford, Arch-deacon Potter, Mrs. Cox, Mrs. Carter, Mr. Warner, Mr. Benjamin Jones, Mrs. Weare, Mr. Powell, jun. of Dublin, Mr. Unwin. And yet I am spared! Lord, may it be for good, and not for evil! There are, that I know of, but two things worth living for: 1. To further the cause of God, and thereby glorify him before the world: 2. To do good to the souls and bodies of men.

Upon a review of the past year, I desire to confess, that my unfruitfulness has been exceeding great; my sins still greater; and God's mercies greater than both. It is now between eleven and twelve at night; nor can I conclude the year more suitably, to the present frame of my own mind, than with the following verse from one of my hymns, which expresses both my sense of past, and my humble dependance on divine goodness for future, favours:

Kind Author, and Ground, of my hope,

Thee, thee for my God I avow;

My glad Ebenezer set up,

And own thou hast help’d me ‘till now.

I muse on the years that are past,

Wherein my defence thou hast prov’d;

Nor wilt thou abandon at last,

A sinner so signally lov’d.

Saturday, January 2, 1768. In the afternoon, called on William Perry, of Southertown. Our discourse happened to take a serious turn. Among other subjects, we spoke concerning the divinity of the ever blessed Son of God. I could scarce help smiling, at the same time that I heartily applauded the honest zeal of my well meaning parishioner: "Let any man," said he, "but search the Scriptures, and if he does not find that Christ, as a divine person, subsisted, not only previous to his birth of the Virgin Mary, but from everlasting, I will lose my head." This brought to my mind that just observation of the late excellent Mr. Hervey; who, speaking of Christ’s atonement, says: "Ask any of your serious tenants, what ideas arise in their minds, upon a perusal of the forementioned texts? I dare venture that, art less and unimproved as their understandings are, they will not hesitate for an answer. They will neither complain of obscurity, nor ask the assistance of learning; but will immediately discern, in all these passages, a gracious Redeemer suffering in their stead; and by his bitter, but expiatory passion, procuring the pardon of their sins. Nay, farther, as they are not accustomed to the finesses of criticism, I apprehend they will be at a loss to conceive how it is possible to understand such passages in any other sense."

Sunday, 3. Read prayers and preached, in the morning, here at Fen-Ottery; and in the afternoon, at Harpford, to a very large congregation, considering the quantity of snow that lies on the ground, and the intenseness of the frost, which render it almost equally un safe to walk or ride. I opened the ministrations of this year, with that grateful acknowledgment of the apostle, 1Co 15:10. "By the grace of God I am what I am:" which was my thesis both parts of the day. My liberty, both of spirit and utterance, was very great in the afternoon. Looking on my watch, I was surprised to find that I had detained my dear people three quarters of an hour and yet, when I concluded, they seemed unwilling to rise from their seats; notwithstanding the unusual intenseness of the cold. Lord of hosts, who hast all hearts in thy hand work in my hearers both to be, to will, and to do, of thy good pleasure!

This dreadfully-severe weather continuing, I ordered two more bushels of wheat to be distributed as follows: to Hooper, James Blackmore, John Sanford, Elizabeth Woodrow, Grace Mitchell, and Martha Ham, one peck each; and to John Trimlett, two pecks.

Saturday, 9. This evening I felt unusual diffidence in myself, about the performance of to-morrow’s duty. Free (blessed be God from fightings without, I yet had fears within I besought the Lord to manifest his strength in my weakness; and these precious words were returned, with unutterable power and sweetness, to my soul: "Trust in the Lord Jehovah, for in him is everlasting strength." I was instantly enabled to cast myself, with perfect acquiescence, on the message from heaven; which, though delivered as an exhortation, is, in effect, a most glorious and comfortable promise. My doubts ceased; my misgivings vanished away; and I was assured that God would certainly give me a supply of sabbath-day strength, for a sabbath-day’s work.

Sunday, 10. Found God faithful to his word. Great was my strength, both morning and afternoon; nor less the liveliness of my soul in preaching.

Received a letter from my honoured mother. The same person who brought it brought me likewise two London newspapers; which I hope to read tomorrow; but dare not do on God's day. After evening service, visited and prayed with William May, sen. His cry was, "What shall I do to be saved?" But I could not, on close conversation with him, discover the least sign of evangelical repentance. He neither sees the vileness of his heart, nor knows his need of Christ. Lord, bless what I was enabled to speak, and do that work upon his soul which man cannot! One of the most difficult and discouraging parts of the ministry, I have long found, is visiting the ignorant and unawakened sick. But nothing is too hard for God. He, whose grace wrought on me, is able to work on the sinner I have been with today; and will assuredly, if his name is in the Book of Life. Amidst all our discouragements, in ministering to others; and amidst all our doubts respecting ourselves; there is yet a foundation both sure and steadfast, even the rock of God's eternal election. Was it not for this, how would my hands hang down! and what hope could I have for myself or others? But this sets all to rights. The unchangeable Jehovah knows his own people by name, and will, at the appointed season, lead them, out of a state of nature into a state of grace, by effectual vocation: for "whom he did predestinate, them he also called." This is all my salvation, and all my desire: the ground of the former, and the object of the latter. At night, God was very gracious to me in secret prayer. Great was my joy in the Lord; sweet my communion, and free my access. O that I had but some thing to render him for all his benefits! Just before I went to bed, that blessed promise was whispered powerfully to my soul, and sensibly sealed upon my heart, "I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee." Amen, Lord Jesus.

Tuesday, 12. In the afternoon, read Dr. Calamy’s Account of the Ejected Ministers. What a blow to vital religion, to the Protestant interest in general, and to the Church of England herself, was the fatal extinguishment of so many burning and shining lights! But they are now where the wicked cease from troubling, and where the weary are at rest.

Thursday, 14. Was greatly edified and comforted in reading Mr. Lee’s choice sermon on "Secret Prayer," from Mt 6:6. in the Supplement to the Morning Exercise at Cripplegate; sermon 14. How sweet are the following remarks, among many others! "At the great day secret prayers shall have open and public answers."

"We halt, like Jacob, both in and after our strongest wrestlings.

"I may term secret prayer, the invisible light of the soul in the bosom of God. Out of this heavenly closet rises Jacob’s ladder, whose rounds are all of light: its foot stands upon the basis of the covenant in thy heart; its top reaches the throne of grace.

"A weeping countenance, and a wounded spirit, are most beautiful prospects to the eye of heaven; when a broken heart pours out repenting tears, like streams from the rock, smitten by the rod of Moses’s law in the hand of a mediator.

"It was an ingenious passage of Chrysostom, concerning the woman of Canaan, filosofei h gunh, the poor distressed creature was turned an acute philosopher with Christ, and disputed the mercy from him. O, it is a blessed thing to attain to this heavenly philosophy of prayer, and to argue blessings out of the hand of God. The soul, like Jacob, does in arenam descendere, enter the lists with omnipotency, and, by holy force, obtain the blessing.

"When the sweet incense of Christ’s prayer ascends before the Father, our prayers become sweet and amiable, and cause a savour of rest with God. This I take to be one reason why the prevalency of prayer is so often assigned to the time of the evening sacrifice; as pointing at the death of Christ, which was about the ninth hour of the day, near the time of the evening oblation. Hence Abraham’s sacrifice received a gracious answer, being offered about the going down of the sun; Isaac went out to pray at eventide; Elijah, at Mount Carmel, prayed and offered at the time of the evening sacrifice; Ezra fell on his knees, and spread out his hands, at the evening sacrifice; David begs that his prayer might avail, by the power of the evening sacrifice; Daniel, in prayer, was touched by the angel, about the time of the evening oblation. All, to show the prevalency of our access to the throne of grace, by the powerful merit of Christ’s intercession, who was the acceptable evening sacrifice.

"The holy motions upon the hearts of saints, in prayer, are the fruits of God's unchangeable decrees of love to them, and the appointed ushers of mercy: he graciously determines to give a praying, arguing, warm, affectionate frame, as the prodromus, or forerunner of some decreed mercy.

"Prayer is that intelligible chain, that draws the soul up to God, and draws mercy down to us; or like the cable which draws the ship to land, though the shore itself remain immoveable:" intimating, that the saints do not pray, with a view to make God, who is unchangeable, reverse any of his decrees; but, 1. To draw their own souls into near communion with him; and, 2. As one appointed means, in and through which God is pleased to bestow the blessings to which his people are predestinated. The excellent man goes on:

"We must gradually be acquainted with all the Three [persons of the Trinity]: first with the Spirit; then, with Christ; and, last, with the Father. First, God sends the Spirit of his Son into our hearts; and, then, through the Son, we cry, Abba, Father. The Father chose us in Christ, and sends his Spirit to draw us to Christ; and, by Christ, to himself. Have ye this access to God, by the Spirit? Bosom- communion flows from bosom-affection.

"A godly man prays in finding seasons. There are special seasons of drawing nigh to God; when he draws nigh to us: when the beloved looks forth at the window, and shews himself through the lattice, Song 2:9. That is a time of grace when he knocks at the door of thy heart, by his Spirit. Motions of the heart [toward Christ] are like the doves of the east, sent with letters about their necks. It was said of Burnard, Ex motu cordis, spiritus sancti praesentiam agnoscebat; he knew when the Holy Spirit was present with him, by the motion of his heart.

"When thou canst discern the print of the broad seal of the covenant upon thy heart; and the privy seal of the Spirit upon thy prayers; and canst look upon the Son in a sacerdotal relation to thee; thou mayest come boldly, &c.

"As Gerson says, Sequitur lachrymosadevotio flante Spiritu sancto: devout tears drop down from the Spirit’s influence: melting supplications follow the Holy Spirit’s gracious infusions.

"As the seaman, when he has set sail, goes to the helm and the compass, and sits still, and observes the sun, or the polar star, and how the ship works, and whether the land-marks form themselves aright according to his chart; so do you, when you have been at prayer, mark your ship, how it makes the port; and what rich goods are laden back again from heaven. Most people lose their prayers in the mist and fog of non-observation.

"David gave himself to prayer; in the Hebrew, it is, but I prayer; a Christian is all over prayer: he prays at rising, at lying down, and as he walks: like a prime favourite at court, who has the key to the privy stairs, and can wake his prince by night.

"We find David at prayer in the morning; and our blessed Lord, early in the morning, before day. Chrysostom advises, Nioyn, pro tw swmatov ten yuxhn: wash thy soul, before thou washest thy body." A direction which I trust to observe inviolably, from this day forward; during my pilgrimage below.

The good man observes, page 292, that such as are truly converted have no need to pray by a prescribed form: "they have the Spirit of God to assist and enable them; and they need not drink of another’s bucket, who have the fountain. This certainly holds good, for the most part at least, with regard to secret prayer: but not always, I apprehend, in open devotions, whether of a public or a domestic kind. Grace and gifts do not always go together. A person may have true grace, and great grace, without gifts; and may, on the other hand, have shining gifts, without a spark of real grace; wit ness the parable of the talents. All prayer is formal, in the worst sense, which does not ascend from the heart, by the Holy Ghost: and all prayer is spiritual which does; be it prescribed, or extemporary. Mr. Lee adds, p. 296.,

"God hath declared himself graciously pleased with secret prayer, so as to send an angel into Daniel’s chamber; and he was weary with flying, volans in lassitudine, he moved so swiftly; as the original text expresses it; Da 9:21. XXXX XXXX. What a high expression [and strong figure] is this! Even angels are represented as weary with hasty flights to bring saints their answers! Of what great account does the Lord esteem his praying people, that angels are expressed to be tired in bringing tidings of mercy!

Sunday, 17. God gave me strength to go through the public duties of the day in a comfortable and becoming manner. In the morning, read prayers, and preached, here at Fen-Ottery, to a large congregation; and, in the afternoon, at Harpford, to an exceedingly numerous one. Baptized a daughter of farmer John Carter’s. Between morning and after noon service read the first epistle to the Thessalonians in the Greek. In the evening, lead the Cripplegate Lectures. Though my joy in the Lord has not been great today, yet this has been a profitable sabbath to my own soul: O God, make it so to the attentive people who sat under my unworthy ministry!

Friday, 22. In the morning rode to Exeter, by appointment, to meet Mr. Luce. Put up at the Swan. Bought Cave’s Historia Literaria, Brook’s Dispensatory, and Erskine’s Sermons, in three vols. At night, I spent three or four hours, reading Erskine’s Sermons: particularly the following ones: "The rent Vail of the Temple;"---"The Harmony of Divine Attributes;"---"The Believer exalted in imputed Righteousness;"---and, "Faith’s Plea upon God's Word and Covenant." The reading of these sweet discourses was wonderfully blessed to my soul. Great was my rejoicing and triumph in Christ. The Lord was with me of a truth, and his gracious visitation revived my spirit. One moment’s communion with Christ, one moment’s sense of union with him, one moment’s view of interest in him, is ineffable, inestimable!

Saturday, 23. Continued at Exeter until the afternoon. Before dinner, Mr. Luce and I made a formal resignation of our respective livings, before Mr. Geare and two other witnesses. Having signed and sealed the instruments of resignation, we left them with Mr. Geare, to be transmitted to the bishop. Prosper thou our handy work, Supreme Disposer of all things! May thy glorious Majesty, and thy gracious blessing, be upon us, for thy mercies sake in Jesus Christ! Amen.

After dinner, left Exeter and returned to Fen-Ottery. The ride was far from a comfortable one. Hail, rain, or snow, almost the whole way.

I think this has been the most remarkable day, in point of weather, I ever knew. Between the time of my rising in the morning, and retuning home at night, we have had frost and thaw, snow, rain, hail, thunder and lightening, calm, high wind, and sunshine: a mixture of almost all weathers, from sunrise to sunset.

Before I retired to my chamber, I read Erskine’s Sermon (and a matchless one it is,) entitled, "The Promising God a Performing God:" and the Lord set the seal of his Spirit on my heart. I was enabled to mix faith with what I read; and God made it a time of love, joy, peace, and spiritual refreshment to my soul. I could look and pray to him as my covenant God in Jesus Christ, who loved me from everlasting, and will love me without end.

Sunday, 24. A day of almost perpetual rain. Read prayers and preached, in the morning, at Harpford, and here in the afternoon, to large congregations, considering the weather. God was with me in a way of bodily strength: but I cannot say I had much spiritual communion with him in a way of sensible intercourse. But though my fleece was not watered, I trust the dew of heaven fell around.

Between the morning and afternoon service, I read Erskine’s Sermon, entitled, "The King held in the Galleries:" not without much comfort and confirmation in Christ.

In the evening farmer Roberts came here to settle his tithe. I told him, I never transacted business on the Lord’s Day, and desired him to defer paying me till some other time. At night read Erskine’s Sermon, entitled, "The humble Soul the peculiar Favourite of Heaven."

Sunday, 31. Read prayers and preached in the morning here at Fen-Ottery: and, in the afternoon, to an exceedingly large congregation at Harpford. Between morning and afternoon service, I made some very important additions to my sermon (wrote last Monday) on Eze 36:25-27. In delivering it at Harpford, today, God was with me of a truth. His word was eagerly received, and seemed to be deeply felt, by very many. I think I have seldom, if ever, seen such an appearance of usefulness among my Harpford people, since I knew them, as this afternoon. Dr. P. of Ottery, seemed to be touched from above: Lord, bring him sensibly and experimentally within the bond of the covenant, if it please thee; and likewise all the elect souls who have heard me this day.

How sweet is the work of the ministry, when attended with the unction and power of the Holy One! My soul has been very barren, ever since last Lord’s Day; but this sabbath has been a sabbath indeed.

Spent the evening, both agreeably and profitably, in reading the confession of faith, charge, and sermon, delivered at Bristol last August, at the ordination of Mr. Evans, jun. Blessed be God for the advancement of his interest among us, under whatever form. Lord, increase the number of thy faithful witnesses, everywhere, and in every denomination of Protestants!

Monday, February 1 . Before I went to bed this night, the Lord favoured me with some sweet intimations of his love.

Sunday, 7. In the morning, at Harpford, and here, at Fen-Ottery, in the afternoon, "read prayers and preached to a very full congregation each time; and, I trust, the word was blessed to some. My strength and enlargement of soul (especially in the afternoon) were very considerable. Bless the Lord, O my soul: and learn to trust him who is faithfulness itself. In the evening, read Bunyan’s Pilgrim, What a stiff, sapless, tedious piece of work is that written by bishop Patrick! How does the unlearned tinker of Bedford outshine the bishop of Ely! I have heard, that his lordship wrote his pilgrim, by way of antidote against what he deemed the fanaticism of John Bunyan’s Pilgrim. But what a rich fund of heavenly experience, life, and sweetness, does the latter contain! How heavy, lifeless, and unevangelical, is the former! Such is the difference between writing from a wordly spirit, and under the influence of the Spirit of God.

Wednesday, 10. The Lord was very gracious to my soul this afternoon. His Spirit was the comforter, and Mr. Erskine’s two sermons, on "The Rainbow of the Covenant," were the channel through which that comfort was conveyed. Amid my many seasons, and long intervals, of barrenness and want of joy, God sometimes makes me glad with the light of his countenance; but, alas! I can too often say, with him of old, concerning such sweet seasons, "Rara kora, brevis mora." Yet 1 can, through grace, say likewise,

A moment's intercourse with thee

Is worth a year's delay.

Surely, O God, I could not long after thy presence, if I did not know the sweetness of it, and love thee in some measure: and I could not know that, but by the revelation of thy Spirit in my heart; nor love thee at all, if thou hadst not first loved me. We grieve at the absence of those we love, and of none else: blessed be God for this evidence of true (however weak) grace!

Thursday, 11. Began to compose "A Course of Family-Prayer-" Lord, prosper the work of my hands upon me, and make it useful!

Friday, 12. A little before bed-time, I darted up an ejaculation, that God would be pleased to strengthen me, and give me faithfulness, in the discharge of my duty toward the parishioners of Broad-Hemhury, whither I expect soon to remove. My God gave me this sweet answer immediately, "I will enable thee, and bless thee." Behold the servant of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word!

I desire to remember, with grief and shame, that, soon after the above manifestation of God's favour to my soul, I was tempted, before I could get to sleep, with high thoughts of my own righteousness, both as a man and as a minister. The enemy plied his fiery darts very thick, and came in as a flood; but the Spirit of the Lord lifted up a standard against him. I was enabled (glory to divine grace) to reject the cursed insinuations as I would hell-fire. Oh, that ever such a wretch as I should be tempted to think highly of himself! I that am, of myself, nothing but sin and weakness; I, in whose flesh naturally dwells no good thing; I, who deserve damnation for the best work I ever performed! Lord Jesus, humble me to the dust, yea to the very centre of abasement, in thy presence. Root out and tear up this most poisonous, this most accursed weed, from the unworthiest heart that ever was. Shew me my utter nothingness. Keep me sensible of my sinnership. Sink me down deeper and deeper, into penitence and self-abhorrence. Break the Dagon of pride in pieces before the ark of thy merits. Demolish, by the breath of thy Spirit, the walls, the Babel of self-righteousness and self-opinion; level them with the trodden soil, grind them to powder, annihilate them for ever and ever. Grace, grace, be all my experience, and all my cry! Amen. Amen.

Sunday, 14. In the morning, read prayers and preached here at Fen-Ottery, to a pretty full auditory. In the afternoon, read prayers at Harpford, and preached Mrs. Mary Wheaton’s funeral sermon, to an exceedingly great congregation indeed. I could not forbear observing, "that God had spared her to a good old age; that she was born in the year 1675, ten years before the death of Charles II and about fourteen before the coming in of king William III.; that she lived in the reigns of seven monarchs, and died last Tuesday, aged ninety-three." Great was my fervour and enlargement of soul; nor less, to appearance, the attention of them that heard. Nay, they seemed to do more than attend; the word, I verily believe, came, with power and weight, to their hearts. I never yet saw my Church so full (insomuch that there was hardly any standing) and, I think, seldom, if ever, beheld a people that seemed to relish the gospel better. Neither they nor myself were weary, though I detained them much longer than usual.------Since my intention of changing livings with Mr. Luce has been publicly known, a spirit of great earnestness and life appears to have been poured out on my people. And yet, I trust, I see my way plainly pointed out, and that it is the will of God I should leave them. A wonderful combination of providential circumstances leaves me scarcely any room to doubt of my call to Broad Hembury. Lord, bring me not up thither unless thy presence goes with me! Take care of thy own elect (and so thou assuredly wilt) here and in this neighbourhood! And give us, O give us, some more parting blessings!---Mr. Holmes, of Exeter, came thence this morning to hear the unworthiest of God's messengers. This gentleman was at my churches both parts of the day; and, from what conversation I had with him, appears to be one who knows and loves the truth as it is in Jesus.

Wednesday, 17. In my chamber, this evening, those words, 2Ti 1:7, “God hath not given unto us the spirit of fear, but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind," were impressed much upon my heart, and my meditation on them was attended, not only with great peace and sweetness, but with joy in the Holy Ghost. My sense of union and communion with God was very clear: and I was enabled to see myself one of God's regenerate people, by finding within myself (through the riches of grace alone) those three infallible evidences of conversion, which that delightful text lays down. The spirit of Christ was to me a spirit of power, when he effectually called me to the knowledge of himself in the year 1756, at Codymain, in Ireland, under the ministry of Mr. James Morris: he has been, and is, a spirit of love, in my soul, to all the divine persons; and, as such, the principle of sanctification: and he has been to me a spirit of a sound mind, by leading me into, and confirming me in, the light of gospel truth, in its full harmony and consistency; which I verily believe, for my own part, to be a branch, at least of that swfronismov (which, among other significations, denotes wisdom and instruction), mentioned by the apostle in that passage; and may not, I apprehend, be improperly rendered soundness of judgment. Yet, the swfronismov, abstracted from the dunamiv and the agaph, is not, of itself, a certain evidence of regeneration; it is the divine power, and the love of God shed abroad in the heart, which render soundness of judgment not only comfortable, but a mark of saving grace. Blessed be God for my experience of all the three!

Sunday, 21. Read prayers, and preached, in the morning, at Harpford; and in the afternoon, here at Fen-Ottery. I have great reason to be thankful for the strength and presence of mind with which I was enabled to go through with my public duties, both parts of the day; and to be humbled in soul, for my want of spiritual liveliness and fervour. Lord, I am and can be alert in thy work, no longer than I feel the efficacy of divine attraction; may I, if it please thee, feel it more and more for the sake of thy rich mercy in Jesus Christ. Amen.

In the evening, I was enabled to draw much spiritual improvement from that passage, Joh 11:40, "Said I not unto thee, that if thou wouldest believe, thou shouldest see the glory of God?" Lord, cause me to do the one, and to see the other!

Tuesday, 23. Awoke very early this morning, with those words full and deep upon my mind, "I will give unto you the sure mercies of David." I cannot say that I had an immediate sense of covenant-interest in that glorious promise; yet the impression of it was attended with a satisfactory sweetness, and its signification was, as it were, spontaneously opened to me, in a manner too clear and pleasing to express. It seemed to me (and I can find no reason, still, to think otherwise) that the passage ta osia DaBid ta pija, may be literally rendered "the sacred [i. e. the inviolable and] "faithful things of David:" for, why may not osiov, which signifies holy, just, and sacred, have, in this connexion, the signification of inviolable; and denote the firmness, certainty, and perpetuity of those spiritual blessings, which are given and made over to God's elect, by virtue and in consequence of the Father’s covenant of grace made in their behalf, with Christ, our antitypical David? This, at least, must be granted; that the words, as they lie in the New Testament, will bear the translation I have given: and my translation and sense of them seem exactly to coincide with the original passage, as it stands in the prophet, whence the apostle quoted it.

Sunday, 28. The Lord was with me in the discharge of my ministry both parts of the day; especially in the afternoon at Harpford. O, my faithful God, bless the word spoken!

Wednesday, March 2. In secret prayer, this morning, before I left my chamber, the fire of divine love kindled, and the Lord sensibly shone upon my soul. I could not for bear saying, "O, why art thou so kind to the chief of sinners?" I was so taken up, and as it were circumfused, with the love of God, and the perception of my union with him, that I could hardly ask for pardon. Thus I walked in the light of his countenance, for, I suppose, two or three minutes: when, alas! evil wanderings intervened, my warmth of joy suddenly subsided, and I was, in great measure, brought down from the mount. Yet the sweetness and peace of this heavenly visit remained after the blessed visitant was withdrawn. Though the sun himself retired from view, yet (if I may so express it) I enjoyed the refraction of his beams. He did not disappear, without leaving a blessing behind him; sufficient, I trust, for faith to live upon until I see him again.

In the afternoon, wrote several letters: among the rest, one to my honoured friend, Dr. Gill, which I concluded thus: "You see, sir, my letter is the very reverse of Ezekiel’s roll. And with reason. Since, when God puts gladness into the heart, why should not the lips overflow with praise?---Though I am certain that you are immortal until your work is done, and that God will perform the thing that is appointed for you, I am yet enabled to bear you, in the arms of prayer, to the throne of grace; and presume to request, that, at the seasons of access with joy, you will not forget the meanest of God's people, and the unworthiest, the most impotent (yet not the least favoured) of his messengers. I need not tell you, that I mean, honoured and very dear sir, your obliged, &c."

Thursday, 3. Upon a review of this day, in which my mind has been variously exercised, I have great reason to stand astonished at my own baseness; nor less so, at the several instances of mercy, both temporal and spiritual, with which God hath favoured me since I awaked this morning. I can, through grace, adopt David’s language, and close the evening with his sweet hymn of thanksgiving: Praise the Lord, O my soul, and forget not all his benefits, who forgiveth all thy sin, and healeth all thine infirmities; who saveth thy life from destruction, and crowneth thee with loving kindness and tender mercies; who satisfies thy mouth with good things," the good things of his providence, and thy heart with the better things of his grace; "making thee young and lusty as an eagle." Ps 103.

Sunday, 6. In the morning, read prayers and preached, at Harpford; and, in the afternoon, here at Fen-Ottery; would I could say, with the fervour and sensible joy I sometimes experience. But, I was rather in a cold frame the whole day. Lord, pardon my unworthiness, and wash away the iniquity of my holy things in the blood of him thou hast provided for a burnt offering! Thou art faithful, who hast promised: nor is my interest in thee the less secure because I have not always eyes to see it clearly.

Tuesday, 8. Our family dining early today, Mr. Harris (of Wellington) and myself took a walk, about two in the afternoon, to the top of Fen-Ottery Hill. Looking round thence, I observed to him how plainly we could see the two churches, of Harpford and Fen-Ottery, in the vale beneath us. Perceiving, however, a pillar of smoke rising into the air, at a little distance from Harpford tower, I asked my companion, "What he thought it was?" He replied, "I suppose they are burning stroil." Imagining this to be the case, we continued our walk for, I believe, full three hours, round Ailsbear Hill, and other parts of the common. Coming, at last, to Micktam in our circuit, we called on old Farmer Francke; and were hardly seated, before he asked us, "Whether we had heard of the fire at Harpford?" Adding, that, "according to the best of what his eldest son could discern, it was Farmer Endicott’s house that was burning." The wind being pretty strong, North East by East, I knew, that, if it was Endicott’s house, or any of the adjoining ones, the vicarage-house and offices must be in imminent danger. I posted away for Harpford, without delay; and, being got within near view of the village, plainly perceived, by the course of the smoke, that the vicarage had actually taken fire. By the time I arrived at the wooden bridge, I met a man coming to acquaint me with what had happened; upon seeing me, he saluted me with "Sir, your house is burnt down to the ground." Entering the village, I found it almost literally true. "the dwelling- house, the barn, the linhays, the stable, &c. with the back house rented by John Woodford, were, as it were by sympathy, all in flames at once, and more than half consumed.---Thomas Wilson’s house, and that in which Henry Bishop lately lived (from which latter mine caught fire), were totally destroyed. When I saw the vicarage irrecoverably lost, I returned to Fen-Ottery, and took horse for Exeter; where I arrived between eight and nine in the evening, and put up at Mr. Lathbury’s. Being fatigued with my hasty ride, I thought it best to apprise Mr. Gearing (agent for the London Insurance Office) by a note of what had happened; who, in his answer, desired to see me the next morning.

What I chiefly enter down this account in my diary for, is this: namely, as a memento of God's great goodness to me, both in a way of providence and grace. Though I was not certain whether the expense (I mean, all above the insurance) of rebuilding the vicar- house, with its appendages, might not eventually fall on me (notwithstanding my resignation of the living last January 23,) by Mr. Luce probably refusing, in consequence of this misfortune, to complete our projected exchange; yet neither the report, nor the sight, of this alarming visitation, made me so much as change countenance, or feel the least dejection. This could not proceed from nature; for, my nerves are naturally so weak, that, in general, the least discomposing accident oversets me quite, for a time It was therefore owing to the supporting goodness of God, who made me experience the truth of that promise, "Thy shoes shall be iron and brass; and as is thy day, so shall thy strength be." Surely, we can both do, and endure, all things, through Christ enabling us. Had any one told me beforehand, "You will see the vicarage all in flames, without the least emotion of mind," I should have thought it impossible. But the strength of God was made perfect in my weakness; and therefore it was that my heart stood fast, believing in the Lord. O, may thy grace be ever sufficient for me!

Spent the evening not only in a comfortable, but even in a rejoicing frame of mind; and never rested better afterwards. Thou, Lord, canst make the feeble, as David. Thus, the 8th of March was a day to be particularly noted, not in my book only, but in my latest remembrance; on account of that wonderful support with which I was favoured: which not only made my feet as hind’s feet, and caused me to walk on the high places of Jacob; but which even bore me up, as on eagle’s wings, above the reach of grief, fear, and weakness; and, as it were, laid me at rest on the bosom of Christ, and within the arms of God.

Wednesday, 9. Continued at Exeter until after dinner. Called on Mr. Gearing, and Mr. Geare. Found, upon inquiry, that, the fire at Harpford happening after the living was vacated by my resignation of it, the exchange will certainly stand good, and the melancholy event there cannot possibly affect me. Who would not trust in the Lord, and wait until a cloudy dispensation is cleared up? Through grace, I was enabled to do this; and the result of things has proved that it would not only have been wicked, but foolish, to have done otherwise. O, that I may always be as well enabled to adopt and realize that divine apothegm, "He that believeth, shall not make haste."

Spent about an hour and a half with good Mr. Holmes, whom I found in great distress of mind, on account of his only surviving son being given over in a fever. During our interview, God so opened my mouth, and so enlarged my heart, that, I trust, both my friend and myself found our spiritual strength renewed, and were sensibly and powerfully comforted from above. In the evening, returned to Fen-Ottery.

Thursday, 10. Drinking tea, this afternoon, at Farmer Carter’s, I had an opportunity of seeing more leisurely, the devastation at Harpford. The whole vicarage is one large mass of ruins. What a providential mercy was it, that I resigned the living before this misfortune happened! O God, how wise, and how gracious, art thou, in all thy ways!

Friday, 11. After breakfast, rode to Broad-Hembury, where I dined with Mr. Luce; who bears the late afflictive providence at Harpford better than I could have expected.

Sunday, 13. In the morning read prayers and preached here at Fen-Ottery; and, in the afternoon, at Harpford (from Ro 8:28.) to an exceeding large congregation. I have much reason to bless God, for the great measure of bodily strength, vouchsafed me today: yet my soul was by no means in a lively frame. Neither triumphant, nor depressed, my mind seemed to resemble the time mentioned by the prophet, in which the day will be neither clear nor dark. Zec 14:6.

At night, before I went to bed, was much troubled with coldness and wanderings in secret prayer.

Monday, 14. Looking over one of my journals this morning, I could not help blessing God for such a series of mercies as my life has been made up of; upon which, these words were instantaneously and sweetly suggested to my soul, "I will carry thee on." Amen, gracious Lord!

Sunday, 20. In the morning, read prayers, and preached, at Harpford, to a very full congregation: but without any ray of sweetness or enlargement; at least, to myself. Between morning and afternoon service, I was much dejected and bowed down in spirit. I was so far left to the doublings and evil surmisings of my own unbelieving heart, as even to dread the remaining public duties that lay before me. But the glorious Lord was better to me than my fears, and graciously disappointed my ungracious misgivings: for, in the afternoon, he was with me, both in a way of strength, and in a way of consolation. I read prayers and preached here at Fen-Ottery, with great freedom, and considerable liveliness to a crowded Church.

About six in the evening, being alone in my chamber, I was still more sensibly led forth beside the waters of comfort. I tasted some sweet droppings of the honeycomb, and could say, "My Lord, and my God." The embers were blown aside, by the breath of the Holy Spirit; the veil of unbelief was vent; and the shadows fled away. Light sprang up, and the fire kindled; even the light of God's countenance, and the fire of his love. Yet my comforts did not amount to the full triumph and ecstatic bliss I have sometimes experienced; but were gentle, peaceful, and serene; attended with a mild, refreshing, lenient warmth; which melted me into conscious nothingness before God, and made me feel him and rest upon him as my all in all. The very state this, in which, if it be his will, I could wish both to live and die: for I look upon such a placid reception of his gently-pervading influence, where all is soft and sweet and still, to be the most desirable frame of soul on this side heaven. But I desire to leave all to the disposal of Him who best knows how to deal with his militant people; and who will be sure to lead them to heaven by the right way, and me among the rest.

Monday, 21. Between ten and eleven at night, in my chamber, a little before I betook myself to rest, the Lord favoured me with some gracious outgoings of affection toward himself. My meditation of him, and communion with him, were sweet; and the intimations of his love to me drew forth my love to him. The cherishing south wind of his loving Spirit breathed upon the garden of my soul, and the spices thereof flowed out. I could say, and still can, "Whom have I in heaven, but thee? and there is none upon earth that I desire in comparison of thee. Come, O my beloved, into thy garden, and eat thy pleasant fruits!" Thus, though affected, ever since the afternoon, with a slight head-ach, my bodily indisposition was more than compensated with the peace that passeth all understanding; and I could rejoice in the sense of union with Christ, my exalted head; a head that is never out of order.

Thursday, 24. In the afternoon, the Lord gave me this word of comfort, "I have put away thy sin." It came with power, and I was enabled to believe the testimony of the Holy Spirit. Towards evening, I was in a very comfortable frame of soul, while making some considerable additions to my sermon on Joh 2:19. How greatly do these occasional visits from above cheer and strengthen a sinner on his way to Zion! Surely, there is a river, and not only the streams, but even a few drops of it, make glad the city of God.

Friday, 25. This afternoon and evening, but especially at night, the Lord has been very gracious to my soul. I could see myself loved with an everlasting love, and clothed with Christ’s everlasting righteousness. My peace flowed as a river; and I found the comforts of the Holy Spirit to be neither few nor small. My sense of justification was unclouded, as when the clear shining of the sun giveth light. "My beloved is mine, and I am his." Under these sweet, unutterable manifestations, I have scarce any thing to pray for; supplication is swallowed up in wonder, love, and praise; Jesus smiles, and more than a ray of heaven is shed upon my soul. "I will greatly rejoice in the Lord; my soul shall be joyful in my God; for he hath clothed me with the garments of salvation, he hath covered me with the robe of righteousness, as a bride groom decketh himself with ornaments, and as a bride adorneth herself with her jewels." My harp is taken down from the willows, and I can sing the Lord’s song in a strange land.

Touch’d by the finger of thy love,

Sweet melody of praise I bring:

Join the enraptur’d choirs above,

And feel the bliss which makes them sing

Saturday, 26. A letter from London informs me, that poor old lady Goring is lately turned Papist. Surely, it is a debt I owe to God, to truth, my own conscience, and to the friendship with which that unhappy lady formerly honoured me, to write to her on this sad occasion. Lord, keep me steadfast in the purity of thy blessed gospel, and, if it please thee, recover her from this snare of the devil!

Was indisposed, great part of this day, with the head-ach; but enjoyed, toward evening, a measure of the peace of God. At night, a little before I went to bed, the Lord was pleased to give me a full assurance of his being with me in a way of grace and strength, and carrying me comfortably through the duties of the ensuing sabbath. I could no more doubt of his giving me a sabbath-day’s blessing, than if the sabbath had been passed, and the blessing actually received.

Sunday, 27. Palm-Sunday. Between eight and nine this morning, the Lord visited my soul with a lively sense of his salvation. My comfort, joy and triumph were unutterable for some minutes; and the savour of his precious ointment, thus divinely shed abroad in my heart, abode with me, more or less, through the course of the whole day. In the morning, my congregation here at Fen-Ottery was very full; and I was enabled to read prayers, and to preach, with more inward liberty, and consolation of spirit, than I have done for some Sundays back. The gospel ordinances were sweet to my taste, and I experienced that animating promise, "He that watereth, shall be watered also himself."

In the afternoon, read prayers, and preached at Harpford, to a congregation indeed. "Behold the Lamb of God," was my subject: O Lamb of God, cause me, and those who heard me this day, to behold thee, here, in the light of special faith; and here after, in the light of endless glory!

Though I have a violent cold upon me, with a tendency to a sore throat, yet I was carried through my duties, not only with great comfort, but with unusual strength of body and voice. A worse church to speak in I never knew, than Harpford; yet I am confident I was well heard by all present; whose number, I apprehend, was at least seven hundred; which, I dare believe, I should not have been, considering my hoarseness today, had not my soul been particularly happy in the Lord. The sense of his presence giveth power to the faint, and makes men act beyond themselves. Under the influence of his Spirit, the meanest believer becomes like the chariots of Amminadib, and goes forth like a giant refreshed with wine: the places of God's worship are, each, a banqueting house; and the means of grace are so many mountains of spices.

Tuesday, 29. That sweet text, "This God is our God for ever and ever; he shall be our guide, even unto death:" proved a cordial to my soul this morning. Blessed be his name, I could adopt those words of triumph, and still can, in the assurance of faith. I am, through grace, as clearly satisfied of my interest in the blessing they contain as if they were addressed to me by name.

I remember a delightful paraphrase of this golden passage, written by Mr. Hart; which ,I cannot help putting down here; and the rather, as it is the very language of my soul at present:

This God is the God we adore,

Our faithful, unchangeable friend;

Whose love is as great as his pow’r,

’Tis Jesus, the first and the last,

Whose Spirit shall guide us safe home;

We’ll praise him, for all that is past,

And trust him, for all that's to come.

In the afternoon, began, and about half finished, a sermon on Php 2:8, which, if the Lord please, I hope to deliver from the pulpit next Friday. The Lord has already, while writing it, made it a means of grace to myself; and gave me to experience the power of that dying love which the text and the preceding context so sweetly celebrate. O Lamb of God, slain for me! Thy blood is balm; thy presence is bliss; thy smile is heaven. Through thy precious righteousness, sinners and salvation meet together. Thou hast knit me to thyself in the bonds of an everlasting covenant which shall not be forgotten and cannot be annulled. Thou hast set me as a seal upon thine arm, and hast set the seal of thy Spirit upon my heart. I can sing, with one of thy saints, now in heaven

Love mov’d thee to die;

And on this I rely,

My Saviour hath lov’d me, I cannot tell why:

But this I can find,

We two are so join’d

He’ll not be in glory and leave me behind.

April 1. Good-Friday. In the morning, read prayers, preached, and administered the blessed Sacrament, at Harpford. Both in the pulpit, and at the Lord’s table, my joy, consolation, and enlargement of soul, were great: and, I think, I never saw communicants more humble, serious, and devout. God's presence seemed to be manifested among us in a very uncommon manner. In the afternoon, read prayers and preached here at Fen-Ottery: and the glorious majesty of the Lord our God was evidently upon speaker and hearers. This has been a Good Friday indeed to my soul; and, I dare believe, to the souls of many beside. Lord, make the sensible unction of thy Spirit not only to descend upon us, but to abide with us!

Saturday, 2. After breakfast, rode to Exeter: where I dined at Mr. Holmes’s. Found that dear and excellent man not only more resigned to the will of God, but even more cheerful than I could well have conceived. Mrs. Paul, of Topsham, and Mr. Lewis, a worthy Baptist minister, dined with us. Our conversation at table was on the best subjects; and I found our Christian discussions sensibly blest to my soul. After tea, myself and four more followed the remains of master Holmes to Eade, about two miles out of the city, where they were interred. Mr. Cole, curate of the parish, read the funeral service; and I preached a sermon, suitable to the solemn occasion, to a large auditory, and one of the most attentive ones I ever saw. I had a violent hoarseness upon me all the afternoon, which made me apprehensive I should both speak and be heard with difficulty. But, upon my entrance into the pulpit, while the first psalm was singing, I lifted up my heart to God, and prayed, "Lord, help me, this once." Nor was my supplication lost. I was helped indeed. I preached forty minutes, with great ease to myself, and with great strength, readiness, and distinctness. It was a blessed season to my own heart; and, I earnestly trust, to the souls of many that heard. The word did indeed seem to come with the demonstration of the Spirit, and with power. Returning to Exon, I supped with Mr. Holmes and the company; and thence, between eleven and twelve at night, returned home to Fen-Ottery

Sunday, 3. Easter-Sunday. Rose this morning, with such a cold, and hoarseness on my voice, that I could hardly speak either audibly or intelligibly. Read prayers, how ever (if it might be called reading) here at Fen-Ottery, and administered the blessed Sacrament; but, knowing it would be in vain to attempt preaching, ordered the clerk to make an apology to the congregation. At the table of the Lord, the Lord of the table was with me of a truth; and made my soul rejoice, amid all the weakness of my body. In the afternoon, rode to Harpford; where, after reading prayers to a very great congregation, as well as I could, which was very badly, I was in some doubt whether I should attempt to preach or not. Considering, however, that, if I found I could not make myself heard, I could but cease; and grieving at the thought of sending away such a multitude, without even endeavouring to break to them the word of life; I went up into the pulpit, and besought the Lord to manifest his strength in my weakness: and he graciously did. I preached three quarters of an hour, with wonderful strength and unusual enlargement of soul. Awe and attention were visible on every face. I was enabled to exert myself greatly, and to pour out my whole soul in the ministry of the word. The sense of God's presence, together with the sweetness and dignity of the subject I was upon, melted me so, that, I think, I was never more strongly carried out. Once in particular, I could scarce refrain from bursting into tears. Hoarse and disagreeable as my voice sounded, yet, I am convinced, the voice of the Holy Spirit made its way to many hearts. Indeed all were struck, if there is any judgment to be formed by appearances. My wonder, at the ability with which I was endued, and my gratitude to the blessed God, for the comforts that were experienced, will hardly suffer me to desist from saying more of this memorable opportunity. Lord, who would not trust thee? Who would not love thee? The work, O God, was thine; and thine be all the glory! Amen, Amen.

Tuesday, 5. My hoarseness, blessed be God, begins to go off Drinking tea, today, at Mr. Leigh’s, at Hayne, the company went away early, and Mr. Leigh and I had the remainder of the afternoon to ourselves. Our conversation took a very improving turn. We talked much of death, the assurance of faith, and the invincibility of converting grace. My conversation on the latter subject never seemed to come to him with so much conviction and power, as now. He almost gave up his Arminianism, and drank in what I was enabled to say, with a seriousness and sensibility I never saw in him before. He even appeared to relish the doctrine of grace, and to feel some of its power. Lord, let not thy Spirit leave him, until thou hast made him cry, from the depth of his heart, "O, sovereign grace! I am nothing! thou art all!"

On my way home to Fen-Ottery, especially as I was riding over Upton-bridge, my soul was in a very comfortable frame. O, the unutterable sweetness of sensible interest in God's election, the covenant of grace, and righteousness of Christ! I trust, I can say, they are all mine.

Wednesday, 6. This afternoon,, about two o clock, I received institution, at Exeter, to the living of Broad-Hembury. While on my knees, the chancellor was committing the souls of that parish to my care, my own soul was secretly lifted up to God for a blessing; which, I humbly trust, will be given, for his mercy’s sake in Jesus Christ.

Immediately after I was instituted to Broad-Hembury, Mr. Luce was instituted to Harpford.

Thursday, 7. That gracious promise was given me today, "I will inform thee and teach thee in the way wherein thou shalt go; and I will guide thee with mine eye." I had been, previously, much dejected in spirit, and exercised with various doubts; but that word of comfort came with such power and effect, that I was soon set to rights again.

Friday, 8. Mr. Luce dined here today, we walked, in the afternoon, to Harpford; where I inducted him into that living. In the course of this day, I was favoured with some comfortable glimpses of my heavenly Father’s countenance. O, that I could ever have a heart warm with love! But it is better to catch fire now-and-then, than to be always cold. Blessed be the Comforter of God's elect, a live coal, from the golden altar which is before the throne, is sometimes dropt into my heart; and then I can sing,

Lov’d of my God, for him again

With love intense I burn:

Chosen of thee ere time began,

I choose thee in return.

To have a part and lot in God's salvation, is the main thing; but to have the joy of it is an additional blessing, which makes our way to the kingdom smooth and sweet.

Saturday, 9. In the evening, while returning from Broad-Hembury (where I dined today); and at night after my return hither to Fen-Ottery; I had the comfort of sweet communion with God, and not only enjoyed that peace which the world cannot give, but was favoured with some delightful assurances of God's everlasting love to me a sinner. I was, like what is said of Naphthali, "satisfied with favour;" even with the favour of him, whose name is as ointment poured forth; whom to know, is life eternal; and whom to converse with, is heaven. The Spirit himself bore witness to my spirit, that I am a child of God, and a joint heir with Christ. Lord, doubtless thou art my Father; O enable me to love thee as such, and to walk worthy of my heavenly pedigree!

Sunday, 10. Did duty, this day, at the churches here, for, I suppose, the last time. In the morning, read prayers and preached at Fen-Ottery; and, in the afternoon, read prayers and preached at Harpford, to a very great congregation. At the latter church, God did indeed open to me a door both of knowledge and of utterance; insomuch that I could not possibly confine myself to my notes; but was carried out with extraordinary enlargement, readiness, and presence of mind; especially while speaking of the certain perseverance of God's regenerate people, and of the utter impossibility of being justified by works. I did not take any leave of my dear people. Farewell-sermons, in my opinion, carry in them such an air of self-importance, that I have long resolved never to preach one again. Let me rather close my ministry in this place, with, 1. Secretly begging pardon of God tonight, for my manifold sins, omissions, and infirmities, both as a man, and as a minister. 2. I earnestly intreat my gracious Lord to make me thankful for the innumerable mercies I have experienced, since I had the care of these parishes upon me. 3. I pray God to command his efficacious blessing on my weak, sinful, and unworthy labours here; most humbly beseeching him to own the messages of salvation I have delivered from time to time, and to grant that the seed he has enabled me to sow, may be found after many days. 4. I beg him to stay with these that stay, and to go with me when I go from them: that his presence and his blessing may be their portion, my portion, and the portion of those among whom I expect shortly to minister. O thou God of power and of grace! all hearts are in thy hand, and all events are at thy disposal! Set, O set, the seal of thy almighty fiat upon each of these petitions! And supply all our need, according to thy riches in glory by Christ Jesus! Amen, Amen.

Tuesday, 12. At night, the Lord gave me to experience some gracious meltings of heart. How sweet are the humiliations of penitential love! I desire no greater bliss, than to lie at my heavenly Master’s foot-stool, dissolved in wonder, gratitude, and self-abasement.

Friday, 15. Several words of comfort were, this day, at different times, spoken to and sealed upon my heart: particularly these three, "Fear not; I will be with thee." "Trust me." "I will uphold thee with the right-hand of my righteousness." At another time these were powerfully suggested to my soul, "Be joyful in the Lord." To many, all this would appear as the most palpable enthusiasm; and there was a time, when I myself should have thought so too. But blessed be God the comforter, I know what it is to enjoy some degree of communion with the Father, and the Son by him. And, exclusively of this inward elegxov, which is, to myself, equivalent, in point of mental satisfaction, to ten thousand demonstrations; my experiences of this kind, considered even in the most rational view, cannot, I am well persuaded, be justly counted enthusiastic, or the offspring of a heated imagination; for, 1. They are attended with such a powerful sweetness, and such commanding weight, such satisfactory clearness, and such a perfect consistency with the promises of Scripture, as leave me no cause to doubt of its being indeed the voice of God to my soul. 2. My mind, on these occasions, is as absolutely passive as my body can at any time be on hearing any person speak with whom I converse. 3. I argue from events. I can, to the best of my remembrance and belief, truly say, that I never yet have had one promise, nor assurance, concerning temporal things, impressed on me beforehand in a way of communion with God, which the event did not realize; I never, that I know of, knew it fail in any one single instance. I do not say, that a particular assurance, concerning any particular futurity, is always given me beforehand: far from it: but when it has, two unisons never harmonized more exactly than my assurance and the subsequent providence. And, if this has, hitherto, been the case with me in temporal concerns, and matters of Providence; why should similar indulgences from above, respecting spiritual things, and matters of grace, be treated as fanciful?

At night, in my chamber, the Lord gave me several solid assurances of his future providential goodness to me. I was enabled to know the voice of Him that spake within, and to cast the anchor of faith on what he said. My complacency and satisfaction of soul were equally comfortable and unutterable. O my God, that, which thou hast promised, thou art able also to perform.

Saturday, 16. In the evening, rode to Broad-Hembury; where, at night, before I went to bed, the Lord gave me some comfortable assurances in secret prayer.

Sunday, 17. In the morning, read prayers and preached, at Broad-Hembury, to a large congregation. I opened (if I may so speak) my spiritual commission, by discoursing from those words, 2Co 4:5. "We preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord." In the afternoon, read prayers and preached, ibid, to a very numerous congregation, from Jude 1:3; and baptized two infants. Great was my reason for gratitude and thankfulness to the gracious Author of all good. I was enabled, both parts of the day, to go through the duties of it with much satisfaction and presence of mind; and the word preached seemed to be relished by many, and to be well received by all.

In the evening, returned to Fen-Ottery; where I read, with great comfort and joy in the Holy Ghost, Mr. Hervey’s sermon on "The Way of Holiness." In secret prayer, too, before I went to bed, the channel of comfortable intercourse was opened between God and my soul. All weakness and all unworthiness as I am, I have, in Christ, both righteousness and strength: and God, through him, is my portion forever. In his favour is life: and that life is mine.

Monday, 18. Late tonight, when the rest of the family were retired to rest, the reading of Jenks’s Meditations was much blessed to my soul. Truly, my fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son Jesus Christ, whose precious blood, in a way of expiation, cleanseth me from all sin.

Thursday, 21. Riding home, tonight, from Exeter, the Lord was with me in a way of spiritual communion. Applying to him for a blessing on my intended removal to Broad-Hembury, this answer was given me, "Go, and I will be with thee:" and, a little while after, "Thou shalt shake off every weight.

Friday, 22. Before I left my chamber, this morning, I was enabled to hold sweet intercourse with the Father of spirits in secret prayer. For a minute or two, my comforts, not to say raptures, were of a very exalted kind. Yet, within an hour after, I was grieved with the bubblings up of indwelling sin; and was, for some time, in a very uncomfortable state of inward temptation; but the Lord kept me from mine iniquity, and withheld me from actually falling. Towards evening, while finishing a sermon on Ps 32:1, I experienced some gracious meltings of soul, and sensibly enjoyed the rays of my heavenly Father’s presence.

Saturday, 23. After dinner, rode to Broad-Hembury; where, at night, in my chamber, a little before I went to bed, my soul was harassed, in a sad and very unusual manner, with doubts and fears and unbelief. I was in spiritual darkness, even darkness that might be felt. I do not know that I ever was so much given up to the evil surmisings of my own heart, since I have been in orders. I could hardly act faith at all. Had it not been for fear of exposing myself and disturbing the family, I should have roared for the disquietness of my heart. My heavenly Pilot disappeared; I seemed to have quite lost my hold on the rock of ages; I sunk in the deep mire; and the waves and storms went over me. Yet, at last, in prayer, I was enabled, I know not how, to throw myself, absolutely and at large, on God, at all events, for better for worse: yet without comfort, and almost without hope. I was, in short, almost in a state of despair. My horror and distress were unutterable. And in this condition I remained, until it pleased God to give me some sleep.

Sunday, 24. When I awaked this morning, I had peace of soul, and a considerable measure of confidence in God. Read prayers, and preached with strength of body and enlargement of mind. After my return from public morning service, my consolations from above were inexpressible. Heaviness did indeed endure for a night; but joy came in the morning. My soul could magnify the Lord; and my spirit rejoiced in God my Saviour. Read Bishop Wilkins’ Preacher, with great approbation and pleasure, and not without improvement. In the afternoon, read prayers, and preached to a very large congregation: and God was with me of a truth. My own soul was richly watered, and there seemed to be showers of blessing all around. I never preached so much extempore, in my life before. My whole introduction was off-hand; nor did I ever express myself more freely, pertinently, and to my own satisfaction. My text, both parts of the day, Ps 32:1. O, what infinite amends has God made me for the distresses of last night! Might I choose for myself (which, however, I am not qualified for, nor yet desirous of doing,) I should hardly, I think, care how much God humbled me in private before him, so I might but enjoy his presence and blessing in the discharge of my public duties.

What a day has this been! A sabbath-day indeed; a day of feasting to my soul; a day of triumph and rejoicing. He brought me into his banqueting-house, and his banner over me was love, I never was more assisted from above, than this afternoon; very seldom so much. Lord, bless the people as thou hast blessed me!

Here let me leave it on thankful record, for my comfort and support (if it please God) in future times of trial and desertion, that I never was lower in the valley than last night; nor higher on the mount than today. The Lord chastened me, but did not give me over unto death. And he never will. He may, indeed, for a small moment, hide his face from me; but with everlasting kindness will he have mercy on me.

Saturday, 30. After dinner, rode to Broad-Hembury; where I spent the evening, and lay at Mrs. Pynsent’s. Very different, through the tender mercy of God, was my frame of mind, tonight, from what it was the Saturday before. I was now enabled to rest, with comfortable complacency, on the power, faithfulness, and grace of my heavenly Father. What a poor, feeble creature is a believer, when faith is not in exercise! He is like an eagle, whose wings are pinioned. But, when the south-wind of the Holy Spirit breathes upon the soul, and fans the smoking flax, the Christian grows as the lily, and casteth forth the root as Lebanon. He is, for the time being, almost tempted to sing that requiem which David, in similar circumstances, sang to his soul, "I shall never be removed; thou, Lord, of thy goodness, hast made my hill so strong."

May 1. Sunday. Read prayers, and preached, morning and afternoon, at Broad-Hembury. The Lord was with me both parts of the day. In private, spent several hours in reading Seed’s Sermons. Elegant, and masterly, is the composition; nervous, and refined, the reasoning: but the main thing, I apprehend, is wanting; even that spiritual unction, that vital vein of gospel experience, without which, the correctest performances of this kind are, to me, powerless and tasteless. Read also Wall’s Critical Notes on the New Testament; in which are many things useful and ingenious: yet I cannot help thinking that the alterations (improperly styled, amendments,) which the learned author would make in the original text, are, for the far greater part, extremely flighty and conjectural; often quite injudicious; and, sometimes, astonishingly daring. Besides, the dead fly of Arminianism mars and taints the whole pot of ointment.

Thursday, 5. My honoured and most dear mother’s birthday. Gracious God, crown her inestimable life with many years to come; and crown each year with additional grace and re-doubled happiness! After dinner, removed, for good, from Fen-Ottery to Broad-Hembury: where, being arrived, I spent the evening in a comfortable frame of soul; humbly trusting, that the God and guide of my life, who fixeth the bounds of our habitations below, will, himself, vouchsafe to be the dwelling place of my soul, here and ever. At night, there was some thunder; during which especially, I was favoured with a sweetly awful sense of God's majesty and love. How happy, O Lord, is the soul which is enabled to wrap itself in thee!

Friday, 6. Enjoyed the peace of God today: particularly at night, before bed-time; when my communion with the Father of spirits was near and sweet. I could indeed say, "My Lord, my love, my all!"

Saturday, 7. Was occasionally comforted from above. Blessed, O God, unutterably blessed, is the man whom thou choosest, and causest to approach unto thee! Thy secret is with me; and thou hast shewn me thy covenant.

Sunday, 8. In the morning, read prayers, and read the Thirty-nine Articles, and the Declaration of Conformity. In the afternoon, read prayers, and preached, to a very large congregation. Between morning and afternoon service, I experienced much of God's presence, alone in my study, while revising the sermon I intended to preach. My comforts and joys did not only flow as a river, but rose like the waves of the sea.---In the evening read Tarretin’s Theologia; true is that great author’s observation, and most happily expressed, "aqanasiav fides est fundamentum euqanasiav." Read also Dr. Sibbes’s "Soul’s Conflict:” in which the following observations are equally important, certain, and comfortable:

"The angel troubled the waters, which then cured those that stept in: it is also Christ’s manner to trouble our souls first, and then to come with healing in his wings. As for crosses, he doth but cast us down, to raise us up; and empty us, that he may fill us; and melt us, that we may be vessels of glory: loving us as well, in the furnace, as when we are out; and standing by us all the while. In the worst condition, the church hath two faces: one towards heaven and Christ, which is always constant and glorious; another towards the world, which is, in appearance, contemptible and changeable. In all storms, there is sea-room enough, in the infinite goodness of God, for faith to be carried with full sail. Places and conditions are happy or miserable, as God vouchsafeth his gracious presence more or less. God is nearest to his children, when he seems farthest off. It is as natural for sin to raise doubts and fears in the conscience, as for rotten flesh and wood to breed worms. Sin, like Achan in the camp, or Jonas in the ship, is that which causeth storms within and without. Of all troubles, the trouble of a proud heart is the greatest. The greater part of our troubles we pull upon ourselves, by not parting our care so, as to take upon us only the care of duty, and leave the rest to God; and by mingling our passions with our crosses; and, like a foolish patient, chewing the pills which we should swallow down."

Tuesday, 10. Whilst taking my evening walk, by myself, on the hill that overlooks this village, and surveying the lovely vales, that lie beneath on either hand, the Lord melted me into gratitude and praise. I was not alone; for the great Father of all was with me. On my return, wrote part of a sermon, after supper, on 2Co 5:8. and my peace and joy in believing were great.

Sunday, 15. In the morning rode to Sheldon; where I read prayers and preached to a very attentive congregation; a small church, but well filled. After service, returned home to Broad-Hembury; where, in the afternoon, I read prayers and preached to a great auditory; and the Lord was with me in an especial manner. Spent the evening very comfortably and profitably, in writing part of a sermon. At night, those words dwelt much upon my mind, and were greatly blest to me, "The Lord is my portion, saith my soul:" through the influence of his good Spirit, I could see and rejoice in God as my portion indeed.

Sunday, 2 2. Whitsunday. In the morning, read prayers, preached, and administered the holy sacrament to thirty-six communicants. In the afternoon, read prayers, and preached, to a very large congregation. I trust the ordinances were blest to some: but, as to myself, I can only say, that I went through the duties of the day with strength, ease, and presence of mind. I desire to be thankful for this; yet am grieved, that I was not more fervent in spirit, and higher on the mount of divine love. I could ever wish to be

Like the rapt seraph that adores and burns.

Fain would I mount; fain would I glow;

And loose my cable from below:

But I can only spread my sail;

Thou, thou must breathe th’ auspicious gale!

Friday, 27. Notwithstanding my aggravated sinfulness and my absolute unworthiness, God gave me, this night, to drink of his consolations, as from a river. “Pardon and sanctification," was my prayer: "Mercy, pardon and salvation," was the gracious answer.

Sunday, 28. This evening, I was enabled to rejoice in spirit. God gave me not only a good hope in his grace, but the assurance of faith. Finished a sermon on Re 2:17. I do think and trust that I can say, that text is verified in me, even me, a sinner. Through the blood of the Lamb, I believe that I shall overcome; I am often fed with the hidden manna of communion with God; there are times when I can set to my seal, that the white stone of absolution and justification is mine; and that I have the new name, the privilege of adoption into the invisible family of God; the consciousness of which is attended with such comfort as is only known to those that receive it. To Father, Son, and Spirit, be all the glory!

Sunday, 29. Read prayers, and preached, morning and afternoon, to a much larger congregation, both times, than I expected, considering the wetness of the weather. God has watered the earth, today, with his rain, which has been, for some time, greatly wanted: but the spiritual shower of divine love did not descend upon my soul, until I retired to my study, this evening, after family prayer. I had then some short, but comfortable intercourse with God. An observation which I met with today, in reading Downame’s "Christian Warfare," struck me much; speaking of the Holy Spirit as the sealer of the elect, he asks, "How is it possible to receive the seal, without feeling the impression?" O that I might feel it, more and more!

June 5. Sunday. This morning, I read prayers, and preached, to a large congregation; and, in the afternoon, to a very large one. My God was present with me, both times; and, I trust, I have reason to hope, that my labour was not in vain in the Lord. Visited and prayed with farmer William Taylor, twice today. The first time, particularly, I had great freedom of speech, in conversing with him on spiritual matters. He has, probably, not many days to live; and, I would hope, is not without some sense of divine things. Visited also, and prayed with Edward Granger: a very ignorant person, and full of what are called good resolutions, if God should restore him again to health. It is a melancholy thing, that, in a Protestant country, a minister should have so much ignorance to combat with, in most of the common people. I thank thee, Holy Father, if I am, in any measure, enlightened into the knowledge of thee; and beseech thee to make me an instrument, in thy hand, of giving light to others, so far as my little sphere extends. Was, through grace, very comfortable in my own soul, several times this day.

Thursday, 9. In the morning, visited and prayed with farmer William Taylor. One thing, which he said, I took notice of with satisfaction: his words were, "My pains are nothing to my hopes." Dined and drank tea at Grange. At night, after my return thence, I was happy in the Lord. I was enabled, from a sense of interest in Christ, to sing those sweet lines,

Jesus, thou art my righteousness,

For all my sins were thine, &c .

Sunday, 12. Read prayers, and preached, morning and afternoon. Might I judge of what others felt, by the comfortable enlargement I experienced myself, both parts of the day, I should trust that the arm of the Lord was revealed. The afternoon audience was very great; and God was with me of a truth. A door of knowledge, and of utterance, was opened to me: and I humbly hope, God opened to himself a door into the hearts of some that heard. I cannot forbear observing, that last night, and today, the Lord gave me some special assurances of his being with me in the discharge of the public duties of this sabbath: and his gracious intimations were verified indeed. The promises of man frequently exceed the performance; but God's performance exceeds even his promises.

Saturday, 18. All day at home. Wrote several hymns; and, while writing that which begins thus: "When faith’s alert, and hope shines clear," &c. I was, through grace, very comfortable in my soul; so, indeed, I have been the whole day. Read bishop Hopkins’s Works, which were sent me from Exeter yesterday, with much spiritual improvement. From morning until now, i. e. until eleven at night, I have enjoyed a continual feast within. Christ has been unspeakably precious to my heart, and the blessed Spirit of God has visited me with sweet and reviving manifestations. Temptations, of a particular kind, beset me more than once; but the Lord lifted up his standard, and I fell not; the gates of hell attacked me, but did not prevail against the grace of God which was with me. Glory be to God on high, who spreads a table for me in the wilderness, making me to banquet on his love; and who has caused my cup of joy to overflow this day. Yea, and I shall dwell in the house of the Lord, and be myself his house, for ever.

Sunday, 19. Though somewhat out of order in the morning, God carried me well through the duties of the day. Read prayers and preached, twice, as usual. In the afternoon, the congregation was very large. This has not been such a rejoicing day to my own soul, as yesterday was; but, I trust, the word preached was not powerless altogether. Yet this, I fear, I can truly say, that my lot has never hitherto been cast among a people so generally ignorant of divine things, and so totally dead to God. I know of but three persons, in all this large and populous parish, on whom, I have solid reason to trust, a work of saving grace is begun: and these are, Mrs. Hutchins, farmer William Taylor, and Joan Venn. But this I verily believe, that, if God had not some elect souls to call, he would not have sent me hither. When vicar of Harpford, I laboured among that people for a great part of two years, before I could perceive a sensible out-pouring of God's Holy Spirit upon them: and yet, before I left them, God seemed to have owned my ministry in a very great and unexpected manner. Lord, grant, if it please thee, that I may have the same consolation here!

Wednesday, 22. Calling on Mrs. Hutchins this evening, I found Joan Venn there, from whom I had the comfort of hearing that my unworthy ministry has, in general, been attended with great power to her soul: but, above all, on the 24th of last April, in the afternoon, under that sermon from Ps 32:1. Lord, carry on thy work in her soul and mine, to the day of Christ!

Friday, 24. Visited and prayed with Sarah Granger. In the evening, had a very comfortable interview with old farmer William Taylor, who, though better than I ever expected to see him, is not, in all probability, far from the invisible world. God enabled me to pray with him extempore; and I never yet saw him so affected. If the Lord gives ability, I think to lay aside forms of prayer, in my future attendance on the sick. I generally find, that prayer, on these occasions, offered up as God gives utterance, is more blest to the souls I attend upon, as well as to my own. Lord, may thy good Spirit, which maketh intercession in thy saints, be ever present with me, to help my infirmities, and teach me to pray as I ought. There are, certainly, particular exigencies, and cases, which few, if any, prescribed forms can reach. With regard to this, and every other part of my duty as a minister, my help standeth in the name of the Lord, who hath made heaven and earth. I only wish that my natural diffidence was less, and my faith greater!

Sunday, 26. A sabbath of joy and blessing. Was somewhat cast down, last night, and early this morning, at the prospect of the public duties lying before me, as I have been, for some days past, troubled with a cough, which grows upon me more and more. But God heard my petitions, and was better to me than my expectations. I read prayers, and preached, in the morning, to a large congregation; and, in the afternoon, to an exceedingly full one; with unusual freedom of utterance, and strength of body, both times. After morning service, visited and prayed with Sarah Granger. In prayer, she was quite melted down, and wept greatly. God gave me both words and matter, suitable to her case. In the evening, visited and prayed with farmer William Taylor; and, on this occasion too, I was enabled to pray with much liberty of speech, and comfort to myself. In the course of our conversation, he told me, that "Being alone yesterday evening, and begging of God to hearken to his supplications, he thought he heard a voice say, ‘I will hear thy prayers:’ and that his hope of acceptance has been ever since, greater than usual." How this really was, I dare not say; but would choose to suspend my judgment about it. This, however, I am glad to observe in him, namely, that he is most earnestly desirous of gaining the assurance of his justification. Surely, if the foundation of true faith were not laid in his soul, he would hardly be so desirous of having the top-stone brought forth with joy. At night, finished a short morning sermon, which I began yesterday, on 1Ki 17:21.

Tuesday, 28. In my way to Grange (where I dined and spent the evening), visited Sarah Granger. I found her surrounded with weeping friends and relatives, and herself little more than alive, in point of bodily strength, but perfectly sensible. My mouth was opened to speak much and pertinently to her case; and the Lord gave me very great freedom, enlargement, and warmth in prayer. I hope it was made a season of blessing both to her and to those who were present, as, though grace, it was to myself. She, strongly, and in a most affecting manner, requested me to have an eye over her children when she was dead and gone, and to do what I could in furthering them in the way to the kingdom of God. I assured her, that nothing in my power should be wanting, if I lived, which might conduce to their spiritual or temporal welfare.

Friday, July 1. Drinking tea, this afternoon, at Priory, we were surprised with a very unexpected storm of rain, thunder, and lightning. The flashes were so frequent, and so very violent, that Mrs. Sydenham proposed shutting the windows, letting down the curtains, and having candles brought in; which was done accordingly. I dropt an intimation of my readiness to go to prayer; but the hint was not accepted. After about two hours, the weather being fair again, I took that opportunity of returning home to Broad-Hembury. On my way, the thunder and lightning were renewed; but there being no rain, I kept on, and, blessed be God's good providence, arrived safe at the vicarage. The Lord preserved me from a slavish fear; but I felt a very desirable awe on my mind, even such as I would always wish to feel, on such a commanding occasion. I conversed much with God in mental prayer, and desire to bless his name, that the awful manifestations of his power were not commissioned either to hurt or destroy. I have heard much louder thunder; but never, I believe, saw such prodigious lightning; unless my being more exposed to it, than I ever was before, makes me think so. Thou, O Lord, commandest the waters; it is the glorious God who maketh the thunder: and (adored be the riches of thy mercy) it was Thou who didst bid the lightnings alarm, but prohibit them to strike. O take me, and seal me thine for ever!

Saturday, 2. God gave me, this night, some very express and comfortable assurances of his blessing me in the course of the public duties tomorrow. Lord, I humbly say, Amen: I beg that it may be so; I believe that it will be so.

Sunday, 3. Early this morning, took horse for Fen-Ottery; where, being arrived, I went to captain Penney’s. After being with him about half an hour, we walked to church. As we were going, the captain suddenly took hold of my left-arm: I, imagining he might have something particular to say to me, went closer to him; when he fell on me, with all his weight. At first, I supposed he might have stumbled, and lost his footing; but was alarmed when I found him continue motionless in my arms. In less than half a minute, he came to himself; and was as well as ever. It seems, he has, several times before, been struck in a similar manner: and, had I not been by his side, he must have fallen prostrate. O, that he may, in this his day, know the things that belong to his everlasting peace, before they are hid from his eyes! Being come to the church, I read prayers, and then preached, with very great enlargement and liberty both of mind and utterance. If I might judge by the tears, which some shed, under the word preached (and, indeed, I myself did with great difficulty refrain from weeping, toward the conclusion), the message of salvation seemed to be attended with power. After dinner, rode to Harpford; where I read prayers, and preached, to a very great congregation. Though my cough was somewhat troublesome, at intervals, I detained my old audience for fifty minutes, and great was my strength of voice and fervour of spirit; nor less their attention. After drinking tea at farmer Carter’s, I returned to Fen-Ottery; where I lay at captain Penney’s.

Upon a retrospective view of this Lord’s-day, I find abundant reason to adore, admire, and praise the goodness of God. Mr. Luce’s being at Plymouth, rendered it necessary for me, as a friend, to assist him, by officiating at his churches; and the Lord has been very gracious to me in my unworthy ministrations. I have had also, the additional satisfaction of delivering the tidings of peace and salvation to a people of whom I had, lately, the charge, and whom I affectionately love in the Lord. Thou God of all grace, command thy omnipotent blessing on what they have heard!

Tuesday, 5. Laying at Otterton last night, I took an airing, this morning, with Mr. Duke, in his coach, to Budleigh, Knowle, Tidwell, and Salterton; and the Lord enabled me, at times, to hold comfortable communion with himself by the way.

Saturday, 9. The merciful and gracious Lord was sensibly with me, the latter part of today. "Awake and sing," and, presently after, "Arise and shine," were spoken to my soul, from above, with power and sweetness.

Late at night, God was again pleased to give me the knowledge of a sabbath-day’s blessing tomorrow. Such comfortable and peremptory convictions of God's future presence and support on a succeeding Sunday (with which I have been so often favoured before-hand) I intend, henceforth, as often as God is pleased to grant them, to distinguish by the name of Saturday-Assurances. Assurances they are indeed; so clear, positive, and satisfactory. I never knew them once fail, nor deceive my trust. I have often been dejected and fearful, at the approached of a sabbath on which I was to minister publicly; and God has frequently, not to say generally, been better to me than my unbelieving fears; but, on those happy days (and, blessed be his name, they have, of late especially, been very many) when previous assurances have been given me of his help and presence on the Sunday following, those assurances have always been made good. The Lord has often disappointed my doubts, and the evil surmisings of unbelief; but he never once disappointed my hope, when he has said, previously, to my soul, "I will be with thee."

Sunday, 10. God has made this a comfortable sabbath indeed. In the morning, read prayers and preached to a considerable congregation; and, in the afternoon, to an exceeding great one, with great readiness, strength, and presence of mind, each time. In the evening, God delivered me out of a grievous temptation, and saved me from falling by it. Visited and prayed with Sarah Granger. I was heartily glad to find that the Lord has made her sensible of the deceitfulness of her heart. Her fears that she is not sincerely earnest in seeking God, and, to use her own expression, in her "longings after the Lord Jesus;” are to me, favourable signs of her being so. In praying with her, God gave me enlargement of mind, and great freedom of speech. Visited old Mrs. Hutchins, who longs for the assurance of faith; but whose fear of death rather increases than abates: I was enabled to speak a word in season; and trust it was not wholly in vain in the Lord. At night read Polhill’s Treatise (late the property of the excellent Mr. Pearsall), entitled, "Precious Faith." It is a precious book, and on a precious subject.

Friday, 15. God shone upon my soul greatly this evening.

Sunday, 17. In the morning, read prayers and preached; but not with that sensible comfort which I sometimes enjoy. In the afternoon, Mr. Savery was so kind as to read prayers and preach in my stead. My cough was rather troublesome today. After evening service, I was much cheered and refreshed in soul, while reading Mr. Erskine’s sermon, entitled, "Faith’s Plea on God's Word and Covenant."

Sunday, 24. In the morning, rode to Sheldon; where I read prayers and preached. Returning thence, I read prayers and preached here, at Broad-Hembury, in the afternoon, with uncommon strength and liveliness, and to the largest congregation I have yet seen in this place. Blessed be the God of all comfort, for the distinguished mercies of this delightful sabbath. I was carried, through the duties of it, as on eagles wings; and, amidst the vast auditory, the word preached seemed to reach some hearts with power and the demonstration of the Spirit. May it be fastened as a nail in a sure place, and he found after many days!

Sunday, 31. Read prayers, and preached, both morning and afternoon, with strength and some liveliness, but with little spiritual joy.

At night, was visited with some tastes, of comfort, and with the sweet rays of my heavenly Father’s countenance, in reading Erskine’s sermons. Read likewise, not without sensible improvement, some part of the acts of the synod of Dort; particularly the judgment of the British divines, "Da Perseverantia Sanctorum."

Saturday, August 6. Was much dejected in soul tonight; but, in seeking the Lord, received some comfortable intimations.

Sunday, 7. In the morning rode to Plymtree; where I read prayers, and preached, with very great freedom, strength, and enlargement, to a serious, attentive congregation; some of whom seemed to experience as much of the Holy Spirit’s power as I did. After dining at Mr. Harward’s, I returned to Broad-Hembury: where I read prayers, and preached, to a prodigiously full church, with equal fervour and liberty both of mind and utterance, as in the morning. I can never enough adore thy goodness, O thou God of all grace!

Monday, 8. I cannot help noting, to my shame, and as a mark of my exceeding depravity, that, after all the Lord’s sabbath-day’s mercies to me yesterday, I was never, that I know of, more cold, lifeless, and wandering, than I was in secret prayer last night, just before going to bed. Pardon, dearest Lord, my want of love! Alas, if I loved thee more, I should serve thee better. During the course of the present day, God gave me some very humbling and instructing views of myself. Abstracted from special, efficacious grace, nothingness (or, if any thing, utter sinfulness; may be written on all I have, and am, and do. Blessed be God, that I have some ground to hope myself interested in a better righteousness than my own!

Sunday, 14. Read prayers, and preached, morning and afternoon. Was, in general, greatly depressed in soul this day; but not so much during the seasons of public worship, as before and after. In the evening, and at night, my heart aspired to God with groanings that cannot be uttered. Yet, while reading Whitty’s Sermons, I experienced a great degree of divine power, and, now and then, some sweetness: but I could not rejoice in the Lord; nor is it fit that such a sinner always should. Deal with me, O God, as thou wilt: but, O, seal me to the day of redemption, and make me be found in the number of thine at last!

Thursday, 18. At Exeter, today, I spent some time with that excellent Christian, good old Mr. Brewer; and, in the course of our conversation, I experienced much of the divine presence. Among other matters, he mentioned some particulars, spoken in a charge lately given at the ordination of a young dissenting minister, which I put down here, as they are too good to be lost. "I cannot conclude," said the old ambassador of Christ, "without reminding you, my young brother, of some things that may be of use to you, in the course of your ministry. 1. Preach Christ crucified, and dwell chiefly on the blessings resulting from his righteousness, atonement, and intercession. 2. Avoid all needless controversies, in the pulpit; except it be, when your subject necessarily requires it; or when the truths of God are likely to suffer by your silence. 3. When you ascend the pulpit, leave your learning behind you: endeavour to preach more to the hearts of your people, than to their heads. 4. Do not affect too much oratory. Seek rather to profit, than to be admired." In the afternoon, returned to Broad-Hembury.

Sunday, 21. In the morning, attended my friend, Mr. Savery, to Sheldon; where he read prayers and preached. Returned, by dinner, to Broad-Hembury, where I read prayers, and preached, in the afternoon, to a large congregation, with a spirit and life that seemed to reach the hearts of most present. It was a sabbath-day’s blessing indeed. Surely, nothing but heaven itself can exceed such a golden opportunity! "Bless the Lord, O my soul; and all that is within me praise his holy name."

Saturday, 27. In secret prayer, tonight, God gave me a Saturday-assurance of a blessing tomorrow; and I was enabled to believe that it would be unto me even as the Lord had said.

Sunday, 28. Read prayers, and preached, both parts of the day, with uncommon strength of body, and with vast enlargement of soul. Between morning and afternoon service, being in my study, and comfortably engaged in secret prayer, the Lord visited me with a refreshing shower of divine love: so that my soul was like a watered garden. I never felt so intense a desire to be useful to the souls of my people; my heart was expanded, and burnt with zeal, for the glory of God, and for the spiritual welfare of my flock. I wished to spend and be spent in the ministry of the word; and had some gracious assurances from on high that God would make use of me to diffuse his gospel, and call in some of his chosen that are yet unconverted. In the afternoon, the congregation was exceedingly great indeed. I was all on fire for God; and the fire, I verily believe, caught from heart to heart. I am astonished, when I review the blessings of this Lord’s day. That a sinner so vile, so feeble, so ill, and so hell-deserving, should be thus powerfully carried beyond himself, and be enabled to preach with such demonstration of the Spirit. Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach, among the gentiles, the unsearchable riches of Christ. Lord, let thy word run, and be glorified! Out of weakness, I am made strong; to thy name alone be the entire praise! And go on, O, go on, to own the counsel of thy unworthiest messenger, and to make the feet of him that sent me sound behind me! Thy mercies to me, both as a man, as a believer, and as a minister, have already been so wonderful, that there is hardly any thing too great for me to hope for at thy hands.

Monday, 29. This evening, after my return from Grange, God was very gracious to my soul. My meditation of him was sweet, and he gave me songs in the night season. I had sweet, melting views of his special goodness, and of my own utter unworthiness. The united sense of these two keeps the soul in an even balance. I am then happiest, as well as safest, when my very exultations lay me lowest.

Wednesday, 31. Writing, this afternoon, to Mrs. Browne, of Bath, I could not help enumerating some of God's chief mercies to me, both in a way of providence and grace, since I saw her last. Among other things, I observed as follows: "God has also given me, in general, a much greater portion of health and strength than usual; and crowned his other mercies, by enabling me to dispense his gospel, for the most part, with a liveliness and fervour which I have seldom experienced for so long a time together. I sing, and ought to sing, of mercy and lovingkindness. I can indeed set up my Ebenezer, erect a monument of thankfulness, and inscribe every separate blessing with David’s motto, This hath God done. May his grace lay me low at his footstool, as a Christian; and his almighty Spirit command success on my unworthy labours, as a minister! The Lord go on to make you, madam, happy in his love, and an instrument of extensive good to his people below. In the exercise of the grace he has given you, and in the discharge of the duties he has allotted to you, may your joy and peace flourish as the lily, and your comforts cast forth the root as Lebanon. Amid all your bodily complaints, may his strength be perfected in your weakness, and his right hand sustain you; until, by the blood of atonement, and the faithful guidance of his Spirit, he has brought you to that land of light and rest and joy, where the glorified inhabitant shall no more, in any sense whatever, say, I am sick. I propose, if Providence permit, to set out for London, the latter end of September; where I hope to spend the ensuing winter with my honoured mother: happy should I be, in the meanwhile, to hear, that your health is at least no worse than usual. I rejoice to find, from several gentlemen of Dorsetshire, that Mr. ___’s health is greatly improved. I have not taken the liberty of writing to him since last March was twelve-month; one reason of which is, lest he should think I had any interested views to serve: which I am sure, is very far from being the case; my present living being vastly more eligible, than any, of which my honoured friend is patron. When you send next to Frampton, you will oblige me in condescending to mention my name, and tendering my most respectful compliments. My affectionate remembrance, and best wishes, attend the three young gentlemen, your nephews; nor can I give a sincerer proof of both, than by praying that they may flourish as olive branches in the courts of the Lord’s house; be made wise unto salvation, by his Spirit; and increase with the increase of God. Mr. and Mrs. Derham have my affectionate compliments: they may wonder, perhaps, that I have not done myself the pleasure of writing to them; but dear Mrs. D. deserves only a scolding letter (if I could find in my heart to send her such an one), for leaving London, last autumn, without seeing me, though she knew I was then in town; and the friend, at whose house she was, and who informed me afterwards of these particulars, was engaged to drink tea with me the very day Mrs. Derham set out for Bath."

Friday, September 2. Received, this morning, a letter from a gospel friend; informing me, that Mr. Morris, of the county of Wexford, in Ireland, whose ministry was, a little turned of twelve years ago, blest to my conversion, is waxing cold in the work of the Lord. Upon which, I thought it a debt due to friendship, and to the cause of God, to write him a letter.

Saturday, 3. God was graciously pleased, this night, to give me an assurance of his blessing on the public work of tomorrow. How tenderly and bountifully does the Father of consolations deal with his sinful messengers! Surely, doubting is doubly a sin in me!

Sunday, 4. In the morning rode to Sheldon; where I was enabled to read prayers, and preach, with great comfort to myself, and, I have reason to hope, with power to them that heard. On my return, being part of the way over Hembercombe (more properly, Hembury Common), a most violent storm of rain obliged me to turn back, and take shelter at Richard Lane’s. After half an hour’s stop there, I returned to Broad-Hembury; where, in the afternoon, I read prayers, and preached, with the greatest freedom and fervour, to a most attentive and (in appearance) affected congregation. Wet as the afternoon has proved, a great number of strangers were at church; and, I verily think, the presence and power of God was amongst us.---After service good old Mrs. Hutchings, and Joan Venn, drank coffee with me at the vicarage. Our conversation was, for the most part, savoury and comfortable. Was rejoiced to hear, that the word of God from my lips has been greatly blessed of late, to those two persons; to farmer Copp, and his eldest son; to old Mr. Thomas Granger, farmer Smith, and several other of my parishoners. Since I came down last into Devonshire from London (i. e. not quite a twelvemonth ago), God has owned my ministry more than ever; particularly, at Harpford, and here. Blessed Lord, the work is thine alone: go on, I most humbly beseech thee, to speak to the hearts of sinners, by the meanest mouth that ever blew the trumpet in Zion! At night, I was much comforted in spirit, in reading bishop Beveridge’s Private Thoughts.

Monday, 5. Had some sweet, refreshing intercourse with God, several times today. Upon a review of my experience during the former part of last year, and occasionally in the course of the present, I cannot help observing, that great humiliations are, often, the best preparatives for ministerial usefulness.

Saturday, 10. God refreshed and satisfied my soul tonight, with a Saturday’s-assurance. "I have blessed thee, and will bless thee again." was the answer I received.

Sunday, 11. In reading prayers, and in preaching, the Lord was signally with me, both parts of the day. In the afternoon, especially, the word, I verily trust, went forth with power and was glorified.

Saturday, 17. Received some satisfactory and comfortable intimations of a Sabbath-day’s blessing tomorrow. Surely, the Lord is indeed good to those that wait for him, and to the soul that seeketh him!

Sunday, 18. Read prayers, and preached, morning and afternoon, with very great fervour, strength, and enlargement. That God is doing his work of grace upon the hearts of some, I have all the proof, both public and private, that the nature of the case will admit of. The Lord hath been to my soul, this day, both in my study, and in the temple, a place of broad rivers and streams.

This evening, I met with a paragraph from archbishop Usher, which well deserves to be entered here: "I must tell you," says the excellent prelate, as my author relates it, "that we do not well understand what sanctification and the new creature are: it is no less than for a man to be brought to an entire resignation of his will to the will of God; and to live in the offering up of his soul continually, in the flames of love, as a whole burnt-offering to Christ." I trust, I have experienced and do frequently experience, something of this blessed work, in myself: Lord, make the little one become a thousand!

Saturday, 24. Dined at Ottery, today, at Mr. Dare s. Our conversation turned partly on historical, partly on religious subjects. We talked, particularly, on the nature of regeneration: and I took occasion, among other things, to observe that the whole process of the new-birth seems included in that three fold conviction, mentioned by our Lord, and declared by him to be the office of the Holy Ghost: namely, Conviction of sin, or of our total depravity by nature and practice; of the impossibility of our being justified by works; of our liableness to the whole curse of the law; and our absolute inability to help, save, or recover ourselves, whether in whole or in part: 2. Conviction of righteousness, i. e. of the perfection, necessity, and efficacy of Christ’s righteousness, in order to justification before God: 3. Conviction of judgment, or that act of the Holy Spirit on the soul, whereby "the prince of this world is judged;" brought, as it were, to the bar; found guilty of usurpation; and dethroned: from which happy moment, the sinner is brought into sweet subjection to God, his lawful sovereign, sin is weakened as to its dominion (in order to its final extirpation), and the regenerate soul is more and more conformed to the image of God's holiness. So that, I suppose, conviction of sin is only another name for evangelical repentance; conviction of righteousness, for true faith in Christ; and conviction of judgment, a periphrasis for sanctification: which three capital graces are the constituents of regeneration. Toward evening returned to Broad-Hembury.

Sunday, 25. In the morning, read prayers, and preached; and the power of God appeared to accompany the word spoken. Young Mr. Minifie, in particular, was, I am informed, greatly affected from above. In the afternoon, the congregation was by far the greatest I ever yet saw here; the people flocked like doves to the windows; and such an auditory, and that auditory so solemn and attentive, was a most awfully affecting sight. I read prayers, and preached, with a fervour, strength, and liveliness, which only God could give. His word seems to run like fire which none can quench. Lord, pardon my unworthiness, and accomplish the work of thy grace upon the hearts of them that hear, and on the base, sinful heart of me the feeblest and most undeserving of thy messengers! After evening service, Mary Ellis called on me. If ever a soul was truly convinced of sin, I believe she is so. I endeavoured to administer balm to her wounded spirit, by opening up the promises, and unfolding a little of the unsearchable riches of Christ. This morning, as I was going to church, Joan Venn put a paper into my hands. Last Tuesday, she gave me an account of God's past dealings with her soul; and I have seldom seen a person, of the truth of whose conversion I had so little cause to doubt. In consequence of our interview that day, she has had some exercises of mind, as I find from this paper, which, omitting what relates to my unworthy self, runs thus: "I have had very deep thoughts, and very great trouble, since my last discourse with you. I have looked into my life past; I have ransacked my soul, and called to mind the sinful failings of my youth: and I find it very hard and difficult, to make my calling and election sure. I have earnestly desired to leave no corner of my soul unsearched; and I find myself a very grievous and wretched sinner. I have committed grievous sins, very grievous sins, such sins as are not fit to be named before God's saints. I have examined my soul by each particular commandment, and find myself guilty of the breach of all, and that in a high degree. And now, when I look upon the glass of the law, and there see my own vileness, I find God's justice and my own deserts even ready to surprise me and cast me down into the nethermost hell, and that most righteously: but O, see the goodness of a gracious God, in that he hath given me a sight of my sins! And I am inclined to think, that, if God did not work with me, this sorrow could not be. O, sir, I cannot but let you know, that some times I have some blessed thoughts of God; and O, how sweet are they to my soul! they are so ravishing, that I cannot possibly declare it; but they are like the morning cloud and early dew, soon gone, and then I am afraid. I have had abundance of trials and temptations in these three years almost; but if I could think that my dear Lord had shed his blood for me, I should not be so much shaken; and, because I cannot apply these things to myself, my heart doth mourn within me. I am greatly afraid of the deceitfulness of my heart, lest that should deceive me. But let the righteous smite me, and it shall be a kindness; and let him reprove me, and it shall be excellent oil which shall not break my head. O, that the Lord Jesus Christ would but sprinkle what I have said with his precious blood! And, now I have opened my soul to you, I most humbly beg and desire your advice concerning these weighty matters; for they are matters which concern my never dying soul.---And I have a high esteem for you: but what is my esteem? The esteem of a poor worm, of a poor sinful creature. O that the Lord would let me see, more and more, my own vileness! Now I have declared to you what the Lord, through grace, hath revealed to me; though I am unworthy to write to such," &c.

O, that all my parishioners were, not only almost, but altogether such, in spirit, as this woman! Illiterate she is, and, I believe, chiefly supports herself by spinning: but, when God teaches, souls are taught, indeed.

October 2. Sunday. In the morning read prayers, and preached, to a large and affected auditory: afterwards, I administered the blessed sacrament Last Whitsunday, I had but thirty-six communicants: today, I had the comfort of counting sixty-one. It was a season of spiritual joy and refreshment. Duty is pleasant, when God is present. In the afternoon, read prayers, and preached, to a still more crowded church than ever. Great were my strength and joy in the Lord; and the word, I verily trust, was armed with divine power. Mr. Pratt, of Dalwood, in Dorsetshire, with two other gentlemen of the same place, were here, both parts of the day. I know not that I ever spent a more comfortable and triumphant sabbath. How is it, O thou God of love, that thy tender mercies should thus accompany and follow the vilest sinner out of hell! That, to me, who am less than the least of all saints, this grace should be given, that I should both experience and preach the unsearchable riches of Christ!

Monday, 3. Good Mr. Bampfield, of Sheldon, called on me this morning; and our conversation, though short, was chiefly on the best subjects.---Having been informed, yesterday, that Mr. Rutter, a worthy dissenting minister in Honiton, was seized, a few days ago, with the palsy, and disabled from the work of the ministry, I wrote him a letter.

December 3. Saturday. Mr. Bottomley, a worthy person, for whom I have a very great esteem, but who has long been an Arminian, put a paper into my hands, last night, at the Queen’s Arms, after the club broke up, containing some of his chief objections to the Calvinistic scheme. It is a copy of a letter, sent by him, some time ago, to Mr. Romaine; and runs in an humble, modest style; very different from the bigotry and fury, the abuse and wilful misrepresentations, too usually found in the productions of those who pretend, amidst all, to be advocates for universal love in the Deity; but of which they seldom shew any traces in themselves. I gave my friend the substance of my thoughts in a letter.

We have now to take notice of Mr. Toplady, as entering the polemic field; and cannot help viewing him with a mixture of love and admiration. As a writer of true genius he has given scope to his own abilities, and thought as well as read. He has carried a classical taste into subjects which have been too often treated in a dry, jejune, and insipid manner. Though the track has been beaten, he has brought out something new on every subject he has entered upon. His style was chaste, animated, simple and grand, and so varied as to suit the different topics he canvassed. He had the peculiarity of spirit to strike off glowing images, and to seize the ridicule of character. The union of strength with elegance and precision characterises his diction, and entitles him to a distinguished rank amongst theological writers.

There was a singular unhappiness attending our author in meeting with an opponent who should have been passed by in silent pity. The person alluded to was the Rev. Mr. John Wesley, a clergyman ordained in the church of England, but whose eccentric principles, and palpable deviations from his ecclesiastical parent, and from what has been received as sound principle in Protestant churches, was a peculiar trait in his character. His popularity as an itinerant preacher, by an assiduous perseverance, procured him a considerable number of votaries, who attached themselves to him as their leader. He published several books extracted from the writings of other men, which also conduced to render him conspicuous. His understanding, strictly speaking, was but ordinary. His imagination was fertile in littleness. The reader is disturbed and disgusted by the indistinctness of his ideas, and the inconclusiveness of his reasonings, the glaring misrepresentations and the plagiarisms of his pages. His arguments have been made up of undigested materials, heterogeneous and repugnant, without either shape or form, the frivolousness of their design and application have been completely destroyed by being only set in array against each other. If a prize had been given to dulness and the most superlative conceit, this gentleman might have started with the certainty of triumph. His resentment towards those who differed from him was intense. His self-importance was astonishing, so that no reprehension given, in ever so mild a way, could instruct him.

Those who have taken a cursory review, and were unacquainted with the parties, have taken our author’s energy for indignation, his spirit for invective, and his retorts for passion and outrage. We pretend not that he was impeccable, we acknowledge the ebullitions of a little subacid humour now and then, and that we find him sometimes indulging himself in a flow of witticism, which may appear to the fastidious as bordering upon levity but what is this but light and shade reciprocally setting off each other? It should be remembered, that those small faults, if they may be called such, are more than compensated by that great solidity and depth of thought, which, like a golden vein, runs through the whole of his writings.

Controversial divinity has been held in much disrepute, by the ill informed zeal with which it has been managed by various disputants. It has often produced a spirit of opposition and rivalship. The setting up of a party, as also bigoted attachments to certain ceremonies, or particular modes of thinking. The naked simplicity of truth has been covered under the shreds and patches of declamation. The result of which has been, that the demon of discord has too often found a lace in the very sacred sanctuary, so as to break that cement that unites professing Christians to one another. It has had such a disagreeable aspect to those who have been making a serious inquiry after divine knowledge, as to promote a lassitude and indifference towards the investigation of subjects that are of everlasting importance. Therefore, while on the one hand we reprobate every idea of an unbecoming asperity in things truly trifling, and of no consequence, let it not be supposed that, because strong truths prove offensive to weak eyes, a minister ought in any degree, by a wretched, dastardly, pusillanimity, to be so disingenous as to make any apology, for not contending earnestly for that faith once delivered to the saints, though it should expose him to the uncandid virulence of habitual dissention.

Mr. Toplady, though so strenuous an advocate for the essentials of Christianity, so as not to recede an iota from his principles, was notwithstanding possessed of enlarged and expanded views. His intimacy and friendship with several valuable characters in the dissenting communion, evidently evinced the generous and liberal sentiments of his breast. He expressed great esteem for those who were engaged in promoting the Redeemer’s interest among mankind: how much soever they may have differed on unimportant topics, they uniformly found in him the urbanity of a gentleman, accompanied with that suavity of disposition which rendered him agreeable to all who had the happiness of his acquaintance. It was his intention, had his health permitted, to employ his pen in endeavouring to refute opinions advanced by Dr. Priestley, in his book, entitled, "Disquisitions on Matter and Spirit." Though the doctor’s theological principles and his were as opposite as it were possible to conceive, we cannot help anticipating, that if such an intellectual feast had taken place, from the specimen of their correspondence, we should have seen the truest respect given, by Mr. Toplady, to a great genius, and the moral integrity of the man, without sacrificing truth, by a fulsome adulation, or for one moment countenancing those destructive tenets which degrade the person, and annihilate the work of Christ in the redemption of sinners.

In the year 1768, six students were expelled the University of Oxford; much investigation relative to the cause took place, and several pamphlets were written on the occasion. It was in some degree the means of reviving an enquiry respecting the Calvinism or Arminianism of the church of England. Had some of the persons concerned in the dispute adhered to observations and facts, it would have saved much superfluous time, in repeating what others have said again and again before them. For it is undeniable, that to be zealously attached to the Articles, Homilies, and Liturgy of the establishment, the epithet of Calvinist is certain to be prefixed to the character who espouses those doctrines. The name of any man, however highly sanctioned, should be of no avail, in enforcing or determining the belief of any one. We know of no infallible spiritual optimist: it is to the Scriptures every appeal must be made: nevertheless, so far as Calvin, or any other venerable character appear to embrace, and ardently stand forth to maintain the unadulterated system of the gospel, we have no objection to arrange ourselves under their banners, and to follow them so far as they followed Christ.

Dr. Nowel peremptorily asserted the Arminianism of the church of England in answer to Pietas Oxoniensis. This called forth the pen of our author, in a treatise published in the year 1769, with the following title: "The Church of England vindicated from the Charge of Arminianism, in a Letter addressed to Dr. Nowel." He has therein shewn, by the clearest deduction of argument, unconnected with laboured sophistry, or the studied distictions of the subtilties of the declaimer, on which side the church leans.

In the same year our author published a tract in English, from the Latin of Jerom Zanchius, with this inscription, "The Doctrine of absolute Predestination stated and asserted, with a Preliminary Discourse on the Divine Attributes, accompanied with the Life of Zanchius." This piece was finished by Mr. Toplady when he was about twenty years of age, but by a modesty of disposition, bordering upon timidity, it was not announced to the public until nine years after. The translation was undertaken with a view to illustrate the principles of the reformation, and obviate objections that have been urged, that the doctrine of predestination was but partially received by those eminent men, who had then lately left the church of Rome, at the same time the principles are discussed upon Scripture premises, and in analogy with the divine attributes.

Mr. John Wesley, in a printed sheet of paper, that it might be distributed with the greater facility, endeavoured to impose on the public a few mutilated extracts from the last mentioned pamphlet, signed with the initials of our author’s name; the notoriety of such a weak procedure, if it had been left unregarded, would, in time, have shewn the imbecility of the attempt, and proved that uprightness had nothing to do with Mr. Wesley or his principles. It however appeared to Mr. Toplady of consequence enough to call forth his pen on the occasion, in a letter from the press, in the year 1770, "To the reverend Mr. John Wesley, relative to his pretended Abridgment of Zanchius." A few months after, a second edition was called for, which was enlarged with a postscript to the reverend Mr. Sellon. His sentiments were manly and spirited, conveyed in a close and nervous style.

This publication was succeeded by a discourse preached at St. Ann’s church, Black-friars, entitled, "A Caveat against Unsound Doctrines." Mr. Toplady in this sermon asserts a few of the essential doctrines of revelation that were stigmatised with every opprobrium, he appeals, and avows his principles, from the confession of faith asserted in that church, of which he was a minister. To those who depreciate every system, as the composition of men, liable to prejudice and error, and may therefore advance propositions which the Bible will by no means support, he places the Scripture as the grand object, and enforces the doctrines by arguments, solid and incompressible.

Mr. Toplady here presents himself before us as a public speaker, in which situation he stood eminently distinguished. A specimen of his judgment and perspicuity, accompanied with a nobleness of sentiment and sublimity of expression, are now before the public. Never did we see a man ascend the pulpit with a more serious air, conscious of the momentous work that he was engaged in. His discourses were extemporary, delivered in the strains of true unadulterated oratory. He had a great variety of talents, such as are seldom seen united in one person: his voice was melodious and affecting; his manner of delivery and action were engaging, elegant, and easy, so as to captivate and fix the attention of every hearer. His explanations were distinct and clear; his arguments strong and forcible; and his exhortations warm and animating; his feelings were so intensely poignant, as to occasion, in some of his addresses, a flow of tears; which, as it were by a sympathetical attraction, have drawn forth a reciprocal sensibility in his auditory. He despised those rhetorical tricks, that captivate and allure the multitude, and yet so numerous have been his assemblies, that the churches where he preached in the metropolis could not contain the hearers. He had an extensive knowledge of the several avenues to the human mind, so as by a sublimity of reasoning to astonish his adversaries. He was no servile imitator of any one, a pleasing originality in his manner was peculiar to himself, and had the appearance of an immediate perception. For to discourse well, something more than learning is wanting; the happy art of expressing with facility and elegance must, in a great degree, be born with the speaker, and is the immediate gift of heaven. A man may be unacquainted with the Grecian and Roman orators, or any preceptive treatise on the subject, and yet enter into the spirit of those great originals. Notwithstanding he was possessed of whatever study and application could impart, or learning, judgment, and genius could combine, we find him estimating all human attainments as of little consequence in divine things, without the effectual agency of the Holy Spirit. It was this that cast a lustre upon his abilities, and peculiarly characterized him a minister of the New Testament. He had the pleasure to see the work of the Lord prosper in his hands, and many souls given him, which will be his crown of rejoicing in the day of the appearance of the Lord Jesus.

In the year 1771, were published, three sermons, by Mr. Toplady, preached in his church, at Broad-Hembury, Dec. 25, 1770, two of which were entitled, "Jesus seen of Angels," and the third, "God's Mindfulness of Man." In these elegant compositions, there is a novetly of sentiment in matters of the most common discussion: the beautiful pathos with which they abound, must at once excite the notice of the most cursory reader.

The publication of these discourses was succeeded by a pamphlet, entitled, "Free Thoughts on the projected Application to Parliament, in the year 1771, for the Abolition of Ecclesiastical Subscription." Our author therein acknowledges himself a defender of subscriptions to articles of faith, and that a community has a right to demand it from those whom they invest with any office in religious concerns, as a fence for keeping principles inimical to their views from entering among them, at the same time he enters his protest, and looks upon it as a grievance, that it should be exacted from the laity, particularly, those [1] who take the academical degrees in law or physic, and asserts, that no body of men whatsoever has any plea to obtrude their opinions upon others. It was his uniform sentiment, that the empire of the mind is peculiar to the dominion of God, in religious concerns; that, to exercise any authority over it, in any case, or in any degree whatever, is a sacrilegious invasion of the divine prerogative, and one of the highest offences that can be committed against God and man. He was a strenuous advocate for Christian benevolence, and for the unrestrained toleration of Protestant Dissenters, with an enlargement of mind, that has a tendency to unite good men of different persuasions into one bond of union, which is the great design of the gospel of Christ.

[1] By an Ac 19 Geo. III. the Dissenters are tolerated to worship God, according to their consciences, on subscribing the Scriptures instead of the Articles

We find our author, in the year 1772, engaged again in vindicating the principles he patronised and avowed in his translation of Zanchius, in a publication under the title, "More Work for Mr. John Wesley, or a Vindication of the Decrees and Providences of God, against a Paper called the Consequence Proved." The decrees of God, or his immanent determination respecting either angels or men, are so inscrutable, that all human researches must utterly fail, when attempting an investigation. The bounds which should circumscribe our thoughts have been most indecently leapt over, so that in endeavouring to account for the divine procedure, and to reconcile what has been supposed to carry an incongruity of principle, have lead the inquirers to canvas the indefeasible prerogative of Deity. The result of which has been, they have found themselves enveloped in a maze of contradiction, and, instead of acknowledging the ambiguity attending human reasoning on such topics, they have substituted frivolous and vexatious objections, contradicting the analogy of divine revelation. We read, that when Christ entered decisively upon the subject, in the 6th chapter of St John’s gospel, some of his disciples peremptorily asserted, that "It was a hard saying," and asked, "Who can bear it?" Our Lord reiterated the doctrine to them, in the same discourse, and many of them, we are there informed, were so inveterate against him, that they left his presence, "and walked no more with him." As it was then, so has it been in every period of time. For almost every sect, however they may have disagreed upon other subjects, have unanimously coincided to explode, with a degrading menace, the doctrine of predestination. Persons of atheistical, and deistical principles, with those unacquainted with the Scriptures, have joined in one decisive adherency of opinion; not considering that the counsel of God must stand, and that he will do all his pleasure, his decrees being, like himself, immutable. Mr. Toplady, in this tract, canvasses the objections urged against God's prescience, with that acuteness of penetration, which carries a pleasing ingenuity in his explanations, clothed with a vigour of language deserving commendation.

On the 12th of May, 1772, our author was appointed to preach a visitation sermon before the clergy of the archdeaconry of Exeter, held at Columpton, which was published a few weeks after under the title "Clerical Subscription no Grievance, &c." This discourse is richly laden with evangelical treasure, we wish it were put into the hands of every candidate for the sacred ministry, on examination it will be found to contain a choice epitome of sacred truths, enforced to the conscience, by several apposite texts of Scripture, shewn to comport with the fixed principles of the church of England.

Animated at all times with a laudable ardour for the interest of the established church, he unremittingly endeavoured to retard its decay, and to restore it to its primitive principles, by bringing to appearance the excellent edifice of her doctrines, as erected on marble columns, instead of posts, crumbling to putrefaction. This is particularly exemplified by referring to a work of his in two vols. octavo, published in the year 1774, inscribed "Historic Proof of the Doctrinal Calvinism of the Church of England, &c." In these volumes, he has shewn great classical taste, splendour of erudition and critical acumen, for while he is attending to the merit of others, he is raising a monument of his own abilities. In this history he investigates the principles of many of those great worthies who were the agents, under Divine Providence, of bringing in the dawn of the morning, into the dark abodes of barbarism and ignorance. The light they were the means of diffusing has gradually increased, and continued as it proceeded in the midst of intervening clouds, until we in our day have experienced something descriptive of its meridian brightness. To that keenness of understanding so necessary to form a true critic, he has added that perseverance of investigation, and accuracy of research, which were essential in delineating the portraits of those great characters. In the details of the extracts, and examination of their principles, he gives an immediate transcript of the feelings of his own mind, and indisputably proves the Calvinism of the church he was so zealously espoused to.

In the year 1774, were published by Mr. Toplady, two sermons, one preached at St. Ann’s Blackfriars, May 25th, with the inscription "Free Will and Merit fairly Examined, or Men not their own Saviours." The other was preached at the Lock Chapel, June 19, entitled, "Good News from Heaven, or the Gospel a joyful Sound," both delivered in the above year. These two discourses are a desirable acquisition to the lovers of evangelical religion and sound reasoning. The material principles contended for are comprised in narrow limits, their connection and existence are made to appear to depend on one another. The arguments are well distinguished and arranged. The clearness and precision of the definitions are such, that everything extraneous is thrown up, and nothing redundant retained, which is not directly adherent to the points immediately in view. The topics introduced are prosecuted with great judgment, accuracy, and caution, so as to steer clear of Arminianism on one side, and Libertinism on the other

In the beginning of the year 1774, a religious pamphlet was printed, called The Gospel Magazine; being a new series of a former work under that name, which was continued statedly. The utility of such a periodical publication must be obvious, for the contents, when executed with discernment, will be various, interesting, instructive, and entertaining, and may be easily purchased by those who have scarcely means to procure a number of books. The above journal was carried on with reputable distinction for a few years. From December 1775, to June 1776, Mr. Toplady was the editor, which enhanced the sale considerably; some of the anonymous parts he composed therein shine conspicuous. He often appeared under the modest character of Minimus. Sometimes he adopted the descriptive signature of Concionator, and a few papers with the initials of his own name. With the assistance of ingenious and learned correspondents, he continued for a time to enrich and diversify this monthly entertainment for the public.

In the year 1775, Mr. Toplady published an 8vo. vol. entitled, "The Scheme of Christian and Philosophical Necessity Asserted." In this work he appears not only as a respectable divine, but as a philosopher and a man of taste; he adopts the opinion in behalf of physical and moral necessity, and rescues the doctrine from the pretended charge of irrationality brought against it by the self-taught opinionist; he combats the notion of man’s determining power, and analyses the two component principles with much ingenuity, and with a palatable mixture of science and pleasantry. He vindicates God's preterition of some of the fallen race, as a Scripture doctrine, at the same time gives his opinion from circumstances, that the far greater part of the human race, are made for endless happiness. To this tract is subjoined a dissertation concerning the sensible qualities of colour, illustrated from the celebrated Mr. Locke. Our author, in his reasonings, by a natural and easy turn, carries persuasion into the heart of the reader without fatiguing him; and though there may not be always an agreement with the peruser and writer in metaphysical or philosophical matters, he must be a very nice critic who is not much taken with many parts of it, as au uniformity of opinion on some speculative subjects is almost impossible.

It may be remembered, that during the war between Great Britain and a large part of the inhabited globe of America, that the feuds and dissensions of party were carried to a considerable extent, discussions began to take place on subjects which before were held too sacred to be entered upon. It was well known that Mr. Toplady was against those coercive measures that had taken place, and was of opinion that no plea could be set up in justification of the proceedings of this country against the colonies, which could be defended on constitutional principles. He was so explicit as to confess, that the civil rights of mankind rank next in value, dignity, and importance, to the gospel of Christ. That the good Christian, and the good Englishman, are characters perfectly compatible, and that no book is more unfavourable to the claims of arbitrary power than the Bible. His sentiments were, that if ever English liberty perish, its perdition must be owing to want of spirit and of virtue in the English. While they as a people are wise to understand, virtuous to love, and firm to defend the palladium of their own constitution, no weapon formed against it can ultimately prosper. England must be a felo de se, and fall by political suicide; that is, she must tamely resign her throat to the knife of despotism before it be possible for her constitutional existence to fail, and that no such degenerate miscreants may ever arise to dishonour the name and betray the rights of Britain, were his fervent wishes on many public and private occasions. As an enemy to passive obedience, and unlimited subjection to civil government, he was exposed to the malicious insinuations of those, who had an ingenuity in misrepresenting his motives, and traducing his character as a Republican in principle; indeed, so ridiculously prejudiced were some of his friends, that it occasioned a suspension of that mutual endearment that apparently subsisted between them in the paths of common amities. It happened very seasonably, that an occasion presented for him to remove the obloquy that had been thrown on his character, by his being appointed to preach at St. Mildred’s Church, in the Poultry, on Friday, Dec. 13, 1776; being a day which was set apart for a general fast. His text was from Php 4:5. The sermon was printed the beginning of the ensuing year. In this discourse, he unequivocally delivered his political sentiments, suitable to the clerical character, expressing a sincere attachment for the English constitution, and to legal liberty, with that subjection to a mild and equitable authority, which was the result of his good sense, prudence, and moderation.

It was the infelicity of our much loved friend to have a capacious soaring mind, inclosed in a very weak and languid body; yet, this by no means retarded his intense application to study, which was often prolonged until two and three o clock in the morning; this and the cold moist air that generally prevails in Devonshire, which is extremely pernicious to weak lungs, it is more than probable laid the foundation of a consumption, which terminated in his death. He endeavoured to exchange his living for one in a southern part of the island, but could not obtain it. As his strength and health were greatly impaired, he was advised by the faculty to remove to London, which he accordingly did in the year 1775, and notwithstanding his debilitated frame, he continued to preach a number of sermons in the churches, for the benefit of public charitable institutions.

Having no settled situation in the metropolis to preach in, and many of his friends being desirous of receiving the advantages of his ministry, they procured, by an engagement with the trustees of the French Calvinist reformed Church, in Orange-street, Leicester Fields, their chapel for divine service, on Sunday and Wednesday evenings. Mr. Toplady accordingly preached his first lecture there on Sunday, April 11th, 1776, from the 44th of Isaiah, verse the 22d. It was on that spot where he closed his ministerial labours, which continued there for the term of two years and three months. In his addresses from the pulpit in that chapel, he appeared often, as it were, divested of the body, and to be in the participation of the happiness that appertains to the invisible state. It was not the mechanical process of preaching, regulated by the caprice of the moment; what he delivered he felt, and his feelings proceeded from thoughtfulness, meditation, and experience; an experience illuminated by divine knowledge, which continued copiously increasing the nearer he approached his heavenly inheritance.

During the time of his residence at Orange-street chapel he published, in the year 1776, a collection of Psalms and Hymns, for public and private worship. The compositions are four hundred and nineteen in number; they are judiciously selected, and some of them altered, where the phraseology is exceptionable. The whole tenour of them is truly evangelical. In an excellent and sensible preface, prefixed to this manual of sacred poetry, Mr. Toplady observes, that, "with regard to the collection, he could only say, that (excepting the very few hymns of his own, which he was prevailed upon to insert), it ought to be the best that has appeared, considering the great number of volumes (no fewer than between forty and fifty), which had, more or less, contributed to the compilation." A spurious edition has been printed, but so retrenched and augmented, as to leave no resemblance to the valuable original, which is replete with the richest odours of gospel truth.

The apprehensions entertained, for some time past, by those who loved him, that his health was on the decline, began now to be confirmed. For, on Easter Sunday, the 19th of April, 1778, as he attempted to speak from Isa 26:19. "Thy dead men shall live, together with my dead body shall they arise," &c. his hoarseness was so violent, that he was obliged, after naming the text, to descend from the pulpit. But so ardently abounding was he in the ministry of the word, that when the least abatement in his disorder gave him a little strength, he entered upon his delightful work with that alacrity of spirit, as if he was in a state of convalescence: when done preaching, he has been so enfeebled as to create the most exquisite sensibility in the breasts of those who have beheld him. After the above Sunday, he preached four times, and on each occasion his words were to the congregation as if he should never see them more, until he met them in the kingdom of heaven.

While this great and invaluable Christian was waiting, and earnestly desiring a dismission from the body, and having, as himself expressed, settled all his concerns, respecting both worlds, so as to have nothing to do but die, he received a shaft from a quiver unexpected. Mr. Wesley, and some of his followers, had propagated, that Mr. Toplady had receded from his former principles, and had a desire to protest against them, in the presence of Mr. Wesley. Letters from the country were sent to him, mentioning his recantation, as also some verbal intimations from those who were present, when the intelligence was given. The suggestion of such a report was certainly prematurely made on the presumption that Mr. Toplady was in such a state, that it would not be communicated to him, and if it should, that his tongue and pen would be so torpid, as to render him unable to enter his protest against the flagitious turpitude of such a procedure. When the above transactions were rehearsed to him, it rekindled the dying embers that remained. He acquainted his physician with his intentions of going before his congregation again, and to make a solemn appeal in reference to his past and present principles, so as to counteract the baneful effects of party rage, and misrepresentation, concealed under the robe of virtue, or Christian purity. He was informed, that it would be dangerous in him to make the attempt; and, that probably he might die in the execution of it. He replied, with his usual magnanimity, "A good man once said, he would rather wear out, than rust out; and I would rather die in the harness, than die in the stall." On Sunday, June the 14th, he came from Knightsbridge, and, after a sermon by his assistant, the rev. Dr. lllingworth, he went up into the pulpit, to the inexpressible surprise of his people, and made a short, but affecting exortation, from the 2nd Epistle of Peter, chap. i. ver. 13, 14. "Yea, I think it meet, as long as I am in this tabernacle, to stir you up, by putting you in remembrance: knowing that shortly I must put off this my tabernacle, even as our Lord Jesus Christ hath shewed me." When mentioning the sensible peace he was a recipient of, and the joy and consolation of the Holy Spirit, that he participated of for several months past, and the desirable expectation, that in a few days he must resign his mortal part to corruption, as a prelude to his seeing the King in his beauty; the effect this had upon his auditory cannot be described or anticipated; but must be seen and felt, to be justly related. He closed his address, respecting the purport of his coming there, in substance as follows, which was printed in a week after, entitled, "The Rev. Mr.Toplady’s Dying Avowal of his Religious sentiments:"

"Whereas, some time since, a wicked, scandalous and false report was diffused, in various parts of this kingdom, by the followers of Mr. John Wesley; purporting, that I have changed some of my religious sentiments, especially such of them as relate more immediately to the doctrines of grace, I thought it my indispensible duty, on the Sunday after I received this information, which was the 13th of June last, publicly to declare myself, from the pulpit in Orange-street Chapel, to the following effect: It having been industriously circulated, by some malicious and unprincipled persons, that during my present long and severe illness, I expressed a strong desire of seeing Mr. John Wesley before I die, and revoking some particulars relative to him, which occur in my writings: Now, I do publicly and most solemnly aver, that I have not, nor ever had, any such intention or desire; and that I most sincerely hope my last hours will be much better employed than in conversing with such a man. To which I added: so certain and so satisfied am I, of the truth of all that I have ever written; that, were I now sitting up in my dying bed, with a pen and ink in my hand, and all the religious and controversial writings I ever published (more especially those relating to Mr. John Wesley, and the Arminian controversy), whether respecting facts or doctrines, could at once be displayed to my view, I should not strike out a single line relative to him or them.

"Matters rested thus, when I received a letter, dated July 17, 1778, from a friend who lives near a hundred miles from town, in which letter is the following passage: I cannot help feeling an uncommon emotion and surprise at the report that you have recanted all that you have written and said against John Wesley, and many like things; and that you declared as much, to your congregation, a few weeks ago. I was told this, by two persons, who said, they were there present at the time. How am I amazed at such falshoods! The party, and name, and character, that are established by lies, have no good foundation, and therefore can never stand long.

"This determined me to publish the present address to the religious world. I pray God to give the perfect liars grace and repentance to the acknowledgment of the truth. And may every blessing, of the upper, and of the nether springs, be the portion of those who maintain, who experience, and adorn, the glorious gospel of the grace of God!

"Should any hostile notice be taken of this paper, I do not intend to make any kind of reply. I am every day in view of dissolution. And, in the fullest assurance of my eternal salvation (an assurance which has not been clouded by a single doubt, for near a year and a half last past) am waiting, looking, and longing for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. "I once intended subjoining to this paper, the specific outlines of my religious sentiments; but on farther reflection, I believe it may be more expedient to refer the reader to the several [2] writings I have published: every one of which I do hereby, as a dying man, ratify and declare to be expressive of my real religious principles, from any one of which principles I have never varied, in the least degree, since God enlightened me into the clear knowledge of his truth; which is now within a few weeks of twenty years ago.

[2] If the reader wishes to see a doctrinal compendium of these, he will find it in a sermon of mine, entitled, "A Caveat against unsound Doctrines:" every part of which I hereby avow to be declarative of my fixed and ultimate judgment.

"I was awakened in the month of August, 1755, but not, as has been falsely reported, under Mr. John Wesley, or any preacher connected with him.

"Though awakened in 1755. I was not led into a full and clear view of all the doctrines of grace, till the year 1758, when, through the great goodness of God, my arminian prejudices received an effectual shock, in reading Dr. Manton’s Sermons on the xviith of St. John.

"I shall remember the years 1755, and 1758, with gratitude and joy, in the heaven of heavens, to all eternity."

A. M. TOPLADY. Knightsbridge, July 22, 1778.

We have followed this ambassador of Christ in his public character, and have now to behold him in the closing scene of life unmoveable and unappalled. The doctrines of the gospel which he so sweetly accented, and which were his constant theme in the house of his pilgrimage, proved his support and comfort, when his fabric was gradually falling to dissolution. His divine master was pleased to confer a peculiar honour upon him in his last hours, by sustaining him in that trying conflict, and by giving him a view by faith of the glory that awaited him. The Psalmist’s words were verified in him, That "light is sown for the righteous, and gladness for the upright in heart." How does the lusture of what men call great, and the splendid actions by which they are dazzled, appear to fade, and prove to be as illusive shadows, when we view a believer in his dying moments, felicitated in the bright and unclouded prospect of eternal felicity!

We shall here introduce a few extracts from a small narrative, published a short time after his death. Some of his observations and remarks were, by a few persons, who were present, committed to writing, that they should not be effaced from the memory, and for the satisfaction of others.

In conversation with a gentleman of the faculty, not long before his death, he frequently disclaimed, with abhorrence, the least dependance on his own righteousness, as any cause of his justification before God, and said, that he rejoiced only in the free, complete, and everlasting salvation of God's elect by Jesus Christ, through the sanctification of the Holy Spirit. We cannot satisfy the reader more than by giving this friend’s own relation of intercourse and conversation. "A remarkable jealousy was apparent in his whole conduct, for fear of receiving any part of that honour which is due to Christ alone. He desired to be nothing, and that Jesus might be all, and in all. His feelings were so very tender upon this subject, that I once undesignedly put him almost in an agony, by remarking the great loss, which the church of Christ would sustain by his death, at this particular, juncture. The utmost distress was immediately visible in his countenance and he exclaimed to this purpose: What; by my death? No! By my death? No, Jesus Christ is able, and will, by proper instruments, defend his own truths. And with regard to what little I have been enabled to do in this way, not to me, not to me, but to his own name, and to that only, be the glory.

"Conversing upon the subject of election, he said that God's everlasting love to his chosen people; his eternal, particular, most free, and immutable choice of them in Christ Jesus; was without the least respect to any work, or works, of righteousness, wrought, or to be wrought, or that ever should be wrought, in them or by them: for God's election does not depend upon our sanctification, but our sanctification depends upon God's election and appointment of us to everlasting life. At another time he was so affected with a sense of God's everlasting love to his soul, that he could not refrain from bursting into tears.

"The more his bodily strength was impaired, the more vigorous, lively,and rejoicing, his mind seemed to be. From the whole tenor of his conversation during our interviews, he appeared not merely placid and serene, but he evidently possessed the fullest assurance of the most triumphant faith. He repeatedly told me, that he had not had the least shadow of a doubt, respecting his eternal salvation, for near two years past. It is no wonder, therefore, that he so earnestly longed to be dissolved and to be with Christ. His soul seemed to be constantly panting heaven-ward; and his desires increased, the nearer his dissolution approached. A short time before his death, at his request, I felt his pulse; and he desired to know what I thought of it? I told him, that his heart and arteries evidently beat (almost every day) weaker and weaker. He replied immediately with the sweetest smile upon his countenance, Why, that is a good sign, that my death is fast approaching; and, blessed be God, I can add, that my heart beats every day stronger and stronger for glory.

"A few days preceding his dissolution, I found him sitting up in his arm chair, and scarcely able to move or speak. I addressed him very softly, and asked, if his consolations continued to abound, as they had hitherto done? He quickly replied; O, my dear sir, it is impossible to describe how good God is to me. Since I have being sitting in this chair this afternoon (glory be to his name!) I have enjoyed such a season, such sweet communion with God, and such delightful manifestations of his presence with, and love to my soul, that it is impossible for words, or any language, to express them. I have had peace and joy unutterable; and I fear not, but that God's consolations and support will continue. But he immediately recollected himself, and added, What have I said? God may, to be sure, as a sovereign, hide his face and his smiles from me; however, I believe he will not; and if he should, yet still will I trust in him: I know I am safe and secure; for his love and his covenant are everlasting."

To another friend, who, in a conversation with him upon the subject of his principles, had asked him, whether any doubt remained upon his mind respecting the truth of them; he answered; Doubt, sir, doubt! Pray, use not that word, when speaking of me. I cannot endure the term; at least, while God continues to shine upon my soul, in the gracious manner he does now: not (added he) but that I am sensible, that while, in the body, if left of Him, I am capable, through the power of temptation, of calling into question every truth of the gospel. But, that is so far from being the case, that the comforts and manifestations of his love are so abundant, as to render my state and condition the most desirable in the world. I would not exchange my condition with any one upon earth. And, with respect to my principles; those blessed truths, which I have been enabled in my poor measure to maintain, appear to me, more than ever, most gloriously indubitable. My own existence is not, to my apprehension, a greater certainty.

The same friend calling upon him a day or two before his death, he said, with hands clasped, and eyes lifted up and starting with tears of the most evident joy, O, my dear sir, I cannot tell you the comforts I feel in my soul: they are past expression. The consolations of God to such an unworthy wretch are so abundant, that he leaves me nothing to pray for, but a continuance of them. I enjoy a heaven already in my soul. My prayers are all converted into praise. Nevertheless, I do not forget, that I am still in the body, and liable to all those distressing fears, which are incident to human nature, when under temptation and without any sensible divine support. But so long as the presence of God continues with me in the degree I now enjoy it, I cannot but think that such a desponding frame is impossible. All this he spake with an emphasis, the most ardent that can be conceived.

Speaking to another particular friend upon the subject of his "dying avowal," he expressed himself thus, My dear friend, those great and glorious truths which the Lord, in rich mercy, has given me to believe, and which he has enabled me (though very feebly) to stand forth in the defence of, are not (as those, who believe not or oppose them, say) dry doctrines, or mere speculative points. No. But, being brought into practical and heart-felt experience, they are the very joy and support of my soul; and the consolations, flowing from them, carry me far above the things of time and sense. Soon afterwards he added: So far as I know my own heart, I have no desire but to be entirely passive; to live, to die, to be, to do, to suffer, whatever is God's blessed will concerning me; being perfectly satisfied, that, as he ever has, so he ever will do that which is best concerning me; and that he deals out, in number, weight and measure, whatever will conduce must to his own glory, and to the good of his people.

Another of his friends, mentioning likewise the report that was spread abroad of his recanting his former principles, he said, with some vehemence and emotion, I recant my former principles! God forbid, that I should be so vile an apostate. To which he presently added, with great apparent humility, And yet that apostate I should soon be, if I were left to myself.

To the same friend, conversing upon the subject of his sickness, he said: Sickness is no affliction; pain no curse; death itself no dissolution.

All his conversations, as he approached nearer and nearer to his decease, seemed more and more happy and heavenly. He frequently called himself the happiest man in the world. O! (says he) how this soul of mine longs to be gone! Like a bird imprisoned in a cage, it longs to take its flight. O, that I had wings like a dove, then would I flee away to the realms of bliss, and be at rest forever! O, that some guardian angel might be commissioned; for I long to be absent from this body, and to be with my Lord for ever. Being asked by a friend, if he always enjoyed such manifestations? he answered: I cannot say, there are no intermissions; for, if there were not, my consolations would be more and greater than I could possibly bear; but, when they abate, they leave such an abiding sense of God's goodness, and of the certainty of my being fixed upon the eternal rock Christ Jesus, that my soul is still filled with peace and joy.

At another time, and indeed for many days together, he cried out, O, what a day of sunshine has this been to me! I have not words to express it. It is unutterable. O, my friends, how good is God! almost without interruption, his presence has been with me. And then, repeating several passages of Scripture, he added, What a great thing it is to rejoice in death! Speaking of Christ, he said, His love is unutterable! He was happy in declaring, that the 8th chapter of the epistle to the Romans, from the 33d to the end of the six following verses, were the joy and comfort of his soul. Upon that portion of Scripture he often descanted with great delight, and would be frequently ejaculating, Lord Jesus! why tarriest thou so long! He sometimes said, I find as the bottles of heaven empty, they are filled again; meaning, probably, the continual comforts of grace, which he abundantly enjoyed.

When he drew near his end, he said, waking from a slumber; O, what delights! Who can fathom the joys of the third heaven? And, a little before his departure, he was blessing and praising God for continuing to him his understanding in clearness; but (added he in a rapture) for what is most of all, his abiding presence, and the shining of his love upon my soul. The sky (says he) is clear; there is no cloud: Come, Lord Jesus, come quickly! Within the hour of his death, he called his friends and his servant, and asked them, if they could give him up? upon their answering in the affirmative, since it pleased the Lord to be so gracious to him, he replied; O, what a blessing it is, you are made willing to give me up into the hands of my dear Redeemer, and to part with me: it will not be long before God takes me; for no mortal man can live, (bursting, while he said it, into tears of joy; after the glories, which God has manifested to my soul. Soon after this he closed his eyes, and found (as Milton finely expresses it)

--------------A death like sleep, A gentle wafting to immortal life.

On Tuesday August 11th, 1778, in the 38th year of his age.

While rehearsing these particulars, we can not help laying down the pen to drop a tributary tear to the revered memory of this highly respectable minister of Jesus Christ.----------- Yet a little time and all painful recollection and sensations of this kind will be at an end, we shall have no more occasion to mark the vicissitudes of human affairs, nor to reflect on the nature and mixture of all earthly enjoyments; the transient duration of mortality shall never more be experienced, for the lustre of all that is great and lovely in the human character will be absorbed in the presence and in the perfect fruition of the adorable Trinity.

On Monday, August the 17th, 1778, at four o’clock in the afternoon, his remains were brought from Knightsbridge, to Tottenham Court Chapel, to be interred. Though the time was kept as private as possible, there were notwithstanding, several thousands of persons present on the solemnity. It was his particular request that no funeral sermon should be preached, he desired to slip into the tomb unnoticed and unregarded. His soul disdained to borrow posthumous fame. He had no wish to have his memory perpetuated by those little arts and finesses so often practised; he knew that his record was on high, and that his name was written in the Lamb’s Book of Life. He sought for no eulogium while living, and any panegyrics bestowed upon him when his course was run, he knew could be of no service, and that they are too often justly construed to proceed from pride, vanity, and weakness.

The Rev. Mr. Rowland Hill, prior to the burial service, could not refrain from innocently trespassing upon the solicitation of his departed friend, by addressing the multitude on the solemn occasion, and embraced the opportunity of affectionately declaring the love and veneration he felt for the deceased. The beautiful simplicity of his pathos, and the incomparably exquisite sensibility he shewed, were more than equivalent to the most studied harangue, furnished with all the trappings of meretricious ornaments. The funeral obsequies were read by Dr. Illingworth, and concluded with a suitable hymn. The casket which held this intrinsic jewel now lies entombed in the family grave of Mr. Hussey, 13 feet deep, under the gallery opposite the pulpit in the above chapel, whereon is fixed a plain stone, with only his name and age inscribed. His clay tenement rests there until the morning of the resurrection, when the trump of God, and the voice of the archangel, shall call forth his sleeping dust to join the disembodied spirit, now in the realms of bliss and glory.

The precious remains of this good man had not been long in the earth, when Mr. Wesley publicly asserted that he died blaspheming, and in the horror of despair; such unparalleled virulence of conduct undoubtedly exposed the personal enmity that rankled in Mr. Wesley’s breast towards Mr. Toplady. Men have a natural propensity to divide in opinion, an aberration from the purest system may attend the path of the most cautious traveller, and no impeachment whatever may be charged upon his benignity or integrity; but when materials, or facts of an important tendency, are accessible, and these are reserved or distorted by an interested falsehood, a display of conduct so mischievous in its consequence must lose all pretensions to veracity, and be too obvious to need any comment.

Sir Richard Hill, a character of eminence, who has for many years appeared as a disinterested volunteer in behalf of evangelical religion, and whose excellent virtues have at the same time adorned his Christian profession, stood forward, unsolicited, and detected the malignant conduct of Mr. Wesley, on this occasion, in an anonymous letter in a morning paper, and in a few weeks after he addressed him again in a small pamphlet, signed with his own name, and acknowledged himself the writer of the former. As these particulars are of material consequence in this narration, we shall not make any circuitous apology for inserting them here verbatim, with only this observation, that Mr. Wesley made no reply in any way.

Copy of a Letter addressed to the Rev. John Wesley, which appeared in the General Advertiser on the eight day of October last.

Rev. Sir,

I give you this public notice that certain persons who are your enemies, perhaps only because you keep clear of their calvinistic doctrines, have thought proper to affirm, that you and some of your preachers, have been vilifying the ashes, and traducing the memory of the late Mr. Augustus Toplady. Nay, it was even positively alleged, that you told Mr. Thomas Robinson of Hilderthorpe, near Bridlington, in Yorkshire, and the Rev. Mr. Greaves, curate to Mr. Fletcher of Madeley, that the account published concerning Mr. Toplady's death was a gross imposition on the public; for that he died in black despair, uttering the most horrible blasphemies; and that none of his friends were permitted to see him. All which was repeated at Bridlington, by one of your preachers, whose name is Rhodes, who further compared Mr. Toplady’s case to the awful one of Francis Spira; and added, "that the dreadful manner in which he died, had caused a woman who attended him to join your societies."

Now, sir, as many living, respectable witnesses can testify that Mr. Toplady departed this life in the full triumph of faith, and that the account published to the world of the state of soul he was in during his long illness, and at the hour of dissolution, was strictly and literally a true one, you are earnestly requested, for the satisfaction of your friends, thus publicly to assure the world, that you never advanced any thing of this sort to Mr. Robinson, Mr. Greaves, or to any other person; or else that you will produce your authority for your assertions; otherwise, it is to be feared, that your own character will suffer much, for having vented a most gross, malicious falsehood against a dead man who cannot answer for himself, in order to support your own cause and party."

I am, Rev. Sir,

Your sincere well wisher,

VERITAS.

Letter to the Rev. Mr. John Wesley.

Hawkstone, Nov. 29, 1779.

Rev. Sir,

The cause of my thus publicly addressing you, is owing to an information I received that you wished to know who was the author of a letter which appeared in the General Advertiser, on Friday the 8th of October last, wherein were some queries put to you concerning certain reports which it was supposed you had spread, relative to the illness and death of the late Mr. Augustus Toplady. I was further given to understand, that you had declared your intention of answering that letter, if the writer would annex his name to it. This being the case, though no names can at all alter facts, yet as I really wish to be rightly informed myself, and as the reports which have been propagated about Mr. Toplady have much staggered and grieved many serious Christians, I now (under my real signature) beg with all plainness, and with no other design than that the real truth may be known, again to propound those questions to you which were put in that letter, of which I confess myself to have been the sole author. And as I hear you have been pleased to call the letter a scurrilous one, I should be glad if you would point out to me wherein that scurrility consists; for though it was anonymous, I am not in the least conscious that there was any thing in it unbecoming that respect which might be due to a gentleman of your venerable age and function; and when you have shewn me wherein I have been culpable, I shall then readily and submissively ask your pardon. The letter itself I shall annex to this. The queries contained in it may be reduced to the following.

1st. Did you, sir, or did you not tell Mr. Thomas Robinson, of Hilderthorpe, near Bridlington in Yorkshire, that Mr. Toplady died in black despair, blaspheming; and that a greater imposition never was imposed on the public than that published by his friends relative to his death?

2dly. Did you ever tell the same in substance to the Rev. Mr. Greaves, [3] curate to Mr. Fletcher of Madely, or to any other person? [3] I hope this worthy gentleman, for whom I profess a sincere esteem, will pardon my having introduced his name without asking his permission.

3dly. Did you, or did you not say, that none of Mr. Toplady’s friends were permitted to see him during his illness?

I now beg leave to tell you, that the cause of my offering these queries to you was owing to the following letter, which I received just before, from a kind friend, and worthy minister of the gospel at Burlington (or Bridlington) in Yorkshire:

"Honoured and dear friend,

"Grace, mercy and peace be multiplied unto you from the Father, and from Jesus Christ, by the blessed Spirit. On the 21st day of August, 1779, I received from Mr. Thomas Robinson, of Hilderthrope, the following awful, and no less shocking, account respecting the death of Mr. Toplady. He said, Mr. J. Wesley told him, that Mr. Toplady died in black despair, blaspheming; and that a greater imposition was never imposed on the public, than that published by his friends relative to his death. He added also, that none of his friends were permitted to see him in his illness; and that one of Mr. John Wesley’s preachers, whose name is Rhodes, did on the 20th instant, declare, that Mr. Toplady’s case was equal to that of Francis Spira; and that the servant who waited upon him did, after his death, join Mr. Wesley’s societies, signifying that there was something very awful.[4] Now, dear Sir, as I know nobody more capable of giving me some satisfaction respecting this heart-affecting report than what you are; please to excuse the liberty I have taken in troubling you; wishing and beseeching you, to give me if you can, a true account of this gloomy story, and you will very much oblige one who wishes you the peaceable enjoyment of every temporal and spiritual good. Believing, nevertheless, that the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, the Lord knoweth them that are his. The redeemed of the Lord shall return and come with singing unto Zion, &c. [4] I cannot believe so ill of Mr. Rhodes, as to suppose he himself invented this horrid tale. He best knows whence he had it. But Mr. Wesley and he being at Burlington about the same time, there is reason to suppose he received it from the same quarter Mr. T. Robinson did.

"Dear Sir, believe me to be

your sincere, affectionate friend,

and humble servant, in the gospel of

Christ Jesus our Lord,

J. GAWKRODGER."

Bridlington, August 30, 1779.

Methinks, sir, this letter breathes the language of real Christianity, and of a heart deeply concerned and interested in the welfare of one from whose works I know, that Mr. G. had received the highest delight and satisfaction. He had read the account of Mr. Toplady’s illness and death; he rejoiced to see the doctrines of the gospel confirmed and established in the experience of that eminent servant of Jesus Christ; and his own heart found strong consolation whilst he meditated on the triumphant victory which his late brother in the ministry had obtained over the king of terrors, through faith in our glorious Immanuel.

Amidst these views and meditations, he is told, by a pious friend and neighbour of his, that Mr. John Wesley had assured him, "that Mr. Toplady died blaspheming, in black despair; that none of his friends were permitted to see him in his illness; and that the account of his death, published by his friends, was a gross imposition on the public; and that a preacher of Mr. Wesley’s had moreover asserted the same, with this farther circumstance, that the person who attended Mr. Toplady in his illness, struck with horror at his awful departure, had joined the methodists."

Overwhelmed with grief and amazement at this declaration, and the authority produced in defence of it (an authority which he dares not call in question), he writes to me to be farther informed of the matter. Upon the receipt of this letter, I thought it best to go to the fountain head, in order to investigate the truth, and therefore called upon you, in the public papers, to know whether you did, or did not, assert the things which are charged upon you. If you did not assert them, Mr. Robinson, Mr. Greaves, and several other persons, have treated you in a manner the most injurious, by making use of the sanction of your name for the propagation of a most wicked and malicious lie. If you did assert them, either you had, or had not, authority for your assertions; if you had no authority, then you, yourself, must have been the inventor of them. If you had authority, then you must know whence that authority came. In order, therefore, to exculpate your own character before the world, be pleased now to name that authority. Tell us how you became so well acquainted with what passed in Mr. Toplady’s sick chamber, and on his dying-bed, when even his most dear and intimate friends were not permitted to see him? Did his nurse, Mrs. Sterling, who attended him, and was with him when he died, communicate this intelligence? I hear she has called upon you on purpose to vindicate herself from the charge of any such assertion; and is ready to declare to all the world, that throughout Mr. Toplady’s long illness, to the hour of his dissolution, prayer and praise, joy and triumph in the God of his salvation, were the continual employment of his lips and heart. But as your conduct will probably make one of the many friends who were permitted to see Mr. Toplady in his illness think it necessary to give the public some farther particulars relative to the state of his soul in that trying season; I shall only, in this place, present you with a short abstract, from a letter which I received from a worthy clergyman, a friend of Mr. Toplady’s, soon after his departure; his words are as follow:

"You will be pleased with the two following remarks made by Mr. Toplady, not long before his death: To a person interested in the salvation of Christ, sickness is no disease, pain no affliction, death no dissolution. The other was an answer to Doctor Gifford, in consequence of the Doctor’s expressing hopes that Mr. Toplady might recover, and be again useful. Mr. Toplady heard what his friend had to say, and then expressed himself nearly in the following words: I believe God never gave such manifestations of his love to any creature, and suffered him to live.'"--- Thus far, my friend.

We can now look to no other source whence these reports may have flowed, than to the most deliberate malice of Mr. Toplady’s avowed foes, among whom, notwithstanding your continual preaching about "love, love; peace, peace, my brethren," I fear you are chief. Till therefore you produce your authority for what you told Mr. Thomas Robinson and others, I have full right, nay, I am absolutely necessitated to fix upon you, rev. sir, as the raiser, and fabricator of this most nefarious report; which I cannot look upon merely as a common falsity, but as a malicious attempt to invalidate and set aside the testimony which God, the eternal Spirit himself, was pleased to bear to his own truth, and to his own work, upon the heart of a dying believer; and even turn that testimony into the blasphemies of Satan. And in this view of it, how far short it falls of the unpardonable sin against the Holy Ghost, must be left to your awful consideration.

When one Jane Cowper, a person belonging to your societies, died, you were ready enough to give your imprimature and recommendation to every wild flight of fancy she uttered, as "all strong sterling sense, strictly agreeable to sound reason." "Here, (says Mr. Wesley in his preface) are no extravagant flights, no mystic reveries, no unscriptural enthusiasm. The sentiments are all just and noble." The cause is plain. The Lord (it seems) had promised this Jane Cowper, "that Mr. J. Wesley’s latter works should exceed his former," therefore she must be canonized; [5] but Mr. Toplady, in his dying avowal, had borne his open testimony both against Mr. Wesley and his principles, therefore, "the devil himself could not have invented any thing worse than what he had uttered," and he must be sent blaspheming and desparing into the bottomless pit. Behold! Sir, what self partiality and a desire to make known your own importance leads you to. The like spirit runs throughout all your publications, whether sermons, journals, appeals, preservatives, Arminian magazines, &c. &c. in all of which, it is too evident, that the grand design in view is that of trumpeting forth your own praises. Tedious and fulsome as this appears in the eyes of men of sense and judgment, yet a gentleman of Mr. Wesley’s cunning and subtlety can, hence, suck no small advantage, as there are multitudes amongst your own people who, through a blind attachment to your person, and a no less blind zeal to promote your interests, look upon it as perfectly right and proper; and are at all times, and upon all occasions, ready to pay the most implicit obedience to your ipse dixits, and to believe, or disbelieve, just as you would have them. But I have nothing to do with such bigots: to endeavour to open their eyes, by argument, would be as vain as to attempt to wash the Ethiopian white, or to change the leopard’s spots. There are, however, many persons of good sense and true piety in your societies, who, in spite of all your artifices, begin to form a judgment of you according to facts. It is for the benefit of such persons, as well as to vindicate the memory of a departed saint from your foul aspersions, that you are presented with this epistle; though I confess I was some time before I could bring myself to write or print it. I considered, that a misjudging, prejudiced world would be happy to take advantage from its contents, and to cry "There, there, so would we have it;" "the Methodists [6] are all fallen together by the ears, and are discharging their artillery at one another." I considered again, that as to expose you was not my motive, so to bring you to any submission was never in human power. I had well nigh resolved to be silent. On the other hand, I perceived that the sealing testimony which God vouchsafed to his own truths in the experience of Mr. Toplady, during his illness, and at the time of his death, was not only denied by you, but even construed into a gross imposition of his friends to deceive the public, and thereby the good effects which might justly have been hoped for were in great measure counteracted; that his enemies were hardened against the truths he maintained and so ably vindicated; and even his friends staggered by the shocking accounts forged and propagated: I say, when I saw this to be the case, I determined (to adopt an expression of your own) to "write and print." I said, Let God be true, and every man a liar. If you make no reply, I cannot avoid construing your silence into an acquiescence of your being guilty of the matter brought against you. If you do "write and print" in answer, let me beg you, for once, to avoid quibbles and evasions.

I am, rev. sir,

Your sincere well wisher, &c. and most humble servant,

RICHARD HILL.

[5] Notwithstanding this young woman might, in some instances, be under the influence of a spirit of enthusiasm, yet far be it from me to affirm, that the whole of her experience was a delusion. On the contrary, I am persuaded she was a sincere, devoted Christian, and believe that she is now in heaven.[6] I observed, upon a former occasion, that the name of Methodist, as it is indiscriminately given by way of reproach to all who have more zeal for religion than is consistent with the fashion of the times, I have no desire to shake off; on the contrary, I would glory in it as the badge which every real Christian is allotted to wear; and I would pray that I might deserve it much more than I do. But as it conveys the idea of an attachment to the tenets of Mr. Wesley, in opposition to the word of God and to the doctrines of ail the Protestant Churches, that of this nation in particular; in this view of it, I desire totally to renounce it.

"We whose names are underwritten are willing to testify upon oath, if required, that all the particulars published to the world in the late Memoirs, relative to the illness and death of the late rev. Augustus Montague Toplady, are strictly true; we ourselves having been eye and ear witnesses of the same. And therefore we all heartily join the author of the foregoing letters, in calling upon Mr. John Wesley, to produce his authority for what he told to Mr. Thomas Robinson of Hilderthorp, the rev. Mr. Greaves, and others, as specified in the letter.

Andrew Gifford, D.D. British Museum.

John Ryland, senior, Northampton.

Thomas Evans, Apothecary, Knightsbridge. [7]

[7] Mr. Evans attended Mr. Toplady the whole time of his last illness until his death.

William Abington, Beaufort-buildings, Strand.

Thomas Hough, Surgeon, 3, Coventry-street.

William Cowley, Barbican.

John Cole, Upper Seymore-street, Portman sq.

Thomas Jarvis, Charing-cross.

Thomas Burgess, Mill-street, Hanover-square.

William Hussey, Coventry-street.

Susannah Hussey, Coventry-street.

Elizabeth Sterling, Nurse. [8]

[8] Mrs. Elizabeth Sterling was the only nurse who attended Mr. Toplady until his death, and of course must be the person falsely charged by Mr. Wesley, to have joined his societies in consequence of his (Mr. Toplady’s) awful departure. A charge equally false with all Mr. Wesley’s other assertions. James Matthews, No. 18, Strand.

It would be an unpardonable omission, not to take notice of the nervous reprehension Mr. Wesley received on his unjust assertions, by a pious dissenting minister, who expostulated with him, in a pamphlet, in the following words:[9] Mr. Wesley, and his confederates, to whom this letter is addressed, did not only persecute the late Mr. Toplady during his life, but even sprinkled his death-bed with abominable falsehood. It was given out, in most of Mr. Wesley’s societies, both far and near, that the worthy man had recanted and disowned the doctrines of sovereign grace, which obliged him, though struggling with death, to appear in the pulpit, emaciated as he was, and openly avow the doctrines he had preached, as the soul support of his departing spirit. Wretched must that cause be, which has need to be supported by such unmanly shifts, and seek for shelter under such disingenuous subterfuges. O! Mr. Wesley, answer for this conduct at the bar of the supreme. Judge yourself, and you shall not be judged. Dare you also to persuade your followers, that Mr. Toplady actually died in despair? Fie upon sanctified slander! Fie! fie!"

[9] See a tract, entitled, "The Foundry Budget Opened," printed for Johnson, 1780, by the reverend Mr. Macgowan, author of the Shaver. Death a Vision, &c. &c.

Those who have read the preceding letters, astonished as they must have been at their contents, will be yet more astonished to hear, that, to the loud and repeated calls, thus given him to speak for himself, Mr. Wesley answered not a word. Nor is it too much to say, that by maintaining a pertinacious silence, in such circumstances, the very vitals of his character were stabbed by himself. He thus consented to a blot remaining on his name, among the foulest that ever stained the reputation of a professed servant of Jesus Christ. The truth or falsehood of those principles, however, which it was the object of his long and laborious life to propagate and defend, cannot be considered as at all affected by his unhappy, and unmanly, and ungodly conduct, in reference to this matter. The account that has just been given of his conduct, together with the reprehension it so well merits, must not, therefore, be considered as designed to repudiate his peculiar principles. By their own merits, or demerits, they must be justified, or condemned. Still less, is it our object to reflect on Mr. Wesley’s followers. By the better part of them, the conduct which we have reprobated, will not be approved. Differing from them, as we do, in a few other points of far greater importance, we yet know, and are happy to acknowledge, that some of them are eminent for great talents, and extensive learning; and that more of them are distinguished, for what is still better,-- for piety towards God, for faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ, and for an ardent and enviable zeal to promote the present and everlasting happiness of their follow men.

We Must now return once more to Mr. Toplady. And before taking our final leave of him, we shall present our readers with a copy of his last Will and Testament; a document, too characteristic to be omitted in any account of its author. It is as follows:

Last Will of Toplady

We here subjoin a copy of the last Will and Testament of Mr. Toplady, ratified six months prior to his decease.

IN THE NAME OF GOD, AMEN. I, Augustus Montague Toplady, Clerk, Batchelor of Arts, and vicar of the Parish and Parish-church of Broad-Hembury, in the county of Devon, and diocese of Exeter; being mindful of my mortality, (though at present in a competent state of bodily health, and of perfect mind and memory) do make and declare this my last will and testament (all written with my own hand, and consisting of three folio pages), this twenty-eighth day of February, in the year of our Lord, One Thousand, Seven Hundred and Seventy-eight, in manner and form following: That is to say, First: I most humbly commit my soul to the hands of Almighty God; whom I know, and have long experinced to be my ever-gracious and infinitely merciful Father. Nor have I the least doubt of my election, justification, and eternal happiness, through the riches of his everlasting and unchangeable kindness to me in Christ Jesus his co-equal Son; my only, my assured, and my all-sufficient Saviour: washed in whose propitiatory blood, and clothed with whose imputed righteousness, I trust to stand perfect and sinless and complete, and do verily believe that I most certainly shall so stand, in the hour of death, and in the kingdom of heaven, and at the last judgment, and in the ultimate state of endless glory. Neither can I write this my last will without rendering the deepest, the most solemn, and the most ardent thanks, to the adorable Trinity in Unity, for their eternal, unmerited, irreversible, and inexhaustible love to me a sinner. I bless God the Father, for having written, from everlasting, my unworthy name in the Book of Life; even for appointing me to obtain salvation, through Jesus Christ my Lord. I adore God the Son, for his having vouchsafed to redeem me by his own most precious death; and for having obeyed the whole law for my justification. I admire and revere the gracious benignity of God the Holy Ghost, who converted me, to the saving knowledge of Christ, more than two-and-twenty years ago, and whose enlightening, supporting, comforting, and sanctifying agency is, and (I doubt not) will be, my strength and my song, in the house of my earthly pilgrimage. Secondly: As to my body, I will and desire it may be interred in my chancel, within the parish church of Broad Hembury, aforesaid, if I should be in Devonshire, or near to that county at the time of my death. But, in case I die at, or in the neighbourhood of London; or at any other considerable distance from Devonshire; let the place of my interment be wheresoever my executor (herein after named) shall choose and appoint; unless, in writing or by word of mouth, I should here-after signify any particular spot for my place of burial. Thirdly: Let me be buried where I may, my express will and desire is, that my grave be dug to the depth of nine feet, at the very least, from the surface of the ground; or (which would be still more agreeable to my will and desire) to the depth of twelve feet, if the nature of the soil should admit of it. I earnestly request my executor to see to the performance of this article, with particular care and exactness. Fourthly: My express will is, that my funeral expenses may not, if possible, exceed the sum of twenty pounds sterling. Let no company be invited to my burial. Let no rings, scarves, hat-bands, or mourning of any kind, be distributed. Let no funeral sermon be preached. Let no monument be erected. [1] Fifthly: whatsoever worldly substance and effects I shall die possessed of; and whatsoever worldly substance and effects I may be entitled to, before, at, or after, the time of my decease; whether money, plate, china, books, coins and medals, paintings, linen, clothes, furniture, and all other effects, of whatsoever kind, and to what amount soever, whether in town or country, at home or abroad; together with all arrears, and dues, of every sort; I do, hereby, give and bequeath the whole and every of them (excepting only such single sum as shall be herein-afterwards distinctly named and other-ways disposed of) to my valuable and valued friend Mr. William Hussey, china and glass-dealer of Coventry-street, in the county of Middlesex, and parish of St. James, in the Liberty of Westminster; and who [viz. the said Mr. William Hussey] when not resident in town is likewise of Kensington-Gore, in the said county of Middlesex, and parish of St. Margaret, Westminster. And I do hereby nominate, constitute, and appoint him, the said William Hussey, the whole and sole executor of this my last will and testament, and my whole and sole residuary legatee. Sixthly: My will is, that my effects, so left and bequeathed, as above- said, to the aforenamed William Hussey, shall be, and hereby are, charged with the payment of the clear and neat sum of one hundred and five pounds, good and lawful money of Great Britain, to Elizabeth Sterling, now or late of Snow’s-Fields, in or near the Borough of Southwark in the county of Surrey, spinster. Which said sum of one hundred and five pounds lawful money of Great Britain, as aforesaid, I will and desire may be paid, clear and free of all deduction whatever, to the said Elizabeth Sterling, by my before named executor, Mr. William Hussey, within three months, at farthest after my decease; for and in consideration of the long and faithful services, rendered by her, the said Elizabeth Sterling, to my late dear and honoured mother of ever-loved and revered memory. Seventhly: Let all my manuscripts of what kind soever (I mean, all manuscripts of and in my own hand-writing,) be consumed by fire, within one week after my interment. [2] Eighthly: Whereas, it may seem mysterious, that I leave and bequeath no testamentary memorial of my regard to any of my own relations, whether by blood or by alliance, and whether related to me by my father’s side or by my mother’s, it may be proper just to hint my reasons. In the first place, I am greatly mistaken, if all my own relations be not superior to me, in point of worldly circumstances. And, secondly, as my said relations are rather numerous, I deem myself more than justified in passing them all by, and in not singling out one, or a few, in preference to the rest; especially seeing my good wishes are impartially divided among them all. Ninthly: With respect to many most valued and honoured persons, whose intimacy and friendship have so highly contributed to the happiness of my life, though not related to me by any family tie; these I likewise omit, as legatees, First, because they are, in general, abundantly richer than myself; and, Secondly, because they too are so extremely numerous, both in town and country, that it is absolutely out of my power to bequeath, to each and every one of them, a substantial or very valuable memento of the respectful love which I bear to then in Christ our common Saviour! and to distinguish only some of them by legacies, might carry an implication of ingratitude to the rest. In testimony of all which premises, (and at the same time, utterly revoking, cancelling, annulling, and rescinding every and all other will or wills by me heretofore made) I hereunto set my hand and seal, the day and year first above written, viz. Saturday, the twenty-eighth day of February; and in the year of our Lord, One Thousand Seven Hundred and Seventy-eight; and of the reign of his majesty, king George the Third, the eighteenth year. AUGUSTUS MONTAGUE TOPLADY. (L. S.)

[1] Some part of this was altered by his own verbal direction.

[2] This was revoked by his own desire, and left to the discretion of his executor.

Signed, declared, and published, as and for the last will and testament of him, the said Augustus Montague Toplady, in the presence of us, who subscribe our names in the testator’s presence, and at his request. JOHN BERNARD JUNTHER, THOMAS WILKS.

We have now exhibited with much diffidence the outlines of the distinguished character of him who is the subject of these Memoirs, without any view either directly or obliquely, to set up or varnish the hypothesis, or the dogmas of a party. We have no connection whatever with any religious department. There is only one Master unto whom we bow and acknowledge implicit obedience, and unto whose doctrine and discipline we profess a cordial attachment. The religion of Jesus Christ we take up as the only solid basis of truth, our guide and comfort through this world, our hope and support in death, and our felicity in an immortal state, to which we are hastening.

Elegiac Poem on the death of the Author

In order to rescue from oblivion the following small fragment which necessarily attends the destiny of some fugitive Pieces, and at the particular solicitations of a few friends, this Elegiac Poem on the death of Mr. Toplady, written by Mr. John Fellows, is inserted.

DESCEND, ye shining seraphs from on high!

Ye, who with wonder and with praise survey

The great Redeemer's love to fallen man;

Ye, who with ceaseless songs surround the throne

Of filial Godhead, basking in the blaze

Of boundless glory; ye, who burn with love

To all the saints; and have, at Christ’s command,

Oft join’d in bright assemblage, and come down

From heaven’s high summit thro’ these lower skies,

To bear his sons triumphant to his throne,

Descend! and in full legion aid the flight

Of a fair saint, who now rejoicing lies

On death’s cold verge: who, in his God's embrace,

Smiling resigns his mortal breath, and stands

On love’s strong pinions ready to ascend.

Salvation to the Lamb who once was slain!

Dominion, glory, majesty, and praise!

Unerring wisdom shines, and boundless might

In all his deeds. By his almighty power

He hath disarm’d the monster of his sting,

The tyrant death is now a conquer’d foe.

Wide as the sound of mighty seas, let all

The heavenly multitudes begin the song.

Let all the skies with hallelujahs ring:

And each angelic harp resound his praise.

Thus, as AUGUSTUS yielded up his breath

And smiling sank into his Saviour’s arm,

His guardian angel sang. Meanwhile a train

Of mighty cherubs, by heaven’s King’s command,

Assembled, wait the signal to descend,

And bring the saint in triumph thro’ the skies.

Michael, the chief of the angelic hosts,

With Gabriel, the fast friend of all the heirs

Of glory, now commanded: The glad chiefs

Prepare their trophies, and with heavenly pomp,

Worthy the great occasion, swift descend

Thro’ the pure aether. All the shining train,

With strong immortal pinions, cleave the skies.

Michael, the prince, before the troop descends,

Exulting thus to friendly Gabriel spake:

MICHAEL.

Gabriel, behold with what extatic joy

Our favour’d train receive the high command

To fetch AUGUSTUS to the climes of bliss!

With eager haste each cherubim proceeds;

Fix’d to the chariot stand the steeds of fire,

Which beat with burning hoofs the sounding plain,

And snorting toss on high their beamy heads

Reluctant to the rein. The fervid wheels

Instinct with spirit, and with love inspir’d,

Burn for the course. Each cherub waves his shield,

And claps his wings, impatient of delay.

GABRIEL.

If any thing can add to heavenly bliss,

Or give new relish to the boundless joys

We feel in doing our great Maker’s will,

It is the holy pleasure which expands

Our glowing hearts, when from the lower world

We bear on high Immanuel’s ransom’d sons,

The chosen objects of his early love:

But when we bring to his eternal hill

Those who have labour’d in his righteous cause,

And have each glorious gospel truth maintain’d

Against the rage of Zion’s numerous foes,

Our joys are greater: and these earthly stars

We bear to heavenly heights and set to shine

In brighter skies. But see, the signal made

For our departure! Down the steep of heaven

As swift as light, ye legions bear away!

MICHAEL.

Here! this ways lies our course! Behold yon star

Which feebly glimmers thro’ the distant void;

And scarce to angels' sight appears in view.

This is the sun that fills the lower skies

With light and heat; and hath, successive years,

Pour'd from his burning throne the blazing day

Which cheers the world where the Redeemer bled.

A world where horrid guilt outrageous reigns,

And black rebellion seeks to storm the skies:

Where haughty man, the lord of all the globe,

Presumes with daring insolence t' arraign

The conduct of his Maker; break his law,

And disbelieve his word. A world where hell's

Black horrid king in ceaseless tumult reigns,

Fomenting rage, and cruelty, and war,

In all their horrid forms; and every vice

So hateful and abhorr'd that heavenly lips

Disdain to mention; but for this devote

To ample vengeance, at th' appointed day

When she shall burn by heaven's awakened ire,

And God in thunder vindicate his law.

GABRIEL.

Yet in this world, such is the sovereign will

Of heaven's dread Monarch, and his high decree,

The sons of grace and heirs of glory dwell.

Here they are kept at distance from his throne,

And from surrounding evils safe preserv'd

By powerful grace; and here they undergo

Such discipline as trains them for the skies.

On their account it is that vengeance stays,

And heaven's rich blessings crown this wicked world

In wide profusion. When the last of all

The ransom'd race hath pass'd the gates of death,

Almighty vengeance, like a flood, will burst

From heaven's high throne, and wrap the world in fire.

MICHAEL.

These are the objects of his choice regard

Whom the bright natives of the sky adore,

Who once was dead, but lives and reigns for ever.

He keeps them in his eye; his power supports

In every trouble. At the hour of death

His arms receive them ; and his guards he sends

In shining squadrons, his cherubic guards,

To fetch them to his throne.

GABRIEL.

This is the cause,

The joyful cause which wings our present flight

Nor is a common saint our precious charge;

But one whose love and labours well are known

On heavenly ground. How often have his prayers

Ardent ascended thro' thick night, and burn'd

Like grateful incense, which heaven's King receiv'd

With pleasing smiles which bright'ned all the sky.

MICHAEL.

How oft amongst the happy sons of light,

Hath the Redeemer spoke his servant's praise;

And, smiling, held him up to heavenly view,

As a defender of his righteous cause!

Mention'd his labours, and his holy zeal

With approbation; and enjoin'd the throng

Of listening cherubs to adorn their harps

With flowery garlands, and prepare new songs

Against the joyful, th' appointed day

Which brings him to the skies!

GABRIEL.

How oft with joy

And holy wonder hath the ardent train

Of warrior angels, when from earth's low plains

They brought some precious saint to heavenly heights

And taught their unfledg'd wings to scale the skies,

Heard them relate, how from their native night

And heavy slumber on the brink of hell,

They were awoke to see their dreadful state,

And sue for mercy, by the mighty power

Of sovereign grace, which to their hearts apply'd

Some powerful portion dropping from the lips

Of that dear servant of the Lord, who now

Demands the care of our surrounding shields,

Our swiftest pinions and our sweetest songs!

MICHAEL

And with what transport have we often heard,

As we ascended thro' the trackless void

With some fair charge, how the Redeemer's love

Was first display'd to cheer their drooping hearts

By some sweet words which heavenly power apply'd,

Warm from the heart and flowing from the lips

Of this dear man! How have the saints been warn'd

Not to erect their building on the sand,

But on th' eternal Rock, which all hell's powers

Can never shake! How have their doubts been clear'd

By the full blaze of heavenly truth! How were

Their minds enlighten'd, comforted, upheld

By his instructions! With what fervent praise

Have they approach'd the great Redeemer's throne,

And, safe on heavenly ground, have bless'd the day

When first they sat attentive at his feet

And heard his words!

GABRIEL.

'Tis true, he was indeed

A burning and a shining light; set up

By heavenly power to lead the ransom'd race

Safe thro' the darkness which o'ershades the land.

The heights of science in his youth he gain'd,

And with a rapid course explor'd the extent

Of learning's province. Then, by powerful grace,

Call'd out, and to his Saviour's vineyard sent,

His ardent soul, inspir'd with love divine,

Pour'd all her faculties and all her strength

Into the noble work; and all her powers

Burn'd to display a bleeding Saviour's love,

And teach a wond'ring world Immanuel's praise.

MICHAEL.

The great Redeemer's glories to reveal,

And make the saints more ready to embrace

A free salvation, 'twas his constant care

To shew the wretched state of native man.

How from the bitter fountain of the fall,

In every stream, the dire pollution runs.

Corrupt and wicked all the rising race

Of Adam stands. Not one but in his heart

Dares to withstand his Maker's sov'reign will,

And all his father in his soul rebels.

For this devote to death each sinner stands

And heavy vengeance hangs o'er all the race;

Which none escape but thro' a Saviour's blood.

GABRIEL.

But with what holy extasy and joy

Did wond'ring crowds hang on the precious lips,

Of the dear saint for whom we now descend;

While in His powerful, soul-affecting strain

The great Redeemer in full glory rose!

How glow'd each heart with joy while he display'd

His glorious person, his amazing love,

His great salvation, his victorious deeds,

And pardon preach'd to sinners through his blood.

MICHAEL.

How did the skies with acclamations ring,

When new ascended souls, on heavenly plains,

Beneath the trees of life, were heard relate

To listening angels, in what powerful strain

He spake the glories of th' incarnate God;

And the exalted Lord of life display'd

In the full blaze of Deity supreme:

Ador'd, as such, by all the happy throng

Of saints and angels, while he fills the skies

With boundless glory.—Hence, ye impious throng!

Whose darken'd minds and eyes unus'd to light,

Ache at the glories of the Son of God.

Ye, whose bold pride presumes such daring heights

As would degrade the sovereign of the skies;

And will not worship at the glorious throne

Where every bright archangel veils his face,

And falls with deepest reverence. But, vain man

Would fain be wise; and in his native filth

Boldly rush in where angels dare not tread,

And make a god himself can comprehend!

GABRIEL.

And with what clearness did the pious saint,

Whose voice on earth will now be heard no more,

Display the glories and the mighty power

Of Sovereign Grace! Not by the will of man,

He plainly shew'd, but the all-conquering might

Of God the Spirit, is each sinner call'd.

'Tis his resistless power that first begins,

Maintains, and, thro' each stage, he carries on

The noble work; prevailing o'er the filth

Of ruin'd nature, 'till it stand complete,

In heavenly glory. All the ransom'd race,

Safe-guided thro' the wilderness, shall find

Their Father's house. Not one of all the train

Shall ever perish. All the powers of hell,

Tho' all their rage unite against one saint,

Can never pluck him from his Saviour's arms.

But sinful man, such is his native pride,

Would fain be sharer in this noble work;

Of his own doings a proud structure raise,

And from its summit boldly mount the skies.

But heaven, with anger, views the impious toil

Of all such builders; mocks their vain attempts,

O'erturns their boasted fabrics, in its ire,

"And buries madmen in the heaps they raise."

MICHAEL.

How great the folly of mistaken man,

To think his works are worthy to appear

On heavenly ground! Who hopes to share the praise

Of his salvation; and with dirty feet

Would dare pollute the bright transparent stream

Of love divine; which, from th' eternal throne,

Flows pure and clear, and in this lower world

Streams like a fountain thro' a Saviour's blood.

But will not with the muddy waters mix

Which rise from nature's fountain.

GABRIEL.

Whether pride,

Or stupid folly in mistaken man,

Most calls for censure, is a puzzling question

No angel can resolve. How much of each

They all betray, when they presume to rise

Against the glories of a sovereign God,

Who sits enthron'd, amidst the boundless blaze

Of uncreated brightness and that light

No mortal can behold! He from his throne,

At one vast comprehensive view, beholds

The universe, and all created things,

Past, present, and to come. How oft have we

And all the heavenly multitude, retir'd

With trembling awe, while the eternal King

Hath in surrounding darkness veil'd his throne;

And not the tall archangel durst presume

To pry into the secrets of his reign!

But man, vain man! can boldly dare to blame,

Oppose and contradict his high decree:

In his own narrow limits would confine

Eternal love, nor give heaven's Sovereign leave

To choose amongst his creatures whom he will,

And bring the happy objects of his choice

Safe to his throne by his almighty power,

Because proud man can see no reason why.

MICHAEL.

But see the world, to which we wing our way,

Appears in view. Behold the clouded sphere

Of earth and water form'd. The darker parts

Are spacious seas; the lighter solid land,

The seat of man. See, in triangular form

Great Britain rise, and swell upon the sight.

Here, in full peace, the heirs of glory dwell,

And sit beneath the gospel's joyful sound.

And from this favour'd land each day we bring

Numbers of shining saints, and bear on high,

To people all the skies.

GABRIEL.

What cause for praise

Hath every native of this happy land!

Happy! thrice happy! knew they how to prize

Each precious privilege which they enjoy,

Since their deliverance from th’ oppressive power

And purple tyranny of haughty Rome.

But, cold and careless grown, they sit supine,

And her ungrateful sons behold the place,

Without emotion, where their fathers bled:

And, fearless now, they with the serpent play,

By whose deceitful wiles, and bloody rage,

A world hath smarted.

MICHAEL.

See, the tools of Rome

With demons join'd, how cunningly they hide

Their base designs! How, in the dark, they work,

And on unwary and unstable minds

Too much prevail; while, like a lamb they paint

The papal monarch! But if once he rear

His bloody standard, this revolted land

Will hear him like a dreadful lion roar:

And late, by sad experience, will be taught

That the old dragon has not lost his sting.

GABRIEL.

And now to bring about her base designs,

See, how the fraud of Rome hath undermin'd

The British counsels! For the land declines

In strength and glory, while the sword of war

She hath, by madness urg'd, and cruel rage,

In her own bowels plung’d. [1]

[1] This Poem was written during the American war. Editor.

MICHAEL.

But see, we stand

On earthly ground, and at our journey's end.

Just rising from the frozen arms of death,

And from the change of matter now broke loose

Our charge appears. His guardian angel smiles

To see our squadron. Not unknown, he views

Each cherub's features; and presumes the cause

For which we left the skies.

GUARDIAN ANGEL.

Hail! ye bright train

Of happy angels! Welcome to the land

Where great Immanuel trains his chosen sons

For boundless glory! And, when fit to rise,

Having perform'd his holy work and will,

Sends his bright guards to bear them to his throne.

Such is the cause which brings you now from heaven.

With ardent joy I your assembly join,

And to your care commit my precious charge,

Who burns with heavenly love, and longs to rise

With you to worship, and to join your songs.

GABRIEL.

Sing, all ye seraphs, the deserved praise

Of our incarnate God! who reigns on high

And dwells amidst the unutterable blaze

Of uncreated light. Him all the skies,

With awful reverence, and with holy joy,

Adore and praise: and his immortal deeds

Will find fresh matter for our soaring songs,

When we, assembled, sit on heavenly hills;

Nor can eternal ages e'er exhaust

The boundless theme. Salvation to the Lamb!

Immortal glory, honour power and praise,

Are justly his! He triumphs over death,

The yawning grave, and all the powers of hell.

SOUL.

What songs are these which charm my wond'ring mind,

And fill with growing joy, unknown before!

What stream of heavenly harmony is this

Which breathes my welcome to the immortal shores!

And sings the triumphs of the mighty God

Whom all my ardent spirit burns to see.

Say, ye bright natives of the heavenly land,

Who in transcendent glory shines around;

Who cheer me with your condescending smiles,

And fire me with your songs! for I perceive

You also worship at Immanuel’s throne,

And all your heavenly harps resound his praise.

Tell me! Oh, tell me, for my vigorous powers

Burn to behold my Saviour and my God,

Where shall I find him? which way thro’ the sky

Lies my long journey? Or will you, bless'd train!

Permit me with your squadron to ascend,

And learn the way to the Redeemer's throne?

MICHAEL.

Yes, happy saint! we come, at the command

Of heaven's Supreme, from his eternal hill;

And a bright chariot bring with steeds of fire,

To bear thee up in triumph thro' the sky,

And lodge thee in thy dearest Lord's embrace.

For know, thy labours and thy ardent love

Are not in heaven unknown: nor will they fail

To find their full reward. The heavy toil

Thou hast sustain'd; and now remains the rest,

Thine are the bliss, the glory, and the joy.

SOUL.

But say, bright armies of the heavenly King!

Whose condescending love brings you so far

From your bless'd home; for, strange it seems to me

You on such errand should forsake the sky;

What need is there of this amazing pomp?

Or why should your bright legions take such care

Of one that's most unworthy? while the praise

Of the Redeemer claims your ceaseless songs;

And the great King who fills th’ eternal throne,

Your constant worship?

MICHAEL.

Think not heaven so thin

Of happy natives, or th' eternal throne

So slightly guarded, but the Lord of all

Can numbers spare to fetch his chosen sons.

Nor think the blessed objects of his choice

So little honour'd by the sons of heaven

That we should be unwilling to bestow

Such tokens of respect as our great King

Commands. Nor would the brightness of our train

Employ thy wonder, had thine eyes beheld

The various beauties of the heavenly land,

The boundless glory of th' eternal throne,

|And the transcendent grandeur of the courts

Of our exalted King!

GABRIEL.

Blest soul! thy need

Of our cherubic guards thou wilt perceive

Far greater than at present may appear.

Thro' the vast trackless void thy journey lies,

And great the distance from this world to heaven.

Thy unexperienced flight might miss the way,

And far aside explore with devious wing

The dreary waste. Besides, th' apostate crew

Of wicked spirits, whose dominion lies

Between the earthly and th' aetherial plains,—

These, though they could not wound, might much annoy

And want not malice to attempt their worst.

They, by their arts, might shake the trembling air

With mimic thunders; and their lightnings play

Full in thy face; while with delusive powers

They raise around thee various horrid forms

To shock thy peace and make thy courage fail.

MICHAEL.

Or if these airy terrors miss'd their end,

And, still unmov'd, thou could'st thy flight maintain

They might assume the drapery of the skies,

Array'd in light, attract thy wond'ring view,

And seem bright cherubs to thy erring sight.

Then bold delusive scenes of pleasure draw,

Green shades and silver fountains might be seen,

And heavenly music seem to charm thine ear;

But all deceitful, tending to ensnare,

And lead thee far away from real joy.

GABRIEL.

These are their arts, but, of our power afraid.

They tremble when our squadrons come in view.

For heavenly glories shock their aching sight,

And gloomy, murmuring, they in haste retire,

Howl o'er the waste, and shelter in their dens.

SOUL.

What reason have I then to love and praise

The great Redeemer! Who to guard me safe

Thro' every danger, sends his winged train

Of warrior angels to protect my flight.

And you, bright heavenly messengers, demand

My warmest gratitude.—But let's ascend!

My spirit burns to mount the bless'd abodes,

To join your praises, learn your noblest songs,

And worship with you at Immanuel's throne.

Adieu! my dearest brethren and my friends,

Whom heavenly providence had made my charge

Whose souls I watched for with unceasing care

Both day and night: and, to my utmost power,

As grace assisted and occasion serv'd,

Labour'd to fix you on the Rock of ages.

And build you up in every gospel truth.

Mourn not for me! but rather lift your eyes

To where the great Redeemer lives and reigns.

He can repair your every loss, and give

Such portions of his Spirit as may fill

Your ardent souls with heavenly love and joy.

Your teachers die, but your Redeemer lives!

Shout, all ye saints! your Jesus lives for ever!

GUARDIAN ANGEL.

Now happy soul thy painful labours end,

And thou art rising far above the reach

Of all that would disturb, or wound thy peace.

Thine and the gospel's foes may strive in vain

With falsehood and deceit to blast thy name,

They cannot hurt thy Master's cause, nor thee.

CHORUS OF ANGELS.

Now we ascend, and thro’ the skies proclaim

Glory to God! Salvation to the Lamb!

Him all the armies of the sky adore:

We sing his boundless goodness as we soar:

His glories shine thro’ all the heavenly plain

Thy God, O Israel! thy Redeemer reigns!

Calvinism Introduction & Advertisement

HISTORIC PROOF OF THE DOCTRINAL CALVINISM OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND.

ADVERTISEMENT.

FOR prevention of mistake, I request leave to apprize the reader,

1. That in the following Essay I use the words CALVINISM and CALVINIST merely in compliance with custom. The doctrinal system, established in England, which LUTHER and CALVIN were the honoured instruments of retrieving, subsisted, from the beginning, in the faith of God's elect people, and in the sacred Scriptures. But, "Dandum aliqud consuetudini."

2. I use the terms PELAGIANISM and ARMINIANISM in their literal and proper signification, as denoting the system originally fabricated by PELAGIUS, and afterwards rebuilt by ARMINIUS. Though, in strictness of speech, that system should rather be denominated, MORGANISM and VAN HARMINISM; the real name of Pelagius having been MORGAN, as that of Arminius was VAN HARMIN.

3. By the word METHODISTS, which likewise frequently occurs, I mean the approvers, followers, and abettors of Mr. JOHN WESLEY'S principles and practices, and them only. If some folks, either through want of knowledge, or want of candour, apply the name of METHODIST to such as agree in all points with the Church of England, it cannot be helped; nor have I the least objection to being involved under that title, in this sense of it: but I myself never use the term, except in the meaning above defined.

4. Mention is often made of the ANABAPTISTS, and of their theological enormities. Be it, therefore, observed, that the Anabaptists of the sixteenth century were a very different sort of people from the baptists of the last century, and of the current; consequently, what is observed of the former, does by no means affect the latter.

5. I foresee one objection, in particular, to which the ensuing work is liable: viz. that the two PELAGIAN METHODISTS, namely, Mr. JOHN WESLEY and Mr. WALTER SELLON, whose fraudulent perversions of truth, facts, and common sense, gave the first occasion to the present undertaking, "are not persons of sufficient consequence to merit so large and explicit a refutation.”I acknowledge the propriety and the force of this remark. It cannot be denied, that the Church of England has seldom, if ever (at least since the Civil Wars), been arraigned, tried, and condemned, by a pair of such insignificant adversaries. Yet, though the men themselves are of no importance, the Church and her doctrine are of much. Which consideration has weight enough with me, not only to warrant the design and extent of the following vindication, but also to justify any future attempts of the same kind, which the continued perverseness of the said discomfited METHODISTS may render needful. I mean, in case the united labours of that junto should be able to squeeze forth any thing which may carry a face of argument. For, otherwise, I have some thoughts of consigning them to the peaceable enjoyment of that contempt and neglect due to their malice and incapacity. Lord Bolingbroke somewhere observes, that "To have the last word is the privilege of bad writers:" a privilege which I shall never envy them.

Mr. WESLEY and his subalterns are, in general, so excessively scurrilous and abusive, that contending with them resembles fighting with chimney-sweepers, or bathing in a mud-pool. So they can but raise a temporary mist before the eyes of their deluded adherents, they care not what they invent, nor whereof they affirm.

6. Let it not, however, be supposed, that I bear them the least degree of personal hatred; God forbid; I have not so learned Christ. The very men, who have my opposition, have my prayers also. I dare address the great Shepherd and Bishop of souls in those lines of the late Dr. Doddridge:

Hast thou a lamb, in all thy flock,

I would disdain to feed?

But I likewise wish ever to add,

Hast thou a foe, before whose face

I fear thy cause to plead?

Grace, mercy, and peace, be to all who love, and who desire to love, our Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity.

INTRODUCTION.

BEFORE I enter on the principal design of the present undertaking, it may be proper to throw together some preliminary observations, by way of Preface, that the main thread of our historic enquiry may, afterwards, proceed the more evenly and uninterruptedly.

In Feburary 1769, I published a pamphlet, entitled, "The Church of England vindicated from the Charge of Arminianism, and the Case of Arminian Subscription particularly considered:”which I addressed to a learned and respectable Oxonian, who had lately presented us with an apology for the Arminian principles; and whose arguments against the real doctrines of our Established Church my counter vindication was designed to obviate.

That Omniscient Being, to whom "all hearts are open," knows, that a feeling regard to his glory, and a tender solicitude for the honour of truth, were my sole determining motives to that humble attempt. I could sincerely adopt the appeal of archbishop Bradwardin, who wrote on a similar occasion, and in defence of the same doctrines: Scis, quod nusquam virtute mea, sed tua, confisus, tantillus aggredior tantam causam. Far, exceeding far, from presuming on any imaginary abilities of my own, and equally remote from wishing to distinguish myself on the stage of public observation, I resolved to conceal my name; though I could not resolve, by continuing entirely silent, to forego my allegiance to God, and my duty to the church.

The controversy had, indeed, been recently in the hands of a person whose zeal for the principles of the Reformation adds dignity to his rank and lustre to his talents; I mean the able and learned author of Pietas Oxoniensis: and I freely confess, that I was under some doubt, whether it might not carry an implication of self-confidence, should I glean up, and lay before the public, a few of those authentic facts and testimonies, the mention of which had, for the most part, been omitted by that masterly writer. Considering, however, that, of old, even those persons who had but a mite to throw into the treasury, were not therefore wholly exempted from the duty of contribution; I fluctuated no longer; but hastily threw together such observations as then occurred, and in a few weeks transmitted them to the printer. I have much reason to bless God for their publication. That tract, hurried and unfinished as it was, met with a reception, which, in such an age as the present, I could neither expect nor imagine.

Upwards of two years after, i. e. in the summer of 1771, a Mr. Walter Sellon (who stands in the same relation to Mr. John Wesley, that Celestius did to Pelagius, and Bertius to Arminius; viz. of retainer-general and white-washer in ordinary) hands a production into the world, designed to prove that Arminianism and the Church of England are as closely connected as the said Messieurs Walter and Jonn are with each other. The piece itself is the joint offspring of the two associated heroes. As, therefore, in its fabrication, those gentlemen were united, even so, in its confutation, they shall not be parted.

Arminianism is their mutual Dulcinea del Toboso. And, contrary to what is usually observed among co-enamoratos, their attention to the same favourite object creates no jealousy, no uneasiness of rivalship, between themselves. High mounted on Pine's Rosinante, forth sallies Mr. John from Wine-street, Bristol, brandishing his reed, and vowing vengeance against all who will not fall down and worship the [i] Dutch image which he has set up. With almost an equal plenitude of zeal and prowess, forth trots Mr. Walter from Ave-maria-lane, low mounted on Cabe's halting dapple. The knight and the squire having met at the rendezvous appointed, the former prances foremost, and, with as much haste as his limping steed will permit, doth trusty Walter amble after his master.

[i] Pelagianism was revived in Holland, under the new name of Aminianism, toward the beginning of the last century.

How successful these combatants are, in their attack on my first defence of the Doctrinal Calvinism of the Church of England, I cheerfully leave to the decision of the Public. This, however, I may venture to say, that, after a tedious incubation of six-and-twenty months, they ought to have hatched an answer that might carry some shew, at least, of plausible argument. But even craft itself seems, in the main, to have discharged them from her service. Here is neither subtlety, nor solidity. I am, in fact, going to encounter a phantom. No laurels, therefore, will crown the conquest; and the poor phantom should, for me, have stalked unmolested, had not the importance of the subject retrieved, in some measure, the in significancy of the performance.

One of them (for it is not always easy to distinguish the immediate speaker) charges me with "crying up the abilities of some against whom I have written, only that I myself may appear to have greater abilities of my own, in vanquishing such able antagonists." Malice has here forged an accusation too ignoble even for malice to believe. The brace of brothers are, indeed, either too blind to see, or too disingenuous to acknowledge, the excellencies of any from whom they dissent; else they would never have termed those great reformers, Luther and Calvin, a pair of "weather-cocks;" [ii] nor have contemptuously styled St. Austin the "giddy apostle of the Calvinist." [iii] For my own part, I acknowledge, with pleasure, the eminent talents of very many worthy persons, from whom I differ extremely in opinion. Mr. Sellon, however, may make himself easy as to this particular. Unless he should improve miraculously, I shall never cry up his abilities. I must want common sense, to suppose him a man of parts; and I must want common modesty, to represent him as such. I can distinguish a barber's bason from a helmet; of course, all the fruit to be reaped from the contest now depending, is, not an ovation for myself, but the acquisition of a tributary pepper-corn to the doctrines of the Church.

[ii] Page 11.

[iii] Page 7.

Mr. Wesley should have laid the burden of his alliance on other shoulders than those of Mr. Sellon. The lot could not possibly have fallen on a more incompetent man. He is much too unknowing, and too hot, to come off with any degree of credit, in an engagement which has foiled so many of the wise and prudent. He should have remembered the example of Dr. Waterland and others.

As the Church is now internally constituted, her Calvinism is impregnable; while she lives, this is immortal. The legislature have it, indeed, in their power (God forbid they should ever have the inclination!) to melt down her Liturgy, Homilies, and Articles; and, when her component particles are severed by state chemistry, to cast her into the Arminian mould: but, until this is really done, all the artifice of man will never be able to fix the banner of Arminius in the citadel, how daringly soever some of his disciples may display it on the walls. Our pulpits may declare for free-will; but the desk, our prayers, and the whole of our standard writings as a Church, breathe only the doctrines of grace.

Several respectable men have reduced themselves to a state of pitiable embarrassment, in attempting to disprove this, during, and since, what has been properly enough denominated, the ecclesiastical reign of archbishop Laud. Had that prelate been a Calvinist, and had the Calvinists of that age joined hands with the enemies to civil and religious liberty, the Calvinism of the Church of England would, probably, have passed uncontested to the present hour: but that prelate attached himself to the new system (and it was then very new indeed) of Arminius; and, which weighed still more against them in the Court balance, the Calvinists were friends to the civil rights of mankind; they (observe, I speak only of the doctrinal, not of the disciplinarian Calvinists) were steady to the true religious and political constitution of their country. They opposed, with equal firmness, Laud's innovations in the Church, and Charles's invasions of civil freedom. Unhappily both for the nation and the Church, and no less fatally for himself, Charles, nurtured in despotism, deemed it his interest to support the Arminians, for purposes of state. I shall have occasion, in the progress of the ensuing Essay, to trace this evil to its source. In the meanwhile, I return to Mr. Wesley and his understrapper; whom though I shall not constantly persist to mention together, but hold them up to view, sometimes singly, sometimes conjointly, as just occasion may require; the intelligent reader will not fail to notice, that every exhibition of Mr. John involves his man Walter; and that Walter cannot be exhibited without involving Mr. John.

Monsieur Bayle has an observation, perfectly applicable to the two furiosos above-mentioned; had the cap been made for them, it could not have fitted them more exactly. "In hot constitutions," says that able critic, "zeal is a sort of drunkenness, which so disorders the mind, that a man sees every thing double and the wrong way. The Priestess of Bacchus, who fell upon her own son, whom she mistook for a wild boar, is an image of that giddiness which seizes the zealots." [iv] I am very far from peremptorily affirming, that Mr. Sellon is as intimately connected with Bacchus, as was the above Priestess; but his conduct certainly bears a strong resemblance of hers. He pretends, that the Church of England is his mother; now, his supposed mother is an avowed, thorough-paced Calvinist; but Mr. Sellon abominates Calvinism, and yet wishes to be thought a churchman. What can he do in so distressful a dilemma? Necessity dictates an expedient. Amidst some qualifying professions of filial respect, this petty Nimrod bends his twelve-penny bow against her he calls his mother; and pretends, all the while, that he is only combating a wild beast, which has chanced to find its way from Geneva to England.

[iv] Hist. Dict. vol. 3. p. 538. Art. Hunnius.

But the Church, and the truths of God, have nothing to fear from the efforts of this jaculator. Parthians might aim their arrows at the sun; wolves may exhaust their strength by howling at the moon; yet, neither the weapons of those could wound the one, nor can the clamour of these so much as alarm the other. The sun persists to shine, and the moon to roll, unextinguished and unimpeded by the impotence of rage, and the emptiness of menace from below.

I have heard, or read, of a picture, which exhibited a view of the apostate angels, just fallen from their state of blessedness. Every attitude and feature were expressive of the extremest horror, indignation, and despair. An artist, into whose possession it came, by only a few touches with his pencil, transformed the shocking representation into a master-piece of loveliness and beauty; so that seraphs seemed to smile and sing, where tormented fiends appeared before to blaspheme for rage and to gnaw their tongues for pain. Mr. Sellon has pursued a plan directly contrary to that of the amiable artist. The methodist's grand business (in which, however, he utterly fails) is, to deform the gospel picture, and to disfigure the beauty of the Church. He labours to metamorphose, if it were possible, the wisdom and glory of God into a caricature equally frightful and ridiculous: but all his cavils are infra jugulum; they come not up to the point. Mr. Wesley and his auxiliaries resemble the army of Mithridates, who lost the day, by mistakenly aiming their arrows, not at the persons, but at the shadows, of the Roman soldiers.

Supposing the principles of the Church of England to be ever so exceptionable in themselves, the mode of assault, adopted by the mock vindicators, is by no means calculated to gain its end. The far greater part of mankind can readily distinguish fury from zeal, and abuse from argument. A writer, like Mr. Sellon, who dips his pen in the common-sewer, injures and disgraces the cause he seeks to advance. "The wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God." It is so far from being a part, that it is the very reverse, of that righteousness which the example of God prescribes, and his written will enjoins.

I am charged with violating the meekness I recommend, and with being no less than ''a persecutor " of the Arminians. [v] Aggressors are often the first to complain. When Mr. Wesley thinks proper to scatter his firebrands, "zeal for the Lord of hosts," and "earnest contention for the faith delivered to the saints," are the varnish which his abusive rage assumes: but if no more than a finger be lifted up in self-defence, the cry is, "Oh, you are without gospel love; you are a persecutor of Mr. John; you will not let the good old man descend quietly to his grave."

[v] p. 32.

As to intolerancy and persecution, I have already declared this to be my steadfast opinion, that "the rights of conscience are inviolably sacred, and that liberty of private judgment is every man's birthright:" yet Mr. Wesley cannot fully avail himself of this concession; for, by having solemnly set his hand to the Articles, Homilies, and Liturgy of the Established Church, he comes within the exception immediately added, and which I here repeat: "If, however, any like Esau have sold their birthright, by subscribing to Articles they do not believe, merely for the sake of temporal profit or aggrandizement, they have only themselves to thank, for the little ceremony they are entitled to." [vi]

[vi] See my Caveat against Unsound Doctrines, p. 17.

It is not necessary to be timid in order to be meek. There is a false meekness, as well as a false charity. Genuine charity, according to the Apostle's description of it, rejoiceth in the truth. The conduct of our Lord himself, and of the first disciples, on various occasions, demonstrated, that it is no part of Christian candour, to hew millstones with a feather. Rebuke them sharply (apstomwv, cuttingly,) says the Apostle, concerning the depravers of doctrinal Christianity; wish well to their persons, but give no quarter to their errors. The world have long seen, that unmixed politeness, condescending generosity, and the most conciliating benevolence, can no more soften Mr. Wesley's rugged rudeness, than the melody of David's harp could lay the North wind, or still the raging of the sea. Mr. Hervey, in his famous Eleven Letters, has handled Mr. Wesley with all the delicacy and tenderness that a virtuoso would shew in catching a butterfly, whose plumage he wishes to preserve uninjured; or a lady, in wiping a piece of china, which she dreads to break. Did Mr. Wesley profit by the engaging meekness of his amiable and elegant refuter? nay, but he waxed worse and worse: like Saul, he strove to stab the name of that in estimable friend, whose gospel music was calculated to dispossess him of his evil spirit. Like the animal, stigmatized in the lviiith Psalm (Ps 58), he stopped his ears, and refuted to hear the voice of the charmer, though the strains were no less sweet than wise. Every artifice that could be invented has been thrown out, to blacken the memory of the most exemplary man this age has produced. Mr. Wesley insulted him, when living, and continues to trample on him, though dead. He digs him, as it were, out of his grave, passes sentence on him as an heretic, ties him to the stake, burns him to ashes, and scatters those ashes to the four winds. Rather than fail, the wretched Mr. Walter Sellon is stilted to oppose the excellent Mr. Hervey; and most egregiously hath the living sinner acquitted himself against the long-departed saint! In much the same spirit, and with just the same success, as the enemy of mankind contended with Michael the arch-angel, about the body of Moses.

Every Reader may not, perhaps, know the true cause (at least, one of the principal causes) of Mr. Wesley's unrelenting enmity to Mr. Hervey; an enmity, which even the death of the latter has not yet extinguished. When that valuable man was writing his Theron and Aspasio, his humility and self-diffidence were so great, that he condescended to solicit many of his friends to revise and correct that admirable work, antecedently to its publication. He occasionally requested this favour even of some who were enemies to several of the doctrines asserted in the Dialogues; among whom was Mr. John Wesley. The author imagined, that the unsparing criticism of an adversary might observe defects, and suggest some useful hints, which the tenderness and partiality of friendship might overlook, or scruple to communicate. Several sheets having been transmitted to Mr. John (an honour of which he soon shewed himself quite unworthy,) he altered, added, and retrenched, with such insolence and wantonness of dictatorial authority, as disgusted even the modest and candid Mr. Hervey. The consequence was, Mr. Wesley lost his supervisor-ship, and in return, sat himself to depreciate the performance he was not allowed to spoil.

By what spirit this gentleman and his deputies are guided, in their discussion of controverted subjects, shall appear, from a specimen of the horrible aspersions which, in "The Church vindicated from Predestination," they venture to heap on the Almighty himself. The recital makes me tremble; the perusal must shock every Reader, who is not steeled to all reverence for the Supreme Being. May the review cause the daring and unhappy writers to fall down, as in the dust, at the footstool of insulted Deity! Wesley and Sellon are not afraid to declare, that, on the hypothesis of divine decrees, the justice of God is "no better than the tyranny of Tiberius." [vii] That God himself is "little better than Moloch." [viii]—"A cruel, unwise, unjust, arbitrary, and self-willed tyrant." [ix]—"A being void of wisdom, justice, mercy, holiness, and truth." [x]—"A devil, yea, worse than a devil." [xi] Did the exorbitancies of the ancient ranters, or the impieties of any modern blasphemers, ever come up to this? Surely, if such Methodists should finally be converted and saved, we can need no stronger proof that grace is infinitely free, and its operation absolutely invincible! Observe, Reader, that these are also the very men who are so abandoned to all sense of shame, as to charge me with blasphemy, for asserting, with Scripture, that God worketh all things according to the council of his own will; and that whatever God wills is right.

[vii] Page 3.

[viii] Page 45.

[ix] Page 59, 71.

[x] Page 74.

[xi] Page 107.

We have seen their portrait of the great and blessed God: let us, next, hear Mr. Sellon's account of his own self; this he has tacked to the fag-end of his work. Be it my humble office, to rescue so brilliant a passage from the ignominy of its present situation, and place it (where it deserves to stand) in the front.

“As to myself," says the Arminian, "I make no scruple to tell you, I am what some call an exotic; one [xii] destitute of the honour of an academical education. The highest degree I lay claim to, is that of a poor fellow of Jesus College, in the University of Christianity [xiii]"

[xii] And true enough it is. Mr. Sellon is, in very deed, destitute of the said honour. His education was as illiberal as are his principles: he was, at his first setting out in life, a low mechanic; he then got himself enrolled on the list of Mr. Wesley's lay-preachers; he next insinuated himself into the favour of a certain person of distinction, who (not being endued with the gift of foresight) procured him admission into Holy orders: and thus he came to wear prunella.

[xiii] Page 126.

Never, surely, till now, did such low, whining cant ooze from the pen of meanness!

And is the pretended vindicator of a national Church dwindled, by his own confession, into an exotic? That his doctrines are exotic, or foreign and far-fetched, I always knew; but I was, hitherto, not botanist enough to ascertain the exoticism of the man. I hope, in his next vindication, he will inform us, to what class of exotic plants he belongs, and whether himself be not as Dutch as his principles.

He adds, that he never had an "academical education;" I believe him; nor is he in any danger of being mistaken for a man of learning. He will never frighten his brother enthusiasts with that horrible bugbear (so alarming to most fanatics) called human literature. He does not so much as know the difference between a degree and a fellowship: "The highest degree I lay claim to," says this pigmy on stilts, "is that of a poor fellow, &c." You should have said, of the Foundry College, in Moorfields, whereof Mr. John Wesley is president, and wherein Thomas Olivers the preaching shoe-mender hath taken his degree in ignorance: that, Mr. Sellon, is the college to which you belong: for into what you cantingly style the "University of Christianity," it does not appear that you are so much as entered. In proof of this, I appeal to your preceptor, Mr. Wesley himself; and to your fellow pupils, his followers. Your own Arminian friends, for whom you falsify through thick and thin, will not acknowledge you for a believer[1][1]. However, as you seem to insist on passing, for "a poor fellow," I shall in the following sheets, attentively consider what the poor fellow has to say against the doctrines of the Church of England.

One who has drawn so blasphemous a character of God, and who has, moreover, given the public so contemptible a sketch of himself, can hardly be thought likely to draw a very favourable account of his opponents. His representation of me, in particular, is so very curious, and composed of such contradictory ingredients, that I must, for the Reader's amusement, submit it to his view. I had before been delineated, by an Arminian helpmeet of Mr. Wesley's, as “sitting in my easy chair, and enjoying all the comforts of life." One would think, that the see of Durham had been transferred to Broad Hembury, and that the Devonshire Vicar was warmly enrobed in lawn and black satin. So much for my attitude and enjoyments; next for my titles; these Mr. Sellon enumerates. I am, it seems,

[1] See the Gospel Magazine, for March, 1771, p. 135.

"A Flaming Calvinist.[2][2]

"A Dragon.[3][3]

"An Hooter.[4][4]

"A Venomous Slanderer.[5][5]

"A Persecutor, possessing the same butcherly spirit that was in bishop Gardiner; yea, ten times more .[6][6]

"A Perfectionist.[7][7]

"A malapert Boy, severely scratching and clawing with venomous nails. [8][8]

"A Papist. [9][9]

"A Socinian. [10][10]

"A Mahometan. [11][11]

"The greatest Bigot that ever existed, without one grain of candour, benevolence, forbearance, moderation, good-will, or charity.[12][12]

"A wild Beast of impatience and lion-like fury. [13][13]

"A Materialist[14][14];" that is, an Atheist.

[2] Page 77

[3] Page 117

[4] Page 17,18

[5] Page 38

[6] Page 31,52.

[7] Page 49.

[8] Page 79.

[9] Page 118.

[10] Page 84.

[11] Page 18.

[12] Page 117.

[13] Page 124.

[14] Page 113

A goodly string of appellations! and not a little extraordinary, that they should all centre in one and the same man! Being so uncommon a person myself, my writings too must be something singular. Take a description of them in the words of the said Sellon: "I find sophistry, fallacy, false insinuations, raillery, perversion of Scripture and the Church Articles, self-contradiction, self-sufficiency, haughtiness, pride and vanity, glaring in almost every page [15]."

[15] Page 126.

Thus, enthroned in my easy chair, dignified with titles, and accurately developed as a writer, I only want a suitable address, to render my magnificence complete; and who so well qualified to prepare it, as the eloquent Mr. Sellon? Lo, he attends; and, respectfully advancing, pays me the following compliments: "Unhappily daring, and unpardonably bold, thy tongue imagineth wickedness, and with lies thou cuttest like a sharp razor. Thou hast loved unrighteousness more than goodness; and to talk of lies more than righteousness. Thou hast loved to speak all words that may do hurt, O, thou false tongue!" [16] Such are the candour and politeness of these Methodists; and such are the arguments, by which they would persuade us, that Arminianism is the religion of the Church of England.

[16] Page 2, 25.

These are the men that set up for "universal love;" who call one another by the cant names of "precious believers," "most excellent souls," "charming children of God," "sweet Christians," and "the clean-hearted." If their hearts are no cleaner than their mouths, they have little reason to value themselves on their "sinless perfection."

These are they who seek to bottom election on faith and goodness foreseen; of which foreseen goodness, humility and benevolence, meekness and forbearance, are, I suppose, some of the ingredients. Woe be to those "sweet Christians," if their election has no better foundation than their "sweet" tempers, words, and works.

And why all this torrent of abuse? The plain truth is this: I detected Mr. Wesley's forgeries, and chastised the forger. Hinc ille lacrymae. Hence the outcries of John himself, together with those of Thomas Olivers and Walter Sellon. The camp of the Philistines gave a scream, when they saw the levelled stone penetrate the brass of their Goliath's forehead: but of all the tribe, none screamed so loud as the frighted Walter; of whose talent at screaming, a specimen has been exhibited to the reader. Let me whisper a friendly hint to this notable screamer. If you wish your scurrilities to obtain belief, restrain them within the banks of probability; malice, when too highly wrought, resembles a cannon too highly charged, which recoils on the engineer himself, instead of reaching its intended object of direction.

I might, with the most justifiable propriety, have declined joining issue, in controversy, with a person of Mr. Sellon's cast, who is, by those that know him, deemed ignorant and unpolished, even to a proverb; he is, indeed, to borrow the language of another, "a small body of Pelagian divinity, bound in calf, neither gilt nor lettered." I once hoped, that his friends were too severe, in branding him with such a character; but he has been so weak as to publish; he has gibbitted himself in print. I am fully convinced, that his friends were in the right, and my charitable hope mistaken.

Let none, however, suppose, that I harbour any degree of malevolence against either him or his master. Whatever I have already written, or may hereafter have occasion to write, in opposition to them, or to any others, on whom the toil of defending; them may devolve, has been, and, I trust, ever will be, designed, not to throw odium on their persons, nor to wound their cause unfairly, but, simply, to strip error of its varnish; to open the eyes of delusion; to pluck the vizor from the face of hypocrisy; to bring Arminian Methodism to the test of fact and argument; to wipe off the aspersions thrown, by the despairing-hand of defeated heterodoxy, on the purest Church under heaven; and to confirm such as have believed through grace.

Indeed, the purity of my intention speaks for itself. At a time of such general defection from the doctrines of the Church Established, I cannot possibly have any sinister ends to answer, by asserting those doctrines. It cannot be to gain applause; for, were that my motive, I should studiously swim with the current, and adopt the fashionable system; neither can it be to acquire preferment, for the doctrines of grace are not the principles to rise by. In the reigns of Edward VI., Elizabeth, and the former part of James I, the Calvinistic points were necessary steps to advancement, and led directly to the top of the Church: but the stairs have been long turned another way: what was, once, the causa sine qua non of ascending, is now a causa propter quam non; or, considered as a reason for keeping unfashionable divines as low on the ecclesiastical ladder as possible.

I bless God, for enabling me to esteem the reproach of Christ greater treasure than all the applause of men, and all the preferments of the Church. WhenI received orders, I obtained mercy to be faithful; and, from that moment, gave up what is called the world, so far as I conceived it to interfere with faith and a good conscience. The opposition which I have met with, in the course of my ten years ministry, has been nothing, compared with what I expected would ensue, on an open, steady attachment to the truths of God: and what insults have been thrown in my way came, for the most part, from a quarter equally abusive and contemptible; I mean, from Mr. John Wesley, and a few of his unfledged disciples; whose efforts give me no greater apprehension than would a fly that was to settle on my hat.

Some readers may suppose, possibly, that, in the course of the annexed Treatise, I have handled my assailants too severely: I request, that such will suspend their judgment, until they have perused the performance which gave rise to the present. Their opinion, I am persuaded, will then be reversed; and they will wonder, either at my deigning to take any notice at all, of an invective so exceedingly low and frivolous; or, at my not chastising the authors of it with a severity proportioned to their demerits: but, for abstaining from the latter, I had, among others, two reasons: 1. I should have sinned against meekness; and, 2. The poverty of Mr. Sellon's talents, in particular, is so extreme, as to render him an object rather of pity than of resentment. As the man cannot reason, nor even write grammatically, I often allow him to rail with impunity. If a malicious ignoramus comes against me with a straw, self-defence does not oblige me, and Christian charity forbids me, to knock him down with a bludgeon.

Moreover, the period may arrive, when this very person, as also his commander-in-chief, may see the justness, and experience the energy, of those heavenly truths which they now unite to blaspheme: they may even preach the faith to which they have subscribed, and which they impotently labour to destroy. If having once been an Arminian, were incompatable with future conversion and salvation, we might indeed ask, who then can be saved? For every man is born an Arminian. Unrenewed nature spurns the idea of inheriting eternal life as the mere gift of Divine Sovereignty, and on the footing of absolute grace. I will not affirm, that all, who heartily embrace the Scripture system of Calvinism, are savingly renewed by the holy Spirit of God; for St. Stephen, teaches us to distinguish between the circumcision, of the ears, and the circumcision of the heart. Thus much, however, I assert, without hesitation, that I know, comparatively, very few Calvinists, of whose saving renewal I have reason to doubt. I will even go a step farther: sincerely to admit and relish a system so diametrically opposite to the natural pride of the human heart, is, with me, an incontestible proof, that a man's judgment, at least, is brought into subjection to the obedience of Christ: and, to every such person, those words may be accommodated, "flesh and blood have not revealed this to thee, but my Father who is in heaven."

I cannot give the two Pelagian gentlemen stronger evidence of my concern for their welfare, than by wishing them to renounce those unhappy principles, which, under pretence of extending the grace of God, by representing it as a glove accommodated to every hand, and which lies at the option of free-will either to make use of, or to fling behind the fire, do, in fact, annihilate all grace whatever, by ultimately resolving its efficacy into the power, merits, and caprice of man. Mr. Wesley and Mr. Sellon may find, in Strype's Collections, a form of recantation, ready drawn to their hands. The historian introduces it thus:

"Another letter there was, writ (A. D. 1555) by one in prison (for the Protestant faith, during the Marian persecution), who had lately been one of these Free-willers [17], but now changed in his judgment, to certain of that persuasion, in prison also for the gospel." The persecution of Protestants was so indiscriminate, that not only the bishops, clergy, and members of the Church of England, felt its iron hand, but even some of the Free-will Men (as they were then called), who dissented from the Church, and had formed a separate conventicle of their own, came in for a taste of the common trouble: but, though a few of the few Free-willers (for their whole number was then exceedingly small) were imprisoned for a while, I cannot find that so much as one of them either died in confinement, or was brought to the stake. If Mr. Wesley and his friend can give authentic evidence, that so much as a single Free-willer was burned by the Papists, let them point him out by name; and, at the same time, remember to adduce their proofs. Such an instance, or instances, if producible, will reflect some honour on the Pelagians of that era, though unable to turn the scale in favour of Pelagianism itself. I now return to the letter of the converted Free-will man. In it, says the historian, he lamented "the loss of the gospel (i. e. the revival of Popery by queen Mary); shewing the reasons of it: whereof one he made to be, that they (viz. himself and his Pelagian brethren) had professed the gospel (i. e. Protestantism) with their tongues, and denied it in their [18] deeds: another, that they were not sound in the doctrine of predestination. In this letter he mentioned what a grief it was to him, that he had endeavoured so much to persuade others into his error of Free-will; and that divers of that congregation of Free-will men began to be better informed; as namely, Ladley and Cole, and others unnamed: the report of whom gave him and his prison-fellows much rejoicing, (adding) that he was convinced (i. e. converted from being a Free-will man) by certain preachers in prison with him, who reconciled St. Paul and St. James together, to his great satisfaction)."

[17] During the preceding reign of King Edward VI. there had been a congregation of Free-willers, in some part of London, who were Separatists from the Church of England; and, indeed, all Free-willers were then accounted Dissenters, and openly professed themselves to be such. Certain salvoes for duplicity, which have since been adapted, were not then invented. The Free-willers of that age were, with all their mistakes, too honest, either to subscribe to the Articles and Homilies of the Church, or statedly to frequent her public worship.—I shall have occasion to mention the Free-will Congregation hereafter.

[18] This is one proof, among a million, that the doctrines of Free-will and of Justification by Works (both which were stiffly contended for by these Pelagians, and to which most of them added the belief of sinless perfection) are not doctrines really calculated to promote holiness of life, whatever the assertors of those tenets may pretend. Observe, they "were not sound in the doctrine of Predestination;" and "their deeds" were so dishonourable to a gospel profession, as to amount even to a " denial" of it. As it was in the beginning, it is now, and ever will be; generally speaking.—Unsoundness and unholiness seldom fail to walk arm in arm.

A great part of this choice letter is published by Mr. Strype, at the close (/) of the volume referred to below. For Mr. Wesley's sake, and for the sake of those who are led captive by him at his will, I here transcribe the following passages, which may serve him as a model of retractation, in case it should please God to grant him repentance to the acknowledgment of the truth.

''What high lauds, thanks and praise, am I bound to give always to God, who hath certified my conscience, by his spirit, that he will not impute my sins unto me, for his son Jesus Christ's sake, in whom he hath chosen his elect before the foundations of the world were laid; and preserveth us all, so that there shall never any of us finally perish, or be damned.

"I, for my part, repent, that ever I was so bitter unto them that were the teachers of this undoubted truth: verily, I am not able to express the sorrows that I have in my heart: most especially, in that I went about, by all means, to persuade others, whereby they might be one with me in that error of Free-will. With joy unspeakable I rejoice, giving thanks to God night and day, in that it hath pleased him to vouch me worthy his fatherly correction at this present shewing me what I am by nature; that is to say full of impiety and all evil: therefore, the great grief which I daily feel, is, because I see the horribleness and the great dishonour, that the filthy Free-will of man doth render unto God. I sigh and am grieved, because I soak evil of that good I knew not.

"Wherefore, my beloved, I am provoked by the Holy Ghost, to visit you with my letter; hoping, and believing, that God will give it good success: whereby God's glory may be the more set forth. For I have a good opinion of you, my dear brethren; trusting in God, that he will reveal unto you the knowledge of himself: for I believe verily, that you will be vessels of God's mercy; therefore I am assured, that you shall lack no necessary article of your salvation. I have good cause so to judge of you; not only because God hath opened his truth to me alone, but I also see how mercifully he hath dealt with many of our brethren, whom you do know well enough, as well as though I did recite them by name. God forbid that I should doubt you, seeing it hath pleased God to reveal himself, in these days, to them that heretofore were deceived with that error of the Pelagians, and suffered [19] imprisonment in defence of that which now they detest and abhor. God be thanked for them. This is the Lord's doing: and it is marvellous in our eyes.

[19] It appears hence, that, in the foregoing reign of king Edward, i. e. from the very first establishment of the Protestant Church of England, Pelagianism or holding and maintaining the doctrine of Free-will and its connected principles, was punished with imprisonment. I acknowledge, that such a method of dealing with the "Free-will Men" reflects very great dishonour on the moderation of those times. It demonstrates, however, the high Calvinism of the church of England, whose secular and spiritual governors (among the latter of whom were the principal Reformers themselves) could proceed, with such extreme rigour, against the abettors of those livry tenets, which some modern Arminians, more rash team wise, would persuade us, were even ub origin?, the doctrines of the Church herself. I must add, that the usage of "the Free-will men" was very severe, both on the right hand and on the left. In the Protestant reign of Edward VI. they had been imprisoned for being too Popish, in the articles of Justification, Election, and Grace; all three of which they supposed to be conditional and emissaole. In the Catholic reign of Mary, they were liable to imprisonment, and some of them actually were imprisoned, for not being Popish enough, in the Articles of Image-worship and Transubstantiation. Their troubles, under Mary, were no more than might be expected; but their sufferings under Edward and the Uelormtrs, \LTC ui*»o-futtly unnatural and inexcusable.

"Like as you have the truth, as concerning the Papists' sacrament, in despising and hating that, as I do, it is well worthy: so likewise is Free will a great untruth, undoubtedly.

" I think that God will receive me home unto himself shortly; therefore, lam moved to signify unto you in what state I stand, concerning the controversy between the opinions of the truth of God's predestination and election in Christ. I do not hold predestination to the end to maintain evil, ns there be some have full ungodly affirmed that we do; God forgive them, if it be his will. We are sure that none, who have the full feeling of their election in Christ, can love or allow those things which God hateth.

I would wish, that men should not allow the fruit of faith to be the cause of faith. Faith bringeth forth good works, and not good works faith; for then of necessity we must attribute our salvation to our good works; which is great blasphemy against God and Christ so to do.

"But, I thank God, I do allow good works in their (proper) place. For I was created in Christ unto good works: wherefore I am bound to allow them, according to the Scriptures; and not to the end to merit by them any thing at all; for then I were utterly deceived; for Esay saith, all our righteousnesses are as a filthy cloth, and are not as the law of God requireth them: wherefore, I acknowledge, that all salvation, justification, redemption, and remission of sins, cometh to us wholly and solely by the mere mercy and free grace of God in Jesus Christ, and not for any of our own works, merits, or deservings. I myself could not understand St. Paul and St. James, to make them agree together, till our good preachers, who were my prison-fellows, did open them unto me. I praise God for them, most humbly; and yet I cannot be so thankful for them as I ought to be.

"Paul saith, faith only justifieth, and not the deeds of the law: and St. James saith, faith, without deeds, is dead. Here are contraries to the carnal man. When I saw these two Scriptures plainly opened, I could not stand against the truth therein: and thus were they opened unto me; that faith only doth justify before God; and the good deeds which St. James speaketh of, justify before the world.

"I thank God that they, who I thought would have been my enemies, are become my friends in the truth: as in sample, by our brethren Ladley and Cole, and such like: if it had lain in their own wills, they would have been enemies to that excellent truth which they do now allow: praised be God for them; for it is he who worketh both the will and deed. If he had not been merciful unto them and to me, and prevented our wills, we had been still wallowing in the mire. The prophet Jeremy saith, "Turn thou me, and I shall be turned; heal thou me, and I shall be healed." And David saith, "The Lord hath prepared the hearts of the poor, and his ear hearkeneth unto them:" so that it is the Lord who doth all that good is. And again, David saith, "Ascribe all honour and glory to God, who alone is worthy: for no man cometh unto me, saith Christ, except the Father, who hath sent me, draw him." And again he saith, "All that the Father hath given me, shall come unto me; and him that cometh to me, I cast not away."

"Therefore, I believe that we shall, every one, be preserved and kept, in him and for him, according to his own word. I dare boldly say, with our everlasting Saviour Jesus Christ, that all the elect shall be preserved and kept forever and ever: so then, none of them shall be damned at any time. They who say that any of them may be lost for ever, do as much as in them lieth to make (i. e. to represent) Christ unable to preserve and keep them: denying the power of Christ, in so saying: for he saith, he loveth his unto the end: which love remaineth, and shall never be extinguished, or put out; and is not as the love of man, which is sometimes angry, and sometimes pleased. God, at no time, is so displeased with any of his elect, to the end that he will deprive them of the purchased possession, which he hath laid up in store for them in Christ before, and were elect according to the foreknowledge of God the father, through sanctifying of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ; which Lamb was killed from the beginning, according to God's divine will and providence. Christ was ordained to die in the flesh; and all was for our sins. Christ was ordained in this respect; that the Father, seeing the fall of Adam, for that purpose only he ordained Christ, to the end that he would preserve a remnant of the posterity of Adam, even as it pleased his godly wisdom.

"What, will some say a remnant, and not all? St. Paul saith, Like as all died in Adam, &c. And St. John saith, Not for our sins only, &c. Ah! will these Free-will men say, Where is your remnant now become? To whom I answer by the Scriptures, whereas Christ shall say, in the last day, Depart from me, ye cursed; I know you not: I pray you, tell me, did not God know them, as concerning their creation, and also their wickedness? Yes, verily: but he knew them not for his elect children.

"The true Church of Christ doth understand these all (viz. the all, and the whole redeemed world, mentioned by St. Paul and St. John,) and all other such like Scriptures, to include all the elect children of God. None otherwise I am sure, that these all can be understood except we should make the Scripture repugnant to itself; which were too much ignorance, and too great an absurdity, to grant.

"I affirm, that all they be blasphemers to God, that do slander the truth in predestination; that say, If I be once in, I cannot be out, do what evil I will or can: all such do declare themselves to be reprobates, and children of God's ire and wrath, rather than any of his. For whosoever delighteth in those things which God hateth and abhorreth, doth declare himself to be none of God’s: but, if he be any of his, he will give him repentance, for to know the truth, by his Spirit. For the Spirit maketh intercession for the saints, according to the pleasure of God. For we know that all things work for the best, unto them that love God, who are called of purpose. For those which he knew before, he also ordained before, that they should be like fashioned unto the shape (i. e. here, to the gracious, hereafter, to the glorious, resemblance) of his Son.

"And seeing God hath made all his elect like to the shape (the spiritual and moral similitude) of Jesus Christ, how is it possible, that any of them can fall away? Whosoever he be, that doth so hold, is against God and Christ; and may as well say, that our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ may perish as any of them; for Christ said unto the Father, Thou hast loved them as thou hast loved me: although Christ spake these words to the comfort of his disciples at the present, so likewise is it to the comfort of all us, his chosen. Those that St. Paul speaketh of that God knew before, he meant by it, all his elect; and immediately he addeth, saying, Whom he appointed before, them also he called; and whom he called, them also he justified; and whom he justified, them also he glorified. What shall we then say to these things? If God be on our side, who can be against us? That is to say, if God have appointed to glorify us and to save us, who can then deny (deprive) him of any of us, or take us out of his hands?

" My sheep, saith Christ, hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me; and I give unto them eternal life, and they shall never perish. O, most worthy Scriptures! which ought to compel us to have a faithful remembrance, and to note the tenor thereof; which is, the sheep of Christ shall never perish.

"Doth Christ mean part of his elect, or all, think you? I do hold, and affirm, and also faithfully believe, that he meant all his elect, and not part, as some do full ungodly affirm. I confess and believe assuredly, that there shall never any of them perish: for I have good authority so to say; because Christ is my author, and saith, if it were possible, the very elect should be deceived. Ergo, it is not possible that they can be so deceived, that they shall ever finally perish, or be damned: wherefore, whosoever doth affirm that there maybe any (i. e. any of the elect) lost, doth affirm that Christ hath a torn body."

The above valuable letter of recantation is thus inscribed: "A Letter to the Congregation of Free-willers, by One that had been of that Persuasion, but come off, and now a Prisoner for Religion:" which superscription will hereafter, in its due place, supply us with a remark of more than slight importance.

To occupy the place of argument, it has been, alleged that "Mr. Wesley is an old man;" and the Church of Rome is still older than he. Is that any reason why the enormities, either of the mother or the son, should pass unchastised?

It has also been suggested, that "Mr. Wesley is a very laborious man:" not more laborious, I presume, than a certain active being, who is said to go to and fro in the earth, and walk up and down in it: [xiv] nor yet more laborious, I should imagine, than certain ancient Sectarians, concerning whom it was long ago said, "Woe unto you Scribes, Pharisees, hypocrites; for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte:" [xv] nor, by any means, so usefully laborious, as a certain diligent member of the community, respecting whose variety of occupations the public have lately received the following intelligence: "The truth of the following instance of industry may be depended on: a poor man, with a large family, now cries milk, every morning, in Lothbury, and the neighbourhood of the Royal Exchange; at eleven, he wheels about a barrow of potatoes; at one, he cleans shoes at the Change; after dinner, cries milk again; in the evening, sells sprats; and at night, finishes the measure of his labour as a watchman." [xvi]

[xiv] Job 1:7 with 1Pe 5:8

[xv] Mt 23:15

[xvi] Bath Chronicle, for Feb. 6, 1772.

Mr. Sellon, moreover, reminds me (p. 128.) that, "while the shepherds are quarrelling, the wolf gets into the sheep fold;" not impossible: but it so happens, that the present quarrel is not among "the shepherds,” but with the "wolf" himself; which "quarrel" is warranted by every maxim of pastoral meekness and fidelity.

I am farther told, that, while I am “berating the Arminians, Rome and the devil laugh in their sleeves." Admitting that Mr. Sellon might derive this anecdote from the fountain-head, the parties themselves, yet, as neither they nor he are very conspicuous for veracity, I construe the intelligence by the rule of reverse, though authenticated by the deposition of their right trusty and well-beloved cousin and counsellor.

Once more: I am charged with “excessive superciliousness, and majesty of pride: " and why not charged with having seven heads and ten horns, and a tail as long as a bell-rope? After all, what has my pride, or my humility, to do with the argument in hand? Whether I am haughty, or meek, is of no more consequence either to that, or to the public, than whether I am tall or short: however, I am, at this very time, giving one proof, that my “majesty of pride" can stoop; stoop even to ventilate the impertinences of Mr. Sellon.

But, however frivolous his cavils, the principles for which he contends are of the most pernicious nature and tendency. I must repeat, what already seems to have given him so much offence, that Arminianism "came from Rome, and leads thither again." Julian, bishop of Eclana a cotemporary and disciple of Pelagius, was one of those who endeavoured, with much art, to gild the doctrines of that heresiarch, in order to render them more sightly and palatable. The Pelagian system, thus varnished and palliated, soon began to acquire the softer name of Semipelagianism Let us take a view of it, as drawn to our hands by the celebrated Mr. Bower, who was himself, in the main, a professed Pelagian, and therefore less likely to present us with an unfavourable portrait of the system he generally approved.

Among the principles of that sect, this learned writer enumerates the following:

“The notion of election and reprobation, in dependent on our merits or demerits, is maintaining a fatal necessity, is the bane of all virtue, and serves only to render good men remiss in working out their salvation, and to drive sinners to despair.

“The decrees of election and reprobation are posterior to, and in consequence of, our good or evil works, as foreseen by God from all eternity," [xvii]

[xvii] Bower’s Hist. of the Popes, vol. i. p. 350.

Is not this too the very language of modern Arminianism? Do not the partizans of that scheme argue on the same principles, and express their objections against Calvinism even in the same identical terms? Should it be said, “True, this proves that Arminianism is Pelagianism revived; but it does not prove, that the doctrines of Arminianism are originally Popish:" a moment's cool attention will make it plain that they are. Let us again hear Mr. Bower, who, after the passage just quoted, immediately adds, “on these two last propositions, the Jesuits found their whole system of grace and free-will; agreeing therein with the Semipelagians, against the Jansenists and St. Austin." [xviii] The Jesuits were moulded into a regular body, towards the middle of the sixteenth century: toward the close of the same century, Arminius began to infest the Protestant churches. It needs therefore no great penetration, to discern from what source he drew his poison. His journey to Rome (though Monsieur Bayle affects to make light of the inferences which were at that very time deduced from it) was not for nothing. If, however, any are disposed to believe, that Arminius imbibed his doctrines from the Socinians in Poland, with whom, it is certain, he was on terms of intimate friendship, I have no objection to splitting the difference: he might import some of his tenets from the Racovian brethren, and yet be indebted, for others, to the disciples of Loyola.

[xviii] Bower, ibid.

Certain it is, that Arminius himself was sensible, how greatly the doctrine of predestination widens the distance between Protestantism and Popery. “There is no point of doctrines (says he) which the Papists, the Anabapists, and the (new) Lutherans more fiercely oppose, nor by means of which they heap more discredit on the reformed Churches, and bring the reformed system itself into more odium; for they (i. e. the Papists, &c.) assert, that no fouler blasphemy against God can be thought or expressed, than is contained in the doctrine of predestination." For which reason, he advises the reformed world to discard predestination from their creed, in order that they may live on more brotherly terms with the Papists, the Anabaptists, and such like.

The Arminian writers make no scruple to seize and retail each other's arguments, as common property. Hence, Samuel Hoord copies from Van Harmin the self-same observation which I have now cited. “Predestination (says Samuel) is an opinion odious to the Papists, opening their foul mouths, against our Church and religion:" [xix] consequently, our adopting the opposite doctrines of universal grace and free-will, would, by bringing us so many degrees nearer to the Papists, conduce to shut their mouths, and make them regard us, so far at least, as their own orthodox and dearly beloved brethren: whence it follows, that, as Arminianism came from Rome, so “it leads thither again."

[xix] Hoord, in Bishop Davenant’s Animadversions, Camb. 1641.

If the joint verdict of Arminius himself, and of his English proselyte Hoord, will not turn the scale, let us add the testimony of a professed Jesuit, by way of making up full weight. When archbishop Laud's papers were examined, a letter was found among them, thus endorsed with that prelate's own hand: "March, 1628. A Jesuit's Letter, sent to the Rector at Bruxels, about the ensuing Parliament." The design of this letter was to give the Superior of the Jesuits, then resident at Brussels, an account of the posture of civil and ecclesiastical affairs in England; an extract from it I shall here subjoin: “Father Rector, let not the damp of astonishment seize upon your ardent and zealous soul, in apprehending the sodaine and unexpected calling of a Parliament. We have now many strings to our bow. We have planted that soveraigne drugge Arminianisme, which we hope will purge the Protestants from their heresie; and it flourisheth and beares fruit in due season. For the better prevention of the Puritanes, the Arminians have already locked up the Duke's (of Buckingham) eares; and we have those of our owne religion, which stand continually at the Duke's chamber, to see who goes in and out: we cannot be too circumspect and carefull in this regard. I am, at this time, transported with joy, to see how happily all instruments and means, as well great as lesser, co-operate unto our purposes. But, to return unto the maine fabricke: —Our foundation is Arminianisme. The Arminians and projectors, as it appeares in the premises, affect mutation. This we second and enforce by probable arguments." [xx]

[xx] Hidden works of darkness, p. 89, 90. Edit. 1645.

The “sovereign drug, Arminianism," which, said the Jesuit, “we (i. e. we Papists) have planted" in England, did indeed bid fair “to purge” our Protestant Church effectually. How merrily Popery and Arminianism, at that time, danced hand in hand, may be learned from Tindal: "The churches were adorned with paintings, images, altar-pieces, &c. and, instead of communion tables, altars were set up, and bowings to them and the sacramental elements enjoined. The predestinarian doctrines were forbid, not only to be preached, but to be printed; and the Arminian sense of the Articles was encouraged and propagated." [xxi] The Jesuit, therefore, did not exult without cause. The “sovereign drug," so lately “planted," did indeed take deep root downward, and bring forth fruit upward, under the cherishing auspices of Charles and Laud.

[xxi] Tindal’s Contin. Of Rapin, vol. 3. octavo, 1758.

Heylyn, too, acknowledges, that the state of things was truly described by another Jesuit of that age, who wrote thus: “Protestantism waxeth weary of itself. The doctrine (by the Arminians, who then sat at the helm) is altered in many things, for which their progenitors forsook the Church of Rome: as limbus patrum; prayer for the dead, and possibility of keeping God's commandments; and the accounting of Calvinism to be heresy at least, if not treason." [xxii]

[xxii] Life of Laud, p. 238.

The maintaining of these positions, by the Court divines, was an “alteration" indeed; which the abandoned Heylyn ascribes to “the ingenuity and moderation found in some professors of our religion." If we sum up the evidence that has been given, we shall find its amount to be, that Arminianism came from the Church of Rome, and leads back again to the pit whence it was digged.

The mention of Rome naturally enough paves the way for saying something about John Goodwin: and the rather, as Mr. Sellon seriously supposes that I paid his friend Wesley a very great compliment, when I styled him, which I still do, the John Goodwin of the present age. The greatness of this compliment will appear, from the following short particulars, which some historians have transmitted to posterity, concerning the said Goodwin.

About the year 1652, when Cromwell's design of usurping the sovereign power became more and more apparent, a set of visionaries, known by the name of Fifth-Monarchy Men, [xxiii] grew very turbulent and conspicuous. Their grand ring-leader was John Goodwin, the Arminian; who had also rendered himself remarkable, by aspersing the Calvinistic doctrines of the Church of England, and by publishing a folio Vindication of King Charles's Beheaders: yet, behold the art of this crafty Arminian! though the Fifth-Monarchy Men were not a little odious and formidable to Oliver Cromwell, and though John Goodwin was actually at the head of those odious and formidable fanatics, Goodwin, notwithstanding plyed Cromwell so assiduously with flattery and obsequiousness, as to gain no small measure of that Usurper's confidence: even the dissembling Oliver was, in part, over-reached by the still more exquisite dissimulation of master Goodwin.

[xxiii] The leading principle, and the extravagant spirit, of these double-dyed enthusiasts, will appear, in part, from the titles of two famous Tracts published by them, about this aera :—1. "The sounding of the last Trumpet; or, several Visions, declaring the universal overturning and rooting up of all earthly Powers in England: with many other Things foretold, which shall come to pass in this Year 1650, lately shewed unto George Foster, who was commanded to print them."— 2. “Sion's approaching Glory; or, the great and glorious Day of the Lord King Jesus's appearing; before whom all the Kings of the Nations must fall, and never rise again. Accurately described, according to the Prophets, Christ, and his Apostles, in Three-and-forty Sections: by James Freze, Merchant, 1652." See Grey's Notes on Hudibras, vol. 2. p. 245.

The Fifth-Monarchists were not entirely extinguished, at the Restoration of Charles II. “That king (says bishop Burnet) had not been many days at Whitehall, when one Venner, a violent Fifth-Monarchy Man, who thought it was not enough to believe that Christ was to put the Saints into the possession of the kingdom, but added to this, that the Saints were to take the kingdom themselves, gathered some of the most furious of the party to a Meeting in Coleman-street (which, by the way, was the very part of the town where John Goodwin, at that very time, privately exercised his ministry; and it is not improbable, but Goodwin's own Meeting-house might be the place of rendezvous, to which Venner convened his brother conspirators. See Calamy's Account of the Ejected Ministers, p. 53. Edit. 1713.) There they concerted the day and the manner of their rising to set Christ on his throne, as they called it: but, withal, they meant to manage the government in his name; and were so formal, that they had prepared standards and colours, with their devices ou them, and furnished themselves with very good arms; but, when the day came, there was but a small appearance, not exceeding twenty; however, they resolved to venture out into the streets, and cry out, No King but Christ. Some of them seemed persuaded, that Christ would come down and head them. They scoured the streets before them, and made a great progress; they killed a great many; but were at last mastered by numbers; and were all either killed, or taken and executed." Burnet's own Time, vol. i. p. 160, 161. Folio.

Bishop Kennett justly observes, that the Fifth-Monarchy Men were “the most bold and bloody of all sorts of enthusiasts." Complete Hist, of Engl. vol. 3. p. 225.

Dr. Echard will, more than any historian yet quoted, let us into the true knowledge of the unparalled exorbitances, which marked the temper and proceedings of this species of fanatics. Venner himself was, it seems, a preaching Cooper, and used to hold forth in John Goodwin's pulpit (that tub without hoops,) in Colman-street. The topics, on which Venner and his associates usually harrangued their Arminian auditory, were, the expedience and necessity of “taking up arms for king Jesus (I shudder at the blasphemy), against the powers of the earth, the king, the duke of York, general Monk, &c. assuring them, that no weapons formed against them (i. e. against their own sect) should prosper, nor an hair of their heads be touched; for one should chase a thousand, and two put ten thousand to flight. Upon which they got a declaration printed, entitled, A Door of Hope opened: in which they said and declared, that they would never sheath their swords, till Babylon (as they called monarchy) became an hissing and a curse; and (till) there be left neither remnant, son, nor nephew: that, when they had led captivity captive in England, they would go into France, Spain, Germany, &c. and rather die, than take the wicked oaths of supremacy and allegiance: that they would not make any leagues with monarchists, but would rise up against the carnal to possess the gate, or the world; to bind their kings in chains and their nobles in fetters of iron." The historian then gives a circumstantial account of Venner's insurrection, in consequence of these godly resolutions: but he, and nineteen others, being at length overpowered and taken, were tried at the Old Bailey, “for treason and murder; which being fully proved on Venner and sixteen of the rest, when sentence was pronounced against them, and Lord Chief Justice Foster seriously charged Venner with the blood of his unhappy accomplices, Venner impudently replied, It was not he, but Jesus, that led them. Being sentenced to be hanged, drawn, and quartered, Vernier and Hodgkins were, on the 19th of January, executed, over against their Meeting-house, in Coleman-street." Echard's Hist, of Engl. vol. 3. p. 42-44.

Bishop Kennett affirms, that most of the Fifth-Monarchy Men, who were executed on account of Venner's insurrection, died “raving, and threatening judgment, and calling down vengeance on the king, the judges, and the city" of London. Complete Hist. u. s.

And yet Mr. John Wesley and Mr. Walter Sellon are for referring us to the writings of John Goodwin (the very man who was at the head of the Fifth-monarchy Men, and whose Meeting house in Coleman-street appears to have been the rendezvous and headquarters of the party,) as the school of orthodoxy, wherein we are to learn what are the genuine doctrines of the Church of England!"— Credat Judaeus apella; non ego.

Let not the candid reader imagine, that my colouring is too strong, or laid on too thickly: to cut off the very possibility of such a surmise, I shall express what I farther have to observe concerning the sly Fifth-Monarchy Man, in the words of others: not forgetting, at the same time, to subjoin, from bishop Burnet, as much as may suffice to authenticate what has been already placed to John Goodwin's account.

“The Fifth-Monarchy Men seemed (viz. A. D. 1652 and 1653,) to be really in expectation, every day, when Christ should appear. John Goodwin headed these; who first brought in Arminianism among the sectaries. None of the preachers were so thorough-paced for him (i. e. for Cromwell) as to temporal matters, as Goodwin was; for he (Goodwin) not only justified the putting the King to death, but magnified it as the gloriousest action men were capable of. He (Goodwin filled all people with such expectation of a glorious thousand years speedily to begin, that it looked like a madness possessing them [xxiv]." Such being the principles of John Goodwin, what a master-piece of political cunning must his conduct have been which could fix him so tightly in the saddle of Cromwell's esteem! On the one hand, Cromwell was taking large strides toward the throne; and, soon, actually acquired kingly power, though (by spinning his thread of affected moderation too finely) he missed the name of King. On the other hand, Goodwin, who had long represented kingship as the great Antichrist which hindered Christ's being set on his throne [xxv],”carried him self fairly with the Protector, who was, every day, visibly approximating nearer and nearer to that very “kingship" which Goodwin abhorred as "the great Antichrist" that excluded the Messiah from possessing his right. A little to save appearances, Cromwell canted, occasionally, to Goodwin, and the rest of the Fifth-Monarchy Men; and in return, Goodwin as cantingly pretended to be convinced of Cromwell's holy and upright intentions!

[xxiv] Burnet's Own Times, vol. i. p. 67.

[xxv] Burnet, Ibid.

It surprised everybody, says Burnet, that John Goodwin, who had been so furious and active against Charles I. should come off with impunity, after the restoration of Charles II. "But (adds the right reverend historian), Goodwin had been so zealous an Arminian, and had sown such division among all the sectaries, on these heads, that, it was said, this procured him friends [xxvi]." It has long been universally known and acknowledged that Charles II. himself had been, for some time before the commencement of his reign, a concealed Papist; and that he continued such, to the last moment of his life. No wonder, therefore, that Goodwin's Arminianisin [xxvii] atoned for the rancour and frenzy of his political principles and behaviour. “Goodwin had, so often, not only justified, but magnified, the putting the king to death, both in his sermons and books, that few thought he could have been either forgot or excused; for (Hugh) Peters and he were the only preachers who spoke of it in that strain [xxviii]." Who will say, that John Goodwin knew not how to balance a straw? During the civil commotions, the raster kept himself secure, by his abhorrence of monarchy. After the nation was resettled, he preserved his neck, and his treasons were overlooked, on account of his zeal for Arminianism. He had been already serviceable to the Popish cause, by “sowing divisions" among Protestants; and he was suffered to live, by a Popish prince who aimed at arbitrary power, in order to his being farther useful in the same laudable department.

[xxvi] Burnet, ibid, p. 163.

[xxvii] Goodwin, however, soon after the coming of Charles II. trembled for his neck, and thought proper to lie hid for a season. The immediate occasion of which panic was this: in August 1660, “was called in a book of John Goodwin (then lately a Minister in Coleman-street, London), entitled, The Obstructers of Justice; written in defence of the sentence against his Majesty Charles I. At which time also the said Goodwin absconded, to prevent justice." (Wood's Athenae, vol. i. col. 882 Edit. 1691.) The fox, however, at length, ventured out of his hole, and was not earthed till 1665.

[xxviii] Burnet, ibid.

So much for Goodwin, as a politician: a word or two now, concerning him as a divine, and an individual; for it is, chiefly, in these latter respects, that I have honoured Mr. John Wesley with, what Mr. Sellon calls, “the great commendation" of being the John Goodwin of the present age.

Dr. Calamy informs, us, that, on the Restoration, Goodwin, ''not being satisfied with the terms of the Uniformity-act, lived and died a Non-conformist. He was a man by himself; was against every man, and had every man almost against him. He was very warm and eager (in) whatsoever he engaged in [xxix].”The same writer observes, that Goodwin "wrote such a number of controversial pieces, that it would be no easy thing to reckon them up with any exactness [xxx].”If instead of the word "wrote,” we only substitute the word “pilfered," the whole of these two passages will fit both the Mr. Johns as neatly as their skins.

[xxix] Account of Ejected Ministers, p. 53.

[xxx] Continuation, vol. i. p. 78.

A very humorous circumstance, respecting Goodwin, is related by Antony Wood: an ingenious writer of that age published a book against Goodwin, with this facetious title: “Coleman-street Conclave visited; and that grand impostor, the Schismatic's Cheater in Chief (who hath long slily lurked therein) truly and duly discovered; containing a most palpable and plain Display of Mr John Goodwin's Self-conviction, and of the notorious Heresies, Errors, Malice, Pride, and Hypocrisy, of this most huge Garagantua. London, 1648.” The title is curious; but the frontispiece, prefixed, was exquisitely laughable, and most justly descriptive, of the original. “Before the title (continues Wood) is John Goodwin's picture, with a windmill over his head, and a weathercock upon it, with other hieroglyphics, or emblems, about him, to shew the instability of the man [xxxi]." The writer of the above piece was Mr. John Vicars, the famous author of “The Schismatic sifted;" who, if he sifted all schismatics as searchingly as he appears to have sifted John Goodwin, the schismatics of that age had no great reason to be much in love either with the sifter, or the sieve. What a masterly sifting would such a man have given to John Wesley and Walter Sellon! But they must now content themselves with Goodwin's legacy of the windmill surmounted by a weathercock.

[xxxi] Athenae, vol. ii. col. 85.

Goodwin had an excellent talent at scurrility and abuse; whereof take the following concise example: Mr. Nedham had written two treatises against him; the one entitled, “Trial of Mr. John Goodwin at the Bar of Religion and right Reason:" the other, “The great Accuser cast down;" on which the inflammable Arminian immediately took fire, and gave vent to his rage in explosions not the most gentle. He characterized Nedham as having “a foul mouth, which Satan had opened against the truth and mind of God," as being “a person of infamous and unclean character for the service of the triers;" as “a man that curseth whatsoever he blesseth, and blesseth whatsoever he curseth [xxxii]." And yet John Goodwin is represented as having been, like Mr. John Wesley, "a meek, loving-hearted" Arminian! Let me add, concerning the first of these Johns, that (among a multitude of other refuters) he was taken to task, in 1653, by the learned Mr. Obadiah Howe, in a performance entitled, ''the Pagan Preacher silenced [xxxiii].”I question, if any of Goodwin's Pagan preachments are still extant: but such of his Pagan treatises as have reached the present times, are, I find, the very Bible and Common Prayer-book of Mr. Walter Sellon. I shall close these remarks on Goodwin with some of the encomiums heaped on him by his said admirer. John Goodwin, saith this sagacious critic, was a man "whom envy itself cannot but praise; a glorious champion for the truth of the gospel, and for the genuine doctrines of the Church of England [xxxiv]." Thus chaunts the godly and loyal Mr. Sellon: the veracity, the modesty, and the propriety of whose panegyric, may be amply collected from the foregoing testimonies, which I have produced, concerning the ranting-Fifth-Monarchy Man, J. Goodwin.

[xxxii] Athenae, vol. 2. col. 469.

[xxxiii] Ibid. 558.

[xxxiv] Sellon, p. 26.

Mr. Sellon is no happier in deducing conclusions, than in the drawing of characters: witness his judicious commentary on a passage of mine, whence he labours to distil no less than the doctrine of universal salvation. In my remarks on Dr. Nowel, I testified my firm belief, that the souls of all departed infants are with God in glory: that, in the decree of predestination to life, God hath included all whom he decreed to take away in infancy; and that the decree of reprobation hath nothing to do with them [xxxv]. From these premises says Sellon, it follows that “Mr. Toplady himself maintains general redemption, and even the universal salvation of mankind." Logica Selloniana. As if all mankind died in infancy. “Oh, but you quoted Mt 18:14, to prove the salvation of infants;" true: I did so. Let us review the text itself. “It is not the will of your Father which is in Heaven, that one of these little ones should perish." Supposing this to be spoken of infants, literally so called, it certainly proves, that all who die in that state are saved. “Oh, but our Lord says nothing about their dying in that state; he speaks of little ones in general, whether they live long, or die soon." Does he indeed? Consult verse 10, "Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones; for I say unto you, that their angels (i.e. as I understand it, the souls of such of them as die in infancy) do always behold the face of my Father who is in Heaven!" Now, I should imagine it impossible for the angels, or souls, of little children, always to behold the face of God in Heaven, unless their souls were previously dislodged from their bodies by death: consequently according to my view of the passage, our Lord, in the 14th verse, speaks of such little ones, and of such only, as actually die in infancy. "Oh, but the word angels means guardian angels, appointed to take care of children." Before I can subscribe to this, I must see a grain or two of that necessary thing called proof. That children, no less than adults, are objects of angelic attention, in the course of Providence, I am far from denying: but, in my present conceptions of the passage under consideration, I cannot believe that exposition to convey the true sense of this particular text. Among other reasons, the following is one: how can those superior spirits, who are (upon very probable grounds) supposed, very frequently, if not constantly, to attend on infants, be yet said to behold always the face of our Father, in heaven? In order, therefore, to prove, that the word angels, in this declaration of our Lord, means angels, properly so termed, it must be first proved, that angels, properly so termed, can be present in more places than one, at one and the same time. “Oh, but angels may some times attend children on earth, and at other times be present in Heaven:" likely enough: but the angels, here spoken of, are said always to behold the face or glory of God, and that in Heaven: an affirmation which can never be reconciled to propriety, or even to truth, if they are supposed to be absent from Heaven at any period, or on any occasion. “Oh, but if angels are long-sighted, they may see into Heaven while they are on earth." I never met with a treatise on the optics of angels, and therefore cannot say much to this hypothetical objection. On the whole, if “little ones in general," whether they die young, or live to maturity, be (as Mr. Sellon contends) entitled to salvation, his own title to happiness is incontestible. If little reasoning, less knowledge, and no regard to truth or decency, be a passport to the skies, this exotic star will glitter there, like a diamond of the first water. In the meanwhile, I should be obliged to the said star, if he would, with the help of Mr. Wesley's irradiation, shew me what becomes of departed infants, upon the Arminian plan of conditional salvation, and election on good works foreseen.

[xxxv] See my Vindication of the Church of England from Arminianism.

From two Arminians, let me, for a moment, pass to a third. It will be found, in the following Historical Disquisition, that I have made some use of Dr. Peter Heylyn's testimonies in favour of the grand argument: and I admit his depositions, on the same principle by which men of the most exceptionable cast are sometimes allowed to turn king's evidence.

Calvinism I - Free-willers...

HISTORIC PROOF OF THE DOCTRINAL CALVINISM OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND.

SECTION I.

Free-willers the first Separatists from the Church of England.— Character and Vindication of King Edward VI.

TIME has been, when Arianism was more generally predominant throughout the Christian Church, than even Arminianism is at present. The whole world, says history, wondered, to see itself become Arian. It was Athanasius against all the world, and all the world against Athanasius.

Hardly were the clouds of Arianism dispersed when the Pelagian darkness overspread a considerable part of the ecclesiastical horizon; and its influence has continued, more or less, to obscure the glory of the Christian faith, from that period to this. Yet is the eclipse far from total. We have a multitude of names, even in our present Sardis, who defile not either their doctrinal or their moral garments; and there is very good reason to believe, that their number, in this kingdom, both among clergy and laity is continually increasing.

It is no novelty for the doctrines of grace to meet with opposition; and, indeed, few doctrines have been so much opposed as they. Swarms of fanatical sectarists were almost coeval with the Reformation itself. Such is the imperfect state of things below, that the most important advantages are connected with some inconveniences. The shining of truth like the shining of the sun, wakens insects into life, which, otherwise, would have no sensitive existence. Yet, better for a few insects to quicken, than for the sun not to shine.

I shall not here review the tares which sprang up with the Protestant corn in Germany; but content myself with just observing, that there was one congregation of Free-willers in London, during the reign even of the pious king Edward VI. and notwithstanding the vigilance of our first Protestant bishops—I say, there was one congregation of Free-willers; or, as they were then most usually called, Free will-men: and it should seem, that there was then, in the metropolis, no more than one conventicle of this kind, held by such as made profession of Protestanism. For that valuable letter of recantation, preserved by the impartial Mr. Strype, and of which so large a part has been quoted in our Introduction, was inscribed (as before observed) with the following remarkable title: "A Letter to the Congregation of Free-willers."

London, however, was not the only place in England where Pelagianism began to nestle, while good king Edward was on the throne. Some of the fraternity appeared likewise in two of the adjoining counties: viz. in Kent and Essex. Observe, I call the Free-willers of that age Pelagians: because the new name of Arminians was not then known. The appearance of Free-will-men in Kent and Essex is assigned by Strype to the year 1550, which was ten years before Arminius himself was born.

"Sectarists," says the historian, " appeared now (viz. A. D. 1550), in Essex and Kent, sheltering themselves under the profession of the gospel. Of whom complaint was made to the Council, These (i.e. these Free-willers) were the first that made separation from the Church of England; having gathered congregations of their own [i];" viz. one in London, one at Feversham in Kent, and another at Bocking in Essex. Besides which, they used to hold some petty bye-meetings, when a few of them could assemble with secresy and safety.

[i] Strype’s Memorials Ecclesiastical, vol. ii. b 1 Ch 29.p. 206.

Before we proceed, let me interpose a short remark.—So far is the Church of England from asserting the spiritual powers of free-will, and from denying predestination, that the deniers of predestination, and the assertors of free-will, were the very first persons who separated from her communion, and made a rent in her garment, by "gathering" three schismatical "congregations of their own." Thus, the Free-willers were the original, and are to this day some of the most real and essential, dissenters from our evangelical establishment.

I now return to the historian, who thus goes on: "The congregation in Essex was mentioned to be at Bocking; that in Kent was at Feversham, as I learn from an old register.

From whence (i.e. from which same old register) I collect, that they held the opinions so far as free-will and predestination are concerned) of the Anabaptists and Pelagians [ii]."

[ii] Ibid

These Free-willers were, it seems, looked upon in so dangerous a view by the Church of England, that they were complained of to the Privy Council; and, for the more peaceful security of the reformed establishment, their names and tenets were authentically registered and enrolled.

Mr. Strype, after giving us the names of fifteen of them, adds as follows: "Their teachers and divers of them were taken up, and found sureties for their appearance; and at length brought into the Ecclesiastical Court, where they were examined in forty-six articles, or more [iii]." Were (which God forbid) all Freewill-men to suffer equal molestation in the present age; were all Anti-predestinarians to be "taken up," "registered," "find sureties for their appearance," and at length be "examined in the Ecclesiastical Court;" what work would it make for constables, stationers, notaries, and bishops' officers!

[iii] Ibid

But to resume the thread. "Many of those, before named, being desposed (i.e. put to their oath) upon the said articles, confessed these to be some sayings and tenets among them:

"That the doctrine of predestination was meeter for devils than for Christian men.

"That children were not born in original sin.

"That no man was so chosen, but he might damn himself; neither any man so reprobate, but he might keep God's commandments, and be saved.

"That St. Paul might have damned him self if he listed.

"That learned men were the cause of great errors.

"That God's predestination was not certain, but upon condition.

"That to play at any manner of game for money is sin, and a work of the flesh.

"That lust after evil was not sin, if the act were not committed. That there were no reprobates. And,

"That the preaching of predestination is a damnable thing." [iv]

[iv] Strype u. s. p. 236, 237.

So much for these Free-willers, who were the first Separatists from the Church of England; and whose tenets Mr. Strype (though not a Calvinist himself) justly allows to be Anabaptistical and Pelagian. How exactly do the doctrines of Wesley and Sellon, on the points of election, reprobation, and free-agency, chime in with the hot and muddy ideas of their Pelagian forefathers! I cannot help indulging a very suitable speculation. What a delicious pastor would Mr. Sellon in particular have made to the Free-willers of Bocking, or Feversham, had the aera of his nativity commenced about 200 years sooner! He would have fed them, not, indeed, with knowledge and understanding, but, after their own hearts. His lack of learning, his being "an exotic without academical education," would have been no impediment to that piece of promotion: nay, the flock would have liked him the better for it; seeing in their estimation, "learned men are the cause of great errors." The spirit of which maxim, aided by his blasphemies against predestination, would have made him (next to Free-will itself) the very idol of the sect.

O tibi praeteritos referat si Jupiter annos!

Instead of being, as now, Mr. John Wesley's pack-horse, you might have sat up for yourself; and, as a reward for your meritorious denial of election, been elected Tub Orator to the Pelagians of Feversham, or Bocking.

From such samples, as history has recorded, of the vigour (not to say the rigour), with which Free-will men were proceeded against, in the days of Edward VI. under whom the reformation of the Church was accomplished, it necessarily and unanswerably follows, that the Church herself was reformed from Popery to Calvinism, and held those predestinarian doctrines, which she punished (or, more properly, persecuted) the Pelagians for denying.

The persons who bore the main sway in Church and State at the time last referred to, were the King, the duke of Somerset, and archbishop Cranmer. Over and above the matters of fact, in which that illustrious triumvirate were concerned, and which neither would nor could have been directed into such a channel, had not those personages been Doctrinal Calvinists; there are also incontestible written evidences, to prove that they were, conscientiously and upon inward principle, firm believers of the Calvinistic doctrines. This shall he proved of Cranmer, in its proper place, when I come to treat of the Reformers. The same will sufficiently appear, as to Somerset, under the Section which is to treat of the influence which Calvin had on the English Reformation. The epistolary intimacy, which subsisted between Calvin and Somerset; the high veneration in which that foreign reformer was held by the latter; and the readiness with which the first Liturgy was altered, in consequence of the same reformer's application; plainly demonstrate that the duke of Somerset, no less than his royal nephew king Edward, and good archbishop Cranmer, had (happily for the Church) heartily adopted Calvin's doctrine, though (no less happily) not proselyted to Calvin's favourite form of ecclesiastical regimen. To these considerations let me add another, drawn from that most excellent prayer, written by himself, upon his being declared Protector of the Realm and governor of the King's person during his majesty’s Minority. It is entitled, "The Lord Protector's Prayer for God's Assistance in the high Office of protector and Governor, new committed to him." [v]

[v] See Strype's Repository of Originals, annexed to the second vol. of Eccles. Memor. p. 18.

A man of the Duke's extraordinary piety can never be thought to trifle with God, and to prevaricate on his knees. The prayer itself, therefore, proves him to have been a Calvinist. Part of it runs thus: "Lord God of hosts, in whose only hand is life and death, victory and confusion, rule and subjection; I am the price of thy Son's death; for thy Son's sake thou wilt not lese (i.e. lose) me. I am a vessel for thy mercy; thy justice will not condemn me. I am recorded in the book of life; I am written with the very blood of Jesus; thy inestimable love will not then cancel my name: for this cause, Lord God, I am bold to speak to thy Majesty: thou, Lord, by thy providence, hast called me to rule; make me therefore able to follow thy calling: thou, Lord, by thine order, hast committed an anointed King to my governance; direct me therefore with thine hand, that I err not from thy good pleasure: finish in me, Lord, thy beginning; and begin in me that thou wilt finish." When this illustrious peer fell, afterwards, a sacrifice to the machinations and state intrigues of Warwick (who, himself, within a short time, paid dearly for his insidiousness and ambition,) Somerset, during his imprisonment in the Tower, and a little before his death, "translated, out of French into English, an epistle wrote to him by John Calvin (on the subject), of Godly Conversation, which he received while under his confinement, and was printed at London." [vi]

[vi] Collins’s Peerage, vol. i. p. 160. Edit. 1768.

As to the Calvinism of king Edward himself, every religious transaction of his reign sets it beyond a doubt. The reformation of the Church upon the principles she still professes, might suffice to comprehend all proofs in one: but this excellent prince was not content to establish the Church of England; he himself voluntarily and solemnly subscribed her Articles. "A book, containing these Articles, was signed by the King's own hand." [vii] And Edward was too sincere a Christian, to sign what he did not believe; a species of prevarication reserved for the more accomplished iniquity of after-times; and which bids fair to end in the utter extirpation of all religion from amongst us.

Neither would king Edward have honoured what is commonly called Ponet's Catechism (of which, more hereafter) with his own prefixed letters of recommendation, had his Majesty not been a thorough Calvinist: nor would he, just before the agonies of death came upon him, have set his seal, as he did, to the doctrine of election, had not that doctrine been an essential and predominant article of his faith. "Lord God (said the royal saint, a little before he expired), deliver me out of this miserable and wretched life, and take me among thy chosen." [viii]

[vii] Strype’s Eccles. Memor. Vol. ii. p. 368.

[viii] Burnet’s History of the Reformation, vol. ii. p. 212.

I unwillingly descend from one of the most wonderful and valuable princes that ever adorned a throne, to the meanest and most rancorous Arminian priest that ever disgraced a surplice. How extreme, how immense the transition, from king Edward VI to Mr. Walter Sellon! But I must let the reader see, in what way this factor for Methodism pretends to account for the Calvinistic measures of king Edward's administration. Even thus: "Some rigid Calvinists in power had imposed upon that good young King, and made use of his authority to impose their notions upon the Church (Sell. p. 53)." A certain sort of people stand in particular need of good memories. Mr. Sellon's forsakes him in the very next page; where the "some rigid Calvinists" are dwindled into one. "Up starts rigid Ponet, and gets poor young king Edward, whom he had brought to his lure, to command all schoolmasters within his dominions to teach the youth this catechism (Ibid. p. 54)." What is this, but calling "poor young king Edward" a poor young fool? An insinuation as false and unjust to the real character of that extraordinary prince, as I should be guilty of, were I to insinuate that Mr. Sellon is a man of sense, learning, and good manners. But supposing we should, for a moment, admit (contrary to all fact and truth), that the "poor young King" was indeed a flexible piece of tape, which Ponet, bishop of Winchester, could easily twist round his finger at pleasure; yet, can it be imagined, that Ponet was an absolute monopolizer of the tape royal? Was he the only haberdasher who made property of the said tape? Could not a soul beside come in for a yard or two? Where (for instance) were Cranmer, and Ridley, and Hooper, and Latimer? Was it possible, that a transaction of such consequence to the Church of England, as the public sanction of Ponet's Catechism, could take effect, without the participation and concurrence of the other English bishops, and of the Convocation, and of the King's Council itself? Every reasonable man will say no: besides, however liable to imposition "poor young king" Edward may be represented, by the Arminians of the present age, yet, surely, his Majesty's next successor but one (under whom that same Catechism was revived, and published with enlargements, by Dr. Nowell, dean of London) cannot be thought to have been very soft and pliable: but, I dare say, Mr. Sellon, by way of answer to this remark, will content himself with crying out, poor young queen Elizabeth!

King Edward was by no means that ductile, undiscerning prince, for which Mr. Sellon's cause requires him to pass. As this defamer, under the impulse of his inspirer, Mr. Wesley, has thought proper to fasten this obliquity on that King's memory, I shall give a short summary of his character, drawn by the best authorities; and the rather, as Edward's reputation is very closely interwoven with the credit of the Church of England, which chiefly owes her present purity and excellence to the pious and paternal authority of that young, but most respectable Josiah.

Bishop Latimer had the honour to know him well; and no man was ever less prone to flatter, than that honest, unpolished prelate. "Blessed (said he) is the land, where there is a noble king; where kings be no banqueters, no players, and where they spend not their time in hunting and hawking. And when had the King's majesty a Council, that took more pains, both night and day, for the setting forth of God's word, and profit of the commonwealth? And yet there be some wicked people that will say (and there are still some wicked Pelagians who continue to say), Tush, this gear will not tarry; it is but my Lord Protector's and my Lord of Canterbury's doing: the King is a child, and he knoweth not of it. Jesu, have mercy! how like are we Englishmen to the Jews, ever stubborn, stiff-necked, and walking in by-ways! Have not we a noble King? Was there ever king so noble, so godly brought up, with so noble Counsellors, so excellent and well-learned schoolmasters? I will tell you this, and speak it even as I think; his Majesty hath more godly wit and understanding, more learning and knowledge, at this age, than twenty of his progenitors, that I could name, had at any time of their life." [ix]

[ix] Latimer's Sermons vol. i. p. 89. 90. Octavo, 1758.

Bishop John Bale, the Antiquarian, could also speak of the King upon personal knowledge; and his testimony is this: "He is abundantly replenished with the most gracious gifts of God; especially, with all kinds of good learning, far above all his progenitors, kings of this imperial region. The childhood of youth is not in him to be reproved; for so might king Josiah have been reproved, who began his reign in the eighth year of his age." The occasion of Bale thus vindicating king Edward, was the petulance of one whom he styles "a frantic Papist of Hampshire," who had insolently termed his Majesty, "a poor child:" which was much the same with Mr. Sellon's contemptuous language of, "poor young king Edward." Mr. Strype, to whom I am indebted for the above quotation from Bale, goes on: "Then he (i.e. Bale) comes closer to this papist, so blasphemously reporting the noble and worthy king Edward, then in the fifteenth year of his age, and the fifth of his reign." Bale added, "His (Majesty's) worthy education in liberal letters, and godly virtues, and his natural aptness in retaining of the same, plenteously declared him to be no poor child, but a manifest Solomon in princely wisdom." [x]

[x] See Strype's Eccles. Memor. vol. ii. p. 377, 378.

Even bishop Burnet offers the following chaplet at Edward's tomb: “Thus died king Edward VI that incomparable young prince. He was then in the sixteenth year of his age, and was counted the wonder of that time. He was not only learned in the tongues, and other liberal sciences, but knew well the state of his kingdom. He kept a book, in which he writ the characters that were given him of all the chief men of the nation, all the judges, lord-lieutenants, and justices of the peace, over England; in it he had marked down their way of living, and their zeal for religion. He had studied the matter of the Mint, with the exchange and value of money, so that he understood it well, as appears by his journal. He also understood fortification, and designed well. He knew all the harbours and ports, both of his own dominions, and of France and Scotland; and how much water they had, and what was the way of coming into them. He had acquired great knowledge in foreign affairs, so that he talked with the ambassadors about them, in such a manner, that they (viz. the foreign ambassadors) filled all the world with the highest opinion of him that was possible; which appears in most of the histories of that age. He had great quickness and apprehension; and, being mistrustful of his memory, used to take notes of almost everything he heard. He writ these, first, in Greek characters, that those about him might not understand them: and, afterwards, writ them out in his journal. He had a copy brought him of everything that passed in Council: which he put in a chest, and kept the key of that always himself. In a word, the natural and acquired perfections of his mind were wonderful. But his virtues and true piety were yet more extraordinary." [xi]

Mountagu, bishop of Winchester, in his Preface to the Works of king James I makes very observable mention of Edward, considered even as a writer. "Edward the Sixth, though his dayes were so short, as he could not give full proofe of those singular parts that were in him; yet he wrote divers epistles and orations, both in Greek and Latin. He wrote a treatise de fide, to the duke of Somerset. He wrote an history of his owne time. Which are all yet extant, under his owne hand, in the King's library, as Mr. Patrick Young, his Majestie's learned Bibliothecarius, hath shewed me. And, which is not to bee forgotten, so diligent an hearer of sermons was that sweet prince, that the notes, of the most of the sermons he heard, are yet to be seene, under his own hand; with the preacher's name, the time, and the place, and all other circumstances." [xii]

[xi] Burnet's Hist, of the Reform, vol. ii. p. 212. & alibi.

[xii] Bp. Mount, u. s. edit. 1616

It were endless, to adduce the praises which have been deservedly accumulated on this most able and most amiable Monarch. But I must not overpass the character given of him by Jerom Cardan, the famous Italian physician, who, the year preceding king Edward's death, spent some months in England. That foreigner, amidst all his acknowledged oddities, was still a person of very extraordinary genius and learning; so that his ability, to judge of the King's capacity and attainments, is indisputable. And the consideration of his being also a Papist, will not suffer us to suppose, that his encomiums have any mixture of party prejudice in this prince's favour. Moreover, Cardan wrote and published his testimony in a country, and at a time, which rendered it [xiii] impossible for him to have any sinister interest in view. " All the Graces," says he "were apparent in king Edward; and, for the tongues, he was not only exact in the English, French, and Latin; but understood the Greek, Italian, and Spanish. Nor was he ignorant of Logic, the principles of Natural Philosophy, or Music: being apt to learn every thing. The sweetness of his temper was such as became a mortal; his gravity becoming the majesty of a King; and his disposition suitable to his high degree. In short, that child was so bred, had such parts, and was of such expectation, that he looked like a miracle of a man. These things are not spoken rhetorically, and beyond the truth; but are indeed short of it. He began to love the liberal arts, before he knew them; to know them, before he could use them. And in him there was such an effort of nature, that not only England, but the world, has reason to lament his being so early snatched away. How truly was it said, of such extraordinary persons, that their lives are short! He gave us an essay of virtue, though he did not live to give us a pattern of it. When the gravity of a king was needful, he carried himself like a man in years: and yet was always affable and gentle, as became his youth. In bounty he finulated his father, who in some cases may appear to have been bad; but there was no ground for suspecting any such thing in the son, whose mind was cultivated by the study of Philosophy."[xiv]

[xiii] Cardan refused to offer the incense of (what he thought would have been) adulation to king Edward, even in that prince's life-time, and during his (Cardan's) residence at the English Court. Much less would he be induced to fawn upon his memory. The philosopher's conduct on that occasion, though it resulted from a mistaken principle, reflects some honour on his integrity and disinterestedness. "I refused (says he), a purse of five hundred pieces some tell me it was a thousand; but I cannot as certain the precise sum), because I would not acknowledge one of the King's titles, in prejudice of the Pope's authority." See Bayle's Diet. vol. ii. p 310. note (D).

[xiv] See the Acta Regia, p. 439. Edit. 1734.

Mr. Guthrie's character of him is far from being excessive. The outlines of Edward's portrait, as drawn by the masterly hand of that able Historian, shall terminate our present review of this great prince. "Henry VIII was the Romulus, and Edward VI the Numa Pompilius, of English Reformation. The former laid its foundation in blood and rapine; the latter reared its fabric, by justice and moderation. Learning is the most trifling part of Edward's character. The rod may make a scholar; but nature must form a genius. Edward had genius. His learning, indeed, was extraordinary; but in that he was equalled, if not excelled, by others of equal years, and of a different sex. Perhaps his sister Elizabeth, and his designed successor, the lady Jane Gray, at his age, knew the languages better than he did. But Edward discovered a genius for government, beyond what, perhaps, ever was known in so early a bloom of life. He soon fell in with those walks of knowledge which lead to the glory and happiness both of prince and people. He understood the principles of trade, and the true maxims which the English ought to pursue with foreign countries, to much greater perfection than any author who wrote at that time on those subjects. The papers which remain in his writing, concerning a mart, and the reformation of abuses, might be suspected not to be of his composition, did we know of any person in those days, who could write so clearly and intelligibly, and, by consequence, so elegantly. His Journal contains, so far as it goes, an account of all the important transactions falling within it; penned in such a manner, as amply proves its author to have known the bottom of every subject he touches. His perpetual attention to commerce gave him, towards the end of his reign, a true notion of that conduct, which England ought to pursue, in those disputes upon the Continent, which endanger the balance of power there. It helped him to form great schemes for the improvement of his maritime force, for the security of his coasts, for the protection of his ships; and, in his project of opening free marts in England, there is somewhat that points towards introducing a new and better system of mercantile affairs, than has yet, perhaps, been pursued. He acquired a taste for elegant magnificence; and, in this, he seems to have been single in his Court. His appearances, on public occasions, were sometimes, perhaps, too Eastern: but he seems to have corrected this extravagance, by striking off a great deal of useless expense. Had Providence been so well reconciled to England, as to have indulged Edward in a longer reign, he had private virtue sufficient to have brought private virtue once more into reputation: while his judgment was so strong, as, at once, to re-animate, and employ the public spirit of his people. The application of this royal youth laid the corner-stones on which the commerce of England is founded, and which alone gives her the rank of a Queen among nations. It was his piety, that purged her religion from superstition; it was his good sense, getting the better of his prejudices, that sated her possessions from ruin, and rescued her Clergy from contempt. It was his example, which fired the young nobility and gentry of his own years, with that generous emulation, which pushed them into every glorious pursuit, when their manly qualities, in a following reign (viz. in the reign of Elizabeth,) raised their drooping country to glory and to empire. It is owing to Edward's compassion, that, at this day, in England's capital, the helpless orphan finds a father; that erring youth are provided with instruction; and that Heaven receives the sounds of praise and gratitude from the mouth of the infant. His wisdom prepared a check for the intemperate, and correction for the idle. His cares make gray hairs go down, without sorrow, to the grave. His bounty embellishes those places, which his charity endowed. And his own person was the habitation where love and learning, the graces and the virtues, delighted to dwell." [xv]

[xv] Guthrie’s Hist. of England, vol. iii. p. 1. 121-123.

Let me just add, that whosoever has read king Edward's Treatise against the Supremacy of the Bishops of Rome (published at London, in 1682), will cease to be surprised at that admiration, with which the English historians celebrate the parts and piety of the royal author. The merits of that performance, in particular, are so transcendent, that a most ingenious acquaintance of mine once doubted, whether it was possible for so young a prince to be the composer of so learned and masterly a work. But my friend (eminent for possessing one of the finest collections of natural and artificial curiosities that ever fell to the lot of a private person) has been so happy as to add to his treasures the original manuscript, in Edward's own handwriting; which places the authenticity of the book above dispute.

Judge now, whether Edward, thus endued with the whole circle of princely qualifications could be that weak, supple, facile, waxen image of a king, which Mr. Wesley's malice and Mr. Sellon's ignorance combine to represent. In trying at which, they not only violate all historic truth, but labour also to blacken the Church of England; by defaming the Protestant Monarch who was, under God, its father and visible head: a monarch, who, like Alfred, was born for the good of mankind; and the lustre of whose crown was eclipsed by the virtues of him that wore it. King Edward's being a Calvinist is the unpardonable crime for which Arminian Methodism seeks to lay his memory in the dust. Under him it was that the English Liturgy was compiled, reformed, and perfected; the Homilies composed; the Articles of Religion framed; and Ponet's Catechism drawn up: which two latter, viz. the Articles and the said Catechism, "were in general received and subscribed to all over the kingdom." [xvi] These were the crimes of Edward and his reforming bishops, for which, Peter Heylin, John Wesley, and Walter Sellon, labour to heap odium on the best of princes and the best of prelates.

[xvi] Guthrie, u. s. p. 114.

Calvinism II - Arminianism charged...

SECTION II.

Arminianism charged and proved on the Church of Rome.

Mr. Sellon acknowledges his absolute ine quality to the task he has undertaken. “I know nothing at all," says he, “how to fence or push:" i.e. he can neither attack, nor defend. A very proper person to set up for a champion, and to style himself a vindicator! But there was no need of such an explicit confession. His production sufficiently demonstrates that its producer can neither fence nor push. Witness the opening of his very first assault, in page 3, where I am presented with a tierce, not of blunderbusses, but of blunders. “In that point,”says the blunderer, “which you stickle so mightily for, viz. the doctrine of absolute, irrespective predestination, though all the members of the Church of Rome do not fall in with it, because they are not compelled to it, as all the members of the Church of Geneva do, because they are compelled to it; yet, if the testimony of Dr. Potter, some time dean of Windsor, be to be depended upon, there are ten Catholics, that hold this point of Genevan doctrine, for one that is so much an Arminian as to deny it.” Such a cluster of glaring untruths deserves no answer. By way, however, of shewing, what an honest and accurate opponent I have to deal with, I'll give the paragraph a thorough sifting.

1. “All the members of the Church of Geneva are compelled to fall in with” the doctrine of predestination. So far is this from being true, that the doctrine itself, of predestination, has been expelled from Geneva, for very considerably more than half a century back. Geneva, which was once dreaded by Papists, as one of the head quarters of Calvinism, and termed, by them, for that reason, “The Protestant Rome," is now, in that happy respect, Geneva no longer. The once faithful city is become an harlot. The unworthy son of one of the greatest divines that ever lived (I mean Benedict, son, if I mistake not, of the immortal Francis Turretin) was a principal instrument of this doctrinal revolution. And, to the everlasting dishonour of bishop Burnet, he, during his exile, contributed not a little to the inroads of Arminianism at Geneva, by prevailing with the leading persons there to abolish the test of ministerial subscriptions, about the year 1686.***

***[[“He was much caressed and esteemed by the principal men of Geneva. He saw they insisted strongly on their consent of doctrine (a formularly commonly known by the name of the Consensus), which they required all those to subscribe who were admitted into orders. He therefore employed all the eloquence he was master of, and all the credit he had acquired among them, to obtain an alteration in this practice. He represented to them the folly and ill consequence of such subscriptions. The warmth, with which he expressed himself on this head, was such, and such was the weight of his character, that the Clergy of Geneva were afterwards released form those subscriptions.” Life of Burnet, annexed to his Hist. of his Own Time, pages 692, 093. Fol. 1734.]]

After his return to England, and his advancement to the episcopal bench, there is great reason to believe, that he would very willingly have played the same game here; and lain the Church of England under a similar obligation to “his warmth and the weight of his character," by releasing (to continue the language of his filial biographer) our clergy too from “the folly and ill consequence of such subscriptions." But, through the goodness of Providence, the people of England were not such implicit trucklers to his lordship's “eloquence and credit,”as were the citizens of Geneva. No “alteration, in this practice" crowned his wish.(t)

(t) [[Bishop Burnet, failing in his desire of abolishing our ecclesiastical subscriptions, was forced to content himself with singing to the tune of He would if he could; in these plaintive and remarkable words: “The requiring subscriptions to the XXXIX Articles is a great imposition.” [Hist. O. T. 2. 634.] An imposition, however, in which his Lordship prudently acquiesced, and to which he was the means of making others submit, rather than he would forego (to use an expression of his own) the “plentiful bishopric" of Sarum.

How much more disinterested and heroic was the conduct of that honest Arminian and learned Arian, Mr. William Whiston! The account is curious: so take it in his own words. “Soon after the accession of the House of Hanover to the throne, Sir Joseph Jekyl, that most excellent and upright master of the rolls, and sincere Christian, Dr. Clark's and my very good friend, had such an opinion of us two, that we might be proper persons to be made bishops, in order to our endeavouring to amend what was amiss in the Church; and had a mind to feel my pulse, how I would relish such a proposal, if ever it should be made me. My answer was direct and sudden, that I would not sign the Thirty-nine Articles, to be archbishop of Canterbury. To which Sir Joseph replied, that bishops are not obliged to sign those articles. I said, I never knew so much before. But still, I added, if I were a bishop, I must oblige others to sign them, which would go sorely against the grain with me. However, I added further, that supposing I should get over that scruple, and esteem the act only as ministerial, which would by no means imply my own approbation; yet, when I were a bishop, I should certainly endeavour to govern my diocese by the Christian rules in the Apostolical constitutions, and in St. Paul's Epistles to Timothy and Titus: which, as [namely, in this gentleman's opinion] they would frequently contradict the laws of the land, would certainly expose me to a praemunire, to the forfeiture of all my goods to the crown, and to imprisonment as long as the king pleased. And this, concluded I, would be the end of bishop Whiston. So I thought no more of it." Winston's memoirs of his own Life and writings, vol. i. p. 169.]]

The time for the destruction of our establishment was not yet come: and, I trust in God, it is still very far off. To the unspeakable mortification of such as Mr. Sellon, the fence is, hitherto, undemolished. Should our governors in church and state ever suffer the fence to be plucked down, farewell to the vineyard. But, till the barrier of subscription (that stumbling-block to Arminians, who, nevertheless, for divers good causes them thereunto moving, make shift to jump over if) actually be taken out of the way, let no man of common knowledge or of common modesty, call our Calvinistic doctrines the tenets of Geneva. If it be any real honour, or dishonour, to drink of the Lemain lake, the Arminians, as matters stand, have it all to themselves.

2. Our author pompously appeals to the authority of “Dr. Potter, dean of Windsor." He should have said, dean of Worcester. Potter was, indeed, promised a canonry of Windsor; but never obtained it.(u)

(u) [[His letter to Laud, in which he supplicated the continuance of that prelate's interest, for his appointment to a stall in St. George's chapel, is worth transcribing.

“My most honoured Lord,

“I humbly thank your Grace for very many demonstrations of your love to me: and particularly for your last favourable mediation to his Majesty in my behalf, for a prebend in Windsor. The conveniency of that preferment (if my sovereign master please to confer it upon me) I shall value more than the profit. But, however, I resolve not to prescribe to your Grace, much less to his Majestic; or, with immodesty, or impunity, to press you. The obligations, which I have to you, are such as I can never satisfy, but with my prayers: which shall be constant, that your Grace may long live, with honour and comfort, to serve God, his Majestie, and this Church, which daily feels the benefit of your wisdom and goodness.

Your Grace's, in all humility.

See Cant. Doome. p. 356. CHR. POTTER."

Potter, however, was distanced in adulation, by the bishop of Cork, in Ireland; who thus wrote to Laud: “What I had, or have, is of your Grace's goodness, under Him who gives life, and breath, and all things; and under our gracious Sovereign, who is the breath of our nostrils." Ibid. p. 355.]]

This Christopher Potter, in the noviciate of his ministry, had been lecturer of Abingdon, where he was extremely popular, and regarded as a zealous Calvinist. But, as Wood observes, “when Dr. Laud became a rising favourite in the royal court, he [Potter] after a great deal of seeking, was made his [Laud's] creature." The editor or editors of the Cambridge Tracts, published in 1719, affect to think, that Laud paid his court to Potter, instead of Potter's being a suitor to Laud. To me, Mr. Wood's account more than seems to prove the contrary. Besides, the archbishop was eminently stiff and supercilious; but the lecturer was as remarkably supple and obsequious. The prelate could have very little advantage to hope for from the acquisition of the lecturer, but the latter had much to hope for from the good graces of the prelate. I conclude therefore, that Potter was a cringer at Laud's levee, and ''after a great deal of seeking," i.e. in modern style, after long attendance and much servility, being found very (z) ductile and obsequious, he was entered on the list of the archbishop's dependants.

(z) [[The ductility of our yung divine will he put beyond all reasonable doubt, by the letter that follows. He had, in his better days, unwarily written an answer to a Popish treatise, published by one Knott, a noisy Jesuit of that age. A second edition of Potter's Answer was, it seems, called for, about, or soon after the aera of his connection with Laud. This furnished the author with a fair opportunity of complimenting that prelate, by requesting his Grace to garble the book, and weed it of what offensive passages he pleased prior to the new impression. On this occasion he thus addressed his patron:

“My most honoured Lord, October 6, 1634.

“The copies of my Answer to The Mistaker are most sold, and a new impression intended. I am now reviewing it. I shall be glad to receive from your Grace by your servant, master Dell, any direction to alter, or correct, if any thing therein be offensive to you. I humbly commend your Grace to the blessed protection of the Lord Almighty; and will be ever

Your Grace's, in all humility

Cant. Doome, p. 251. CHR. POTTER.''

His Grace did, accordingly, with his own hand, purge the book of several passages which, in his judgment, bore too hard on the Pope and Church of Rome; and, the very next year, this Potter (for not being made of too stiff clay) was appointed dean of Worcester!]]

Laud's plan of civil and religious tyranny is well known; and the only way for Potter to preserve the favour he had taken so great pains to acquire, was by a round recantation of the Calvinistic doctrines; which were, at all events, to be discountenanced and smothered, as a necessary prerequisite to our union with Rome: an union which Heylin himself once and again frankly acknowledges to have been one of the grand objects in view.(a)

(a) [[But why was the revival of Popery one of the grand objects at that time? The cause is easily traced. King Charles, indisputably, aimed at arbitrary power. To this end, Popery must be revived, not for its own sake, but as the most convenient prop to despotism. And no method either so effectually, or so expeditiously, conducive to the firm erection of this prop, as the introduction of Arminianism. These were the three constituary segments of that political circle, into which the Court and Court Bishops, that then were, wished to conjure the Protestants of England. Or, if you please, such was the plan of that goodly pillar, which was to be erected, as a trophy, on the grave of departed liberty. Arminianism was to have been the base; Popery the shaft; and tyranny the capital that should terminate the whole.]]

To promote this design, and still further to ingratiate himself with his patron, Potter writes a treatise entitled, A Survey of the New Platform of Predestination: the manuscript copy of which fell into the hands of the learned Dr. Twisse, who gave himself the needless trouble of refuting it.

Upon the credit of this renegado Calvinist and pretended dean of Windsor, (b) we are told,

(b) [[Mr. Sellion seems to have been led into this mistake, respecting Potter's deanery, by the title page prefixed to a letter of Potter's, preserved in the Cambridge Tracts already mentioned. A proof, by the way, of the accuracy and faithfulness with which those tracts were compiled. A proof, moreover, of the many inconvenient stumbles to which such writers as Mr. Sellon are exposed, who content them selves with borrowing their information from indexes and title pages.

I have, above, stiled Dr. Potter a renegado. Such, in outward profession, at least, he certainly was; and such, no doubt, Laud esteemed him to be. But, after all his tergiversation, the Abingdon lecturer does not appear to have embraced Arminianism ex azimo and upon principle. Like the magnetic needle when disturbed, he seems to have been in a state of continual vibration, uneasy till he recovered his primitive direction to the good old Calvinistic point. This I infer from his own words. In that very letter to which Mr. Sellon carries his appeal; in that very letter which underwent the necessary corrections and alterations of the good Cambridge Arminians who flourished in the year 1719; even in that letter of Christopher Potter, pruned and amended as afore said, I find the following passages. “You are affected,'' says he, to his friend Vicars (who had charged him, and not temerariously, with inconsistency in matters of religion), “you are affected with a strong suspicion, that I am turned Armmian: and you further guess at the motive, that some sprinkling of Court holy water, like an exorcism, hath enchanted and conjured me into this new shape." The virtue of Court holy water is doubtless very efficacious, as an alternative. No transformations, recorded in Ovid, can vie with the still more wonderful Metamorphoses, which this potent sprinkling hath occasioned both in patriots, politicians, and divines. Potter's correspondent had exactly hit the mark. It was indeed the application of Court holy water judiciously sprinkled by the hand of Laud which had made Christopher cast his skin, and come forth, in appearance, a sleek Arminian. But, when hard pushed by honest Mr. Vicars, he was ashamed (as well he might) to set his avowed probatum est to the powerful virtues of the said water. And how did he parry off the charge? Even by denying himself to be an Arminian at all. His words are these: “I desire you to believe, that I neither am, nor ever will be Arminian. I love Calvin very well; and, I must tell you, I cannot hate Arminius. I can assure you, I do not depart from my ancient judgment; but do well remember what I affirmed in my questions at the act, and have confirmed it, I suppose, in my sermon; so, you see, I am still where I was." The questions, which he here alludes to, and which had been maintained by him at the Oxford act in the year 1627, were these three: Efficacia gratiae non pendet a libero influxu arbitrii; Christus Divinae Justitiae, vice nostra, proprie & integre satisfecit; ipse actus fidei, to crodere, non imputatur nobis in justitiam sensu proprio: i.e. “the efficacy of Grace is not suspended on the free influence of man's will; Christ did strictly and completely satisfy God's justice in our room and stead; the act of believing is not, itself, properly imputed to us for righteousness." In his farther vindication of himself from the charge of Arminianism, Potter makes very honourable mention of seven predestinarian divines, whom (let the reader mark it well) he terms the “worthiest doctors" of the churches of England, France, and Germany. Nay (let Mr. Sellon hear it, and weep), he even stiles the Arminians, what indeed they are, dissenters from our own national Church. “The Arminians," continues he, “dissent from us only in these four questions [viz. concerning Predestination, Redemption, Grace, and Perseverance], The Lutheran Churches maintain against us all these four questions, and moreover a number of notable dreams and dotages, both in matters of ceremony and doctrine: among others, you remember their absurd ubiquity and consubstantiation. Now notwithstanding all their [i.e. the Lutherans'] foul corruptions, yet I presume you know, for it is apparent out of public records, that our better reformed Churches in England, France, Germany, &c. by the advice of their worthiest doctors, Calvin, Bucer, Beza, Martyr, Zanchius, Ursin, Pareus, have still offered to the Lutherans all Christian amity, peace and communion: though those virulent, fiery adders of Saxony" [i.e. the Lutheran divines] “would never give ear to the voice of those wise charmers." In the mature judgment, therefore, even of Potter himself, Calvin, Zanchius, and the other five, were wise charmers, and our worthiest doctors. Let us next hear what the same gentleman thought concerning Mr. Sellon's favourite doctrine of election upon faith and works foreseen. “Can you deny," continues he, “that many learned, pious Catholic bishops of the old church taught predestination for foreseen faith or works? and suppose them herein to have erred, as, for my part, I doubt not but they did; though upon other grounds than the bare assertion of Calvin, Beza, or Senensis; yet, can you deny, that notwithstanding this error and others, they were then, and still since, accounted holy Catholic bishops?" He adds: "I resolve never to be an Arminian, and ever to be moderate.” For the above passages, see the Cambar. r. from p. 230 to p. 244.

The Reader, perhaps, may think that I have thrown, away too much time on this Dr. Potter. I did it to shew, on what flimsy props Mr. Sellon rests the weight of his cause. At the very utmost, the doctor was a kind of amphibious divine. In these matters, Laud seems to have had no great reason to boast of him as a proselyte; any more than Mr. Wesley's friend Wat has to trust him as a referee. This will appear farther, from another very remarkable passage, occurring in a sermon, preached by the same Dr. Potter, at the consecration of his uncle Barnaby to the see of Carlisle. I give the quotation, on the credit of the editors of the above letter. The passage itself is this: “For our controversies, first let me protest, I favour not, I rather suspect any new inventions; for ab antiquitate non recedo nisi invitus: especially renouncing all such" [viz. all such new inventions] “as any way favour or flatter the depraved nature and will of man, which I constantly believe to be free only to evil, and of itself to have no power at all, merely none, to any act or thing spiritually good. Most heartily embracing that doctrine, which most amply commends the riches of God's free grace, which I acknowledge to be the whole and sole cause of our predestination, conversion, and salvation: abhorring all damned doctrines of the Pelagians, Semipelagians, Jesuits, Socinians, and of their rags and reliques; which help only to pride and prick up corrupt nature: humbly confessing, in the words of St. Cyprian (so often repeated by that worthy champion of grace, St.Augustin,) in nullo gloriandurn est, quandoquidem nostrum nihil est. It is God that worketh in us both the will and the deed: and therefore let him that glorieth glory in the Lord." Cambr. Tr. p. 220, 227.

I cannot help thinking (for human nature is prone to speculate) how dextrously Dr. Potter played his game; and how neatly Dr. Laud, though a knowing one, was taken in. The former (if we are to believe his own solemn protestations) had still very ample mental reserves in favour of Calvinism: while the latter supposed him a sincere convert to Arminianism, and promoted him accordingly.—This reminds me of another very famous instance of worldly wisdom. The elder Vossius published, in the year 1618, a learned History of Pelagiauiam. Wherein (say the compilers of the Biogr. Dict. vol. ii. p. 317.) "he affirmed, that the sentiments of St. Austin, upon grace and predestination, were not the most ancient; and that those of the Remonstrants [i.e. of the Arminians] were different from those of the Semipelagians." This book delighted Laud so much that, at his earnest recommendation, Charles I made its author a prebendary of Canterbury, with permission to reside still in Holland. Seems it not a little strange, that, rather than a vigorous effort in favour of Arminianism should pass unrewarded, a prelate, of such high principles as Laud, should obtain a stall, in the metropolitan church of all England, for one who was, by birth, a German, and, by education and connection, a Dutch Presbyterian? There was, indeed, no preferment, to which Vossius's merits, as a scholar, did not entitle him: his learning and virtues, however, would never have cleared his way to Canterbury cathedral, had he not contributed to the advancement of that new scheme, which Laud had so deeply at heart. But what will the reader say, should he be told, that, after all, Laud was mistaken as to the sincerity of Vossius's Arminianism? Take the account, in the words of Dr. Potter above mentioned: “He" [i.e. Vossius] “hath declared himself, in his last book, De Scriptoribus" [I suppose, it should be Historicis] “Latinis, to be of St. Augustin's mind in these questions" [viz. concerning predestination and grace;] and is allowed, by the states, public professor at Leyden, where no Armimian is tolerated." Cambr. Tr. p. 237. So convenient is it, on some certain occasions, for a divine to look (like Janus, or like the Germanic eagle) two ways at once!]]

3. That “there are ten Papists, who hold the doctrine of predestination, from one that denies it.”Every man who knows what Popery is; every man, who is at all acquainted either with the ancient or present state of that Church; must consider such an assertion, as the most false and daring insult that can be offered to common sense. Have not the doctrines, called Calvinistic, been condemned in form, and the assertors of them pronounced accursed, by the Council of Trent? Did any man ever read a single Popish book of controversy, written within a century after the Reformation, in which the Protestants are not universally charged (as we still are by the Arminians) with making God the author of sin, only because they universally held predestination? And, for the modern Popish books of controversy, I have hardly seen one, in which the writers of that communion do not exult, and impudently congratulate the Church of England on her visible departure from those doctrines. And, God knows, the Church of Rome has, in this respect, but too much reason for triumph. Many nominal Protestants are saving Papists the trouble of poisoning the people, by doing it to their hands. What Heylin quotes, from a Jesuit who wrote in the time of Charles I., is in great measure true of the present times: “the doctrines are altered in many things: as for example, the Pope not antichrist; pictures; free-will; predestination; universal grace; inherent righteousness; the merit" [which Heylin softens into, or reward rather] of good works. The Thirty-nine Articles seeming patient, if not ambitious also, of some Catholic sense; limbus patrum; justification not by faith alone, &c."

The thirty-nine Article themselves are neither patient nor ambitious of what the Jesuit called a Catholic sense. How patient, or even ambitious, of a Popish sense, some of the subscribers to those Articles may be, is another point. Stubborn experience and incontestible fact oblige us to distinguish, with Dr. South, between the doctrines of the Church, and of some who call themselves churchmen.

Studious as I am of brevity, I cannot dismiss the shameless objection, drawn from the pretended Popery of Calvinism without additional animadversion. The slander does, indeed, carry its own refutation stamped upon his forehead: which refutation the following detail of facts may serve to confirm.

I shall demonstrate, in its proper place, that the principles of John Wickliff, and of his celebrated proselyte John Huss, were the same with what have since acquired the name of Calvinistic. An extract from the bull of pope Martin V. fraught with anathemas against the memories of those holy men, and published A.D. 1418, will evince the detestation and the alarm with which the attempted revival of these doctrines was received by the Church of Rome. Some of the Articles, against which his Holiness inveighed so fiercely, were as follow: (d)

(d) [[Fox's Acts & Mon. vol. i. p. 739. Edit. 1684.]]

"There is one only universal Church, which is the university" [or entire number] “of the predestinate. Paul was never a member of the Devil, although” [before his conversion] “he did certain acts like unto the acts of the church malignant."

“The reprobate are not parts of the" [invisible] “Church; for that no part of the same finally falleth from her: because the charity" [or grace] “of predestination, which bindeth the Church together, never faileth."

“The reprobate, although he be sometimes in grace according to present justice" [i.e. by a present appearance of outward righteousness], “yet is he never a part of the Holy Church" [in reality]: "and the predestinate is ever a member of the Church, although some time he fall from grace adventitia, but not from the grace of predestination: ever taking the Church for the convocation of the predestinate, whether they be in grace or not, according to present justice:" i.e. whether they be converted already, or yet remain to be so, the predestinate, or elect, constitute, as such, that invisible Church, which God the Father hath chosen, and God the Son redeemed.

"The grace of predestination is the band, wherewith the body of the Church, and every member of the same, is indissolubly joined to Christ their Head."

Nothing can be more innocent and scriptural than these positions. But the religion of the Bible is not the religion of Rome. Hence, in the bull above mentioned, the Pope thus fulminates against those doctrines and their abettors: "certain arch heretics have risen and sprung up, not against one only, but against divers and sundry documents of the Catholic faith: being land-lopers, schismatics, and seditious persons; fraught with devilish pride and wolvish madness, deceived by the subtilty of Satan, and, from one evil vanity, brought to a worse. Who, although they rose up and sprang in divers parts of the world, yet agreed they all in one, having their tails as it were knit together; to wit, John Wickliff, of England; John Huss, of Bohemia; and Jerom, of Prague, of damnable memory, who drew with them no small number to miserable ruin and infidelity. We, therefore, having a desire to resist such evil and pernicious errors, and utterly root them out from amongst the company of faithful Christians, will and command your discretions, by our letters apostolical, that you that are archbishops, bishops, and other of the clergy, and every one of you by himself, or by any other or others, do see that all and singular persons, of what dignity, office, pre-eminence, state, or condition soever they be, and by what name soever they are known, who shall presume, obstinately, by any ways or means, privily or apartly, to hold, believe, and teach the articles, books, or doctrine of the foresaid arch-hertics, John Wickliff, John Huss, and Jerom of Prague; that then, as before, you see and cause them, and eveiy of them to be most severely punished; and that you judge and give sentence upon them as heretics, and that, as arrant heretics, you leave them to the secular court or power. Furthermore, we will and command, that, by this our authority apostolical, ye exhort and admonish all the professors of the Catholic faith, as emperors, kings, dukes, princes, marquisses, earls, barons, knights, and other magistrates, rectors, consuls, pro-consuls, shires, countries, and universities of the kingdoms, provinces, cities, towns, castles, villages, their lands and other places, and all other executing temporal jurisdiction, that they expel out of their kingdoms, provinces, cities, towns, castles, villages, lands, and other places, all and all manner of such heretics; and that they suffer no such, within their shires and circuits, to preach, or to keep either house or family, or to use any handy-craft or occupations, or other trades of merchandize, or to solace themselves any ways, or to frequent the company of Christian men. And furthermore, if such public and known heretics shall chance to die, let him and them want Christian burial. His goods and substance also, from the time of his death, according to the canonical sanctions, being confiscate; let no such enjoy them to whom they appertain, 'till, by the Ecclesiastical judges, sentence upon his or their crime of heresy be declared and promulgate." The reader, who is desirous of perusing the whole of this bull, may see it in Fox, vol. i. from p. 737 to 742. But the sample here given may suffice to shew that Calvinism appeared as dreadful to the eyes of Popery, as it can to those of John Wesley or Walter Sellon.

The see of Rome relished these doctrines no better in the century that followed. Three years after the rise of Martin Luther, another flaming bull was issued against that reformer, by Leo X.: of this bull these were some of the roarings: "Rise up, O Lord, and judge thy cause, for foxes are risen up, seeking to destroy thy vineyard. Rise up, Peter, and attend to the cause of the holy Church of Rome, the mother of all churches; against which, false liars have risen up, bringing in sects of perdition, to their own speedy destruction, whose tongue is like fire, full of unquietness, and replenished with deadly poison; who, having a wicked zeal, and nourishing contentions in their hearts, do brag and lie against the verity. Rise up, Paul, also: we pray thee, who hast illuminated the same Church with thy doctrine and martyrdom, for now is sprung up a new Porphiry, who, as the said Porphiry did then unjustly slander the holy Apostles, so semblably doth this man" [meaning Luther] “now slander, revile, rebuke, bite, and bark against the holy bishops, our predecessors. Finally, let all the holy universal Church rise up, and, with the blessed Apostles, together make intercession to Almighty God, that the errors of all schismatics being rooted up, his holy Church may be conserved in peace and unity. We, for the charge of our pastoral office committed unto us, can no longer forbear, or wink at the pestiferous poison of these foresaid errors; of which errors, we thought good to recite certain here, the tenor of which is as followeth.” A long catalogue of pretended heresies is then given: among which, are these two;

In every good work the just man sinneth.

Freewill, after sin [i.e. ever since original sin], is a title and name only [i.e. a mere empty word, without reality or foundation in truth].

On these and the other articles asserted by Luther, pope Leo thus continues to descant: “all which errors, there is no man in his right wits, but he knoweth the same, in their several respects; how pestilent they be, how pernicious, how much they seduce godly and simple rninds, and, finally, how much they be against all charity, and against the reverence of the holy Church of Rome, the mother of all faithful, and mistress of the faith itself; and against the sinews and strength of Ecclesiastical discipline, which is obedience, the fountain and well-spring of all virtues, and without which every man is easily convicted to be an infidel. Wherefore, by the counsel and assent of the said our reverend brethren, upon due consideration of all and singular the premises; by the authority of Almighty God, and of the blessed apostles Peter and Paul, and by our own, we do condemn, reprove, and utterly reject all and singular the articles or errors aforesaid, respectively: and, by the tenor hereof, we here decree and declare, that they ought of all Christian people, both men and women, to be taken as damned, reproved, and rejected. And therefore forbidding here under pain of the greater curse and excommunication; losing of their dignities, whether they be ecclesiastical or temporal; and to be deprived of all regular orders and privileges; also of losing their liberties to hold general schools, to read and profess any science or faculty; of losing also their tenures and feoffments, and of inability for ever to recover the same again, or any other; moreover, under pain of secluding from Christian burial, yea and of treason also: we charge and command all and singular Christian people, as well of the laity, as of the clergy, that they shall not presume, publicly or privately, under any manner of pretence or colour, colourably or expressly, or how else soever, to hold, maintain, defend, preach, or favour the foresaid errors, or any of them, or any such perverse doctrine." (d) This instrument, of which I have hardly retailed the tenth part, is dated June 15, 1520.

(d) [[Fox, vol. ii. p. 537—541.]]

Honest Luther laughed at this Ecclesiastical thunder and lightning. He published an answer, whose purport did equal honour to his integrity and intrepidity. “A rumour readied me," says the adamantine reformer, “that a certain bull was gone forth against me, and circulated almost over the world, before I had so much as seen it: though, in right, it ought to have been transmitted first and directly to my hands, I being the particular object at whom it was levelled.” The fact was, the Pope's bull (somewhat like Mr. Wesley's Abridgment of Zanchius) was, as Luther expresses it, of the owl or bat kind; it flew about surreptitiously and in the dark. Noctis & tenebrarum filia, timet lucem vultus mei, says Luther; hunc tamen ipsam noctuam vix tandem, multem adjuvantibus amicis, in imagine sua datum est videre: “this bird of night sought to elude my view; the owl was, however, though with some difficulty, caught by my friends, and brought to me, that I might survey the creature in its proper form." "I do," adds Luther, “hold, defend, and embrace, with the full trust of my spirit, those articles condemned and excommunicated in the said bull: and I affirm, that the same articles ought to be held of all faithful Christians under pain of eternal malediction; and that they are to be counted for Antichrists, whosoever have consented to the said bull: whom I also, together with the spirit of all them that know the truth, do utterly detest and shun. And let this stand for thy revocation, 0 bulla, vere bullarum filia, O thou bull, which art the very daughter of all vain bubbles." (e) The Pope got nothing by stigmatizing Luther with heresy and schism. The German reformer treated the Italian pontiff with no more ceremony than, Come out, thou ass-headed Antichrist; is not thy whorish face ashamed? I am far from applauding the violence of Luther's temper, and from approving the coarseness of his language. But the good man was heated; and, I suppose, thought it needful, on some occasions, to answer fools according to their folly, lest they should be wise in their own conceit.

(e) [[See, Fox ibid. p. 541, & sequ.]]

Calvinism III - The Judgment of the council of Trent...

SECTION III.

The Judgment of the council of Trent, concerning the Doctrines called Calvinistic.

LUTHER died in the year 1546. The first session of the Council of Trent had been held in the year preceding. After many and long adjournments, infinite wrangling, chicanery and intrigue, the Council broke up for good, A.D. 1563. During these eighteen years, five pontiffs, successively, occupied the Roman chair; viz. Paul III., Julius III., Marcellus II., Paul IV., and Pius IV. The acts passed by this Council, in the course of their five and twenty sessions, most glaringly demonstrate the Church's unabated abhorrence of the Calvinistic doctrines. Nay, if Petavius is to be believed (and, on a subject of this sort, there is no reason to question the testimony of that learned Jesuit,) the Council of Trent was called together, as much on Calvin's account as on Luther's. The condemnation of those two reformers (whose doctrine, concerning predestination, was one and the same) being, according to that historian, one of the main objects in view. I slightly touched on the tridentine decisions, in my former vindication of the Church of England. I shall, here, consider them more diffusively. The decrees of the Council of Trent are the genuine, avowed, indisputable standard of Popery. From them I extract the ensuing passages. Whoever reads them will at once see that Arminianism is the central point wherein Popery and Plagiarism meet.

“If any one shall affirm, that man's free will, moved and excited of God, does not, by consenting, co-operate with God the mover and exciter, so as to prepare and dispose itself for the attainment of justification; if, moreover, any one shall say, that the human will cannot refuse complying, if it pleases; but that it is unactive, and merely passive; let such an one be accursed.

“If any one shall affirm, that, since the fall of Adam, man's free-will is lost and extinguished; or, that it is a thing merely titular, yea, a name without a thing, and a fiction introduced by Satan into the Church; let such an one be accursed.

“If any one shall affirm, that all works done before justification, in what way soever they are done, are properly sins, or deserve the displeasure of God, &c.; let such an one be accursed.

“If any one shall say, that the ungodly is justified by faith only, and that it is by no means necessary that he should prepare and dispose himself by the motion of his own will; let such an one be accursed.

“If any one shall affirm, that men are justified, either by the imputation of Christ's righteousness alone, or by a mere '' [i.e. gratuitous] “remission of sins, to the exclusion of inherent grace and charity shed abroad in their hearts by the Holy Spirit; or shall say, that the alone bounty of God is the grace by which we are justified; let such an one be accursed.

“If any one shall affirm, that justifying faith is no more than a reliance on the mercy of God as forgiving our sins for the sake of Christ; or that we are justified by such a reliance only; let such an one be accursed.

“If any one shall affirm, that a regenerate and justified man is bound to believe that he is certainly in the number of the elect; let such an one be accursed.

“If any one shall affirm, with positive and absolute certainty, that he shall surely have the great gift of perseverance to the end; let him be accursed.

“If any one shall affirm, that the grace of justification does not accrue to any, but to those who are predestinated unto life; and that all the rest" [viz. all who are not predestinated to life] “are called, indeed, but do not receive grace, on account of their being predestinated to evil; let such an one be accursed.

“If any one shall affirm, that the laws of God are impossible to be kept even by such as are justified and in a state of grace; let him be accursed." [By keeping the laws of God, the Church of Rome evidently means a sinless obedience.]

“If any one shall affirm, that the man, who is once justified, cannot thenceforth sin" [i.e. so sin, as to perish finally], “nor lose grace; and, consequently, that he who falls and sins" [viz. unto death] “was never really justified; let such an one be accursed.

“If any one shall affirm, that good works do not preserve and increase justification; but that good works themselves are only the fruits and evidence of justification already had; let such an one be accursed.

“If any one shall affirm, that the righteous, if they endure to the end by well-doing and keeping God's precepts, ought not, through God's mercy and Christ's merits, to expect and look for an eternal recompense for those good works which they have wrought in God; let such an one be accursed.

“If any one shall affirm, that the good works of a justified man are so the gifts of God as not to be, at the same time, the merits of the justified person himself; or that the justified person does not himself merit in crease of grace, eternal life, and an increase of glory, by those good works which he performs through God's grace and Christ's merits, that is to say, if he die in a state of grace; let such an one be accursed."

And now, what opinion can the reader form of Mr. Sellon's veracity? Must not he, who dares to insinuate that “predestination is held by ten Papists out of eleven," be either a man of no reading, or a man of no truth? Admit the first, and he is too mean for contempt. Admit the last, and he is too bad for correction.

“But, it may be, the Church of Rome, in the present century, differs from the Church of Rome in the year 1563." By no means. The members of that Church are, for the most part, true and steady to her principles. Would to God I could say as much concerning the members of our own. By continuing the historical chain, we shall quickly and clearly see, that Popery and Arminianism have been, ever since, as good friends, as they were in the days of Wicklitf, or at the breaking up of the Council of Trent. I shall give two famous instances. The conduct of the Romish Church towards Jansenius; and, more recently, towards father Quesnell, will plainly shew, that Popery and Calvinism are as far from shaking hands as ever.

Calvinism IV - The Arminianism of the Church of Rome...

SECTION IV.

The Arminianism of the Church of Rome farther evinced, in her Treatment of Jansenius and Quesnell.

CORNELIUS JANSSEN, bishop of Ypres, flourished about fifty years after the dissolution of the above execrable synod. Though born of Popish parents, and conversant with Papists all his life, it pleased God to open the eyes of this prelate, in such a manner, as gave the most serious alarm to the friends of Rome; and with a success, which has, probably, laid the basis of a future reformation in the Church of France. This great man, naturally of a studious turn, applied himself, with peculiar diligence to the works of Austin. On reading them carefully, he saw, and was surprised to see, how enormously the Church, which calls herself Catholic, had deviated from the system of that ancient father, whom, nevertheless, she has justly honoured with the titles of saint, and doctor of grace; and to whose authority she has, often, been so audacious, as to carry her appeal. Many of the enlightened clergy and laity, of our own church, can easily form a judgment of Jansenius's feelings on this occasion, by the astonishment, which themselves have experienced, when, on a careful review of her admirable Liturgy, Articles, and Homilies, they first began to discern the vastness of that doctrinal chasm, which severs her real from her imputed sons.

The farther Jansenius advanced, the more he read, prayed, and reflected, the deeper and the clearer was his conviction of the general apostacy from truth. Yet, determined to make no rash conclusions, and resolved to have firm ground for every step he took, he devoted more than twenty years to the momentous enquiry. He went through the whole works of the voluminous father, ten times. Those parts of them, which professedly treat of grace, predestination, and free-will, he read thirty times over: making such large and laborious extracts from those valuable writings, as, when properly arranged, and digested into a regular synopsis, might ascertain the doctrine of St. Austin, concerning these points, beyond all possibility of doubt.

In a world like the present, but especially in those parts of it where Popery is the reigning superstition, it is, often, extremely difficult to connect integrity with prudence. The man who will be honest, must run some risque. Jansenius, having been sent on a kind of academic embassy, to negotiate some business of importance with the Spanish king, in favour of the university of Louvain, the good fathers of the inquisition appeared extremely desirous to sacrifice Jansenius to the manes of Pelagius. Probably, during his residence in Spain, Janssen might have rendered himself suspected of heresy, by talking too freely in favour of predestination and by imprudently hinting, how much he wished to see his church really espouse the principles of that saint, whose works she pretended to revere as oracles. However this was, the inquisitors were alarmed; and actually applied to Basil de Leon, at whose house he had lodged, to furnish them with such materials against him, as might justify their citing him before the tribunal of the Holy Office. But by the blessing of Providence on the courage and address of Basil, the rising storm was dispelled; and Jansenius, then lately returned to Flanders, continued unmolested in his college: whence, a few years after, he was (not for his religious, but for his secular services) raised to the mitre. In his consecration to the see of Ypres, the Romanists have had the mortification to behold an heretical bishop of an infallible Church. Nay, he was the very bishop, by the imposition of whose hands cardinal Bellarmine himself received the order of priesthood. Misfortunes these, which the zeal of the good Spanish inquisitors would willingly have rendered impossible, by laying the axe to the root in due season. Let no reader imagine, that I am either blind to the dark parts of this eminent prelate's conduct, or willing to conceal them. Intimidated, very probably, by the narrowness of his escape in Spain, Jansenius did not venture to publish his collections from St. Austin. Nay, (such is man!) he even waged a paper war with the Protestants of Holland, and sought to retrieve his character at Rome, by ridiculously attempting to prove, that the doctrine of grace maintained by Austin, was not that doctrine of grace maintained by Calvin. To such wretched shifts, and palpable contradictions, are even great and good men reduced, when they have not a sufficient portion of intrepidity to assert the truth at all events. And what did he gain by this duplicity? What all trimmers deserve, and most of them meet with, hatred and contempt. His memory is execrated by the general voice of the Romish Church, who have, without scruple, branded heresy on his name, and whose bigotry would not suffer his very (h) tomb to be left standing in his own cathedral of Ypres. For, his valuable Excerpta from St. Austin, which he had not the courage to publish himself appeared within two years after his decease: and raised such a ferment among the papists, particularly in France and Flanders, as all the arts and efforts of infallibility knew not how to lay. Light

(h) Mr. Bayle, from Leydecker gives the following account of the demolition of Jansenius's monument “Francis de Robes," who succeeded Janssen in the bishopric of Ypres, “caused the tomb-stone of his predecessor to be taken away silently by night, on which were written the praises of his Tirtue and learning, and, particularly, of his book intitled Augustinus." The epitaph, it seems, imported, that “this most faithful interpreter of St. Augustin's most secret thoughts, had employed, upon that work, a divine wit, an indefatigable labour, and all the time of his life;" adding, that “the Church would receive the fruit of it upon earth, as he did the reward of it in heaven." Words these, which were not only totally incompatible with the decisions of the Council of Trent; but moreover, as Mr. Bayle observes, “Injurious to the bulls of pope Urban VIII. and Innocent X. who had condemned that book." He adds, that “the destruction of the grave-stone was made by an express order of pope Alexander VII." Bayle's Dict. vol. iii. p. 548.

shone in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not. She, who affects to pride herself on being the "centre of unity," found herself agitated with all the discord and distractions of a chaotic war. The book asserted from St. Austin, that “there are no remains of purity or goodness, in human nature, since the fall: that the influence of grace is irresistible: and that, in the work of conversion and sanctification, all is to be ascribed to grace, and nothing to human nature. On the contrary, the Jesuits maintained, as they still do" [would to God that Jesuits were the only ones], “that human nature is far from being deprived of all power of doing good; and that man born free may resist the operations of grace;" i.e. so resist them as to render them eventually ineffectual.

"In the year 1641,”continues the last cited historian, "the Jesuits, adding to their arguments the interest they had at the Court of Rome, got the book 'Augustinus' prohibited by the Inquisition; and, the following year, condemned by the Pope, as reviving the errors which his predecessors had banished." This pope was Urban VIII. His successor, Innocent X. went still farther in his opposition to the synopsis of St. Austin; for he condemned, "By a bull, dated May 31, 1653, the five following propositions, selected, by the Jesuits, out of Jansenius's 'Augustinus,' as the most proper to discredit that work. These propositions were,

“I. There are divine precepts which good men, notwithstanding their desire to observe them, are absolutely unable to obey, &c.

“II. No person, in this corrupt state of nature, can resist the influence of divine grace.

“III. In order to render human actions (k) meritorious or otherwise, it is not requisite that they be exempt from necessity, but only that they be free from constraint.

(k) Janseuius was, certainly, a man of too great penetration, and too well versed in the theory of consequences, not to know that absolute grace cuts up human merit by the roots. But, being determined to keep up some appearance of attachment to the Roman see, that these truths, he ventured to assert, might have the wider and securer spread among the people of that communion; he found, or thought he found it needful, to open their eyes by degrees, and not pour too much light upon them at once. He contented himself, therefore, on, some occasions, with establishing certain premises, whence, indeed, certain conclusions naturally and necessarily follow; but which he prudently left to the illation of his disciples. This was shrewd; but all the candour in the world cannot call it honest.

“IV. The Semipelagians admitted preventing grace to be necessary to every" [good] “action; and their heresy consisted in this, that they allowed the human will to be included with a power of resisting that grace, or of complying with its influence.

“V. Whoever says, that Christ died, or shed his blood, for all mankind, is a Semipelagian.

“The condemnation'' [of these propositions] “afforded great matter of triumph to the Jesuits:" and no wonder; for, that artful order of men know but too well, that nothing so effectually bars out Popery, as the belief of those doctrines, by whatever name they are called: whether we term them Austinism or Jansenism; Calvinism, or Church-of-Englandism.

Sir Paul Rycaut, in his continuation of Platina, gives us the very words, in which each of the above five propositions were respectively condemned. A consistory of cardinals and divines being called, and the Pope himself presiding in person at the board; the propositions were reprobated in manner and form following: “We pronounce the first of these propositions to be presumptuous, blasphemous, heretical, and condemned with a curse; and, as such, we condemn it accordingly. The second also we pronounce to be heretical; and, as such, we condemn it. The third we pronounce heretical: and we condemn it as such. The fourth we condemn, as false and heretical. The fifth, as importing that Christ died for the salvation of those only who were elected, we pronounce to be false, presumptuous, scandalous, impious, blasphemous, scurrilous, derogatory to the goodness of God, and heretical; and, as such, we condemn it."

Pope Alexander VII. who succeeded Innocent X. “not only confirmed, at the instance of the Jesuits, the bull of Innocent, condemning the five propositions, mentioned above; but, by a new bull" [dated A. D. 1657,] “declared that the said propositions were the doctrines of Jansenius, and were contained in his book; and that they had been condemned in the obvious sense, and in the sense of their author; in sensu obvio, in sensu ab auctore intento. Nay, the Jesuits procured, by their interest in cabinet-councils, a mandate from Louis XIV." [of France], "commanding all, within his dominions, to receive a formulary, or confession of faith, in which the doctrine, condemned by the Pope was owned to be the doctrine contained in the book of Jansenius, styled Augustinus. They, who refused to sign that formulary, were deprived of their livings, and either cast into prison, or sent into exile."

This persecution of Jansenius's numerous disciples (for his book had opened the eyes of multitudes) was both severe and lasting. The truths which he had brought to light were, at all events, to be stifled and exterminated, as opening a door to Protestantism, and as shaking the very foundations of the infallible Church. Hence, in France, where Jansenius's formidable book had made most havoc amongst Catholics, the abjuration of the five propositions was exacted, not only from all the secular clergy, but even from every monk, nun and friar, who was not willing to undergo the opprobrium and penalties of heresy. Nay, the very laity of the several dioceses were not excused from abjuring these reputed and real doctrines of Calvinism: (p) which, however, could not extirpate the party of Jansenius; who subsist, in vast numbers, to this day, and are suspected (not without reason) of only waiting a favourable opportunity of entirely shaking off the papal yoke.

(p) “The assembly of the clergy, in the years 1660, 1661, and 1664, ordered all persons to subscribe the formulary. Which, being confirmed by the King's declaration, all the ecclesiastics, monks, nuns, and others, in every diocese, were obliged to subscribe: those who refused, being interdicted and excommunicated." Biographical Diction, vol. vii. p. 17.

The bread of sound doctrine, which the bishop of Ypres has cast upon the waters, will, I doubt not, be found after many days. In vain did pope Clement XIII. by his bull, dated July 15, 1705, renew the fulminations of his predecessors, by declaring, that “the faithful ought to condemn, as heretical, not only with their mouths, but in their hearts, the sense of Jansen's book contained in the five propositions." (q) In vain did the same pontiff deal out his anathemas, A.D. 1713, against the same five propositions of Jansenius, and against the hundred and one propositions extracted from father Quesnell. The papal fulminations, though launched by pretended infallibility, and seconded by all the real power of the civil aim, have not been able to eradicate the good seed sown by Jansenius in France and Flanders. It is true, the seed is, at present, and has been from the first, under the harrow of persecution: insomuch that, in France especially, it is far less dangerous to be taken for an Atheist, than for a Jansenist. Truth, however, at the long run, will and must prevail. It is more than probable, that, in some future period, Jansenius (as having laid the first stone) will be considered as the virtual reformer of France. I have dwelt, thus largely, on the violent efforts of the Romish Church to extinguish the minutest glimmering of Calvinism; the more clearly to demonstrate, either the utter ignorance, or the criminal unfairness, of Mr. Sellon, which induced him to aver, that the Calvinistic system is the system of the Church of Rome, and embraced by ten Papists out of eleven.

(q) Biogr. Dict. Ibid. p. 18.

I have already observed, that, so low down as the year 1713, the hundred and one propositions, extracted from the writings of Qnesnell, were condemned at Rome, as the very quint-essence of heresy. Some of these propositions (for I have not room to recite them all) were as follow:

“The grace of Jesus Christ, the efficacious principle of all good, is necessary to every good action.

“The difference between the Jewish and the Christian Covenant'' [i.e. the difference between the law and the gospel] “lies in this: that, in the former God requires the sinner to avoid sin and to fulfil the law, leaving him, at the same time, in his state of inability; whereas, in the latter, God gives the sinner that which he commands, by purifying him with his grace.

"How great is the happiness, to be admitted into a covenant, wherein God confers upon us that which he requires of us!

“Grace is an operation of the Almighty hand of God, which nothing can hinder nor retard.

“When God willeth to save a soul, the undoubted effect always and everywhere followeth the will of God.

“When God accompanies his command and external word with the unction of his Spirit and the internal power of his grace, it then works in the heart that obedience which it requires.

“All those whom God willeth to save by Jesus Christ are infallibly saved.

“Faith, the use, the increase, and the reward of faith, are all a gift of the pure bounty of God.

“What is the Church, but the congregation of the children of God, adopted in Christ, redeemed by his blood, living by his Spirit, acting by his grace, and expecting the grace of the world to come.

“The Church is composed of all the elect and just of all ages."

These truly scriptural propositions are, among the rest, recited in the bull Unigenitus, above mentioned, and there stand anathematised by the Church of Rome in these very words: "We do, by this our constitution, which shall be of perpetual force and obligation, declare, condemn, and reject, respectively, all and every one of the propositions before recited, as false, captious, shocking, offensive to pious ears, scandalous, pernicious, rash, injurious to the Church" [i.e. to the Romish Church] “and her practice; contumelious, not only against the Church, but likewise against the secular powers; seditious, impious, blasphemous, heretical, and manifestly reviving several heresies. Whosoever shall teach, defend, or publish them, or any of them, jointly or separately; or shall treat of them by way of dispute, either publicly or privately, unless it be to impugn them; shall, ipso facto, with out any other declaration, incur the censures of the Church, and all other penalties appointed by the law against such delinquents.” Is it possible for the Church of Rome to execrate and abjure Calvinism in stronger terms? And is it possible for words to convey clearer and more solid proof, that Popery and Arminianism are (so far as these points are concerned) one and the same? And is it possible for impudence itself to forge a more flagrant untruth, than by saying that Arminianism is not Popery, and that ten Papists out of eleven hold predestination? Well may the author of the Confessional (than whom, with all his mistakes, scarce any age has produced a more keen and nervous reasoner) make the following just and incontestable remark: "Our first reformers framed and placed the Thirty-nine Articles, and more particularly those called Calvinistical, as the surest and strongest barriers to keep out Popery." (s)

(s) Confessional, p. 331. Edit. 3. What immediately follows the above citation, I here throw in to a note, because, though too important to be entirely omitted, it yet does not directly pertain to the argument I am upon. “A Protestant divine," adds this masterly writer, “may possibly have his objections to the plain sense of these articles" [i.e. to the plain sense of the Calvinistic articles of the Church of England]; “but in this case, he ought not to subscribe them at nil. For if he can bring himself to assent and to subscribe them in a Catholic" [i.e. in a Popish-Arminian] "sense I would desire to know what security the Church has, that he does not put the like Catholic sense (with which he may be furnished by the Jesuits) upon those articles which concern transubstantiation and purgatory?”

In consequence of the above papal fulmination, Quesnell (whose crime only consisted in his having a little more spiritual light than most of his brethren) was, first, banished from Paris; then, thrown into a dungeon at Brussels from whence, after almost four months, imprisonment, he found means to make his escape into Holland, where he died A. D. 1719, after an exile of about fifteen years. The bull itself, by which his 101 propositions were condemned, is to this very day, so strictly enforced in France, that the clergy of that kingdom (though, generally, less bigotted than the clergy of other Popish countries) will not administer the last offices to a dying person, until he has solemnly declared his detestation of the doctrines which those propositions contain. What a front, then, must Mr. Sellon have, to insinuate, that ten Papists out of eleven hold the doctrine of grace; when, even in France, where Popery sits much lighter than in any other unreformed nation, not a single Papist, though lying on the bed of death, is permitted to receive the sacrament, until he has, with his dying breath, disavowed the doctrine of predestination in all its branches.

Let me further ask the calumniat or, whether he ever knew a single person, who, from being a doctrinal Calvinist, was perverted to the Church of Rome? But I myself have known several Arminians, who were carried over to Popery with very little difficulty; and, from being half Protestants, easily commenced complete Romanists, (t) Ask your friend and dictator, Mr. John Wesley, whether numbers of his followers have not, from time to time, gone oft to the mother of Abominations, particularly, in Bristol? where, I have been credibly informed, the Romish priests cry him up (not without reason) as a very moderate and a very useful man (u).

(t) How natural and easy the transition is, from Arminianism to avowed Popery, is evident, among others, from the examples of Bolsec and Bertius abroad; and, at home, from those of William Barrett Godfrey Goodman, bishop of Gloucester.

Jerom Bolsec was, originally, a Carmelite friar of Paris. From motives either of conscience, or of secular interest, he forsook his order; and, leaving France, made open profession of the Protestant religion. Among other places, he went, says Bayle, “to Geneva, as a physician; but, finding that he did not distinguish himself to his satisfaction in that profession, he set up for divinity; and dogmatized, at first, in private, on the mystery of predestination, according to the principles of Pelagius, and afterwards had the boldness to make a public discourse against the received opinion. As soon as his conversation with certain persons to infect them with his Pelagianism, was known, Calvin went to see him, and censured him mildly: afterwards, he sent for him to his house, and endeavoured to reclaim him from his error. But this did not hinder Bolsec from delivering, in public, an insulting discourse against the decree of eternal predestination. It is thought, that he was the bolder because he imagined that Calvin was not among his auditors. He had such a thought, because he did not see him [sitting] in his [usual] place. The reason was, Calvin, not coming in till after the discourse was begun, kept himself hid behind the crowd." (Bayle's Hist. Dict. vol. ii. art. Bolsec). Mr. Samuel Clark, a pious, learned, and laborious writer of the last century, informs us (see his Marrow of Ecclesiastical History, part i. p. 298, 299,) that Bolsec delivered this harangue October 16, 1551, taking for his text these words, “He that is of God, heareth the words of God:" whence he took occasion to preach up free-will, and that predestination was out of works foreseen. Calvin himself (see Bayle, ut supr.) in a letter which he wrote to the Swiss churches, says, that among other things asserted by Bolsec, on the above, or a similar occasion, the wretch spoke to this effect: that “men do not therefore obtain salvation, because they are elected; but are therefore elected, because they believe; and that no man is reprobate by the bare decree of God, but only those who deprive themselves of the common election." Being, after several fruitless efforts to reclaim him, banished from Geneva, he retired into the territory of Bern; where, says Mr. Clark, “he was the cause of many and great stirs." After being twice expelled thence, on account of his turbulent behaviour, he returned into France; and, “presently after, when he saw the [French] churches under affliction, he fell back to Popery, loading the reformed Churches with many reproaches." Thus did this man's tenets of free-will, conditional predestination, universal grace, and salvation by works, ripen him for a relapse to the church of Rome.

Those principles had the same effect on Peter Bertius. He was an intimate friend and devoted admirer of Arminius. This gradually prepared him for his subsequent apostacy to Popery. Arminius died the 19th of October, 1609. And who so fit to deliver his funeral oration (or, in modern language, to preach his funeral sermon,) as his good friend and coadjutor Bertius? Preached by him it accordingly was, on the 22d of the same month, which was the day of Arminius's interment. And, to this very hour, the said funeral oration (notwithstanding the orator's revolt to the Church of Rome a few years after) stands prefixed to all the editions of Arminius's works, which I have ever seen: as if Popery and Arminianism were fated to be inseparable. I do not recollect to have met with the exact aera of Bertius's declaring himself a Papist. But, in the collection of archbishop Usher's Letters, annexed to his Life by Dr. Parr, I find the following paragraph, in a letter from Dr. Ward to that prelate: “Your lordship was partly acquainted with a business which I had undertaken, to answer one chapter of [cardinal] Perron's latest work, set out after his decease. Since that time, Petrus Bertius, the remonstrant [i.e. the Arminian,] is turned Roman Catholic, and hath undertaken the translation of that whole book into Latin." This letter is dated September 25,1622. In one from bishop Usher, to the same Dr. Ward (who was master of Sidney college, Cambridge, and succeeded bishop Davenant in the Margaret professorship of Divinity,) the excellent prelate tells him, “I do very well approve the judgment of them, who advised you to handle the controversies mentioned in that chapter of cardinal Perron's book, which Bertius pretendeth to have been the principal motive of his verifying the title of his old book, Hymenaeus Desertor. His oration of the motives to his perversion, I saw, before I left England: than which, I never yet did see a more silly and miserable discourse proceed from the hands of a learned man." Let. 1. and liii. p. 82. and 85. Thus easy, quick, and ready, is it to pass, from the religion of James Arminius, to that of Cardinal James Davy du Perron!

A sadly memorable instance of the game kind happened in our land some years after. Godfrey Goodman, the unworthy bishop of Gloucester, who had long swam with Laud in almost every measure that conduced to the extension of Arminianism, Civil tyranny, and Ecclesiastical pomp, at length declared in his last will, that he died “in the faith and communion of the mother Church of Rome." But I dismiss so shocking an event, with that observation of the Apostle: “They went out from us, but they were not of us; for, if they had been of us, they would doubtless have continued with us." Yet must I subjoin the remark of Echard: “As this was the only apostate English bishop, since the reformation, so he was the only one, who left children to beg their bread." Ech. Hist, of Engl. vol. ii. p. 782.

The case of William Barrett, fellow of Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge, is well known. I have, already, given a sketch of his history, and taken notice of his revolt to Popery, in my former pamphlet, entitled, The Church of England vindicated from the charge of Arminianism, p. 48. &c.

(u) Many specimens might be given of Mr. Wesley's lax Protestantism. Among them, every considerate reader must rank the following paragraph: “Justification by works is not the fundamental doctrine of Popery; but the universality of the Romish Church and the supremacy of the bishop of Rome. And to call any one a Papist who denies these, is neither charity nor justice" (page the 9th of a two penny tract, written by Mr. John Wesley, and entitled, A Letter to a gentleman at Bristol, 1758.) According to this reasoning, a man may hold transubstantiation, ecclesiastical infallibility, purgatory, image worship, invocation of saints and angels, &c. &c. and yet be a good Protestant all the while! The French clergy (for instance) who put a query on the Pope's supremacy, but are (or, at least, generally profess themselves to be) stiff Romanists in most other points, cannot, in Mr. Wesley's estimation, be with "charity and justice" considered as Papists! Does not such a bare-faced, concession look as if the conceder himself was fearful (and upon very good grounds) lest, without a prudent caveat of that kind, the charge of Popery might fall heavy on somebody else?

Calvinism V - The Objection,...

SECTION V.

The Objection, drawn from the supposed Calvinism of Thomas Aquinas, refuted, with a word concerning St. Austin.

BUT, it seems Austin and Aquinas were "two champions for predestination:" and "their names," I am farther told, " have as much weight in the Church of Rome as they have with" (x) the vicar of Broad Hembury. I am apt to think, that Mr. Sellon's acquaintance, either with St. Austin's writings, or with those of Aquinas, is, at best, extremely slender. However his bare mention of those foreign names may serve to give Mr. Wesley's old women an huge idea of "brother Sellon's purdigious larning."

(x) Sellon, p. 3.

Whatever may be said for the truly admirable bishop of Hippo; it is certain, that the ingenious native of Aquino was by no means a consistent predestinarian. He had, indeed, his lucid intervals; but, if the Arminians should find themselves at a loss for quibbles, I would recommend to them a diligent perusal of that laborious hair-splitter; who will furnish them in their own way, with many useful and necessary quirks, without the assistance whereto their system had, long ago, lost its hold even on the prejudiced and the superficial.

Of all Aquinas's numerous writings (which are said to amount to 17 folio volumes), I have only his Summa Theologiae, and his Commentaries on the Gospels, and St. Paul's Epistles. To collect all the Semipelagian passages, with which those two performances are fraught, would be a task equally prolix and unprofitable. My citations, therefore, shall be few and short: but such as may suffice to evince, that this scholastic Papist does, in many material points respecting the present argument, shake hands from his grave, with his younger brethren, the modern Arminians. "The Book of Life," says he, " is the enrolment of those who are ordained to life eternal. Whoever is in present possession of grace, is, by virtue of that very possession, deserving of eternal life. This ordination, however, sometimes fails; for, some people are ordained to have eternal life, by the" [inherent] " grace they possess, which eternal life, they, notwithstanding, come short of, by the commission of deadly sin. They who are appointed to life eternal, not by God's predestination, but only through the grace'' [they are partakers of], "are said to be written in the Book of Life, not absolutely, but under certain limitations." Let me add a word from this author, concerning justification, which he supposes to be synonymous with the infusion of grace: " Free-will," says he, "is essential to the nature of man: consequently, in that person, who has the use of his free-will God worketh no motion unto righteousness without the motion of the man's freewill." In his comment on the first Epistle to Timothy, he thus asserts the merit of works: "Spiritual treasure is no other than an assemblage of merits; which merits are the foundation of that future building which is prepared for us in Heaven: for the whole preparation of future glory is by merits, which merits we acquire by grace; and this grace is the fountain of merit."

Now let any man judge, whether this Popish writer does not, in these and similar passages, speak the language of Pelagius. That he sometimes stumbles on great and precious truths, cannot be denied. Where this is the case, let him have his due commendation. But the least that can be said is, that those of his lucubrations which I have met with abound with such astonishing self-contradictions, as are only to be paralleled in the puny publications wherewith Mr. John Wesley hath edified his readers.

So much for Thomas Aquinas. Next, for the celebrated African bishop; concerning whom, Mr. Sellon thus descants: "Austin's writings are judged to confirm the Popish doctrines so much, that the effigy of that father is set with three others, to support the papal chair. And suppose I was to make the effigy of Arminius serve as a leg to my chair, would it thence follow that I am an Arminian? As little does it follow, that the doctrine of predestination asserted by St. Austin, is the received doctrine of Rome, only because the Pope affects to sit on the shoulders of Austin's wooden image. If my adversary has only such wooden arguments to urge, the interests of his dearly beloved Arminianism will be as ridiculously and as feebly supported, as is the Pope's (b) chair by the worm-eaten effigy. Is it true, that the system of grace, maintained by Austin, is espoused by the Roman Church? Quite the reverse. The writers of that communion do, indeed, make very pompous use of St. Austin's name, and pretend to pay no little deference to his authority: but with just as much sincerity, as Mr. Sellon professes to revere and vindicate the Church of England. Papists dazzle the vulgar by the mention of St. Austin, that the brightness of his name may render their apostacy from his doctrines impreceivable.

(b) After all, what if none of the four supporting images should be really representative of St. Austin? I am aware, that the contrary has been affirmed, by authority incomparably more credible than that of Mr. Sellon. I, therefore, only start the query as a bare possibility. But, were it even fact, it would not be the first mistake of the kind into which the Holy Inafallible See hath fallen. Witness the following famous instance. " Till the year 1669, the bishops of Rome thought they had a pregnant proof, not only of St. Peter's erecting their chair, but of his sitting in it himself: for till that year, the very chair, on •which they believed, or would make others believe, he [St. Peter] had sat, was shewn, and exposed to public adoration, on the 18th of January, the festival of the said chair. But while it was cleaning, in order to be set up in some conspicious place of the Vatican, the twelve labours of Hercules, unluckily, appeared to be engraved on it. "Our worship, however," says Giacomo Bartolina, who was present at this discovery, and relates it, "was not misplaced: since it was not to the wood we paid it, but to the prince of Apostles, St. Peter." Bower's Hist, of the Popes, vol. i p. 7.

With what propriety St. Austin's image lends its shoulder to the Pope's haunch, may be judged from the following brief sketch of Austin's doctrine: which I shall give in the words of the honest and learned Mr. Du Pin.

"Sinners," says St.Augustin, "sin voluntarily, and without compulsion: and they cannot complain that God hath denied them his grace, or the gift of perseverance, since he owes his grace to no-body."(c) The historian goes on: " He [Austin] again insisteth upon the same matter, and upon the same principles, in both the books which he writ in answer to Hilary's and Prosper's letters. The first is, of the predestination of the saints; and the second, of the gift of perseverance: wherein he demonstrates, that the beginning of faith and good purposes is the gift of God; and that so, our predestination, or vocation, doth not depend upon our merits. The second book concerns the gift of perseverance; which he shews to depend equally on God, as the beginning of our conversion. St. Augustin composed these treatises in the year 429. (d)

(c) Dupin's Hist. of Ecclesiastical Writers, vol. 3. p. 203.

(d) ibid.

"St. Augustin's principles, concerning predestination and reprobation, do exactly agree with his opinion touching grace. Both those decrees, according to him, suppose the foreknowledge of original sin, and of the corruption of the whole mass of mankind. If God would suffer all men to remain there, none could complain of that severity, seeing they are all guilty and doomed to damnation, because of the sin of the first man. But God resolved, from all eternity, to deliver some, whom he had chosen out of pure mercy, with out any regard to their future merits; and, from all eternity, he prepared, for them that were thus chosen, those gifts and graces which are necessary to save them infallibly: and these he bestows upon them in time. All those, therefore, that are of the number of the elect, hear the gospel, and believe, and per severe in the faith working by love, to the end of their lives. If they chance to wander from the right way, they return, and repent of their sins: and it is certain, that they shall all die in the faith of Jesus Christ."(e)

(e) Ibid. p. 205, 206. These citations demonstrate the justness of Mr. Bayle’s following remark. “It is certain,” says this shrewd, perspicacious writer, “that the engagement, which the church of Rome is under, to respect St. Austin’s system, casts her into a perplexity which is very ridiculous. It is manifest to all men, who examine things without prejudice and with sufficient abilities, that Austin’s doctrine, and that of Jansenius, are one and the same; so that we cannot, without indignation, behold the Court of Rome boasting to have condemned Jansenius, and yet to have preserved St. Austin in all his glory. These are two things altogether inconsistent. More than this, the Council of Trent, in condemning Calvin’s doctrine of free-will, did necessarily condemn that of St. Austin; for no Calvinist ever denied, or can deny, the concurrence of the human will, and the liberty of the soul, in that sense which St. Austin has given to the words concurrence, co-operation, and liberty. So that when they [i.e. the Papists] boast of having St. Austin's faith, it is only meant to preserve a decorum, and to save their system from the destruction which a sincere confession of the truth must necessarily occasion." Bayle's Hist. Dict. vol. i. art. Augustin.

Let the reader but compare the above summary of St. Austin's doctrine with the determinations of the Council of Trent, quoted in the 3d of the preceding sections; and he will, at first view, perceive, how little stress is to be laid on the Pope's reposing his loins upon St. Austin's effigy, while he tramples the leading (f) doctrines of that predestinarian saint under foot, and anathematises all who embrace them.

(f) This is evident, among other proofs, from the following instance: some of St. Austin's works, concerning grace and against freewill, are actually under the black mark of the Romish index Expurgatorius. For the knowledge of which, I am indebted to the information of Spanhemius. " In doctrinam illius [Augustini] de gratia et libero arbitrio, iniquiora sunt saepe judicia familiae Jesuitarum et obvia. Nec pauca inquisitores Hispanici et index Expurgatorius in Augustino damnant, obelo iis configenda. Spanhem, Operum, tom i. 925.

Had I any kind of intercourse with his Arminian holiness of Rome, I would advise him to cashier the image of St. Austin from serving any longer as a support to his easy chair. I would recommend to him a log, made of Ledsham ash: which he might soon obtain, by ordering one of his emissaries (whereof he has a pretty many) in this kingdom, to procure an effigy of Mr. Walter Sellon, as nearly resembling the original, as it can be made; to serve—not, indeed, upon due recollection, as a stay to his Holiness's throne—nor even as a prop to his footstool—but, which would be perfectly in character, as a leg to a certain convenience (a sella perforata, though not the sella porphyretica,) whereon, I presume his Holiness deigns, occasionally, to sit : and which, the wooden effigy of this wooden Arminian would, with all imaginable propriety and gracefulness, assist in supporting. 077

Calvinism VI - The Charge of Ranterism...

SECTION VI.

The Charge of Ranterism refuted and retorted.

PASS we, now, to a slander against the Calvinistic doctrines, drawn from a very different topic. "Antinomianism and Ranterism are," according to my adversary, "the genuine effects of absolute predestination." As to Antinomianism, I have, elsewhere, (g) shewn what it is, and demonstrated that it no more follows from Calvinism, than midnight from the sun. But, as the charge of Ranterism may carry a new appearance to those who are unacquainted with the scurrilities of the super-annuated Arminians, from whose quiver Mr. Sellon has borrowed his shafts, I will not dismiss it without some examination.

(g) See my Caveat against Unsound Doctrines.

The sect who, in the reign of Charles I., justly went by the name of Ranters, were no other than the spawn, or continuation, of the (h) Familists, who made so much noise under the administration of Elizabeth. To judge, therefore, of the branch, we must review the parent-tree. To trace the rise, and ascertain the principles of the Ranters, we must follow the stream to the spring, by carrying up our enquiries to the Familists themselves.

(h) Fuller's Church History of Britain; b. x a. 2. p. 33.

The learned Camden, in his history of Queen Elizabeth, informs us, under the year 1580, that "not only perfidious subjects, but also foreigners, out of Holland, a country (i) fruitful of heretics, began, at this time, to trouble the peace of the Church and commonwealth in Eng land. Under a shew of singular integrity and sanctity, they insinuated themselves into the affection of the ignorant, common people; and then instilled into their minds several damnable heresies, manifestly repugnant to the Christian faith: using uncouth and strange kind of expressions. These named themselves of the Family of Love, or House of Charity. They persuaded their followers, that those only were elected, and should be saved, who were admitted into that family; and all the rest, reprobates, and to be damned: and that it was lawful for them to deny, upon their oath, before a magistrate, whatsoever they pleased; or before any other, who was not of their family." He adds, that their leader, Henry Nicholas, "with a blasphemous mouth, gave out, that he partook of God, and God [partook] of his humanity." King James I has given us a miniature drawing of these people, sketched with his own hand: " That vile sect," says his Majesty, "called the Familie of Love, think themselves only pure, and, in a manner, without sinne; the only true church, and only worthie to be participant of the sacraments; and all the rest of the world to be but abomination in the sight of God."

(i) I do not wonder at this remark of the Historian. Nor will any other unprejudiced person, who considers that, among the rest, Arminius (at whom, and his adherents, Mr. Camden strongly seems to glance in this sentence) was a Dutchman.

(l) Of this sect was Velsius, an Hollander, who, in the year 1563, made much disturbance among the Dutch congregation in London. (See Strype's Annals of the twelve first years of Elizabeth; chap. 34.) This was the same Velsius, who, "In the year 1556, held a dispute at Frankfort, with one Horne, who appeared in behalf of Calvin's doctrine of absolute predestination, and against free-will. Him Velsius called ambitionis et kenodozian odofictt vilissimum manicipium, i.e. a most vile slave of ambition and vain-glory. He asserted, that, he that was born might not sin, and, in effect, could not sin: that is, if he remained in the grace of regeneration." (Strype, Ibid. p. 347 ) So far were these ranting free-willers from Calvinism!

Hence it appears, that these wretched fanatics (like some others I could easily name) held, 1. That men's election or reprobation was conditional; and that the condition was, their joining, or not joining, themselves to this pretended family of love: consequently, 2. That salvation did not extend beyond the purlieus of their own sect: 3. That faith was not to be kept with any but themselves: and, 4. That men might, in the present life, be in a manner without sin." Their tenets, therefore, appear to have been a farrago of Pelagianism, Popery, and enthusiasm.

Henry Nicholas, a native of Amsterdam, and the founder of this sect, had, it seems, began to sow his tares in England, many years before the aera assigned by Camden: though it was not perhaps, until about the year 1580, that the Familists were sufficiently numerous and daring to alarm the vigilance of government. But the enthusiast had before taken a voyage hither, in the reign of king Edward VI., and, joining himself, at first, to a Dutch church in London, perverted "a number of artificers and silly women."(m)

(m) Fuller's Church Hist. b. ix. p. 112.

From a paper, subscribed by one of these sectarians, and published by Mr. Strype, we may derive still stronger light into some of their distinguishing principles. It seems, in the year 1581, Dr. Wolton, bishop of Exeter, deprived the rector of Lidford, in Devonshire, for being a Familist, or Ranter. This ranter's name was Anthony Randal: who, among other heterodoxies, held, that the Mosaic history of Adam's Temptation and Fall was a mere allegory:" moreover, that as many as receive Jesus Christ and his doctrine, did fully keep all the moral law, and lived pure without sinning."(n) In the summary of assertions, which the said Anthony Randal acknowledged under his own hand, I find the following passages:—"He saith, that he cannot put down" [i.e. safely commit to writing] "what he hath learned of predestination, or Providence, without speaking, or at least seeming to speak, against the law of the realm. He saith, he hath taught openly, and will teach, during his life (being not forbidden by the prince,) that as many as receive Jesus Christ and his doctrine, do fulfil, keep, and do, all the moral law given by God to Moses: and so to live clean and clear without sinning, or the act of sin. And moreover, that every one that preacheth any doctrine contrary to this, neither knoweth God, nor his Christ, nor yet the power and strength of the Holy Spirit,''(o) Let me make a short stricture on these two paragraphs. It is sufficiently plain, 1. That the ranter denied predestination, and had (at best) but a very lax idea of divine Providence: yet, 2. He was honest enough to grant, that the doctrines of Predestination and Providence were a part of the national belief, established by " the law of the realm." Hence, 3. He would not venture to blaspheme those doctrines under his hand-writing, for fear of the consequences that might follow. Herein, the ranter acted discreetly enough. 4. He was an avowed perfectionist: and, 5. Was a most uncharitable bigot; else he had never affirmed, that every one, who preaches against his ranting doctrine of sinless perfection, knows nothing of God, or of Christ, or of the Holy Spirit. Who, on this occasion, can help thinking on Messieurs John Wesley and Walter Sellon? I mean, so far as concerns the tenet of perfection. For, on the articles of predestination and providence, even ranting Randal himself would not venture to fly so openly in the face of the " law of the realm," as have his ranting successors, the two adventurers above mentioned.

(n) Strype's Life of Whitgift, p. 222.

(o) Appendix to ditto, p. 93.

In the second year of James I the Ranters or Familists (call them which you please,) presented a very long petition to that monarch; in which they had, at last, the courage to own their firm belief of universal redemption, and, not obscurely, hinted their attachment to the doctrine of freewill. The whole petition may be read in Fuller.(p) I shall content myself with transcribing two or three paragraphs. They term themselves "The Family of Love, or of God;" and disclaim all affinity to the Puritans, whom they brand with the epithets of disobedient, brain-sick, proud-minded, heady, and hypocritical: whose malice," add the Ranters, "hath, for five and twenty years past, and upwards, and ever since, with many untrue suggestions, and most foul errors and odious crimes (the which we could then, if need were, prove,) sought our utter overthrow and destruction." The Puritans, I dare believe, deemed themselves to be, as indeed they were, honoured by the low slanders of these wild and extravagant sectarists. But, would we think it possible? this very Family of Love, (or of Lust rather, says Fuller,) these identical Ranters, pretended, with as much confidence and as little truth as Messieurs John and Walter do at this day, to be very sound and zealous members of the Church of England! " If," continue the petitioners, " we do vary, or swerve, from the established religion in this land, either in service, ceremonies, sermons, or sacraments; then let us be rejected for sectaries, and never receive the benefit of subjects." We may learn, from this astonishing instance of impudence and falsehood, that it is no new thing, with schismatics, to lay the brats of their own invention at the door of the Church. Mr. Wesley, among others, seeks much to avail himself of this audacious artifice. As if the Church of England was the common receptacle of error, and looked ninety-nine ways at once!

(p) Church Hist. of Brit. book. x. sect. 18.

But to resume the petition. I shall not, here, stay to enquire into the merits of the question concerning the universality of redemption and grace. I shall only shew, from the very words of the Ranters themselves, that they held the universality of both. They tell the King that the writings of Henry Nicholas were written and published, " To the end that all people, when they hear or read his writings, might endeavour to bring forth the fruits of repentance, according as all the holy scripture doth likewise require the same of every one: and that they might, in that sort, become saved, through Jesus Christ the Saviour of all the world." They add, that Nicholas's books were written by an immediate impulse from Heaven: or, to use their own phraseology, that his productions did " proceed out of the great grace and love of God and Christ towards all kings, princes, rulers, and people, upon the universal earth, to their salvation, unity, peace, and concord, in the same godly love."

"This Family of Love," says merry old "Fuller, who shut their doors before, now" [i.e. about A. D. 1655] keep open house: yea, Family is too narrow a name for them; they are grown so numerous. Formerly by their own confession in this petition, they had three qualities few, poor, and unlearned. For the last, billa vera: their lack of learning they still retain: being otherwise many, and some rich; but all under the name of Ranters. And thus," adds the facetious historian, " I fairly leave them, on condition they will fairly leave me, that I may hear no more of them for delivering truth and my own conscience, in what I have written concerning their opinions." (q)

(q) Ibid. p. 83.

By this time, the reader must clearly see with how little reason and justice Mr. Sellon pronounces Ranterism to be the genuine effect of the doctrine of predestination. So far from being an effect of it, it is totally and diametrically the reverse of that doctrine, in every point of view. Mr. Sellon is the ranter, both in the speculative and practical sense of the term. Speculatively: for he avowedly holds, with his ranting brethren of the two last centuries, that our Lord is the intentional Saviour of all the world, without any exception; and that the grace of God extends " to all people upon the universal earth." Nay, on the article of sinful perfection, this modern Arminian exceeds the madness of his ancient brethren. For, some of them only asserted that people may be in a manner without sin: whereas, the still more illuminated Mr. Sellon affirms, with the hottest of the elder sect, that people may be totally without sin. In which respect, he outrants many of the old Ranters themselves.

But what is empty speculation, if unproductive of substantial practice? herein, likewise, my worthy assailant comes not a jot behind the foremost of the primitive Ranters. For, what are his written works, but one continued series of ranting against the sovereignty and grace of God, and against all who affirm with the Church (art. xvii.) that predestination to life is the everlasting purpose of God, whereby, before the foundations of the world were laid, he hath constantly decreed, by his counsel, secret to us, to deliver from curse and dam nation those whom he hath chosen in Christ out of mankind? And yet (so exactly does he tread in the footsteps of the " Family of Love,") Mr. Sellon would, like them, fain cajole his readers into an opinion that he is no sectary, nor doth vary, nor swerve, from the established religion of this land! " Thus, though he has reason enough to be ashamed of his relations, the Ranters, he can hardly, I imagine, have the assurance to disown them. Should he, however, be sufficiently case-hardened, to deny the consanguinity; he bears the family-likeness so strongly, that in vain would he attempt to shuffle off the name, while every feature and line of his doctrinal physiognomy compels us to write Ranter upon his forehead.

Calvinism VII - An Enquiry into the Judgment of the earliest Fathers,...

SECTION VII.

An Enquiry into the Judgment of the earliest Fathers, concerning the Points in Question.

In my letter to Dr. N. I took occasion to observe, that there is the utmost reason to believe that the main body of the Christian Church (in which I do not include the Arians of those times) were, for the four first centuries, unanimous believers of the doctrines now termed Calvinistic. For this observation, I assigned two reasons: 1. The universal horror and surprize, which the broaching of Pelagius's opinions, about the beginning of the 5th century, occasioned in the whole Christian Church; and, 2. The authority of Dr. Cave, who asserts, in express terms, that Pelagius haeresin novam condidit, “was the founder of a new heresy.” From whence I inferred, and infer still, that, if the non-imputation of Adam's offence to his posterity, and the bottoming of predestination and justification upon human worthiness, were (as all historians concur to affirm) branches of Pelagius's new heresy; it follows, that the opposite doctrines, of Adam's transgression imputed to his off spring, and of predestination and justification by grace alone, were, and must have been, branches of the old faith universally held by the Church for the first 400 years after Christ.

These two arguments Mr. Sellon, very prudently, passes over, uncanvassed and unmentioned: and skips to my ninth page, from whence he gleans an incidental remark, on which he thus descants: "Your telling us, p. 9 that, during the four first ages of the Christian Church, predestination and its concomitant doctrines were undisputed, for ought appears to the contrary, is no reason at all.” It, certainly, is a strong presumptive reason, though not offered as direct proof, for, two of the direct reasons had been given before, and still remain, not only undemolished, but untouched, by my cautious adversary; who, with all his furious zeal for Arminianism, chose rather to let those reasons keep possession of the field than run the risque of burning his own fingers in assaulting them. I will attend, however, to what he delivers concerning the “no reason at all.”

He grants, that those doctrines were, for the four first ages, undisputed: which he thus affects to account for; “because it does not appear that there were any that held them.” We shall presently see that they were held, and held firmly too, by those of the primitive fathers who are commonly distinguished by the title of Apostolical, from their having lived nearest to the Apostles' times, i.e. within the first Christian century. In the meanwhile, let us weigh the mode of argumentation adopted by Mr. Sellon: "The doctrines of grace were therefore undisputed, because it does not appear that they were believed.” I hardly think, this will stand the test. Here is an absolute, peremptory assertion, built (not so much as on a phantom or a shadow, but on a mere non-appearance. Besides: does it not, at least, seem more probable, that these doctrines were therefore unopposed, because they were generally held? For, daily experience evinces that, to this day, those same doctrines meet with opposition enough from the persons by whom they are not held: and, I am apt to think, that human nature, as such, is just that, now, which it was in the four first centuries. Had the primitive times swarmed with Arminians, as the latter times have, the doctrines of grace would have been no less opposed and disputed against then, than they have been since.

Another consideration also merits our attention. Not only every Church, or collective body of professing Christians; but likewise every individual man, who thinks religion and philosophy worthy of attending to, must, necessarily, form some judgment or other concerning the points in debate, I may venture, therefore, without taking any undue advantage, to lay it down as a datum, that the Christians of the four first ages (who certainly had the scriptures in their hands, and heard them read in their public assemblies) could not possibly be neutrals, on a subject of such importance as that of predestination and grace; but must, unavoidably, have either believed that doctrine, or disbelieved it: they were on one side, or on the other. Indeed, had the holy scripture made no mention at all of predestination, neither for, nor against, it is possible (and but barely possible,) that the primitive Churches might have thought little or nothing about that sublime article. But it is undeniable, that the scriptures make very express, ample, and repeated mention of it: and the mention there made of it must be understood in some sense or other. Now, if predestination and its derivative doctrines were at all thought of by the first Churches; and if, for ought that can be proved to the contrary, those doctrines passed undisputed till contravened by Pelagius in the fifth century; does it not (to say the least) look as if they had been universally received and embraced, during the first 400 years after Christ? We will suppose, a moment, for argument sake, the doctrines of grace to have passed undisputed among English Protestants, from the aera of the Reformation down to the emersion of Mr. John Wesley. What, in such a case, would have been the natural inference? Not, that nobody held these undisputed principles: but, that they would and must have been controverted, long before, had they not been held universally- Why is the existence of a certain luminary, called the sun, undisputed? Surely, not because its existence is disbelieved; but, on the contrary, because it is universally known and acknowledged. I must, therefore, repeat my question, which seems to have given Mr. Sellon and his fraternity so much disquiet: where was not the doctrine of predestination, before Pelagius? The Arminians treat election, as Gardiner, the Popish bishop of Winchester, treated the doctrine of free justification. Before the Homily on Salvation was published, archbishop Cranmer and others sent for Gardiner, and shewed him that excellent Homily, “wherein was handled the matter of justification; endeavouring to persuade him to allow of it, by reasoning with him concerning it. But Winchester pretended, whatsoever they said could not salve his conscience; and challenged them to shew any old writer who taught as that Homily did.”

If the testimony of old writers was needful, to confirm the good old doctrines, there are old writers enough at hand, to confirm all and every one of them. But it suffices for me, that we have the suffrages of the oldest writers; I mean, the Prophets and Apostles. The holy Scriptures are the truest and the purest antiquity. While these are for us, it matters not who are against us. However, the Calvinists of later ages are very far from standing alone, in their resolute adherence to the scripture doctrines. The learned bishop Beveridge, whose acquaintance with the monuments of primitive antiquity is incontestible, treating, (for instance) of regeneration by the efficacious grace of God, expresses himself thus; and avers, that the first Churches believed as follows: Our Lord "doth not say, there are some things you cannot do without me, or, there are many things you cannot do without me; but, without me ye can do nothing: nothing good, nothing pleasing and acceptable unto God. Whereas, if we could either prepare ourselves to turn, or turn ourselves when pre pared, we should do much. And, to put it out of doubt, the same Spirit tells us elsewhere, it is God that worketh in you both to will and to do, of his good pleasure. It is he who first enables us to will what we ought to do, and then to do what we will. Both the grace we desire, and our desire of grace, proceed from him. And therefore it is requisite, in order to our conversion, that the understanding be not only so enlightened as to discern the evil from the good; but that our wills be also so rectified as to prefer the good before the evil. By this rectifying, or bringing of the will into its right order again, its liberty is not destroyed, but healed: so that it is free, after, as well as before conversion; free to God and Holiness, as it was before free only to sin and wicked ness. And this was the doctrine of the Primitive Church. St. Augustin, in whose days Pelagius first rose up against this truth, hath written several volumes to this purpose.”

St Jerom, who was cotemporary with St. Augustin, addressed him, not as the founder, but as a principal restorer, of the doctrines of grace; “Thou art famous,” said Jerom to Austin, “through the world. The orthodox revere thee, as the re-builder of the ancient faith.” And I am much mistaken, if St. Jerom, who lived more than thirteen hundred years ago, was not better qualified to judge and pronounce concerning the faith of the ancients, than all the followers of Van-Harmin taken together.

There are cases, wherein a man's own testimony, even in his own cause, is not only admissible, but weighty and respectable. Of this kind I consider the following declaration, of St. Austin. “We have shewed (says he, directing his speech to the Pelagians,) by invincible authorities, that the holy bishops, who lived before us, taught the same faith which we maintain; and overthrew the arguments which you make use of, not only in their discourses, but in their writings also. We have shewed you their opinions, which are very particular and clear. I hope their testimonies will cure your blindness, as I wish it: but, if you continue obstinate in your error, which God forbid, you are no more to look for a tribunal to justify you, out for those wonderful defenders of the truth to accuse you, St. Irenaeus, St. Cyprian, Rheticius, Olympius, St. Hilary, St. Gregory, St. Ambrose, St. Basil, St. John Chrysostom, &c. with all those who communicated with them, that is to say, the whole Church.”

I once devoted a considerable share of time and attention to the fathers. But, I scruple not to acknowledge, that, after a while, I desisted from this study as barren and unimproving. Some excellent things are, indeed, interspersed in their writings: but the golden grains are almost lost amidst an infinity of rubbish “If a man,'' says Dr. Young, “was to find one pearl in an oyster of a million, it would hardly encourage him to commence fisherman for life.” So say I, of the fathers in general. Even supposing (what I can by no means grant,) that the harvest of instruction would recompense the toil of breaking up the ground; a life-time would hardly suffice to read the fathers with care: and, perhaps, two life-times would scarcely enable a reader to digest them completely. That knowledge which is truly important, lies in a much narrower compass I am quite of his mind, who said Unus Augustinis, prae mille Patribus; et unus Paulus praemille Augustinis. One page of St. Austin is worth a thousand of most other fathers; but one page of St. Paul is worth a thousand of St. Austin's. I speak not this, to depreciate the labours of such learned persons as have trod the paths of what is called primitive antiquity; but simply to profess the idea, I cannot help entertaining, of the vanity and unprofitableness, with which I apprehend this kind of chace to be generally attended. If any are otherwise minded, let them follow the chace, and prosper.

There are, however, a few writings, still extant, which, in point both of antiquity and value, appear to rank next below the inspired. The chief of these are the remains of Barnabas, Clemens Romanus, Ignatius, and Polycarp A few citations, from these venerable divines and martyrs, will serve to evince the falsehood of Limborch's assertion, where he tells us, that, “prior to the rise of St. Austin, the primitive Churches knew little or nothing about predestination.” If that proverbial remark be true, the nearer the fountain the clearer the stream; the testimonies, brought from these early writers, must come with weight little, if at all, short of decisive.

I. Very frequent mention is made of Barnabas, in the New Testament. He was originally a Jew by religion, a Cypriot by birth, and for some time a companion of St. Paul in his journies for the gospel. Dr. Cave, and others, are of opinion, that he was one of the seventy disciples who were sent out by Christ himself (Lu 10.) to preach the word. But it is certain, that, some years after our Lord's ascension, he was expressly fixed upon, by the peculiar designation of the Holy Ghost, to be a preacher at large; Lu 13:2. It is probable, that he at last received the crown of martyrdom in his native island of Cyprus.

From the fragment of an epistle retrieved by the learned archbishop Usher, and generally admitted to be the authentic work of Barnabas, I select the following passages.

That he held the absolute freeness of divine grace, appears from this remarkable assertion: “When Christ" says he, “chose his own Apostles who were to preach his gospel, he chose them when they were wickeder than all wickedness itself; to demonstrate, that he came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.” That he was far from being startled at the doctrine of reprobation, seems more than probable: else, I should imagine, he would scarcely have represented the incarnation and death of Christ to have been designed for filling up the measure of Jewish iniquity. His words are these: “Therefore did the Son of God come in the flesh, to this very end, that he might finish and bring to perfection the sins of those who had persecuted his prophets unto death. For this reason” [i.e. this was one reason for which] he suffered. If a modern Calvinist was to express himself in this manner, what a hideous outcry would be raised, as if heaven and earth were falling!

Far from representing the death of Christ as a contingency, or as an event which might, or might not have taken place; Barnabas avers that it came to pass necessarily: “It was Christ's own will that he should thus suffer. It was requisite that he should suffer on the tree. For the prophet saith concerning him, Deliver my soul, &c.”

Speaking of regeneration and conversion, he ascribes the power, by which those super natural effects are accomplished, entirely to God: “When God hath renewed us by the remission of sins, he hath formed us into a quite different likeness; so that we have a child-like mind: forasmuch as he himself fashions us anew. Again: “behold we have been formed afresh: as he speaketh by another prophet; Lo, saith the Lord, I will take away from them, that is, from those whom the Spirit of the Lord fore-viewed, I will take away from them [their] stony hearts, and I will send fleshly hearts into them.”

In the following Paragraph, Barnabas seems to glance at the specialty of redemption: “The Lord saith again” [i.e. Christ, the second person in the Trinity,] “In whom shall I appear before the Lord my God, and be glorified? He answereth: I will praise thee in the Church, in the midst of my brethren; and sing to thee in the midst of the Church of the Saints.” If this venerable writer only glances at. particular redemption, in the last passage; he more than glances at it, in this which follows: “Understand, therefore, O ye children of [spiritual] gladness, that the Lord hath made all [these] things manifest to us beforehand, that we might know to whom we should gratefully render thanks in all things. Since therefore the Son of God, though he is Jehovah, and will judge the living and the dead, suffered, that his punishment might make us alive; let us rest assured, that the Son of God could not have suffered but for us.” The sense evidently is, that the essential dignity of Christ, as Kuriov, or Sovereign Lord, will not permit us to believe that it was possible for him to suffer and shed his blood in vain, or for those who are not, eventually, “made alive by his punishment'' in their room and stead. To the same effect he thus speaks, in the person of Christ: “Wherefore? “[i.e. wherefore was the sin-offering, under the law, to be eaten by the priests alone?] "Because I am to offer up my flesh as a sacrifice for the sins of the new people:" i.e. for the sins of those who shall be made new creatures in Christ by the Spirit and grace of God: who can say, with Barnabas, in the words already quoted, “He himself fashions us anew: behold, we have been formed afresh.” And these surely, are far enough from including the whole of mankind. It is plain, Menardus understood this passage (as every unprejudiced reader must) of Christ's offering up himself only “for the sins of the new, or renewed people,” as militating very strongly against universal redemption; else, in his pert note on the place, he would not, like many other annotators, have flown directly in the face of the text, and presumed to charge Barnabas with being in an error; “Lawv twv kainwv, i.e. populi novi. Non ita recte: quia Christus pro universo mundo passus est.” Barnabas, however, thought otherwise. And so would his angry commentator, had he duly weighed the notion, of in discriminate redemption, in the balance of the sanctuary.

Barnabas's judgment, respecting the certainty of perseverance, may be concluded from his connecting evangelical hope with final salvation. Though hope is, perhaps, one of the lowest on the round of Christian graces; yet, a Christian grace it is: and the hope, which has the finished redemption of Jesus for its object, shall be crowned with everlasting glory, by him who will never break a bruised reed, nor quench the smoking flax: “They, who hope in him, shall live for ever.” Much less shall the stronger graces fail: “Whosoever eateth of these things shall live everlastingly.” "He" [i.e. God] "saith whosoever shall hear those that call, and believeth, shall live eternally.”

According to this truly apostolic writer, free-will has nothing to do in the affairs of spiritual and future salvation. Speaking of God's true Israel, he asks, “But, from whence is it, that they come to consider and understand these things? We, who consider his commandments aright, speak as the Lord willeth us to speak. For that end, he hath circumcised our ears and our hearts, that we might understand these things.” Again: “He, giving us repentance, hath led us into the incorruptible temple. The person, therefore, who is desirous of salvation, looketh not unto man, but to him that dwelleth in man and speaketh by man.”

I shall chose my citations, from Barnabas, with but one testimony more: “Issue not thy commands to thy maid-servant, or to thy man servant, in an acrimonious manner, lest thon fear not that God who is master both of you and them: for he came not to call men, epi proswpon, according to their outward condition in life, but [his call is] unto those whom the Spirit hath prepared,” be their outward condition what it may.

II. Clemens Romanus is said to have been a disciple of the apostle Peter: and is universally allowed to be that Clement, whom St. Paul numbered among; his fellow labourers, and whose name he peremptorily affirmed to be in the book of Life. Php 4:3. He was made bishop of Rome, probably, about A. D. 64, or 65. But it is very uncertain at what time, and in what manner, he was honoured with martyrdom.

His First Epistle to the Corinthians is celebrated, by many of the ancient writers, as one of the finest and most valuable productions of the apostolic age. So highly was it esteemed, that, for several centuries, it made a part of the public service of the primitive Church: being read in their assemblies, and revered as inferior only to the books of the New Testament. Nor does a learned modern (Monsieur Du Pin) betray the least want of judgment, in declaring the Epistle, now under consideration, to be, “after the Holy Scriptures, one of the most eminent records of antiquity.” It seems to have been written before the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans: consequently, much within forty years after our Lord's ascension; and about, six or seven years after the death of the apostle Paul, with whom, and with several others of the apostles, Clement was personally and intimately acquainted.

The testimonies of such a writer, in favour of the great truths called Calvinistic, deserve the reader's attention. Among which testimonies, are the following:

The Epistle opens thus: “The Church of God, which dwelleth at Rome, to the Church of God dwelling at Corinth, called and set apart by the will of God, through Jesus Christ our Lord.” Hinting at some violent tumults and dissentions which had lately agitated and divided the Corinthian Church, he terms such proceedings “a criminal and unholy sedition, strange and unseemly in the elect of God.” Reminding them of the exemplary care with which they had formerly attended to the performance of every good work; he observes, “your contest, day and night, was for the whole brotherhood; that the number of his elect might be saved with mercy and with [a good] conscience.” Nor did clement consider the salvation of the elect as pecarious, or their perseverance as uncertain. “It being the will of God,” says he, “that all his beloved ones should be made partakers of repentance; he hath established them firmly by his own Almighty purpose.”

His judgment, concerning the extent of redemption, may be inferred from the two following passages. In the first, treating of Rahab's deliverance by the line of scarlet depending from her window, he considers that event as typical of salvation by Christ's atonement: hereby says he, “They [i.e. Rahab, and as many of her friends as were collected under her roof for preservation] made it manifest, that redemption by the blood of the Lord should accrue to all who believe and hope in God.” Again: the Messiah's “Life is taken from the earth; because of the iniquities of my people. He went unto death.”

That this primitive bishop had the most exalted ideas of the immutability, the certainty, and the omnipotence, of God's decrees, is evident beyond all contradiction. Witness his description of the all-controlling power with which God's providential disposals are attended: “In pursuance of his will, the teeming earth produces, at the proper seasons, abundant pro vision both for men, and for wild beasts, and for all the animals that are upon it; without varying from, and without altering, aught of those things which were decreed by him.” (?) With a sublimity both of sentiment and style, which would do honour even to Homer or Demosthenes, he thus asserts the independency, sovereignty, and invincibility, of the divine appointments: “By the word of his Majesty he hath constituted all things; and he is able, by a word, to overturn them. Who shall say unto him, What hast thou done? or who shall resist the might of his power? He hath done all things at what season he pleased, and in what manner he pleased: and not one of the things which have been decreed by him shall pass away. All things are open to his view, nor hath any thing absconded from his will and pleasure.”

Far from supposing that the precious doctrine of election conduces to immorality, he represents election as the main ground-work of sanctification, and as the grand inducement to virtue and obedience: “Let us draw nigh to God with holiness of mind, lifting up chaste and unpolluted hands, loving our gentle and compassionate Father, who hath made us a part of the election unto himself. For so it is written: When the Most High parcelled out the nations, and when he dispersed the sons of Adam, he appointed the boundaries of the nations according to the number of his angels. His people Jacob were the Lord's portion; Israel was the line of his inheritance. And, in another place, he saith: Behold, the Lord taketh to himself a nation from the midst of the nations, as a man taketh the first-fruits from his corn-floor.” Under the ravishing view of interest in this unspeakable blessing of election, well may the excellent father add, as he does presently after: “Since, therefore, we are the portion of the Holy One, let us practise all the works of holiness: avoiding slanders, and defiled and unchaste embraces, drunkenness and innovations, together with abominable desires, detestable adultery, and loathsome pride.” How far, how infinitely far, is the believing consideration of God's electing love from leading to licentiousness!

Nothing can be more scriptural than this writer's doctrine concerning the sovereignty and freeness of divine grace. “Let us,” says he, “closely and steadfastly adhere to those persons unto whom grace is given of God.” To this grace, thus freely given, he ascribes the exercise of the social virtues; “Equity and lowliness of mind and meekness, are found in those who are the blessed of God.” Speaking of the Old-Testament saints, he refers the whole of their good will, good works, justification and eternal felicity, to the discriminating favour and sovereign pleasure of God alone: “All these persons were glorified and magnified, not by themselves, or by their own works, or by the righteous practice which they wrought; but by his will. We too, being called by his will in Christ, Jesus are justified, not by ourselves, nor by our own wisdom, or understanding, or piety, or by the works which we have performed in holiness of heart; but by faith, whereby Almighty God hath, from eternity, justified all those.” i.e. all those whom it was his will to justify.

Clement easily foresaw that the doctrine of free grace and unmerited justification, as stated by him in the above passage, might be cavilled at by legalists and merit-mongers, as tending to the consequential exclusion of good works. He, therefore, discreetly anticipates this cavil, by entering a just caveat against an inference so unnatural and malicious. “What then shall we do, brethren?" says he, in the very next paragraph: “Shall we desist from well-doing, and renounce our love” [to God and our neighbour]? “May the Sovereign Lord never permit this to befal us by any means! Nay, but let us be in haste to accomplish every good work, with earnestness, and with full propensity.”

He most carefully guards against the sacrilegious encroachments of free-will and self-righteousness: “It is by Jesus Christ that we can steadfastly look into the heights of Heaven. It is by him that we shall behold his spotless and most exalted countenance. By him the eyes of our heart have been opened. By him our foolish and dark understanding springs up afresh into his marvellous light. It was the will of the Lord that we should by him taste of that knowledge which can never die.” "He that made and formed us hath introduced us into his world: having afore prepared his benefits for us, even before we were born. As, therefore, we have all things from him, we ought for all things to give him thanks.”

Dissuading the Corinthians from casting blocks of offence in each others way he thus enforces his prohibition: "Remember the words of our Lord Jesus: for he hath said, Woe to that man; it were good for him rather not to have been born, than that he should cause one of my elect people to stumble.” Though the elect themselves may stumble, i.e. though it is possible for them both to offend, and to be offended; yet, according to Clement's Theology, none of them can finally miss of glory. They shall all, eventually, be completely sanctified, and made meet for the inheritance of the saints in light. “All the elect of God are made perfect in love.” He adds: "It was of love that the Lord accepted us. It was through the love which he bore to us, that our Lord Christ did, by the will of God, give his blood for us, and his flesh in the room of our flesh, and his soul in the room of ours.” This eminent saint believed, and expressly asserts, that pardon of sin does not extend beyond the pale of election. His words are these: “It is written, Blessed are they whose iniquities are remitted, and whose sins are covered: blessed is the person to whom the Lord will by no means impute sin; nor is there deceit in his mouth. This blessedness accrues to those who have been elected of God through our Lord Jesus Christ.” The Royal Psalmist was, no doubt, one of God's elect: and he is, accordingly, so styled by our apostolic author: “elect David saith, I will confess unto the Lord, &c.” I cannot close my citations from St. Clement more suitably, than with that most excellent prayer, which almost concludes his epistle: and which I most earnestly beg of God, the Holy Spirit to engrave indelibly on the reader's heart and mine: “May the all-seeing God the Sovereign of spirits and the Lord of all flesh, who hath elected the Lord Jesus Christ, and us into a peculiar people through him; grant, to each soul that calls on his holy and exalted name, the graces of “faith, fear, peace, patience, long suffering, temperance, purity, and soundness of judgment; through our high-priest and defender, Jesus Christ.”

I have made the large extracts from Barnabas and Clement, because their two epistles appear to be the oldest remains of uncanonical antiquity. Indeed, the first epistle of Clement to the Corinthians was evidently composed many years prior to some of the writings of the New Testament itself. For, if that epistle (as there is the strongest reason to believe) was antecedent to the final conquest of Jerusalem by Titus, it must have been written considerably earlier than the Gospel of St. John, his three Epistles, and the book of Revelation. A circumstance, however, which I should not have noticed here, had I not thought it necessary to offer some apology to my readers, for having detained them so long with these quotations, in a work, which, as I transcribe it from the rough copy, I am designedly rendering as concise as may consist with justice to the argument: - the genuine Epistles of Ignatius and Polycarp, though extremely ancient, yet are not of quite so high antiquity as the two preceding: for which reason, I shall present the reader with the fewer citations; but those sufficiently weighty and express, to convince any impartial, attentive enquirer, that these two venerable preachers and martyrs were, in deed and in truth, earnest contenders for the faith which was once delivered to the saints.

III. Ignatius is said to have been ordained bishop of Antioch in Syria, A. D. 66, and to have held that see for upward of 40 years. He was a disciple of St. John, and had the happiness of being particularly intimate with that apostle. Under the third general persecution, i.e. about the year 107, Ignatius, having asserted the divinity of the Christian religion in the emperor Trajan's own presence, was sentenced to be thrown to wild beasts, on an amphitheatre at Rome: which was accordingly executed.

On his way from Antioch to Rome, this blessed prisoner of Christ, loaded with chains, and led as a sheep to the slaughter, wrote those six Epistles (of whose authenticity there seems no just reason to doubt,) addressed to the Christians in Ephesus, Magnesia Tralles, Rome, Philadelphia, and Smyrna. As to the Epistle inscribed to Polycarp, though thought genuine by Vossius, it is rejected as spurious by arch bishop Usher; and considered as doubtful, even by Dr. Cave.

In the exordium of his Epistle to the Smyrneans, Ignatius addresses them as “Filled with faith and love, and indefectible in every gift of grace. And, indeed, the gilts of grace would stand us in little stead, if indefectibility was not their certain attendant. So far was this holy bishop from doubting the final perseverance of those who are really endued “with faith and love;” that he tells them, in terms of the fullest assurance, “I glorify Jesus Christ our God, who hath made you thus [spiritually] wise. For I have understood, that ye are knit firmly together in immoveable faith, even as though ye were both in flesh and spirit nailed to the cross of Jesus Christ our Lord; and that ye are made stedfast in love, through the blood of Christ.”

He believed the redemption wrought by Christ, to be co-extensive with the Church of God's peculiar people: “Christ,” says he, “suffered all these things on our account, that we might be saved.” He would not allow the grace of true repentance to be in a man's own power: for, speaking of some persons, whom he styles “wild beasts in human shape,” he adds, “you ought not only to refuse receiving such, but, if possible, you should even avoid meeting them. You ought only to pray in their behalf, if they may by some means repent; which, however, is exceeding difficult: but the power of this [viz. of making them repent] rests with Jesus Christ our true life.”

Sensible of his inability to undergo the tortures of martyrdom, in his own strength, he thus expresses his reliance on the strength of grace: “The nigher to the sword, the nigher to God. When surrounded with wild beasts, I shall be encompassed with God. It is only by the name of Jesus Christ that I shall so endure all things as to suffer with him; he enduing me with strength who was himself perfect man.”

That he held God's sovereign and righteous praeterition of some, appears from the following expression: “Whom some men ignorantly deny; or, rather, have been denied of him.”

Nothing can breathe a more genuine sense of Christian humility, than his absolute renunciation of merit in all its branches: “It is by the will of God, that I have been vouchsafed this honour" [namely, the honour of being in chains for the gospel:] "not from conscience “[i.e. from my own uprightness, or conscientiousness,] “but from the grace of God.” On the same principle, speaking of one Burrhus, a deacon, who was to be the bearer of this Epistle to Smyrna, and from whose tender friendship Ignatius had reaped great consolation, he thus prays in his behalf: “May grace make him retribution!”

His Epistle to the Ephesians, opens thus: “Ignatius, who is also called Theophorus, to the Church which is at Ephesus in Asia, blessed by the greatness and fulness of God the Father; predestinated ever, before time, unto the glory which is perpetual and unchangeable, united and chosen [i.e. fixed upon to be the everlasting residence of the saints] by the will of the Father, and of Jesus Christ our God, through the true suffering.'' That is, through the humiliation and sufferings of Christ the true propitiation.

Congratulating the Ephesians, on the harmony which subsisted among themselves, he takes occasion to intimate, that the Church, which is Christ's mystic body, is as firmly united to Christ as Christ himself is united to the Father. Is it possible to express the infallible certainty of final perseverance, in stronger terms? And would not one almost believe, that Ignatius designed the above passage as a comment on those words of our Lord, Because I live, ye shall live also?

How remote he was from crying up the pretended abilities of free-will, may sufficiently appear from what follows: “Carnal men,” i.e. men unrenewed by the Almighty Spirit of God, “are not able to perform spiritual things —ye do all things,” i.e all spiritual things, “by Jesus Christ,” or by grace and strength derived from him.

In the inscription of his Epistle to the Philadelphians, he observes, of the clergy of that Church, that Christ had, in pursuance of his own will, firmly established them in stedfastness, by his holy Spirit.” A glaring proof, that, in the judgment of Ignatius, saving grace is not that evanid, loseable thing, which Arminianisns represents it to be. As the acquisition of it is not owing to the will of man; so neither is it dependent on man's will for preservation and continuance. In the course of the same Epistle, he has a similar remark: “Although some have been desirous of seducing me after the flesh, yet that Spirit which is of God is not seduced;” i.e. not to be seduced.

Making mention of one Agathopus, who attended him from Syria toward Rome, at the manifest hazard of life; he terms him “an elect person, who bears me company from Syria, having renounced the present life.” He styles the Church at Tralles, “elect and esteemed of God:” and, in the same Epistle, gives another very strong attestation to the doctrine of final perseverance. For, treating of some heretics, who denied the literality of Christ's sufferings, he thus descants: "Avoid those evil shoots" [that spring up by a Christian Church, like suckers by the side of a tree,] “which bring forth deadly fruit, whereof, if a man taste, he presently dies. These are not of the Father's planting; for, if they were, the branches of the cross would appear, and their fruit would be incorruptible “i.e. imperishable and immortal:’ through which he doth by his passion [i.e. by virtue of his own sufferings and death,] call you who are his members. For the head cannot be born without the members: God, who is the same [i.e. who is always himself unchangeable, and without shadow of turning,] having passed his word for their union." Yet, though this apostolic bishop was thus rooted and grounded in a belief of the essential perpetuity of grace; he still was of opinion (and so, I am confident, is every Calvinist under Heaven,) that, without constant and intense watching unto prayer, the exercise of grace is liable to a partial and temporary failure. "I am yet in danger, [says the blessed martyr: i.e. in danger,] if left to my own strength, of denying Christ with my mouth, in order to avoid the torments of death.” But his self-diffidence (and who can be too diffident of self?) did not, however, make him lose sight of God's faithfulness to him, which, he well knew, could, alone keep him faithful to God: for he immediately adds, in the very next words, “nevertheless, my Father in Jesus Christ is faithful to fulfil your prayer and mine.” And so he found him to be. God did hear his prayer, and make him faithful unto death. Reader, may the same happy coalition of fear and faith; may the most absolute self-distrust, united with an unshaken confidence in the stability of divine grace, be your portion, and mine, till we enter the haven of everlasting joy: where we shall no longer stand in need of faith, to fill our sails, nor of fear, to steady us with its ballast!

In his Epistle to the Romans, Ignatius has an observation, which shews that he was far enough from holding the tenet of free-will, in the Arminian sense of it: "A Christian is not the workmanship of suasion, but of greatness:" i.e. men become real Christians, not by the power of moral argument, but by the mighty operation of divine agency. Whoever denies the ability of free-will, in spirituals, must, with that, deny the meritoriousness of human works. And so did Ignatius. Witness that passage, where, speaking of the savage-treatment he received from the soldiers who were guarding him to Rome, he says, “They behave themselves the worse to me for my beneficence to them. I reap, however, the more instruction from their injurious behaviour. Yet, I am not justified by this.” He knew, that neither the sufferings, which he was enabled to endure for Christ; nor his kindness to his persecutors; nor his improving their barbarities into profitable instruction; constituted any part of that righteousness, for the sake of which he was justified before God. He considered them as valuable fruits of the Spirit, and us proofs of grace received: but not as matter of merit; not as causes or conditions either of his presenter future acceptance with the Majesty of Heaven. Yet this consideration did by no means render him negligent to obey, or reluctant to suffer. Warmed with the faith that works by love, his language was, Kalon emoi apoqanein dia Ihswn Xrizon, h Basileuein thn paragon thv ghv: “It is better for me to die for Jesus Christ, than to be monarch of the whole earth.”

IV. Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna, is, by many (among whom are Usher and Cave,) supposed to have been the person meant by the Angel of the Church in Smyrna, mentioned Re 2:8. That he was one of the apostle John's disciples, cannot be questioned, if ancient testimony be allowed to carry the least weight. He was burnt alive for the Christian faith, A. D. 167, or (as others) 169, in about the hundredth year of his age, and about the 74th of his episcopate.

We have one Epistle of his, written to the believers at Philippi. From this venerable, but concise performance, two or three short extracts may suffice.

He terms the chains, with which many persecuted Christians were bound for their attachment to the gospel, “the ornamental bracelets of them that have been really elected by God and our Lord.” For those, who have been “really elected,” he believed that the blood of Christ was shed: for he presently adds, “who submitted to go unto death itself, for our sins.” And, farther on: “It was for us that he underwent all things; that we might live through him.” Nor was he less sound in the article of gratuitous justification by the sovereign will of God: “Into which joy,” says he, "many are exceedingly desirous to enter: knowing, that ye are saved by grace; not of works, but by the will of God through Jesus Christ.”

Polycarp considered his own martyrdom for the faith as an event which God had foreordained: for, in the prayer which he offered up after he was bound to the stake with his hands behind him, was this expression: “Among whom, [i. e. among that company of foregoing martyrs, who had already set their lives as a seal to truth,] may I be received unto thee, this day, for a goodly and acceptable sacrifice: even as thou, the faithful God, who canst not lie, hast fore-appointed, and didst reveal to me beforehand, and hast accordingly brought to pass.” The same Christians of Smyrna, who recorded their Bishop's dying prayer, appear to have agreed in judgment with him, as to perseverance, and the extent of our Lord's redemption: for, in their circular letter to the Churches, occasioned by the martyrdom of their holy pastor, they observe, the Jews and Heathens "do not know that we shall never be able to forsake Christ, who suffered for the salvation of the whole world of them that are saved.” They conclude their Epistle with this affectionate wish: “We pray for your health and happiness, brethren: and that ye may, according to the gospel, walk in the doctrine of Jesus Christ: together with whom, be glory ascribed to God, even our Father, and to the Holy Spirit, for saving the holy elect people.” A person, named Pionius, who, afterwards took a copy of the above congregational epistle; adds this pious prayer for himself: “That the Lord Jesus Christ would gather me also with his elect.''

By this time, it sufficiently appears that Mr. Sellon must be extremely deficient either in knowledge, or in honesty, (I am prone to think, in both;) else, even he would never have ventured to assert that predestination, and its concomitant doctrines, "do not appear to have been held by anybody, during the first four centuries from the Christian aera.” Calvinism is, by no means, that novel thing which it is for the interest of Arminianism to wish. What Mr. Sellon sneeringly calls “The good old cause,” is indeed an old cause, and a good one. The doctrines of grace must needs be good old doctrines, was it only because they are so plentifully diffused through a good old book, called the Bible. We have, also, just seen, that they are likewise asserted by those good old divines who lived nearest to the apostles, and who were actually conversant with them. I have, moreover, shewn, again and again, and hope to give still farther proof of it in the course of the present defence, that the said good old doctrines are the doctrines of the good old Church of England, and were the avowed principles of her good old reformers. Whereas the tenets of Messieurs Wesley and Sellon are as bad as they are new. I mean new, comparatively speaking: else they are, (as I intend to demonstrate, before I have done with them) as old as Pelagius. But no scheme of errors, however grey, is of equal antiquity with the truths from which it deviates.

Calvinism VIII - The Judgment of some eminent Christians,...

SECTION VIII.

The Judgment of some eminent Christians, who flourished before the Reformation, concerning the Doctrines in Debate.

EVEN in the worst and darkest of times, God has never left himself entirely without witness, nor permitted the truths of his gospel to be totally exterminated. They have, sometimes, laid, to all outward appearance, in very few hands: but they have constantly subsisted somewhere. The prophet Elijah once imagined that himself was the only person who was kept faithful to God, amidst that torrent of idolatry which then overwhelmed the land of Israel. But what said the answer of God unto him? I have reserved to myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal. Even so then, at this pre sent time also, there is, and at every time there has been and shall be, a remnant, according to the election of grace. However discouraging appearances may be, in seasons either of persecution, idolatry, or general profaneness, there are many known instances of divine preservation; and many others, unknown by us, but noticed by him who knoweth them that are his.

"Ask now of the days that are past, which were before thee,” and they will testify of his unfailing faithfulness, not only in enduing his people with faith and love to the truth; but also in raising up some of them, to be witnesses for Christ. Even within the circle of my contracted reading, I have met with accounts of many. A select number of the most distinguished shall, without farther ceremony, be introduced to Mr. Sellon: and I heartily wish he may profit by their acquaintance.

I. Among those who may, with the strictest justice, be styled the morning stars of the Reformation, were the ancient and famous Churches of the Albigenses and Waldenses: so denominated from Alby, a city of Langue-doc in France, where they abounded in great numbers: and afterwards about the year 1170, from Peter Valdo, an opulent citizen of Lyons, by whom these excellent people were much countenanced and assisted. Though some suppose them to have acquired the name of Waldenses, quasi Vallenses, from their being extremely numerous in the valleys of Piedmont. Others, from the German word Walt, which signifies a wood: woods being their frequent refuge from persecution.

Dr. Alix, in his remarks on the Ecclesiastical History of these Churches, is, in general, prodigiously careful not to drop the least hint concerning (what has been since called) the Calvinism of those Christians. But the present learned bishop of Bristol has been more just and candid. His Lordship tells us, from Mezeray, “they had almost the same opinions as those who are now called Calvinists.” It will, I apprehend, be easily made appear, that their opinions were not only almost, but altogether the same. Nor did they soon deviate from the evangelical system of their forefathers: for, so low down as the aera of the Reformation, I find that “they sent to Zuinglius for teachers, and afterwards to Calvin: of whose sentiments,” add the compilers of the work I quote, “the remainder of them, called the Vaudois, continue to be.”

Their first rise was of very considerable antiquity. The Romish Council, assembled, by order of pope Alexander III. at Tours, in May 1163, prohibited all persons, under pain of excommunication, from having any intercourse with these people; who are described as teaching and professing "a damnable heresy, long since sprung up in the territory of Toulouse.” Van Maestricht assures us, that they wrote against the errors and superstitions of the Church of Rome, in the year 1100. According to Pilichdorffius, the Waldenses themselves carried up the date of their commencement as a body, as high as three hundred years after Constantine, i.e. to about the year 637. For my own part, I believe their antiquity to have been higher still. I agree with some of our oldest and best Protestant divines, in considering the Albigenses, or Waldenses (for they were, in fact, one and the same,) to have been a branch of that visible Church, against which the gates of hell could never totally prevail: and that the uninterrupted succession of Apostolical doctrine continued with them, from the primitive times, quite down to the Reformation: soon after which period, they seem to have been melted into the common mass of Protestants. Neither does this conjecture limit the extent of the visible Church in former ages to so narrow a compass, as may at first be imagined. For they were, says Poplinerius, “Diffused, not only throughout all France, in the year 1100, but through almost every country in Europe. "And,” says he; "to this very day, they have their stubborn partizans in France, Spain, England, Scotland, Italy, Germany, Bohemia, Saxony, Poland, Lithuania, and other nations.”

Archbishop Usher, whose enquiries were never superficial, and whose conclusions are never precipitate, lays great stress on a remarkable passage in Reinerius, a Popish inquisitor, who died about the year 1259. The passage is this: “Of all the sects which as yet exist, or ever have existed, none is more detrimental to the Church,” i.e. to the Romish Church, “than the sect of the Waldenses. And this on three accounts: 1. Because it is a much more ancient sect than any other. For, some say, that it has continued ever since the Popedom of Silvester: others, that it has subsisted from the time of the Apostles. 2. It is a more extensive sect than any other: for there is almost no country, in which this sect has not a footing. 3. This sect has a mighty appearance of piety: inasmuch as they live justly before men, and believe all things rightly concerning God, and all the articles contained in the Creed. They only blaspheme the Roman Church and Clergy.”

I have premised enough, concerning the people. Let us now enquire into the particulars of their faith.

There is extant, a short Waldensian Confession, written in the year 1120, and consisting of XIV. Articles. The 1st Article professes their agreement with, what is usually termed, The Apostles Creed. The 2nd acknowledges Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, to be the one God. The 3d recapitulates the canonical books of the Old and New Testament, just as they now stand in the Protestant Bibles; and accepts against the Apocrypha, as uninspired. The 4th asserts, that, “By the disobedience of Adam, sin entered into the world, and we are made sinners in Adam, and by Adam.” The 5th runs thus: “Christ was promised to our forefathers; who received the law, to the end that, knowing their sin by the law, and their unrighteousness and insufficiency, they might desire the coming of Christ, to satisfy for their sins, and, by himself, to accomplish the law.” The 6th affirms, that “Christ was born at the time appointed by God his Father.” The 7th, “Christ is our life and truth, and peace and righteousness, and advocate, and master, and priest: who died for the salvation of all those who believe, and is raised again for our justification.” Six of the remaining articles are levelled at the superstitions of Popery: and the last testifies their due subjection to the civil powers.

Almost 400 years afterwards, the descendants of those ancient and evangelical Churches gave proof, that they were, in no respect whatever, degenerated from the purity and simplicity of the gospel. For, in the beginning of the year 1508, I find them presenting a large account of their faith, in three separate papers addressed to Uladislaus, king of Hungary. “We believe,” say they, “and confess, that Almighty God, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, three in person, but one in the essence of Deity, is the producer of faith and the giver of salvation.” They say, speaking of Christ, “By whose merit the alone Father accomplishes our salvation, according to the purpose of his own election.'' They affirm, that “he intercedes for those who shall possess the inheritance of glory:” and that “he forsaketh not his Church, for which he offered up himself unto death;” but is ever present with her, “in a way of grace, efficacy, and help, which are his free gift.'' They define the holy, universal Church to be “the aggregate of all the elect, from the beginning of the world to the end of it: - whose names and number he alone can tell, who hath inscribed them in the Book of Life.” To these persons, grace is given: “The first and principal ministry of the universal Church is the gospel of Christ, wherein are revealed the grace and truth which he hath painfully purchased for us by the torture of the cross; which grace is given to the elect, who are called by the Holy Ghost and God the Father unto salvation, with the gift of faith.” Under the article, entitled Communio Sanctorum, they come, if possible, more roundly to the point. Nothing can be clearer than their meaning; though the persons who drew up the confession were far from commanding a good style in Latin. “It is manifest,” say they, “that such only as are elected to glory become partakers of true faith, grace, righteousness in the merit of Christ, [and] eternal salvation.”

What they deliver concerning the doctrine of purgatory, though rather uncouthly expressed, deserves to be laid before the reader. "There is no other chief place of determinate purgatory, but the Lord Christ; of whom it was truly said by the angel, he shall save his people from their sins. And so saith St. Paul: having made a purgation of sins, he sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high. Every one, therefore, who shall be saved, must draw from this full fountain of righteousness and goodness. By grace alone, through the gift of faith, whosoever is to be saved cometh to the purgation by Christ Jesus; as saith St. Paul: a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ; and we believe in Christ Jesus, that we may be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law. And Christ himself saith, he that believeth on me hath eternal life.”

I take leave of this confession, with one citation more. “St Paul says, Christ loved his Church, and gave himself for it, that he might sanctify it, &c. It is not said that he might prepare her for hell; but for heaven and for repose, after her present toils. For it is certain, that only the elect of God are blessed; and God leadeth them into that righteousness which we have already treated of. Concerning them, the apostle saith, He hath elected us in him, before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him in love. And again, he saith; whom he did predestinate, them he also called; and whom he called, them he also justified.”

Archbishop Usher presents us with another concise profession of faith, transmitted by these good people to Francis I. of France, in the year 1544: which, though subsequent to the opening of the Reformation, is too excellent to be wholly unnoticed in this place. A single extract, however, shall suffice. "We believe, that there is but one God; who is a spirit, the maker of all things, the parent of all men; who is over all, through all, and in us all, and is to be worshipped in spirit and in truth, whom alone we hope for; the distributor of life, food, and raiment; the distributor also of health and sickness, of conveniences and inconveniences. Him we love, as the author of all goodness: him we dread, as the inspector of hearts.

“We believe Jesus Christ to be the Son and image of the Father, in whom dwelleth all the fullness of the godhead; by whom we come to the knowledge of the Father, and who is our mediator and advocate: neither is there any other name under Heaven, given unto men, whereby to be saved.

“We believe that we possess the Holy Ghost, the comforter, proceeding from the Father and the Son; by whose inspiration, we are enabled to pray; and by whose efficacy we are born again. He it is who worketh all good works in us; and by him are we led into all truth.

“We believe that there is one Holy Church, viz. The congregation of all God's elect, from the beginning to the end of the world, whose head is our Lord Jesus Christ. Which Church is governed by the word, and led by the Spirit of God.

“We believe, that the pious, and those who fear God, will approve themselves unto him, by being studious of good works, which God hath prepared before hand, that they should walk in them: such are love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, honesty, modesty, temperance, and what other works we find applauded in Scripture.” It would, perhaps, be difficult to meet with so much genuine gospel, comprised within so small a compass, in any writings, except the inspired. If the reader be desirous to know the horrid and almost unparalled persecutions, which the Albingenses suffered at the hands of the Romish Church, from age to age (after the more open apostacy of that Church from the original faith of the gospel,) even to the extinction of no fewer than ten hundred thousand lives; he may, among others, consult that excellent work, entitled, The History of Popery, a book which it is pity that any Protestant should be without, and Mr. Samuel Clark's General Martyrology. That most excellent prince, Lewis XII. of France, was actuated by a better spirit. When incited to persecute the Waldenses, he returned this truly great reply: God forbid that I should persecute any for being more religious than myself.

From whole Churches, let us, for the present, pass to particular persons.

Gotteschalcus, sometime a Benedictine monk in the monastery of Orbez, and diocese of Soissons, flourished about A. D. 840. He is thought to have obtained the sirname of Fulgentius, or the shining, on account of his uncommon attainments in literature; though, perhaps, his agreement in doctrine with the famous Fulgentius (bishop of Ruspae, in Africa, who was counted the St. Austin of his age, and died in the year 533) might have given the first occasion to call him by that name.

Archbishop Usher has written the history of this worthy and learned person, and of the controversies concerning predestination and free-will, which his (i.e. Gotteschalcus's) writings and sufferings were the means of reviving in the ninth century. To this elaborate performance of the great prelate, I stand indebted for most of the particulars which I am now going to lay before the reader.

It seems uncertain, whether Gotteschalcus was a native of Germany, or of France. His name appears to indicate the former.

His deep acquaintance with the writings of St. Austin brought him into love with the doctrines of grace; and he determined to avow them, at all events. In such a Church as the Roman, and in a period of such religious darkness as the ninth age, it was no wonder that his ardent espousal of the evangelical system, and the unyielding firmness with which he openly maintained it, should involve him in a series of persecution, which, at length, sunk him to his grave.

Hincmar was made archbishop of Rheims, A. D. 845, and soon distinguished himself as Gotteschalcus's inexorable oppressor. This prelate had a mind unsoftened with any one of the humane feelings: and, for his religion, it was Christianity reversed. Mean, sanginuary, and imperious; by nature; he had, moreover, imbibed some of the grossest dregs of Pelaiganism: which he obtruded on others with an enthusiastic vehemence, bordering on madness; and with a fierceness nothing short of brutal. From a metropolitan, thus disposed and thus principled; armed, too, with that extent of authority which ecclesiastics of his rank then possessed; Gotteschalcus had nothing to look for, but that unrelenting hatred and severity, which superior merit [especially, when it ventures to deviate from the beaten path] seldom fails to experience, at the hands of those, in whom ignorance and bigotry are united with the powers of mischief.

Among the articles which Hincmar charged this holy man with maintaining, were the three following.

1. That, "As God hath predestinated certain persons to life eternal; so hath he, likewise, pre-ordained other certain persons to eternal death.

2. “It is not the will of God, that every one of mankind should be saved: he willeth the salvation of those only who [eventually] are saved. All are saved, whom God wills to save: consequently, whoever perish, it was not the divine pleasure to save them. For, if all those are not saved whom God willeth to be so; it would follow, that God does not act according to his own will: and, if he wills more than he is able to perform, be is no longer omnipotent, but impotent; but the scripture affirms that he is omnipotent; for be doth whatsoever he pleased to do. All things that the Lord would, hath he done in heaven, and in earth, in the sea, and in all deep places, Ps 135:6. Again; O Lord, the King Almighty, the whole world is in thy power; and, if thou hast appointed to save Israel, there is no man that can gainsay thee. Thou art Lord of all things, and there is no man that can resist thee who art the Lord. Esther 13:9,11.

3. “Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ was not crucified and put to death for the redemption of the entire world, i.e. not for the ransom and salvation of the whole of mankind; but only for such as are saved.”

To these were afterwards added, as doctrines of Gotteschalcus:

“They who are predestinated to destruction cannot be saved; and they who are predestinated to the kingdom cannot perish.

“Ever since the first man fell by his free-will, none of us are able to use their free-wills unto good, but only to evil.”

Gotteschalcus's opinions were, undoubtedly, stated by Hincmar in the most rigorous and exceptionable terms. For this reason, let us hear the judicious and learned martyr speak for himself. This he continues to do, in two separate confessions of his faith penned by his own hand, and which are happily, still preserved.”

“I believe,” says he, “and acknowledge, that the Almighty and unchangeable God gratuitously foreknew and predestinated the holy angels, and elect men, unto life eternal.” -- St. Austin asks, “wherefore, said our Lord to the Jews, ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep? Because” (saith Austin) “our Lord perceived that they were predestinated to everlasting destruction, and were not purchased with the price of his blood. What mischief, then, can the wolf do? What hurt can the thief and robber do? They can destroy those only who are predestinated thereunto.” The same St. Austin, speaking of the two worlds, expresses himself thus: 'The Church is a whole world, and there is also a whole world which hateth the Church. The world [of the reprobate] hateth the world [of the elect]: the world of those who are at enmity with God hateth that world which is reconciled to him; the world of the condemned hateth the world of the saved; the world of the impure hateth the world of the holy.' Austin saith again: ' There is a world, of which the Apostle says, That we should not be condemned with the world, 1Co 2:16. For this world, our Lord doth not pray.' So also speaketh St. Isidore; “There is a double predestination: of the elect, unto happiness; and of the reprobate unto death “

The above extract is from Gotteschalcus's smaller confession. His larger one runs in the form of a most pious and solemn address to Almighty God. It were needless to cite any parts of it, after what has been already produced. Whoever pleases, may see it, at full length, in Usher's History, referred to below.

For thus believing, the great and good man was degraded from the order of priesthood, and imprisoned in the monastery of Hault-Villier. He was, moreover, sentenced to undergo the punishment of scourging: which inhuman discipline was continually repeated, with the most merciless severity, 'till, by mere dint of torture, they had compelled him to commit one of his own books to the flames, which he had written, in favour of predestination, against Rabon, archbishop of Mentz. His sufferings might, at anytime, have been exchanged for liberty and ease, had he but dissembled his judgment, and ceased to avow his faith. But he was enabled to continue steadfast, to the very last. No torments could induce him to deny, with his mouth, the grace which he loved in his heart. In him was eminently realized that saying ascribed to Ignatius: Stand firm as a beaten anvil. It is the part of a magnanimous combatant, to be torn to pieces, and yet to overcome.

I have termed Gotteschalcus a martyr. And such, in fact, he was. I grant his execution was more tedious and lingering than that of those who are usually crowned with that venerable name. His sufferings did not terminate with the pain of an hour, but were extended through a long series of years: and nothing, inferior to the Almighty power of God, could have kept him faithful unto death. Exhausted, at length, by an uninterrupted succession of hardships, he breathed out his soul into the hands of Christ, A. D. 870, in about the one and twentieth year of his imprisonment. Hincmar, to whose restless persecutions this man of God stood indebted for most of his calamities, did not always ride triumphant on the wheel of prosperity. About twelve years after the death of Gotteschalcus, the Nordmans, swarming from the North of Europe, made irruptions into France; on which, the prelate of Rheims thought proper to consult his personal safety, by deserting his flock. Abdicating, therefore, the see, which he had so unworthily filled, he retreated (Barbaras a Barbaris) to a more solitary and secure part of the kingdom: in which melancholy retirement, surrounded with woods and morasses, he died (probably of a broken heart) A.D. 882.

III. Remigius, archbishop of Lyons, and Gotteschalcus's cotemporary, deserves to be mentioned here, as an eminent assertor of the doctrines of grace.

Hincmar of Rheims had written a letter of complaint against Gotteschalcus, addressed to the Church of Lyons. This was replied to by Remigius; part of whose answer ran thus. "The blessed fathers of the Church do, with one consent, with one voice, and as it were with one spirit, display and celebrate that immoveable truth of God's prescience and predestination, respecting both its parts, viz. concerning the elect, and reprobate: to wit, [the predestination] of the elect, unto glory; and of the reprobate, not unto sin, but unto punishment. And in these particulars, they [i.e. the fathers] openly affirm that the unchangeable series of God's disposals is demonstrated to us; which divine disposals are not temporal, neither did they commence in any period of time, but are strictly eternal. Nor is it possible for any one elect person to perish: or that any of the reprobate should be saved, because of their hardness and impenitency of heart. This both the verity of the sacred writings, and the authority of the holy and orthodox fathers, harmoniously declare, and inculcate on us as a point to be believed and held by us without the least doubt or scruple. Pursuant to the foregoing account of the universal faith, Almighty God did, from the beginning, prior to the formation of the world, and before he had made any thing, predestinate (for certain just, and immutable reasons of his eternal counsel) some certain persons to glory, of his own gratuitous favour: of which certain persons, not one shall perish, through his mercy protecting them. Other certain persons he hath predestinated to perdition, by his just judgment, for the evil desert of their ungodliness, which he foreknew: and, of these, none can be saved. Not because of any compulsive violence offered them by the divine power, but because of the stubborn and persevering naughtiness of their own iniquity.'' Remigius expresses himself with a prudential guardedness, which reflects no little honour on his judgment. He acknowledged, as the present Calvinists also do, 1. That there most certainly are a two-fold prescience and predestination, terminating on two sorts of persons, the elect and reprobate. 2. That God's disposals, or decrees, are strictly eternal: and, 3. That they are unchangeable. 4. That, consequently, not one elect person can perish; nor, 5. any reprobate be saved. 6. That the election of the former was absolutely gratuitous and unmerited: 7. That the punishment of the latter (observe: not their reprobation itself, but their perdition, or actual damnation) is owing to their foreseen ungodliness. Which foreseen ungodliness results, 8. not from any compulsive force offered to them, or put upon them by God himself, but from that “stubborn and persevering naughtiness of their own iniquity,” which God is, indeed, able to remove, but under the power and guilt of which it is his inscrutable will to leave them.

Among the illustrious partizans of grace, I must not omit to number,

IV. Floras, sirnamed Magister, a deacon of the Church of Lyons; who, about A.D. 852, published A Defence of Predestination, in opposition to a Semipelagian treatise on that subject, written by the famous scholastic, Duns Scotus. The drift of Florus's book (drawn up, it seems, in the name of the whole Church of Lyons) was, says Vossius, to prove, "That there is a double predestination: viz. of some, who are elected into life; and of others, who are destined to death. That men have, by nature, no free-will, except to what is evil. That the elect are compelled to good. But that the reprobate are not compelled to sin: they are only compelled to undergo the punishment which, by sin, they have merited.” I am inclinable to doubt, whether Vossius (whose “Pelagian History" might, with more truth, be styled, An Apology for Pelagianism) has, in the above passage, stated the Theses of Florus with sufficient candour. I can hardly suppose a man of the judgment and learning, which Florus seems to have possessed, would ever assert, that “The elect are compelled to what is good.'' We may, perhaps, learn his sentiments on this subject, with greater certainty and precision, from his own words, largely cited by archbishop Usher,

“Our Lord himself,” says Florus, "plainly shews, that the very first commencement of what good we have is not of ourselves, but of him: Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you. Joh 15:16. Thus, likewise, the apostle speaks to believers; He who hath begun a good work in you, will perfect it even unto the day of Christ. Php 1:6. And again; Unto you it is given, in Christ's behalf, not only to believe, but also to suffer for his sake. Php 1:29. The blessed apostle, St. John, affirms, Not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and gave his Son to be the propitiation for our sins. 1Jo 4:10. And again, a blessed apostle says, Let us run with patience, the race that is set before us, looking unto Jesus the author and the finisher of our faith. Heb 12:2. If, therefore, we desire to be true members of the universal Church, let us faithfully put all to the account of grace. The Lord chuseth his saints; not they him. God himself both begins and accomplishes what is good, in his believers. He first loves his saints, in order that they may also love him. Man has not, of himself, a will to that which is good: neither has he, of himself, the power to perform a good work. Both one and the other are received from him, of whom the apostle saith, It is God that worketh in us, both to will and to do, of his own good pleasure. Through his mercy, he himself is beforehand with the will of man: as saith the Psalmist: My God will prevent me with his goodness. He himself inspires man with the grace of thinking rightly; according to that of the apostle: Not that we are, of ourselves, sufficient to think any thing, as of ourselves; but our sufficiency is of God. He is himself the cause of our having a good will. He is himself the cause of our desiring and accomplishing what is holy. And he not only worketh these things, at present, in his elect; but he hath also, before the formation of the world, predestinated them, by his grace, that they should be holy and blameless before him. Eph 1:4. Whoever, then, does not believe that this grand and most efficacious cause" [viz. God's predestination and grace] “precedes our will, in order that we may will and do that which is right, doth manifestly oppose the truth, and stands convicted of Pelagianism.” It is true, that, in these passages, Florus nervously asserts the efficacy of divine influence: but says nothing about forcible compulsion. And, indeed, there was no reason why he should. The operation of grace renders itself effectual, without offering the least violence to the human mind.

Open a blind man's eyes to see the sun, and he will need no compulsion to make him admire it. Suppose there was a person, to whose ceaseless bounty you owed every comfort you enjoy, but of whom, notwithstanding, you never had so much as the sight. Should that person, in process of time, favour you with a visit; would you stand in need of compulsion, to make you speak to him? must you be dragged by the hair of your head, into his presence? No. You would, at once, fly to him, and bid him welcome. You would, freely, yet irresistibly (such is the sweetly captivating power of gratitude,) thank him, and give him your best accommodations, and wish your best were better for his sake. Similar is the free, though necessary, tendency of an enlightened soul to God and Christ. Calvinism disclaims all compulsion, properly so called. It pleads only for that victorious, conciliating efficacy, which is inseparable from the grace of divine attraction: and acknowledges no other energy but that to which the apostle sets his comprobatum est, where he says, The Love of Christ constraineth us.

Calvinism IX - The Judgment of some eminent Persons,...

SECTION IX.

The Judgment of some eminent Persons, prior to the Reformation, continued.

IF we carry down our enquiries to the century preceding the Reformation, we shall find that period illuminated by several very distinguished advocates for the doctrines of free and sovereign grace, as now held by those who are since called Calvinists.

V. John Huss, the well-known Bohemian martyr, was converted to the truth of the gospel, next under God, by reading the works of our renowned countryman John Wickliff. He took his batchelor of arts' degree in the University of Prague, A. D. 1393, and was eminent for learning (as learning then went), but more so for the exemplary sanctity of his life. I need not relate the perfidy of the Council of Constance, who condemned him to the flames, in open violation of the safe-conduct which had been solemnly granted him by the Emperor Sigismund. Suffice it to observe, that this infamous synod acted up to their own maxim, of “No faith to be kept with heretics:’ and that he was burned, A. D. 1415. His dying prediction at the stake is, however, too remarkable to be omitted. “He behaved himself, at his martyrdom, with a wonderful cheerfulness; and seems to have had a spirit of prophecy: for whereas Huss, in the Bohemian tongue, signifies a goose, he told them, You now roast a goose; but, after an hundred years, a swan shall rise out of my ashes. Which was fulfilled in Luther, who just an hundred years after Huss's death, began to appear in opposition to the Pope.”

Among the articles of pretended heresy, which this excellent man was arraigned and put to death for maintaining, were the following:

“There is but one holy, universal, or Catholic Church, which is the universal company of all the predestinate. I do confess,” said Huss, “that this proposition is mine; and [it] is confirmed by St. Augustine upon St. John.

“St. Paul was never any member of the devil, albeit that he committed and did certain acts like unto the acts of the malignant Church" [i.e. St. Paul, prior to his conversion, acted like a reprobate, though he was, secretly, and in reality, one of God's elect]. "And likewise St. Peter, who fell into an horrible sin of perjury and denial of his master; it was by the permission of God, that he might the more firmly and stedfastly rise again and be confirmed.” To this charge, Huss replied, “I answer according to St. Austin, that it is expedient that the elect and predestinate should sin and offend.”

“No part or member of the Church doth depart, or fall away, at any time, from the body: forsomuch as the charity of predestination, which is the bond and chain of the same, doth never fall.” Huss answers; This proposition is thus placed in my book: “As the reprobate of the Church proceed out of the same, and yet are not as parts or members of the same; forsomuch as no part or member of the same doth finally fall away: because that the charity of predestination, which is the bond and chain of the same, doth never fall away. This is proved by 1Co 13. and Ro 8. All things turn to good, to them that love God: also, I am certain that neither death nor life can separate us from the charity and love of God, as it is more at large in the book.”

Another article, objected against him, was, his being of opinion that “the predestinate, although he be not in the state of grace according to present justice, yet is he always a member of the universal Church.'' He answers: "Thus it is in the book, about the beginning of the fifth chapter, where it is declared, that there be divers manners or sorts of being in the Church: for there are some in the Church, according to the mis-shapen faith; and other some according to predestination: as Christians predestinate, now in sin, shall return again unto grace.” The good man added: "Predestination doth make a man a member of the universal Church; the which [i. e. predestination] is a preparation of grace for the present, and of glory to come: and not any degree of” [outward] “dignity, neither election of man'' [or, one man's designation of another to some office or station,] "neither any sensible sign" [i.e. predestination does not barely extend to the outward signs, or means of grace: but includes something more and higher:] “For the traitor Judas Iscariot, notwithstanding Christ's election" [or appointment of him to the apostleship,] and the temporal graces which were given him for his office of apostleship, and that he was reputed and counted of men a true apostle of Jesus Christ; yet was he no true disciple, but a wolf covered in a sheep's skin, as St. Augustin saith.''

“A reprobate man is never a member of the holy Church. I answer, it is in my book, with sufficient long probation out of Ps 26, and out of Eph 5: and also by St. Bernard's saying, The Church of Jesus Christ is more plainly and evidently his body, than the body which he delivered for us to death. I have also written, in the fifth chapter of my book, that the holy Church" [i.e. the outward, visible Church of professing Christians, here on earth] “is the barn of the Lord, in the which are both good and evil, predestinate and reprobate: the good being as the good corn, or grain; and the evil, as the chaff. And thereunto is added the exposition of St. Austin.”

“Judas was never a true disciple of Jesus Christ. I answer, and I do confess the same. They came out from amongst us, but they were none of us. He knew from the beginning, who they were that believed not, and who should betray him. And therefore I say unto you, that none cometh unto me, except it be given him of my Father.”

Such were some of the allegations, brought against this holy man by the Council of Constance; and such were his answers, when he stood on his public trial, as a lily among thorns, or as a sheep in the midst of wolves. How easy it is for me to write in defence of these inestimable truths, which (through the goodness of Divine Providence) have now, in our happy land, the sanction of national establishment! But with what invincible strength of grace was this adamantine saint endued, who bore his explicit, unshaken testimony to the faith, in the presence and hearing of its worst foes, armed with all the terrific powers of this world!

Prior to his execution, Mr. Huss made his solemn appeal to God, from the judgment of the Pope and Council. In this appeal (the whole of which would well repay the reader's perusal,) he again repeats his assured faith in the doctrine of election; where he celebrates the willingness with which Christ vouchsafed, “By the most bitter and ignominious death, to redeem the children of God, chosen before the foundation of the world, from everlasting damnation.”

Much farther proof might be given of Huss's Calvinism. Enough, however, has been produced. Yet will I request my reader's patient attention to the passage that follows. He was accused of having affirmed, that “Christ doth more love a predestinate man, being sinful, than any reprobate, in what grace possible soever he be.” To which, his reply was: “My words are in the fourth chapter of my book, entitled, Of the Church. And it is evident, that God doth love the predestinate being sinful" [i.e. the elect, even prior to their conversion;] than any reprobate, in what [seeming] grace soever he be for the time; forasmuch as he [i. e. God] willeth that the predestinate shall have perpetual blessedness, and the reprobate to have eternal fire. The predestinate cannot fall from grace: for they have a certain, radical grace rooted in them, although they [may] be deprived of the abundant grace for a time.”

As to what he says above, concerning the love which God bears to the predestinate, even while sinful; though it be, perhaps, rather incautiously phrased, it still is, in effect, affirming no more than the Apostle has affirmed before him: God, who is rich in mercy, for the great love wherewith he loved us, even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ. By grace ye are saved. Eph 2:4-5.

It is very observable, that the Popish Council of Constance charged Huss with being a Fatalist: and opposed the doctrine of predestination, which he held and taught, by the same identical cavils which have been, since, so greedily licked up, and so plentifully disgorged, by Messrs. Wesley, Sellon, and others of that fraternity. These gentlemen blush not to whet their bills on the door posts of Popery itself, rather than not be enabled to peck at those Protestant doctrines, to which they (I will not say, for divers good, but) for divers weighty causes, have, themselves, most solemnly, though most hypocritically, subscribed.

Next after the testimony of John Huss, naturally follows that of his intimate friend and faithful fellow-martyr, Jerom of Prague. As they were united in their lives by the most sacred ties of religious and learned regard, so in their deaths they were almost undivided: for they were both executed within a twelve month of each other.

VI. Jerom, surnamed of Prague, from the place of his nativity, was a lay gentleman, of competent fortune, and of very extraordinary learning. Having taken his master of arts' degree, in the university of his native city, he visited most of the countries in Europe. In the course of this tour, the universities of Paris, Cologne, and Heidelburg, successively complimented him with the same degree which he had taken at Prague. The writers of the Biographical Dictionary seem to think it probable, that the university of Oxford likewise favoured him with the same mark of respect. It is, however, certain, that, during his progress, he was over in England; where he copied out the books of Wickcliff, and returned with them to Prague.

In proving the Calvinism of Dr. John Huss, I have proved the Calvinism of his brother in the faith, the learned and pious Jerom. “I knew him,” said Jerom, speaking of Huss, "to be a just and true preacher of the holy gospel: and whatsoever things Mr. Huss and Wickliff have held or written, I will affirm, even unto death, that they were holy and blessed men.” In pursuance of this declaration, delivered before a full meeting of the Council of Constance, he was condemned to death: and, in the very sentence of condemnation, the Council alleged this reason, among others, why they proceeded against him to the ultimate severity, viz, because he had "affirmed, that he never, at any time, had read any errors or heresy in the books and treatises of the said Wickliff and Huss, and because the said Jerom is an adherent and maintainer of the said Wickliff and Huss and their errors, and both is and hath been a favourer of them.” As he suffered for the same blessed cause, so he suffered on the same spot of ground where his friend Huss had been executed: and his persecutors gave the strongest proofs they were able of their meanness and malice, by fixing him to a stake which had been shaped into an image, resembling his brother-martyr, who had so lately and so gloriously set his life as a seal to the truth in that place. Yet, though no circumstance was omitted which might tend to shake his fortitude and to disconcert him in his last moments, “he suffered with all the magnanimity of Huss. He embraced the stake, to which he was fastened with the peculiar malice of wet cords. When the executioner went behind him, to set fire to the pile, Come here, said Jerom, and kindle it before my eyes; for if I dreaded such a sight, I should never have come to this place, when I had a free opportunity of escaping. The fire was kindled, and he then sung an hymn, which was soon finished by the incircling flames.

VII. John de Wesalia was another eminent witness for the doctrines of grace, and suffered much for his adherence to them. “He was,” says Monsieur Bayle, “a doctor of divinity; and was very ill treated by the inquisition in Germany, for having taught some doctrines which disgusted the Catholics.” Another writer informs us, more particularly, what those doctrines were, which gave the Church of Rome so much disgust. Diether Isenburgh, archbishop of Mentz, convened an assembly of Popish doctors, A. D. 1479, to sit in judgment on this pretended heretic, who was then, on account of his religious principles, a prisoner in a convent of that city. A long catalogue of articles was laid to his charge: of which, the following were some:

“God hath, from everlasting, written a book, wherein he hath inscribed all his elect: and whosoever is not already written there will never be written there at all.

“Moreover, he that is written therein will never be blotted out of it.

“The elect are saved by the alone grace of God: and what man soever God willeth to save, by enduing him with grace, if all the priests in the world were desirous to damn and excommunicate that man, he would still be saved. Whomsoever, likewise, God willeth to condemn, if the whole clan of pope, priests, and others, were desirous of saving that man, he still condemned would be.

“If there had never been any Pope in the world, they, who are saved, would have been saved notwithstanding.

“They who undertake pilgrimages to Rome, are fools.

“I will not look on any thing as sinful which the scripture does not call so.

“I despise the Pope, his Church and his Councils. But I love Christ. Let the word of Christ dwell in us abundantly.

“It is a difficult thing to be a [true] Christian.''

The Church of Rome took fire at these propositions. The affair was carried before the tribunal of the inquisition. In the course of his examination, another heinous heresy was laid to his charge: viz. that he had given it as his opinion, that St. Paul contributed nothing toward his own conversion by the help of his own free-will. A man need but look into Ac 9, to be fully convinced that Dr. Wesalia was in the right. How exactly, by the bye, does Mr. Sellon jump with these Romish inquisitors, who has declared, totidem verbis, that, in converting St. Paul, “The Lord did wait for St. Paul's compliance and improvements!" i.e. at the very time when God struck Saul to the earth, he waited for Saul's consent to fall! Had the Almighty waited for the compliance of him who was breathing out threats and slaughters against the gospel, he might have waited long enough, and waited for nothing at last.

Wesalia, it seems, was extremely old and infirm when he underwent the above inquisitorial examination. Being, says Mr. Bayle, “Broken by age and diseases, he was not able to express his thoughts before such a dreadful tribunal:” hence proceeded the retraction, into which he was trepanned. It is plain, that his retraction was not considered as sincere, from his being condemned to perpetual confinement and penance “in a monastery of the Augustins; where he died soon after.”

Calvinism X - The Judgment of several eminent Persons,...

SECTION X.

The Judgment of several eminent Persons, who flourished in England, antecedently to the Reformation.

FROM among the ancient worthies, natives of our own land, and remarkable for having been led into an acquaintance with the distinguishing doctrines of the gospel; Bede, Grosthead, Wickliffe, Bradwardin, and Lord Cobham, may be selected, as none of the least conspicuous. If our island be disgraced with having given birth to Pelagius, she is also honoured with having been the mother of such sons as have cut up Pelagianism both root and branch.

I. Beda, or Bede, whom all succeeding ages have concurred to surname The Venerable, was born A.D. 672, or 673, in the county of Durham, somewhere near the mouth of the Tine. Dr. Fuller styles him "the profoundest scholar in that age, for Latin, Greek, Philosophy, History, Divinity, and Mathematics:” and adds, that “homilies of his making were read, during his life-time, in the Christian Churches: a dignity afforded to him alone:" He died A. D. 734. An incident, which occurred in his last moments, is of so singular a nature, that I cannot help giving it to the reader. “One of the last things he did, was the translating of St. John's gospel into English. When death seized on him, one of his devout scholars, whom he used for his secretary or amanuensis, complained, My beloved master, there remains yet one sentence unwritten. - ”Write it then quickly,” replied Bede: and summoning all his spirits together (like the last blaze of a candle going out) he indited it, and expired.” Thus, adds the historian, “God's children are immortal, while their Father hath any thing for them to do on earth: and death, that beast, cannot overcome and kill them, till they have first finished their testimony, Re 2:7, which done, like silk-worms, they willingly die, when their web is ended, and are comfortably entombed in their own endeavours.”

I should offer an insult even to the most unknowing reader, were I to observe, that the very name of Arrninius was unheard of for many centuries after this early period. But if Arminius himself was unborn, the doctrines of which that Dutch schismatic was the reviver and the varnisher, had, about the beginning of the fifth century, been broached by Pelagius, who was the Arminius of that age. With what horror and detestation our learned and pious Anglo-Saxon reviewed that heretic and his heresies, appears from what he says of both, in the course of his ecclesiastical History of the English Nation. He goes even so far, as to style the free-will system, “The Pelagian plague.”

Archbishop Usher, in his History of the Predestination Controversy, already referred to so often, cites some of Pelagius's propositions, together with Beda's refutations of them, in the very words of each writer. The following extract will enable the reader to form an exact judgment of Beda's Calvinism.

“Whereas Pelagius says, that we are not impelled to evil by the corruption of our nature, seeing we do neither good nor evil without the compliance of our own will; he herein contradicts the apostle, who affirms, “I know, that in me, that is, in my flesh, dwelleth no good thing.” Ro 7. - Moreover, when Pelagius asserts that we are at liberty to do one thing always" [i.e. to do always what is good, if it be not our own faults,] “seeing we are always able to do both one and the other,” [i.e. in Pelagius's opinion, free-will has a power of indifference to good or evil; to either of which it sovereignly inclines, according to its own in dependent determination: to this Beda replies] “He herein contradicts the prophet, who humbly addressing himself to God, saith, I know, O Lord, that a man's way is not his own; it is not in man that walketh to direct his own steps: Jer 10:23. Nay, Pelagius maketh himself greater than the apostle, who said, With my mind I myself serve the law of God, but with my flesh the law of sin.” Ro 7:25.

On one hand, Pelagius had affirmed, "That, in the expulsion of Adam from Paradise, and in the assumption of Enoch into heaven, God himself had given a demonstration of man's free-will: since Adam would not have merited punishment at the hand of a just God, nor would Enoch have deserved to be elected, unless each of them had it in his power to act the reverse of what they did. In the very same manner, adds Pelagius, we must judge concerning the two brothers, Cain and Abel; and concerning the twins, Esau and Jacob “To this Beda opposes the following simple, strong, scriptural answer: “Pelagius here runs counter to the apostle, whose decision is, the children being not yet born, neither having done good nor evil, that the purpose of God, according to election, might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth, it was said, The elder shall serve the younger: as it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.” Ro 9:11-13.

Pelagius had asserted, that “The just God could never command us to do any thing impossible; nor can the merciful God condemn a man for doing what he could not avoid.” Beda replies, “The former proposition is true, if spoken with reference to that succour which we derive from him, to whom the universal Church thus prays, Lead thou me forth in the path of thy commandments. Ps 119:35. But, if a man trust to his own powers, he is refuted by that most true saying of Christ, Without me can ye can do nothing. Joh 15:5. And whereas Pelagius declares, that he who is gracious will not condemn a man for doing what he could not avoid; he, in this, flatly opposes the assertion of the same gracious Redeemer and just Judge; who avers, that, except a man, even infants themselves included, be born again, of water and the Spirit, he cannot see the kingdom of God.” Joh 3:5.

II. Robert Grosthead, born at Stradbrook, in Suffolk, was made bishop of Lincoln, A. D. 1235. Mr. Camden terms him, “a much better scholar and linguist than could be expected from the age he lived in: an awful reprover of the Pope, a monitor to the king, a lover of truth, a corrector of prelates, an instructor of the clergy, a maintainer of scholars, a preacher to the people, a diligent searcher of the Scripture, and a mallet to the Romanists.”

This great luminary was translated to Heaven, October 1, 1253. Few ecclesiastics make so bright a figure in the annals of their country. “He was,” says Rapin, “a prelate of resolution and courage, neither to be gained by court-favours, nor to be frightened by the Pope's menaces. Wholly intent on following what appeared to him reasonable and just, he little regarded the circumstances of the times, or the quality of persons; but equally opposed the king's will, and the pope's pleasure, according as it happened. He could not see, without indignation and concern, the best preferments in the kingdom bestowed on Italians, who neither resided on their benefices, nor understood English. Refusing to institute an Italian to one of the best livings of his diocese, he was presently after suspended: but, regardless of the censure, he continued his episcopal functions. He even refused, at that very time, to admit of new provisions from the Pope in favour of other Italians, declaring, that to entrust the cure of souls to such pastors was to act in the name of the devil, rather than by the authority of God. Soon after, Grosthead touched the Pope in a very sensible part, by computing the yearly (i) sums drawn by the beneficed Italians out of England. Innocent IV., who then sat in the papal chair, sent him a menacing letter, which would have frightened any but him. Grosthead returned a very bold answer, which put Innocent into a terrible rage. What! said the Pope, has this old dotard the confidence to censure my conduct? By St. Peter and St. Paul, I will make such an example that the world shall stand amazed at his punishment. For is not his sovereign, the king of England, our vassal? Nay, is he not our slave? It is but, therefore, signifying our pleasure to the English Court, and this antiquated prelate will be immediately imprisoned, and put to what further disgrace we shall think fit. The annals of Lannercost inform us, that the bishop was excommunicated, a little before his death: but he, without regarding the censure, appealed to the court of heaven. Several historians add, that Innocent moved, in the conclave, to have the body of Grosthead taken up and buried in the highway: but to this the cardinals would not consent. Be this as it will, if he was excommunicated, he paid no attention to it, but continued to discharge his functions. Neither were the clergy of his diocese more scrupulous than their bishop: for they obeyed him until the day of his death.”

(i) These sums, remitted to beneficed foreigners, amounted, in the year 1252, to seventy thousand marks: while the king’s revenue hardly rose to twenty thousand. See Fuller’s Church Hist. book iii. p. 65.

It was not without much imaginary reason, that the Pope was so violently exasperated against Grosthead: who might well stand, in his Holiness's books, for a rebel and a heretic. (l) Of his rebellions, some account has been now given. Of his heresy take the following passage for a sample:

(l) Grosthead also passed, among some of the vulgar, for a magician: only because he was well skilled in Greek and Hebrew, and had a bias to the study of Astronomy. Hence those old verses, written in the reign of king Richard II.

For of the greet clerk Grostest

I red, how ready that he was

Upon Clergy and hede of brasse

To make, and forge it, for to tell

Of such things as befell.

And seven yeers bysiness

He laid: but, for the lacknsse

Of half a minute of an houre,

Fro first that he began labour,

He lost all that he had doe.

Vide Hist. et Antiq. Univers. Oxon, i. p. 82

“Grace is that good pleasure of God, whereby he willeth to give us what we have not deserved, in order to our benefit, not to his. It is manifest, therefore, that all the good which is within us, whether it be natural, or freely conferred afterwards, proceeds from the grace of God: for there is no good thing of which his will is not the author; and what he wills is done. He himself averts our will from evil, and converts our will to good, and makes our will to persevere in that good. - A will to good, whereby man becomes conformed to the will of God, is a grace freely given: for the divine will is grace. And grace is then said to be infused, when the divine will begins to operate on our will.”

The humility of this great and good man is evident from what he says in one of his Epistles, written while he was arch-deacon of Leicester. “Nothing that occurs in your letters ought to give me more pain than your styling me, a person invested with authority, and endued with brightness of knowledge. So far am I from being of your opinion, that I feel myself unfit even to be a disciple to a man of authority: and perceive myself enveloped with the darkness of ignorance, as to innumerable matters which are objects of knowledge. But, did I in reality possess any of those high qualities which you ascribe to me, he alone would be worthy of the praise, and it would all be referrible to him unto whom we daily say, Not unto us, O Lord, not unto us, but to thy name give the glory.'' The same spirit of modesty and self-abasement accompanied him to the Episcopal chair. Hence he usually styled himself, in his subsequent Letters, Robertus, permissione Divina, Lincolniensis Ecclesiae; Minister humilis; “Robert, by Divine permission, the poor Minister of the Church of Lincoln.” (o)

(o) Similar was the humility of the ever memorable bishop Hall; whose last will began thus: “In the name of God, Amen. I, Joseph Hall, D.D. not worthy to be called bishop of Norwich, &c.” Fuller’s Worthies, part ii. p. 130. Still more demiss were the modesty and self-abasement of that thrice eminent prodigy of holiness, Mr. Bradford, the martyr: who subscribed himself, The sinful John Bradford: a very painted hypocrite, John Bradford: the most miserable, hard-hearted, and unthankful sinner, John Brdford. See Fox’s Mart. Vol. iii.

I acknowledge, that, on the subjects of grace and free-will, Grosthead does not always preserve an invariable consistency. The wonder, however, ought to be, not that he saw no better, but that he saw so well as he did. Like Apollos, he was, as to the main, eloquent, mighty in the scriptures, fervent in spirit, speaking and teaching boldly the things of the Lord: though, like the same excellent Alexandrian, he some times needed an Aquila and Priscilla to expound to him the way of God more perfectly. (p)

(p) Ac 18:24-26.

III. John de Wickliff, surnamed The evangelical Doctor, enlightened and adorned the succeeding century. He was born in the parish of Wickliff, near Richmond, in Yorkshire, about A. D. 1324. The historical particulars, relative to the life of this extraordinary man, are so interesting and numerous, that I forbear to enter on them lest they lead me too far.

Mr. Guthrie, in his History of England, observes, that Wickliff “seems to have been a strong predestinarian.” It will presently appear, that he more than seemed to have been such; and that Luther and Calvin themselves were not stronger predestinarians than Wickliff. I shall open the evidence, with two propositions, extracted from his own writings:

1. “The prayer of the reprobate prevaileth for no man.

2. “All things that happen, do come absolutely of necessity.” (r)

(r) Fox’s Acts and Mon. vol. i. p. 513

The manner, in which this great harbinger of the reformation defended the latter proposition, plainly shews him to have been (notwithstanding Guthrie's insinuation to the contrary) a deep and skilful disputant. "Our Lord,” says he, "affirmed that such or such an event should come to pass. Its accomplishment, therefore, was unavoidable. The antecedent is infallible: by parity of argument, the consequent is so too. For the consequent is not in the power of a created being, forasmuch as Christ affirmed so many things" [before they were brought to pass.] “Neither did Christ [pre-] affirm any thing accidentally. Seeing, then, that his affirmation was not accidental, but necessary; it follows, that the event affirmed by him must be necessary likewise. This argument,” adds Wickliff “receives additional strength, by observing, that, in what way soever God may declare his will by his after-discoveries of it in time; still, his determination, concerning the event, took place before the world was made: ergo, the event will surely follow. The necessity, therefore, of the antecedent, holds no less irrefragably for the necessity of the consequent. And who can either promote or hinder the inference, viz. That this was decreed of God before the foundation of the world?" I will not undertake to justify the whole of this paragraph. I can only meet the excellent man half-way. I agree with him, as to the necessity of events: but I cannot, as he evidently did, suppose God himself to be a necessary agent, in the utmost sense of the term. That God acts in the most exact conformity to his own decrees, is a truth which scripture asserts again and again: but that God was absolutely free in decreeing, is no less asserted by the inspired writers; who, with one voice, declare the Father's predestination, and subsequent disposal, of all things, to be entirely founded, not on any antecedent necessity, but on the single sovereign pleasure of his own will.

The quotation, however, proves, that Wickliff was an absolute Necessitarian. And he improves, with great solidity and acuteness, the topic of prophecy into (what it most certainly is) a very strong argument for predestination. As the prophecies of the Old and New Testaments are such an evidence of the divine inspiration of the sacred writers, and such a proof of Christianity, as all the infidels in the world will never be able to overthrow; so, on the other hand, those same prophecies conclude, to the full, as strongly in favour of peremptory predestination. For, if events were undecreed, they would be unforeknown: and if unforeknown, they could not be infallibly (t) predicted. To say, that ‘events may be foreknown, without falling under any effective or permissive decree;' would be saying either nothing to the purpose, or worse than nothing. For, if God can, with certainty, foreknow any event whatever, which he did not previously determine to accomplish or permit; and that event, barely foreknown but entirely undecreed, be so certainly future, as to furnish positive ground for unerring prophecy; it would follow, 1. That God is dependent, for his knowledge, on the things known; instead of all things being dependent on him: and, 2. That there is some extraneous concatenation of causes, prior to the will and knowledge of God, by which his will is regulated, and on which his knowledge is founded. Thus Arminianism, in flying from the decree, jumps over head and ears into the most dangerous and exceptional part of that very stoicism which she pretends to execrate and avoid.

(t)It is very observable, that Wickliff’s argument for predestination, drawn from the prophecies of our Lord, and cited at large in the preceding note, puzzled the then archbishop of Armagh (whose name I know not, nor do I think it worth hunting out,) that it furnished his Popish grace with employment for two years together, to reconcile the free-will of man with the certain completion of prophecy. A task, however, which after all his labour, the Romish prelate found too hard for him. Yet, his Lordship that he might not be forced to acknowledge pre destination and give up free-will, thought proper to give up the infallible prescience of Christ himself; blasphemously affirming, that “it was possible for Christ to be mistaken in his prophecies, and to misinform his Church as to future events.” The passage is so uncommon, that I will give it in the writer's own words. “Dicit adversarius [scil. Wickliff,] quoad istud argumentum, dominum Armachanum per duos annos studuisse pro ejus dissolutione, et finaliter nescivit (ut dici(t aliter evadere, nisi concedendo, quod Christus errasse potuit, et ecclesiam decepisse. Quam conclusionem nullus Catholicus (ut dicit Wicklift) concederet. Et sic videtur ponere Dominum Armachanum extra numerum Catholicoium.' Gulielm. Wodford contra Wicklesmu, Vide Fascic. Rer. vol. i. p. 256.

I return, now, to doctor Wickliff, whose strictures led me into this digression.

What he little more than intimates, in the citation given above; he delivered, it seems, more plainly and peremptorily, elsewhere. Among the 62 articles, laid to his charge by Thomas Netter (commonly called, Thomas of Walden, who flourished about the year 1409,) and for which that writer refers to the volume and chapter of Wickliff's works; are these three:

That “all things come to pass by fatal necessity:

That “God could not make the world otherwise than it is made: and,

That “God cannot do any thing, which he doth not do.” (u)

(u) Fuller's Church Hist. b. iv. p, 134. What this valuable historian premises, concerning Wickliff, before he enters on his account of him, deserves to be quoted, I intend,” says Dr. Fuller, “neither to deny, dissemble, defend, nor excuse, any of his faults. We have this treasure saith the Apostle, in earthen vessels: and he, that shall endeavour to prove a pitcher of clay to be a pot of gold, will take great pains to small purpose. Yea, should I be over officious to retain myself to plead for Wickliff's faults, that glorious saint would sooner chide than thank me.”

This is fatalism with a witness. And I cite these prepositions, not to depreciate Dr. Wickliff, whose character I admire and revere, as one of the greatest and best since the apostolic age; nor yet with a view to recommend the propositions themselves: but, simply, to shew, how far this illustrious reformer ran from the present Arminian system, or rather no-system, of chance and free-will. But, concerning even those of Wickliff's assertions, which were the most rash and unguarded; candour (not to say, justice) obliges me to observe, with Fuller, that, were all his works extant, “we might therein read the occasion, intention, and connexion, of what he spake: together with the limitations, restrictions, distinctions and qualifications, of what he maintained. There we might see, what was the overplus of his passion, and what the just measure of his judgment. Many phrases, heretical in sound, would appear orthodox in sense. Yea, some of his [reputedly--] poisonous passages, dressed with due caution, would prove not only wholesome, but cordial truths: many of his expressions wanting, not granum ponderis, but granum salis; no weight of truth, but some grains of discretion.”

What I shall next add, may be rather styled bold truths, than indiscreet assertions. He defined the Church to consist only of persons predestinated. And affirmed, that God loved David and Peter as dearly when they grievously sinned, as he doth now when they are possessed of glory. This latter position might, possibly, have been more unexceptionably expressed; be it, substantially, ever so true.

Wickliff was sound in the article of gratuits paroudon and justification by the alone death and righteousness of Jesus Christ. "The merit of Christ,” says he, "is, of itself, sufficient to redeem every man from Hell. It is to be understood of a sufficiency of itself, without any other concurring cause. All that follow Christ, being justified by his righteousness, shall be saved, as his offspring.” (z) It has been already observed, and proved, that he had very high notions of that inevitable necessity, by which he supposed every event is governed. Yet, he did not enthusiastically sever the end from the means. Witness his own words: “Though all future things do happen necessarily, yet God wills that good things happen to his servants through the efficacy of prayer.” Upon the whole, it is no wonder that such a profligate factor for Popery and Arminianism, as Peter Heylin, should (pro more,) indecently affirm, that “Wickliff's field had more tares than wheat; and his books more heterodoxes than sound Catholic doctrine.”

(z) See Allix's Remarks on the Albigenses, chap, xxiv. p. 229. Dr. Allix farther observes, that Wickliff “rejects the doctrine of the merit of works, and falls upon those who say, that 'God did not all for them,' but think that 'their merits help.' Heal us Lord, for nought, says Wickliff; that is, for no merit of ours, but for thy mercy.” Ibid. p. 229, 230.

His character, as briefly drawn by bishop Newton, and a word or two from Mr. Rolt, shall conclude his article. Bishop Newton terms him, “the deservedly famous John Wickliff, the honour of his own, and the admiration of all succeeding, times. Rector only of Lutterworth [in Leicestershire] he filled all England, and almost all Europe, with his doctrine. He began to grow famous, about the year 1360. He (c) translated the canonical scriptures into the English language and wrote comments upon them. He demonstrated the antichristianity of Popery, and the abomination of desolation in the temple of God. - His success was greater than he could have expected. The princes, the people, the university of Oxford, many even of the clergy, favoured and supported him, and embraced his opinions. - This truly great and good man died of a [second stroke of the] palsy, the last day of the year 1387. But his doctrines did not die with him. His books were read in the public schools and colleges at Oxford, and were recommended to the diligent perusal of each student in the University, till they were condemned and prohibited, by the council of Constance, in the next century. He himself had been permitted to die in peace; but after his death, his doctrines were condemned [again,] his books were burnt, his very body was dug up and burnt too, by a decree of the council of Constance, and the command of Pope Martin V. executed by Richard Fleming, bishop of Lincoln. His followers, however, were not discouraged; and many of them witnessed a good confession even unto death.”

(c) A Specimen, or two, of Wickliff's translation of the New Testament, into the old English of that period, may not be displeasing to the reader.

“Mt 11:25-26. In thilke tyme Jhesus answeried and seid, I knowleche to thee, Fadir, Lord of Hevene and of earthe, for thou hast hid these thingis fro wise men and redy, and hast schewid hem to litil children. So, Fadir; for so it was plesynge to fore thee.

“Joh 10:26-30. Ye beleven not, for ye ben not of my scheep. My scheep heren my vois, and I knowe hem, and thei suen me. And I gyve to hem everlastyinge life, and thei schulen not perische, withouten end; and noon schal rauysche hem fro myn hand. That thing that my Fader gaf to me, is more than alle thingis: and no man may rauysche from my Fadirs hond. I and the Fadir ben oon.

“Ro 9:11-21. Whanne thei weren not ghit borun neitbier hadden doon ony thing of good, either of yvel; that the purpos of God schulde dwell bi eleccioun, not of works, but of God clepying; it was seid to him, that the more schulde serve the lesse: as it is writun, I louyde Jacob, but I hatide Esau. What therfore schulen we seie? wher wickidnesse be anentis God? God forbede. For he seith to Moises, I schal have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I schal gyve mercy on whom I have mercy. Therefore, it is not neither of man willynge, aeither ren nynge; but of God hauynge mercy. And the Scriptures seith to Farao, For to this thing have I styrrid thee, that I schewe in thee my vertu, and that my name be teeld in a erthe. Therefore, of whom God wole, he hath mercy: and whom he wole, he endurith. Thanne seeith thou to me, what is sought ghit, for who withstondith his will? Oo man, what art thou that answerist to God ! Wher a maad thing seith to him that made it, What hast thou maad me so? Wher a pottere of cley hath not power to make, of the same gobbet, oo vessel into onour, a nothir into dispyt!"

Taken from Lewis's edition of Wickliff's Transl. N. Test. - Lond. 1731. folio.

“I am informed,” says Mr. Rolt, “by a gentleman, who lives near Lutterworth, that the gown, which Dr. Wickliff wore, now covers the communion table in that Church, (f) And, as this eminent man may justly be considered as the author of the Reformation, not only in England, hut throughout all Europe; surely, some decent respect should be paid to his worth, and a public monument erected to his memory. The Wickliffites were opressed, but could not be extinguished. Persecution served only to establish that faith which became general at the Reformation, about a hundred years after these restraints were moderated. The whole nation then unanimously embraced the doctrine which Wickliff began; and Popery was abolished in England, that the purity of religion might increase the blessings of liberty.” Let me just add; surely Arminianism must blush to call herself Protestant, when he, whom all unite to consider as (under God) the “author of the Reformation, not in England only, but in all Europe,” was not merely a Calvinist, but more than a Calvinist; and carried the doctrine of predestination to such an extreme height, as even Luther, Calvin, and Zanchius, did not fully come up to. Mr. Hume is sufficiently moderate, and not at all above par, in affirming Wickliff to have “asserted, that everything was subject to fate and destiny, and that all men are predestinated either to eternal salvation or reprobation.”

(f) I, too, remember to have heard, but how authentically I cannot affirm, that the pulpit, in which Wickliff used to preach, is still preserved in the Church of Lutterworth.

IV. Thomas Bradwardin, personal chaplain to king Edward III. and at last archbishop of Canterbury, may rank with the brightest luminaries, of whom this or any other nation can boast. Mr. Camden observes, that Bradwardin Castle, in Herefordshire, “gave both original and name" to this famous archbishop; “who for his great variety of knowledge, and his admirable proficiency in the most abstruse parts of learning, was honoured with the title of Dr. Profundus,” or the profound doctor. That his ancestors had been seated in that part of Herefordshire mentioned above, is admitted by the general stream of writers, who have treated of this great man. But he himself was certainly born in Sussex. Sir Henry Savile seems to have had very sufficient reason for determining our prelate's birth-place to the city of Chichester. The year that gave him to the world, was probably 1290, about the middle of the reign of Edward I. During the reign of Edward II. he was admitted into Merton College, Oxford: and was proctor of the University, A. D. 1325. He made himself perfect master of the philosophy of Aristotle and Plato. But his chief talent lay in Mathematics and Theology: to these he devoted his main application, and in these he distanced the brightest of his co-temporaries. Sir Henry Savile had in his possession a large manuscript volume of astronomical tables, composed by this extraordinary man; on which that most learned writer sat a very high value, and of which he speaks in very respectable terms.

If Sir Henry admired Bradwardin as a philosopher; he revered and was in raptures with him as a divine. “It was in divinity,” says he, “that the archbishop snatched the prize from all his coevals. That single volume [De Causa Dei,] of which I am the editor, written to unravel and expose the false hood of Pelagianism, is alone sufficient to crown him with the most consummate theologist of that century. We have the sad, but resistless conviction of experience, that the Pelagian heresy has been a growing evil, for ages back. To this, therefore, our accomplished author opposed his artillery. Some lectures, which he had formerly delivered at Oxford, were the basis of this most noble performance. At the earnest entreaty of the Merton students, to whom those lectures had been read, he arranged, polished, enlarged, and reduced them into form, while he was Chancellor of the diocese of London. No sooner was the work completed and given to the public, than vast multitudes of hands were employed in transcribing it, and copies of it were diffused throughout the greatest part of Europe. No treatise, could be more eagerly sought and received. Hardly a library was without it. It captivated the very muses; for Chaucer the father of English poetry, who flourished within a few years after the arch bishop's decease, puts him in the same rank with St. Austin, in these lines, so pleasingly remarkable for their antique simplicity of style:

“But what that God afore wrote, must needs bee,

After the opinion of certain clerkis

Witnessed of him that any clerked Is,

That in school is great altercation

In this matter, and great disputation,

And hath been of ail hundred thousand men.

But I no cannot boult it to the bren,

As can the holy doctour Saincte Austin,

Or Boece, or the bishop of Bradwardin.”

Our excellent prelate, being a most exact mathematician, has, conformably to the rules of the science he so much admired, thrown his theological arguments into mathematical order: and, I believe, was the first divine who pursued that method. Hence, his book against the Pelagians is, from the beginning to end, one regular, strong unbroken chain. This does, indeed, render his work abstruse and difficult, in some measure, to such as peruse it superficially: but, at the same time, it conduces to make his reasonings intrinsically firm, conclusive, and invincible.”

Having, for some years, sat as Divinity Professor, at Oxford, with the most exalted reputation; he was admitted to the friendship of Richard de Bury, the learned bishop of Durham: and, at length, went to live with him as one of his family. Seven other persons (mostly Merton men) conspicuous for genius and learning, were also transplanted, from Oxford, to the house of that munificent prelate, who had a very high relish for the pleasures and improvements resulting from literary conversation."

Such was the modesty of Bradwardin, that his preferments flowed in upon him, not only unsought, put undesired. It was with great difficulty, that he was prevailed upon to let a canonry of Lincoln be annexed to his chancellorship of London, though the revenue of the latter was far from large. At length, his vast learning, and the invariable purity of his life, rendered him so famous, that he was nominated by John Stratford, then archbishop of Canterbury, to be chaplain to his sovereign, King Edward III. In this capacity, he attended that great Prince, during his long and successful wars in France. With a warpless integrity, rarely found in those who wait on kings, he made it his business to calm and mitigate the fierceness of his master's temper, when he saw him either immoderately fired with warlike rage, or unduly flushed with the advantages of victory. Nor were his piety and watchfulness limited to his monarch. He often preached to the army with such meekness and persuasiveness of wisdom, as restrained them from many of those savage violences, which are too frequently the attendants on military success.

On the death of Stratford, the church of Canterbury unanimously chose Bradwardin for their archbishop. But the king being still engaged in France, refused to part with him. John Ufford was then put in nomination for that see: but he dying soon after his election, Bradwardin was chosen a second time, and the king yielded to the choice. He was, accordingly, consecrated at (n) Avignon, in 1349, and returned into England soon after. But he did not long adorn the metropolitical chair. He died, at Lambeth, the October following; and was interred in St. Anselm's chapel, by the south wall, within the cathedral of Canterbury: disgraced with a most wretched Epitaph, which is only worthy of preservation for its having once marked the tomb of so great a man.

(n) Bradwardin was a known predestinarian: a circumstance which by no means weighed in his favour with the Pope. Accordingly, on the day of the archbishop's consecration, after the ceremony was over, he was insulted, as he sat at dinner, by a buffoon mounted on an ass for that purpose. The person who procured him this low affront was the cardinal of Tudela, the Pope's near kinsman. - Anglia Sacra, vol. i. p. 43.

I have dwelled the longer on the outlines of Bradwardin's History, because I find them so superficially hurried over by the generality of our English writers. A species of negligence, not easily excusable, where a character, so peculiarly illustrious, was the object of investigation.

The Protestant cause is more indebted to this extraordinary prelate, than seems to be commonly known. He was, in some sense, Dr. Wickliff's spiritual father: for it was the perusal of Bradwardin's writings, which, next to the Holy Scriptures, opened that proto-reformer's eyes to discover the genuine doctrine of faith and justification. “Bradwardin taught him" [i.e. taught Wickliff] “the nature of a true and justifying faith, in opposition to merit-mongers and pardoners, purgatory and pilgrimages."

I now beg my reader's permission to lay before him a few passages from Bradwardin's golden work, entitled, “The Cause of God:” written as an antidote against the Pelagian poison, and to demonstrate the absoluteness both of providence and grace. This inestimable performance was printed, A. D. 1618, by the united care (and, it should seem, at the joint-expense) of the pious Dr. George Abbot, archbishop of Canterbury, and the most learned Sir Henry Savile.

Bradwardin laments the Pelagianism of his own times, in terms but too applicable to the present: “What multitudes, O Lord, at this day, join hands with Pelagius, in contending for free-will, and in fighting against thy absolutely-free grace; and against that great spiritual champion for grace, the Apostle Paul! By how many is thy unmerited grace looked upon with scornful abhorrence, while they proudly insist, that free-will alone is sufficient to salvation! or, if they make use of the word grace, and slightly pretend to believe that grace is necessary; to what purpose is this pretence, while they boast of its being in the power of free-will to lay thy grace under obligation? thus making grace itself no longer gratuitous, but representing thee as selling it, instead of giving it.

“Some, more haughty than even Lucifer, are not content with barely lifting themselves to an equality with thee; but are most daringly desirous to govern and control thee, who art the King of kings. Such are they, who dread not to affirm, that, even in a common action, their own will walks first, as an independent mistress; and that thy will follows after, like an obsequious handmaid: that they themselves go foremost, like sovereign lords; while thou walkest behind them, like a hired servant: that they issue their orders, as kings; and that thou like an implicit subject, actest according to the imperial nod of their determining will.” By such nervous reasoning, and by such well adapted images, did this Christian hero cut in sunder the very sinews of what was then termed antecedent merit; but which is now suppled into the smoother phrase of, “conditional grace:” the same thing in sense, though of softer sound.

Among the first positions, which Bradwardin undertakes to prove, are these: that “God is, not contingently, but necessarily, perfect. That he is incapable of changing. That he is not (for instance) irascible and appeasable; liable to the emotions of joy and sorrow; or, in any respect, passive. Since, if he were, he would be changeable: whereas he is always the same, and never varies. He cannot change for the better, because" says Bradwardin, “he is already perfectly good [and happy.] Neither can he change for the worse, because he is necessarily perfect, and therefore cannot cease to be so.”

He justly observes, that “the divine will is universaliter efficax, universally efficacious: which is a mark of much higher perfection, than if his will could be hindered, frustrated, or miss of its intent. If God could wish for any thing, and yet not have it; or if he could will any thing, and yet not bring it to pass; he would and must, from that moment, cease to be perfectly happy, which is impossible.” The consequence is plain: viz. that every thing falls out according to God's original design, or effective and permissive determination.

He powerfully beats down the Doctrine of human merit. He will not allow that men can merit at the hand of God, either antecedently, or subsequently, i.e. either prior to grace received, or after it. Is it not more bountiful to give than to barter? to bestow a thing freely, gratis, and for nothing; than for the sake of any preceding or subsequent desert, which would be a sort of price or payment? Even a generous man often confers benefits on others, without any view to the previous or succeeding merit of the object. Much more does God do this, who is infinitely richer in bounty than the most liberal of his creatures.” From this, and a hundred other passages to the same effect, it is evident, that, where he applies the word meritum to any human act of obedience, he means no more by it, than moral goodness and virtue, as opposed to sin and vice: in which sense the term merit is incontestably used by several of the primitive fathers; though the word has been long and justly reprobated by all sound divines, on account of the antichristian use that is made of it by Papists and Pelagians.

From that declaration of our Lord, My Father worketh hitherto, and I work; and from that assertion of the apostle, in him we live, and are moved (kinwmeqa,] and exist; the archbishop infers, 1. That no thing whatever can put any other thing into motion unless God himself, by his own proper influence, give motion to the thing so moved: 2. That no thing whatever can put any other into motion, without God's being the immediate mover of it: Yea, 3. That whatsoever is put in motion by any thing else, is more immediately moved by God himself, than by the instrument which sets it in motion, be that instrument what it will.” This is winding up matters to a very high standard. And yet, perhaps, the standard is no higher than Philosophy itself can justify. But my readers will observe, that I am neither dictating to them, nor so much as giving my own express opinion. My present business is, to quote Bradwardin, simply as his judgment stands. “God,” says he, “maketh all things, and moveth all things. In every formation, and in every motion, there must be some unoriginal former and some immoveable mover; else the process would be end-less.” His meaning is, that unless we trace up all being, and all philosophic motion (whether active motion, or passive,) to God himself, we can find no first cause, wherein to rest: we can have no central point to stop at, but shall be lost amid the immense circumference of boundless, wild uncertainty.

What he delivers concerning the knowledge of God, is worthy of our utmost attention. “It is certain, that God hath a knowledge of all things present, of all things past, and of all things to come: which knowledge is supremely actual, particular, distinct, and (a) infallible, We may consider it as either simple, or approbative. His simple or absolute knowledge extends to every thing. His know ledge of approbation includes (over and above the former) the liking, the good pleasure, and complacency of will, which he graciously bears to some persons.” ( c ) This distinction of the divine knowledge into absolute and approbatory, is founded on clear scripture evidence. Of the first, see Joh 21:17. 2Ti 2:19. Of the latter, Joh 10:14. 1Jo 3:20.

(a) The certainty and necessity of every future event follow as strongly on the principle of God's foreknowledge, or omniscience, as they can possibly do on the hypothesis of the most adamantine decree. Moreover, the very same arguments, by which the divine knowledge of future events is proved, are no less conclusive against that false species of capricious free-will which the Arminians so lavishly ascribe to mankind. That God's omniscience and the Arminian free agency, cannot possibly stand together, is acknowledged by the eminent and penetrating Mr. Montesquieu; who, accordingly, puts the following arguments into the mouth of his supposed Persian. “It is not possible, that God can foresee what depends on the determination of free-agents. Because, what hath not existed, is not in being; and, consequently, cannot be known: which, having no properties, cannot be perceived. God cannot read in the will what is not in it; or see in the soul a thing which is not yet existing in it: for, till she hath deter mined, the action which she determines upon is not in her. The soul is the maker of her own determination: but there are some circumstances, in which she is so irresolute, that she knows not on which side to determine. Sometimes she may even do it, only to make use of her liberty; in such manner that God cannot see this determination beforehand, neither in the action of the soul, nor in the actions which the objects make upon her. How then can God forsee those things which depend upon the determination of free agents? He could foresee them but in two ways: by conjecture; which is irreconcilable with infinite foreknowledge: or, otherwise, he must see them as necessary effects, which infallibly follow a cause which produces them as infallibly.” This consummate geuius, presently after, observes, that, “supposing God to foresee in the latter respect the idea of absolute free-agency vanishes that instant: since the soul in her act of determining, would no more be free, than one billiard ball is free to lie still when it is pushed by another.” See Montesquieu's Persian Letters, vol. i. let. lxix. Edit. 1762.

The matter, then, is reduced to this issue: either God must be stripped of his omniscience; or men must be divested of independent and uncertain free will. If one stands, the other must fall. Query: which had we best give up? Shall we commence Atheists? Or shall we confess ourselves dependent beings? What the Apostle says, on another occasion, I, for my own part, make no scruple to say here: Let God be true, and every man a liar. Let the knowledge of God be infinite, though it shrivel human freedom to a span. Better is it, not to rob God of an essential attribute, than to crown ourselves with an ideal plume, or rather a diadem of straw, and trample on real deity by supposing ourselves kings and gods.

He employs a whole chapter in proving, Quod res scitae non sunt causae divinae scientiae: or, that “the things known are not the foundation of God's knowing them. This to some, may seem a question of unnecessary speculation: but, on a nearer view it must appear to be a point of the utmost importance, in which the perfection (and consequently, the very being) of God are deeply involved. A summary of Bradwardin's reasoning on this subject deserves to be laid before the reader. “Knowledge is a principal perfection in God. If, therefore, his knowledge is derived from the objects with which it is conversant, it would follow, that God is indebted, for part of his perfection, to some other source than himself: in which case, he must cease to be self-perfect. He would, moreover, cease to be all-sufficient of himself: for he would stand in need of created help, to render his knowledge complete. His omniscience would be forced to ask assistance from the very things it comprehends. And how could his essential glory be matchless and unrivalled, if any portion of it was suspended on assistance borrowed from without? Add to this, that if the things, which God knows, are themselves the producing cause of his knowing them; they must be antecedent to his knowledge, either in commencement of existence, or in order of nature. But they are not prior to his knowledge in either of these respects: for they are all created in time: whereas God and his knowledge are eternal. Besides, if the Deity received any degree of his intelligence from the beings he has made, he would cease to be a pure actor: he would be passive, in that reception. Whence it would also follow, that he must be susceptible of change. Nay, he would degenerate into a sort of inferiority to the things known, and (being dependent on them for his know ledge) would, so far, be considered as less noble than they. The divine understanding would, like ours, be, occasionally, in a state of suspense and fluctuation. God might rather be said to possess a power or capability of knowing, than knowledge itself. He would only stand disposed to know either this or that, indifferently, according as the event may turn: and would be actuated and determined by agency and casuality extraneous to himself. And thus he would neither be the highest nor the first.” Swayed by such reasons as these, the archbishop concludes, that Averroes was right in affirming, that “the knowledge of God is a cause of the things known, and not vice versa. Human knowledge is founded on its respective objects; but all objects of the divine knowledge are founded on the divine knowledge itself.” He adds: “God himself is the first and the last, the beginning and the end. But were the things which he knows the basis of his knowledge, it would follow, that his creatures contribute to improve their Maker's wisdom. And thus, foolish man, or even the meanest beast of the field, would be exalted into a necessary assistant, councellor, and teacher of the all-wise God. Well, therefore, may we say, with Austin, God knew all his creatures, both corporeal and incorporeal, not because they exist; but they therefore exist, because he knew them: for he was not ignorant of what he intended to create. Amidst all the innumerable revolutions of advancing and departing ages, the knowledge of God is neither lessened nor improved. No incident can possibly arise which thou didst not expect and foresee, who knowest all things: and every created nature is what it is, in consequence of thy knowing it as such.”

We are not to suppose, that Bradwardin contended for what may be called the mere knowledge of God, nakedly and abstractedly considered. He asserted the infinity, the independency, and the efficacy of the divine know ledge as founded on, and resulting from the eternal sovereignty, and irresistibility, of the divine will. "The will of God,” says he, "is universally efficacious and invincible, and necessitates as a cause. It cannot be impeded, much less can it be defeated and made void, by any means whatever.” What follows is extremely conclusive: “If you allow, 1. That God is able to do a thing: and, 2. That he is willing to do a thing; then, 3. I affirm, that thing will not, cannot, go unaccomplished. God either does it now, or will certainly do it at the destined season. Otherwise, he must either lose his power, or change his mind. He is in want of nothing that is requisite to carry his purposes into execution. Whence that remark of the philosopher: He, that hath both will and power to do a thing, certainly doth that thing.” Again: If the will of God could be frustrated and vanquished, its defeat would arise from the created wills, either of angels, or of men. But, could any created will whatever, whether angelic or human, counter-act and baffle the will of God; the will of the creature must be superior, [either] in strength, [or in wisdom,] to the will of the creator: which can by no means be allowed.” The absolute immutability of God effectually secures the infallible accomplishment of his will: whence our great English Austin justly observes, that "both the divine know ledge, and the divine will, are altogether unchangeable: since, was either one or the other to undergo any alteration, a change must fall on God himself.

Pursuant to these maxims, he affirms, that, "whatever things come to pass, they are brought to pass by the providence of God.” Nor could he suppose, that the great and blessed God is, in point of wisdom, fore-cast, and attention, inferior even to a prudent master of a family, who takes care of every thing that belongs to him; and makes provision beforehand, according to the best of his knowledge and power; and leaves nothing unregulated in his house, but exactly appoints the due time and place for every thing.”

The sentiments of this learned writer, relative to the doctrine of fate, are too judicious and important, to be wholly passed over. "We must,” says he, “beyond all doubt, admit, there is such a thing as a divine fate.” By a divine fate, he means, the decree which God hath irrevocably pronounced, or spoken: for he seems to agree with those who derive the word Fatum, either a fando, or from fiat; i.e. from God's speaking or commanding things to be. Whence he adds: “Is it not written, that in the beginning of the creation, God said, Fiat lux, let there be light, and there was light? Is it not written again, He spake and it was done? Now, that divine fate is chiefly a branch of the divine will, which is the efficacious cause of things.” This seems to have been the real sense, in which the doctrine of (r) fate was maintained by those of the ancients who were truly wise and considerate. And, in this sense, fate is a Christian doctrine in the strictest import of the word Christian. Nay, set aside fate, in this meaning of it, and I cannot see how either natural or revealed religion can stand. St. Austin was of the very same mind. “All that connection,” says he, "and that train of causes, whereby every thing is what it is, are by the stoics called fate: the whole of which fate they ascribe to the will and power of the supreme God, whom they most justly believe to fore-know all things, and to leave nothing unordained. But it is the will itself of the supreme God, which they are chiefly found to call by the name of fate; because the energy of his will is unconquerably extended through all things.” Another passage of St. Austin's, quoted also by Bradwardin, is no less pertinent and judicious: “We are far from denying that train of causes wherein the will of God has the grand sway. We avoid, however, giving it the name of fate; that is to say, unless you derive the word from fando. For we cannot but acknowledge, that it is written in the Scriptures, God hath once spoken, and these two things have I heard, that power belongeth unto God; and that mercy is with thee, for thou wilt render to every man according to his works. Now, whereas it is here said, that God hath spoken once; the meaning is, that he hath spoken unchangeably and irreversibly: even as he foreknew all things that should come to pass, and the things which he himself would do. The kingdoms of men are absolutely appointed by Divine Providence. Which if any one is desirous, for that reason, to attribute to fate, meaning by that word, the will and power of God, let him hold fast the sentiment, and only correct the phrase.”

(r) “Virgil, in the beginning of his AEneid, says, every thing that happened to this hero was Vi Superum; and Homer says, The quarrel between Achilles and Agamemnon, with all its direful consequences, was by the will of Jove. When Cicero says, reason obliges us to own that every thing is done by fate; he means just the same by that word [viz. fate,] as Homer does by Diov Bwlh, and Virgil by his Vi superum: Fatum est quod Dii fantur, vel quod Jupiter fatur. Cic. de div. 1. 52.”

Tindal's Abridgment of Spence's Polymetis, p. 29.

Bradwardin observes, that fate may be distinguished into active and passive. “Active fate is no other than the declaratory decree, or pronounced determination, of the will of God, considered as the disposer of all things. Passive fate may be taken, as the term itself imports, for that subjective effect and inherent tendency, with which things themselves are imbued, in consequence and by virtue of the afore-said pronounced determination.” He adds, from Aristotle and Isidore, that the fable of the Three Fates is not without its reality. Atropos denoted what is past; Lachesis, the future; Clotho, the present. But all the three names were only designed to shadow forth God himself, as Plato strenuously affirms.”

The speculations of the celebrated Boethius (y) as cited by Bradwardin, on the articles of Providence and Fate, are not unworthy of perusal. Though far from unexpectionable, they are subtle and ingenious. “Providence is but another name for the Divine Wisdom itself, which stands at the helm of all things, and by which all things are regulated. - On the other hand, fate is that inherent disposition in things themselves, by which Divine Providence concatenates all things in their proper successions and dependencies. Providence comprehends all things, together and at once, however those things may differ from each other, and however infinite their number may seem. But fate reduces each particular thing into actual order, by a proper distribution as to motion, pace, form, and season: insomuch that, this actual evolution of the series of causes (which evolution is temporary, or brought to pass in time,) may be termed Providence, if considered as united and gathered to a point in the divine view. This simple connected view of all futurities, which is a perfection essential to the uncreated mind, may also be called fate; if you consider that view as gradually opened and unfolded in the several successions of time; for, though fate and Providence are not strictly the same, yet the former is dependent on the latter. That series of causes and effects, which is ordered by fate, takes its rise from the simplicity of Providence. As some curious artificer first forms, in his own mind, a design or plan of the piece of workmanship he intends to make, and then begins to take the work itself in hand, carrying into execution, through a regular and successive progress, the idea which he had, before, simply and readily modeled: so God, by his providence, orders and settles, particularly and firmly, the things that are to be accomplished; and, by fate, manages, in all their multiplicity and temporary successions, the things so ordered and settled. Whether, therefore, fate be rendered actually operative by the ministry of those unembodied spirits who are the servants and executors of Divine Providence; or by the human mind; or by the whole concurrence of subservient nature; or by the motions of the celestial orbs; or by the power of the good angels; or by the manifold subtlety of daemons; whether the chain of fate be complicated by any or all of these; thus much is certainly evident, that God's providence is the pure, immoveable model, according to which, matters are conducted; and that fate is the moveable connection, and temporary train, or series, of those things which the Divine Providence hath appointed to be accomplished. And from hence it is, that all things, which are subjected to fate, are likewise subjected to Providence; for Providence is the supreme regulatress, to which fate itself acts in subserviency.”

(y) Boethius was descended from one of the most noble families in Rome. He studied, eighteen years, at Athens; where, says Dr. Cave, “Omnium artium, omnium disciplinarum, non modo elementa, sed et reconditiora mysteria, penitus imbibit:" insomuch that he was deemed the prince of scholars. In the year 487, he was sole consul of Rome. After a life strangely variegated with prosperity and affliction, this great man fell a sacrifice to the tyranny of Theodric, and was beheaded in prison, at Pavia. A. D. 524. During his exile to this place, he wrote his book on the Trinity; and during his imprisonment, he composed his Treatise on the Consolation of Philosophy; which latter was so admired by our matchless king Alfred, that he used constantly to carry it about him. -- This illustrious linguist, philosopher and poet, was interred at Pavia, in the Church of St. Austin, under the following epitaph:

Maeonia et latia lingua clarissimus, et qui

Consul eram, hic perii, missus in exilium.

Et quid mors rapuit? Probitas me vexit ad auras

Et nunc fama viget maxima, vivit opus.

See Cave, Dupin, &c.

Thus far Boethius. The reader, perhaps, will be inclinable, with me, to ask, what need of labouring the point so nicely? To what end, is the thread so finely spun? one thing, however, is plain: viz. that, by Providence, he understood God's eternal foresight; and, by fate, that temporary disposure of events, which we now call Providence. (a) To the former, he might be induced by the literal import of the word providence. If I rightly remember, Cicero, somewhere, shews himself of the same mind, and assigns that very reason for it. It should also be noticed, that, according to Boethius’s doctrine, the divine fore-knowledge is not a naked, idle speculation of what barely would come to pass; but is tantamount to an operative, effective determination of what certainly shall come to pass. For he supposes absolute fate itself to be no more than a sub-ordinate adminstrator, whose business it is to see that all events exactly correspond to that active knowledge of them which God had from everlasting. He expresses this, very clearly, in another subsequent passage, quoted by Bradwardin, wherein he reciprocates the terms providence and fate: “this series of fate, or providence, tightly binds down the actions and circumstances of men, by an indissoluble concatenation of causes.” To this Bradwardin himself heartily accedes, in a remarkable paragraph adopted from St. Austin: “Our wills have just so much ability, as God willed and foreknew they should have. Consequently, they cannot avoid being indued with whatever ability they possess; and what they are to do, they absolutely shall do: for, both their ability and their works were foreknown of God, whose foreknowledge cannot be deceived.”

(a) The folio edition of Bailey's Dictionary has a paragraph (under the word fate), in which it is observed, that “fate primarily implies the same with effatum, a word, or decree pronounced by God: or a fixed sentence, whereby the Deity has prescribed the order of things, and allotted every person what shall befal him. The Greeks call it eimarmenh, as though a chain, or necessary series of things, indissolubly linked together; and the moderns call it providence.” The folio editors of the above work endeavour to explain away this judicious passage. But it is no wonder that a set of men, who are for excluding the Son and Spirit of God from the divine essence, should be for expunging predestination and its correlative articles from the Christian Creed.

What Bradwardin professedly delivers, concerning the subjection of our most voluntary actions to the decrees and providence of God; what he adds, concerning the co-incidence of permission, and design; with several other correlative points of religious metaphysics; I purposely omit: not for want of inclination but of room. I shall, therefore, for the present, conclude my extract from his testimony, with a short sample, or two, of what he hath advanced, concerning predestination itself, the powers of free-will, and the perseverance of the saints.

Predestination is the only ground on which the divine foreknowledge and providence can stand. Abstracted from the will and purpose of God, neither persons, nor things, nor events, could have any certain futurition: consequently, they could not be certainly fore-know-able. And providence must regulate every punctilio of its dispensations, by the same preconstructed plan; or it would follow, that God is liable to unforeseen emergencies, and acts either ignorantly, or contrary to his own will. The great Bradwardin was so clearly and deeply convinced of this, that he defines predestination to be (what in reality it is) neither more nor less than “AEterna praevolutio Dei, sive prae-ordinatio voluntatis divinae, circa futurum: God's eternal prevolition, or pre-determination of his will, respecting what shall come to pass.” He treats the mysterious articles of election and reprobation in particular, with such force and compass of argument, united with such modesty and judgment, as may, alone, suffice to class him among the ablest reasoners that ever wrote.

On the subject of liberty and necessity, he acknowledges that there is such a thing as free-will in God's reasonable creatures: and, I believe, every Calvinist upon earth acknowledges the same. The point, in dispute between us and the Arminians, is, not concerning the existence of free-will; but concerning its powers. That man is naturally endued with a will, we never denied: and that man's will is naturally free to what is morally and spiritually evil, we always affirmed. The grand hinge, then, on which the debate turns, is, whether free-will be, or be not, a faculty of such sovereignty and power, as either to ratify, or to baffle, the saving grace of God, according to its [i.e. according to the will's] own independent pleasure and self-determination? I should imagine, that every man of sense, piety, and reflection, must, at once, determine this question in the negative. If some do not, who are nevertheless possessed of those qualifications, I can only stand amazed at the force of that prejudice, which can induce any reasonable and religious person to suppose that divine wisdom is frustrable, and the divine power defeatable, by creatures of yesterday, who are absolutely and constantly dependent on God for their very being (and, consequently, for the whole of their operations) from moment to moment.

Bradwardin believed, that the human will, however free in its actings, is not altogether exempt from necessity. He supposed, that what the understanding regards as good, the will must necessarily desire; and what the understanding represents as evil, the will must necessarily disapprove. A remark this, not spun from the subtleties of metaphysics; but founded in fact, and demonstrable from every man's own hourly experience. The will, therefore, is no other than the practical echo of the understanding: and is so far from being endued with a self-determining power, or with a freedom of indifference to this or that; that it closes in with the dictates of the intellect, as naturally, as necessarily, and as implicitly, as an eastern slave accommodates his obedience to the commands of the grand seignor. As the understanding is, thus, the directress of the will; so, ten thousand different circumstances concur to influence and direct the understanding: which latter is altogether as passive, in her reception of impression from without, as she is sometimes active in her subsequent contemplation and combination of them. It follows, that if the understanding (from which the will receives its bias,) be thus liable to passive, subjective necessity; the will itself, which is absolutely governed by a faculty so subject to necessitation, cannot possibly be possessed of that kind of freedom, which the Arminian scheme supposes her to be: since, if she was, the handmaid would be above her mistress; and uncontrollable sovereignty would be the immediate offspring of constringent necessity. Hence Bradwardin observes, that the human will cannot so much as conquer a single temptation, even after God's regenerating power has passed upon the soul, sine alio Dei auxilio speciali, “without a fresh supply of God's particular assistance: “which particular assistance he defines to be, volantas Dei invicta the supernatural influence, resulting from the unconquerable will of God: "armed with which, his tempted children get the better of every temptation; but destitute of which, every temptation gets the better of them.”

And, indeed was not this the case, “The number of the elect and predestinate would,'' as Bradwardin nervously argues, “depend more on man than upon God. Men, by antecedently and casually disposing their own wills to this or that, would leave God no more to do, than to regulate his after decrees in a subservient conformity to the prior determinations of his creatures, and in a way of subjection and subordination to their will and pleasure:” than which supposition, nothing can be more impious and irrational. Besides, as he presently adds, if free-will was possessed of these enormous powers, “It would be vain and idle in a man to pray to God for victory over temptation, or to give him thanks for victory obtained." When free-willers kneel down to petition God for any spiritual blessing, what is such conduct, but a virtual renunciation of their own distinguishing tenet? And, on the footing of that tenet, what an unmeaning service is the ascription of praise!

Quesitum meritus sume superbiam.

Away with prayer. Away with thanksgiving. Neither the one, nor the other, has any reasonable pretext to keep it in countenance, on the principles of Pelagius and Arminius. The whole lower creation cannot exhibit a more glaring example of human inconsistency, than a free-willer on his knees.

Bradwardin was not less clear on the important article of final perseverance. According to him, this crowning grace is the gift of God alone: “When David prayed thus for his devout subjects, O Lord God, preserve this will of their heart forever, and grant that their inclination to thy fear may continue in them (m); what was this, but a prayer for their ultimate perseverance? and why did he ask it of God, if it is not the gift of God, but acquirable by every man's own powers?” To which the evangelical prelate adds: “As David besought God, for the preserverance of his own religious subjects; so also the Lord Christ, our mystic David, besought God the Father in behalf of his own people, saying, Holy Father, preserve in thy own name those whom thou hast given unto me.” Quoting that passage, Jer 32:37-40 he thus descants: “Hence it is evident, that both a departure from evil, and a final continuance in good to the end of our days, by virtue of that everlasting covenant which secures us against revolting from the Lord, which is what we mean by the phrase of perseverance to the end; neither takes it rise from, nor is carried on by, man; but from and by God himself. For which reason, St. Austin, in his Treatise concerning the Blessing of Perseverance, observes, that, in the above passage of scripture, God promises perseverance to his people, saying, I will put my fear into their hearts, that they shall not depart from me. What is this (saith Austin), but to affirm, The fear which I will put into their hearts, shall be such, and so great, that they shall perseveringly adhere to me?"

(m) 1Ch 29:18. Our English translation renders it thus: O Lord God, - keep this for ever in the imagination of the thoughts of the heart of thy people and prepare [the margin reads, establish] their hearts unto thee.

It is now time for me to take my unwilling leave of Bradwardin, and put an end to this long Section, by just dropping a word,

V. Concerning that illustrious nobleman and martyr, Sir John Oldcastle, the good lord Cobham. No one, who is at all acquainted with English History, need be informed, that this great and excellent person fell a sacrifice, in reality, to the rage of the Romish ecclesiastics; whose hatred he had incurred by the purity of his religious principles, and by the honest boldness with which he asserted them. King Henry V. notwithstanding his political maxim, of keeping fair with the Church, at all events, would, probably, never have gratified her with a victim of such high rank, and for whom he had a great personal regard, if some churchmen of that age had not trumped up a charge of treason against lord Cobham: when all the while, his real crime, in their eye, was, heresy. The Princes of the House of Lancaster could not but be perfectly conscious that their possession of the throne was founded on manifest usurpation. This rendered them extremely suspicious of their subjects; and induced them to avenge, with severity, every measure that seemed to threaten the smallest approaches of a revolution. The Papists availed themselves of this circumstance, in the case of lord Cobham. The King, though displeased at this nobleman's abhorrence of Popery, was not, perhaps, sorry to hear of his escape form the Tower: as that incident extricated his Majesty from the painful alternative of either offending the Church, by pardoning Cobham in form; or of resigning a victorious general and faithful subject to the flames, in order to satisfy a set of men who were, in reality, but so many dead weights on the wheel of civil government. But the ecclesiastics would not quit their prey so easily. Some time after lord Cobham's escape from the Tower, about 100 Wickliffites (or, as they were then called, Lollards) were assembled, for the purposes of devotion, in St. Giles's Fields, at that time, an uncultivated tract of ground, overgrown with bushes and trees. The good people were then obliged by persecution either entirely to forego all religious meetings, or to hold them in such sequestered places as those.

This innocent assembly was not conducted with the intended secrecy. The Papists gained intelligence of it, and alarmed the King (who was keeping Christmas at Eltham) with information, that a number of Lollards, to the amount of at least 20,000, with lord Cobham at their head, were rendezvoused in St. Giles's Fields, with a view to exterminate the reigning family. The jealous King gave implicit credit to the false representation: and, repairing, at midnight, to the place, with such forces as he could hastily collect found about 80 persons met together. Some were immediately slaughtered by the soldiers. About 60 were taken prisoners; of whom, 34 were afterwards hanged, and seven hanged and burned.

I mention this pretended conspiracy, because it sealed the doom of lord Cobham. Though he was not so much as present at the above meeting, “A Bill of Attainder passed against him, a reward of a thousand marks was set on his head, and a perpetual exemption from taxes promised to any town that should secure him.” After a concealment of nigh four years, the attainted Peer was apprehended in Montgomeryshire, and conveyed to London; where he received sentence of death. He was executed in St. Giles's Fields, on Christmas-day, December 25, 1417. Nothing could be more cruel than the mode of his sufferings. All historians agree, that he was burned hanging. Echard says, that he was suspended over the fire, by an iron chain, fastened round his middle. The plate, in Mr. Fox, represents him as hanging with his back downward, by three chains: the first fastened to his middle, by an iron hoop; the second, to his right thigh: the other to his neck.

We have very little remaining of what was written by the noble martyr. His two confessions of faith, which occur in Fox, were evidently so worded, as to give no more offence to the times, than was absolutely necessary: a precaution, which, however, did not save the life of their author. I therefore rest the evidence of his probable Calvinism, on the known Calvinism of Wickliff. I have already proved, that Wickliff carried the doctrines of predestination and grace to a very great length: nor is it likely, that Lord Cohbam should have been so devoted an admirer of Wickliff, as he certainly was; nor have put himself to the labour, expense, and danger, of transcribing and dispersing the writings of that reformer, with such zeal and industry as he certainly did; had he differed from Wickliff on points which so materially affect the whole system of Protestantism. A very judicious writer affirms that lord Cobham ''caused all the works of Wickliff to be wrote out and dispersed in Bohemia, France, Spain, Portugal, and other parts of Europe.” Which, I should imagine, he would no more have done, had he not adopted Wickliff's plan of doctrine, than the vicar of Broad Hembury would be at the pains and cost of re-printing and dispersing the lucubrations of Mr. John Wesley.

Indeed, the principles of all Wickliff's disciples appear, so far as I have been able to find, highly Calvinistical. Take one specimen in lieu of many,

About the year 1391, during the reign of Richard II. a letter of expostulation, written, by a Lollard, to one Nicholas Hereford (who had apostatized from Wickliffism to popery,) has he two following paragraphs: “No perversion of any reprobate,” says the pious expostulator, “is able to turn the congregation of the elect from the faith: because all things that shall come to pass, are eternally, in God, devised and ordained for the best unto the elect Christians. Like as the mystical body of Christ is the congregation of all the elect; so Antichrist, mystically, is the Church of the wicked and of all the reprobates.” (x) So true is it, that the doctrine of absolute predestination was held and maintained by the very first Protestants, long before the actual establishment of that doctrine at the Reformation.

(x) Fox’s Acts and Mon. vol. i. p. 574.

Calvinism XI - The Charge of Mahometanism refuted.

SECTION XI.

The Charge of Mahometanism refuted.

THE reader may, if he pleases, consider himself as entered, at present, on a kind of historical voyage. Mr. Sellon pretends to think, that we are in full sail for Constantinople; and that Calvinism is at once the compass by which we steer, and the breeze by which we are carried, plump into the Grand Seignor's harbour. Predestination and the ineluctabilis ordo rerum, are, according to this sage Arminian geographer, situate only in the latitude of Mahomet: and every man, who believes, with scripture, that God worketh all things after the council of his own will; and, with our Church, that all things, both in heaven and earth, are ordered by a never-failing providence; every man, who thus believes, is, in my redoubtable adversary's estimation, a Mahometan.

I must acknowledge, that such a contemptible cavil as this, is too low and ridiculous to merit a single moment's attention. However, as it has been urged, formerly, by the wretched authors of Calvino-Turcismus; (y) and now repeated, with an air of seeming seriousness, by Mr John Wesley's advocate; I beg permission of my readers to touch at Constantinople in earnest; not with a view to stay there for good, but just to look about us, and determine, for ourselves, whether Calvinism and Mahometanism are the same, or not.

(y) A book was published under this title at Antwerp, in the year 1559, and again at Cologne, in 1603. It was the joint-work of two English Papists (William Reynolds and William Gifford), who had fled their country. Its drift was to prove the conformity of Calvinism and Mahometanism. Gifford, who finished and published it, was a priest; and had several times encouraged some assassins to murder Queen Elizabeth. To the above book, the learned Dr. Sutcliffe, dean of Exeter, published an answer: the title to which ran thus; De Turco-Papismo, &c. i.e. “Of the Mahometan Popery: or a Treatise of the Conspiracy of Turks and Papists against the Church and Faith of Christ; of their agreement and resemblance in religion and morals. To which are added, four books concerning the slanders and calumnies of the Mahometan-Papists; in answer to that most defamatory libel, entitled Mahometan Calvinism, written by William Gifford, a notorious and vile flatterer of the Popes and Jesuits.” See Bayle, vol. v. art. Sutcliff.

Dean Prideaux shall set us on shore. This learned historian observes, that the religion of Mahomet is “made up of three parts: whereof one was borrowed from the Jews, another from the Christians, and the third from the Heathen Arabs.” A whole third, then, of the Mahometan system, is neither more nor less than Christianity at second hand. But shall we therefore disclaim a dozen or twenty articles of our Christain Creed, because those articles were adopted by Mahomet? What a prodigious gap such absurd conduct would make in our Confession of Faith, may be easily judged of, from the ensuing specimen.

“The first doctrine that Mahomet propagated among them [i.e. among his followers at Mecca,] was, That there is but one God, and that he only is to be worshipped; and that all idols were to be taken away, and their worship utterly abolished.

“He allowed both the Old and the New Testament; and that Moses and Jesus Christ were prophets sent from God.

“They [i.e. the Mahometans] own that there are angels, executioners of God's commands, designed for certain offices both in heaven and earth.

“They believe a general resurrection of the dead.

“They hold both a general judgment, and a particular one [at death].

“If a person ask, Why God hath created the infidels and wicked? Their answer is, That we ought not to be over-curious to search into the secrets of God.

“The morals of the Mahometans consist in doing good, and shunning evil.

“Their casuists hold, that actions done without faith in God are sins.

"They forbid to judge of uncertain things; because it doth not belong to us to judge of the things which God hath concealed from us.

“Their devotion extends even to the sacred names. When they pronounce the name of God, they make a bow; and add, most high, most blessed, most strong, most excellent, or some such epithet.

“The Mahometans tolerate all religions.

“They are commanded to pray, at the appointed times:

“And to give alms.

"They hold a heaven and hell.

“Mahomet forbad adultery to his followerers.

"They assert the immortality of the soul.”

Among the maxims of the Alcoran, are; “Forgive those who have offended thee. Do good to all.”

Now, would any reasonable Christian strike out these articles from his Creed, only because Mahomet has inserted them in his? And does it follow, that the most respectable persons in the world, who are influenced by these excellent principles of faith and practice, are, tor that reason, to be dubbed Mahometans? But the plain truth is, Mr. Sellon knows no more of Constantinople, than he does of Geneva. He is equally unacquainted with the real systems both of Turcism and Christianity. Even a superficial survey of his subject would have sufficed to inform him, that “The questions, relating to predestination and free-grace, have been agitated, among the Mahometan doctors, with as much heat and vehemence, as ever they were in Christendom.” The Mahometans have their sort of Arminians, no less than we. If Mr. Sellon asks, “How goes the stream of doctrines at Constantinople?" I also can ask, in my turn, How goes the stream at Ispahan? If the Mahometan Turks, of the sect of Omar, believe an absolute predestination and provi dence; it is no less certain, that the Mahometan Persians, of the sect of Halis, deny predestination, and assert free-will, with as much out rageous fervour, as Mr. John Wesley himself. But shall I hence infer, that Mr. Wesley is a Mahometan? I cannot, in justice, pay the Mahometans so bad a compliment. I rather say to Mr. Wesley, what the excellent Mr. Hervey said to him long ago, “Before you turn Turk, or Deist, or Atheist, see that you first become an honest man. They will all disown you, if you go over to their party, destitute of common honesty. Out of zeal to demolish the doctrine of election, you scruple not to overleap the bounds of integrity and truth."

After all, there is not that conformity between the Christian and the Turkish doctrine of predestination, which Mr. Wesley and his consistory would have us believe. Do Mahometans assert an election in Christ to grace and glory? Do they maintain, that, in the preordination of events, the means are no less preordained, than the end? Do they consider the Son of God, as joint agent with his Father, in the providential disposure of all things below? Do they hold the eternal covenant of grace, which obtained among the persons of the godhead, in behalf, and for the salvation, of a peculiar people, who shall, by the regenerating efficacy of the Holy Ghost, be made zealous of good works? Do the Mahometans believe any thing about final perseverance, and the inamissibility of saving grace? No such thing. I can easily prove their denial of these gospel doctrines, whenever that proof shall be necessary. And even as to the predestination of temporal events, the discipies of Omar (so far as I can hitherto find, and unless their doctrine be greatly mis-represented) seem to have exceeding gross and confused ideas. They appear to consider predestination as a sort of blind, rapid, over-bearing impetus, which, right or wrong, with means or without, carries all things violently before it, with little or no attention to the peculiar and respective nature of second causes. Whereas, according to the Christian scheme, predestination forms a wise, regular, connected plan? and Providence conducts the execution of it in such a manner as to assign their due share of importance to the correlative means; and secure the certainty both of means and end, without violating or forcing the intellectual powers of any one rational agent.

I have already scrupled to enrol Mr. Wesley himself on the list of mussulmen. Some of his tenets, however, are so nearly related to the worst branches of the Mahometan system, that he might very readily be mistaken, at first sight, for a disciple of Hali. Survey the dark side of Mahometism; and you will almost aver, that the portrait was intended for the mufti of Moorfields.

"The Mahometans would have us believe, that he [viz. Mahomet] was a saint, from the fourth year of his age: for then, say they, the angel Gabriel took him from among his fellows, while at play with them; and carrying him aside, cut open his breast, and took out his heart, and wrung out of it that black drop of blood, in which (say they) was contained the fomes peccati: so that he had none of it ever after.” - So much for Mahomet's sinless perfection.

“They hold it unlawful to drink wine; and to play at chess, tables, cards, or such like recreations.

“They esteem good works meritorious of heaven.

“Some will be honoured for their abstinence, in eating and drinking sparingly and seldom. Some profess poverty, and will enjoy no earthly things. Others brag of revelations, visions, and enthusiasms. Some are for traditions, and merits, by which [they suppose] salvation is obtained, and not by grace.'' How easy would it be, to run the parallel between Mahometans and some other folks! I must, however, partly acquit Mr. Wesley of Mahometism, on the head of recreations; for, in a certain two-penny extract from somebody else, published in the year 1767, Mr. Wesley recommends the recreating exercise of battle-door and shuttlecock, together with that of the wooden horse.

Beside the above articles, the Mahometans hold, that there is a third, or middle place, for the reception of some departed souls.

They deny the perpetuity of faith: beliveing, that whosoever renounceth it, loseth the merit of all his good works; and that, during all that time, he can do nothing acceptable to God, until he hath repented: and then he becomes a mussulman, or faithful, again.” Their dervises “live a very retierd and austere life; going bare-foot, with a leathern girdle round their bodies, full of sharp points, to mortify the flesh.”

The Mahometan bigotry is so excessive, that “they esteem themselves only to be wise, valiant, and holy. The rest of the world they look upon to be fools and reprobates; and use them accordingly.”

Among the followers of Mahomet, “Any person may be a priest, that pleases to take the habit and perform the functions; and may lay down his office when he will: there being nothing like ordination amongst them.” By this time, the reader may judge, whether the Church of England, or Mr. Wesley and his friend Sellon, make the nearest approaches to Mahometism. As to myself in particular, I can give a decisive proof that I am not a Mahometan. It might be better for Mr. Sellon, if I was. For, it is one of the essential commands, enjoined by the Alcoran, that Mahomet's disciples must “never dispute with the ignorant.” Consequently, were Mahomet and I master and scholar, the Yorkshire Arminian would have escaped the whole of his present chastisement.

Calvinism XII - The Judgment of the most eminent English Martyrs,...

SECTION XII.

The Judgment of the most eminent English Martyrs, who suffered for the Gospel, prior to the Settlement of the Reformation.

HAVING seen "how the stream goes at Constantinople,” let us weigh anchor, and return to our own more enlightened clime.

When it pleased God to visit this kingdom with a revival of gospel truth, the persons, whose interest it was to keep mankind involved in religious darkness, strained every sinew of secular and ecclesiastical power, to obstruct the progress of a doctrine, which, if not seasonably smothered, would inevitably prove fatal to that golden idol which the churchmen of those times worshipped. They well knew, that the scheme of free salvation, as it stands simply revealed in Scripture, lays the axe, not only to the tree, but to the very root, of Popery: which, like Dagon before the ark, cannot but fall, in proportion as the doctrines of gratuitous election and unconditional justification prevail and extend. Hence, the sword of persecution was unsheathed; and they, whose eyes God had opened, could sing, with those of old, For thy sake, we are killed all the day long; we are counted as sheep appointed to be slain.

While the sword was brandished, and while the fires were flaming, Protestants went cheerfully to death for the doctrines of Christ. But, now the sword is laid asleep, and the fires are extinguished, the doctrines of Christ are too generally forgot: nay, what is still more shocking, the very mention of those doctrines seems to frighten some nominal Protestants out of their wits. If we have lost the persecutions, we have also (in a manner) lost the spirit and faith of our Christian predecessors. This will too plainly appear, so far as the articles now in question are concerned, even from the few following examples.

I. William Sawtree, an early and eminent disciple of Wicklilf, was rector or vicar of St. Scithe's parish in London, and the first who had the honour of being burnt for Protestantism in England. That this worthy proto-martyr held the doctrine of election, appears, from part of a paper which he wrote and delivered to Arundel, archbishop of Canterbury. In the fullness of his zeal against angel-worshiping, he gave the prelate to understand, that, was he bound to worship one or the other, he would, of the two, “rather worship a man, whom he knew to be predestinated, than worship an angel:” assigning for reason, because “the one is a man of the same nature with the humanity of Christ, which an angel is not (f).” He suffered death, A. D. 1400.

(f) Fox’s Acts and Mon. vol. i. p. 587.

II. Mr. John Claydon, a devout tradesman of London, was burned in Smithfield, A. D. 1415. An English book had been found in his custody, from whence fteen articles of heresy were extracted, which served as the ground work of his prosecution and condemnation. Among these articles, was one, concerning election and perseverance, which ran thus: “5. That no reprobate is a member of the Church, but only such as be elected and predestinate to salvation: seeing the Church is no other thing but the congregation of faithful souls, who do, and will keep their faith constantly, as well in deed, as in word (g).'' This book, it seems, was entitled, “The Lanthorn of Light" (h): and Mr. Claydon confessed, that he “had got that copy of it transcribed and bound at his own expense.” On which, he was consigned to the flames, as incorrigible.

(g) Fox, i. 727.

(h) lts author was one Mr. John Grime, a Wicklifist. The short extract from it, cited above, may stand as a general specimen of the doctrines with which the writings of the earliest Protestants were fraught.

III. Mr. Thomas Bilney, who had been the instrument of bishop Latimer's conversion, was burned in 1531. Among the articles of his examination before Tonstal, bishop of London, were the following: “Whether he believed the Catholic Church may err in the faith, or no? And whether he thought the Catholic Church is only a spiritual Church, intelligible and known only to God?" To this double interrogatory, Bilney answered in these words “The Catholic Church” [i. e. the universal Church of God's predestinated people,] “can by no means err in faith: for it is the whole congregation of the elect; and so known only unto God, who knoweth who are his (i).” Two other ensnaring questions were put to this holy man: "Whether he believed all things, pertaining to salvation and damnation, to come of necessity, and nothing to be in our own wills? And, whether he believed God to be the author of all evil (k)?" He discreetly answered, “God is the author of the punishment only, but not of the offence (l).” He would never have been put to the test of such queries as these, if he had not been considered as a known predestinarian.

(i) Fox, ii. 213. (k) Ibid. (l) Ibid.

IV. James Bainham, a gentleman of birth and learning, by profession a lawyer, of the Middle Temple, suffered at the stake in 1532. His judgment concerning the evangelical doctrines, sufficiently appears from one of his answers, on his first trial before Stokesley, bishop of London. "All godliness,” said the martyr, "is given of God by his abundant grace: the which no man of himself can keep, but it" [i.e. the retaining, as well as the reception, of grace] “must be given him of God (m).” So highly was this chosen vessel favoured in his last moments, that, when his legs and arms were half consumed by the flames, he addressed the spectators in these memorable words: “O ye Papists, ye looked for miracles. Here you may see a miracle; for, in this fire, I feel no more pain, than if I were on a bed of down. It is to me a bed of roses.”

(m) Fox, ii. 246.

V. William Tyndal, though put to death in Flanders, must yet, as a native of this kingdom, be numbered among the English martyrs. He was a person of seraphic piety, indefatigable study, and extraordinary learning. His modesty, zeal, and disinterestedness, were so great, that he declared, he should be content to live in any country of England, on an allowance of ten pounds per annum, and bind himself to receive no more, if he might only have authority to instruct children and preach the gospel.

Heylin himself confesses, that Tyndal has a “flying-out against free-will.” It will presently be seen, that that early and eminent Protestant "flew out,” not only against free-will, but also against other corrupt branches of the Popish and Pelagian system.

His translation of the New Testament into English (for he did not live to finish the Old) made the cloud of persecution, which had been long hovering over him, burst into a storm. He was apprehended at Antwerp (through the treachery of an ungrateful Englishman, whom he had liberally relieved and hospitably entertained), and carried prisoner to Filford, eighteen miles from that city; where he was strangled and burned, in 1536.

During his residence at Antwerp, he sent over a letter to Mr. Frith, (then a prisoner in the Tower, and afterwards a martyr) exhorting him to fortitude under his sufferings for the name of Christ. "The will of God,” says Tyndal, in his letter, "be fulfilled! and what he hath ordained to be, ere the world was made, that come, and his glory reign over all (o)!” He adds: “There falleth not an hair, till God's hour be come: and when his hour is come, necessity carrieth us hence, though we be not willing. - Be cheerful; and remember, that, among the hard-hearted in England, there is a number reserved by grace; for whose sakes, if need be, you must be ready to suffer.” Nothing, on this side Heaven is so sublime and animating as the Christian philosophy. And what is the Christian philosophy, but another name for Calvinism?

(o) Fox, ii. 307.

From several treatises, written by Mr. Tyndal, a great number of propositions were extracted by the Papists, and branded for “heretical and erroneous.” Of these propositions, the following are some: (p)

“Faith only justifieth.

“The spirit of God turneth us and our nature, that we do good as naturally “[i. e. as necessarily] “as a tree brings forth fruit.

“Faith rooteth herself in the hearts of the elect.

"Works do only declare to thee that thou art justified.

“If thou wouldest obtain Heaven by the merits and deservings of thine own works, thou wrongest and shamest the blood of Christ.

“The true believer is heir of God, by Christ's deservings: yea, and in Christ was predestinate, and ordained unto eternal life, before the world began.

“In believing, we receive the spirit of God, which is the earnest of eternal life; and we are in eternal life already, and already feel in our hearts the sweetness thereof, and are overcome with the kindness of God and Christ: and therefore we love the will of God; and, of love, are ready to work freely, and not to obtain that which is given us freely, and whereof we are heirs already.

(p) Fox, ii. 497-499.

“The longing and consent of the heart to the law of God, is the working of the Spirit; which God hath poured into thy heart, in earnest that thou mightest be sure that God will fulfil all the promises he hath made to thee. It is also the seal and mark, which God putteth on all men whom he chooseth to everlasting life.

“Yea, and by thy good deeds shall thou be saved: not which thou hast done, but which Christ hath done for thee. For Christ is thine, and all his deeds are thy deeds. Christ is in thee and thou in him; knit together inseparably; neither canst thou be damned, except Christ be damned with thee; neither can Christ be saved, except thou be saved with him.” The two last clauses of this paragraph are, certainly, very strongly expressed. Yet they contain a truth, which our Lord himself affirmed, though in terms less harsh: Where I am, there shall also my servant come. - Because I live, ye shall live also. Christ mystical can no more perish than Christ personal. Tyndal goes on.

“Hark what St. Paul saith: If I preach, I have nought to rejoice in, for necessity is put unto me. - If I do it willingly,” saith he, “then have I my reward; that is, then am I sure that God's spirit is in me, and that I am elect to eternal life.

“We deserve not everlasting life, by our good works; for God hath promised it unto us, before we began to do good (q).” Yet Mr. Tyndal zealously asserted the necessity of good works, as fruits and proofs of faith: though, with Scripture, he utterly denied their being meritorious in the sight of God: witness the following excellent passage: "If thy faith induce thee not to do good works, thou hast not the right faith: thou only thinkest that thou hast it. For St. James saith, that faith, without works, is dead in itself. He saith not, that it is little, or feeble: but that it is dead: and that which is dead, is not. Therefore, when thou art not moved by faith to the love of God, and, by the love of God, to good works, thou hast no faith (r).” So true is it, on one hand, that real grace cannot but produce good works; and, on the other, that (as Tyndal observes) “if God had promised Heaven to us because of our works, we could then never be sure of our salvation: for we should never know how much, nor how long, we should labour, to be saved; and should always be in fear that we had done too little, and so we could never die joyfully (s).”

(q) Fox, ibid. 507. (r) Ibid. (s) Ibid. 500

Dr. Heylin shall contribute his mite towards demonstating the Calvinism of Tyndal: premising, first, that, in the judgment of the said doctor, “There were so many heterodoxies in the most of Tyndal's writings, as render them no fit rule for a reformation, any more than those of Wickliff before remembered.” Some of these “many heterodoxies,” Peter Heylin thus enumerates: "Grace,” saith Tyndal, “is properly God's favour, benevolence, or kind mind; which, of his own self, without our deservings, he reached to us: whereby [i.e. by which undeserved favour and benevolence] he was moved and inclined to give Christ unto us, with all other gifts of grace. Which having told us, in his Preface to St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans; he telleth us, not long after, that, in the 9th, 10th, and 11th chapters of the Epistle, the apostle teacheth us of God's predestination: from whence [i. e. from and out of God's predestination] it springeth althogether; whether we shall believe, or not believe; be loosed from sin, or not be loosed. By which predestination, our justifying and salvation are clear taken out of our hands, and put into the hands of God only: which thing is most necessary of all. For we are so weak, and so uncertain, that, if it stood in us, there would of truth no man be saved: the devil, no doubt, would deceive him. But now God is sure of his predestination; neither can any man withstand or lett him.”

Discoursing, in another place, of the act the will hath on the understanding, [a blunder of Heylin's; who meant to say, of the act which the understanding hath on the will,] “He [Tyndal] telleth us, that the will of man followeth the wit [i.e. followeth the understanding:] that, as the wit erreth, so doth the will: and as the wit [the understanding] is in captivity, so is the will: neither is it possible that the will should be free, when the wit is in bondage [through original sin].

“Finally, in the heats of his disputation with Sir Thomas More, who had said, that 'Men were to endeavour themselves, and captivate their understandings, if they would believe,' Tyndal first cries out, how beetle-blind is fleshly reason! and then subjoins, that the will hath no operation at all in the working of within my soul, no more than the child hath in begetting his father: for, saith Paul, It [i.e. faith] is the gift of God, and not of us.” Oh rare William Tyndal! "heterodox'' with a witness! - The reader need not be told, that the Sir Thomas More, whose tenet of free-will was thus combated by Tyndal, was the same Sir Thomas who was afterwards beheaded by Henry VIII. for exalting the pope's supremacy above the king's.

Arminianism will, beyond all question, join hands with Popery, in condemning the above extracts: though nothing can be more certain than this great truth, that the principles, which they assert, are the very essence of the gospel; and, if the Scriptures are true, must be reckoned in the number of its brightest and most valuable doctrines. I agree with the learned and pious Mr. Fox, that, “If these articles be made heresies, which refer the benefit of our inheritance of life and salvation to God's gift, and not to our labours; to grace, and not to merits; to faith, and not to the law of works; then let us clean shut up the New Testament, and away with God's word.” We have nothing to do, but to “leave Christ and his heretical gospel; and, in his stead, set up the bishop of Rome with his Talmud, and become the disciples of his decretals.”

VI. Mr. John Lambert received the academical part of his education in the University of Cambrige: where it pleased God to convert him by means of Mr. Bilney. His true name was Nicholson: but his subsequent dangers on a religious account induced him to assume that of Lambert, for his greater security against the storm that threatened. He was, however, burned in Smithfield, A. D. 1538; but with a fire so ill made (purposely to increase his pains), that his legs were consumed, and he still remained alive. Whereupon, two, who stood on each side of him, lifted him, on the points of their halberts, as high as the chain (which fastened him to the stake) would reach: and he, lifting up such hands as he had, his fingers' ends flaming with fire, cried to the people, with an audible voice, “None but Christ, none but Christ!'' And so, being set down again from their nalberts, he fell again into the fire, and breathed out his faithful soul into the arms of his Redeemer"

He had been chaplain to the English merchants at Antwerp. On an accusation of heresy, he was seized and conveyed to London. In the course of his examination before Warham, archbishop of Canterbury, he was asked, “Dost thou believe that whatsover is done of man, whether it be good or ill, cometh of necessity (z)?" Mr. Lambert easily perceived, that his being so closely questioned on the article of predestination, was no other than a trap laid for his life. His reply did equal honour to his prudence and faithfulness: "Unto the first part of your riddle, I neither can nor will give any definitive answer. Concerning the second part, whether man hath free-will or no, to deserve joy or pain? as for our deserving of joy, in particular, I think it very little or none; even when we do the very commandments and law of God. When you have done all things that are commanded you, saith our Saviour, say that ye be unprofitable servants. When we have done his bidding, we ought not so to magnify neither ourself, nor our own free-will: but laud him with a meek heart, through whose benefit we have done (if at any time we do it) his liking and pleasure. Hence Austin prayeth Domine, da quod jubes, et jube quod vis: Lord, give what thou commandest, and command what thou wilt. Concerning free-will, I mean altogether as doth St. Austin: that, of ourselves, we have no liberty nor ability to do the will of God; but are shut up and sold under sin, as both Isaiah and Paul bear witness: but by the grace of God we are rid and set at liberty, according to the portion which every man “[i.e. every regenerate man] "hath received of the same; some more, some less (a).”

(z) Fox. ii. 331

(a) Fox, Ibid. 335

Lambert was also asked, “Whether faith alone, without good works, may suffice to the salvation and justification of a man who has fallen into sin after baptism (b)?" The martyr answered in the words of St. Austin, “Opera bona non faciunt justum sed justificatus facit bona opera: The performance of good works does not justify a man, but the man who is justified performs good works (c).”

(b) Fox, ibid. 332.

(c) Ibid. 350.

Lambert was (d) not sentenced on his first examination. But, in a short time, he was apprehended again, and appealed from the judgment of the bishops, to the king. Henry VIII gave him the hearing in person. The stern overbearing roughness with which that sour unfeeling tyrant treated the evangelical prisoner; and the decent firmness with which the latter acquitted himself, amidst such insults as would either have quite intimidated, or violently exasperated the generality of men; may be read in almost any of our historians. The result was, that Mr. Lambert received sentence of death, and was executed in the manner above related (e).

(d) Bishop Burnet attributes Lambert's escape at this time, to the death of archbishop Warham, and to the change of counsels which that event, for a while, occasioned. – Hist. of the Reform, vol. i. p. 241.

(e) In the year 1541, one Alexander Seton, preacher at St Antholin's, brought himself into great danger for asserting the doctrines of grace. He was, at length, unhappily prevailed with to recant: and my reason for making any mention of him, is, because the doctrines, for which he had like to have lost his life, demonstrate, among a multiplicity of other instances, how high the Protestant tide ever ran in favour of Calvinism. Mr.Fox observes, (ii. 452.) that "the greatest matter alledged against Seton, was, for preaching free justification by faith in Christ, and against man's free-will, and against false confidence in good works.” The substance of his principles may be read in Fox, (u. s. p. 451.) and are well worthy of perusal, notwithstanding the man himself made afterwards a verbal retraction of them. Gold is gold, let who will fling it away.

VII. Mrs. Anne Ascough, (commonly called Askew,) a most pious and accomplished young lady, of whom the world was not worthy, adorns the Protestant calendar. Her understanding only was masculine, not her manners. The diamond was set in gold. The virtues of her heart added value to a genius originally bright, and solidly improved. Both were sanctified and ennobled by the grace of God. Hence, her piety was angelic; her meekness, invincible; her fortitude, supernatural. “She might have lived,” says Mr Fox, "in great wealth and prosperity, if she would have followed the world rather than Christ (f).” Her family and connections were of considerable rank: and, unless I am much mistaken, she herself seemed to have possessed at one time, some post of honour in the court of queen Catharine Parr. For the wit, delicacy, and good sense, with which she embarrassed the lord mayor of London, bishop Bonner, bishop Gardiner, and others, in the course of her examinations, the reader may consult Strype, Fox, and Burnet. She had been so inhumanly racked, during her imprisonment, that she lost the use of her limbs, and was forced to be conveyed to Smithfield in a chair. Three persons of the other sex suffered martyrdom at the same time; and were not a little strengthened in the last stage of their warfare, by the example, prayers, and exhortations of this excellent woman: who, notwithstanding, was so weakened and disabled by the brutal hardships of her confinement, that two Serjeants were obliged to support her at the stake, till the fagots were kindled. Amidst all these outward infirmities, her heaven-born soul continued triumphant and alert. She was filled with joy unspeakable and full of glory. Her faculties were so entire, and her presence of mind so extraordinary, that, as she stood at the stake, she frequently corrected Shaxton, while he was preaching the execution-sermon, when he advanced any thing contrary to the doctrines of Scripture. Sermon being ended, (which was preached in the open air,) the lord chancellor Wriothesley offered the King's pardon to the four martyrs, as they stood at their respective stakes, on condition of recantation. They all nobly refused. Not one of them would so much as look at the papers when held out to them. Mrs. Ascough, in particular, answered “I did not come hither to deny my Lord and Master.” The lord mayor then gave the word of command, fiat justitia: and the flames were immediately kindled. Thus these blessed martyrs ascended in chariots of fire to Heaven. The spot whereon they were executed was that open part of Smithfield, which lies over against the gate that leads to St. Bartholomew's church. Mrs. Ascough was not 25 years of age (h).

(f) Acts and Mon. ii. 489.

(h) In the History of Popery, vol. ii. p. 464, a piece of spiritual Poetry is preserved, which was written and sung by Mr. Ascough, while she lay under sentence of death in Newgate. Considering it as the production of a Lady, whose constitution was quite broken with sufferings; and not forgetting, that it was composed above two hundred and twenty years ago, (viz. A. D. 1546.) it will reflect the reverse of dishonour on the amiable authoress, to insert it here.

LIKE as the armed knight

appointed to the field,

with this world will I fight,

and faith shall be my shield

Faith is that weapon strong,

which will not fail at need:

My foes therefore among

therewith I will proceed.

As it had in strength

and force of Christ his way

It will prevail at length,

tho' all the Devils say nay.

Faith in the fathers old

obtained righteousness:

which maketh me so bold

to fear no world's distress.

I now rejoice in heart,

and hope bids me do so:

for Christ wil take my part,

and ease me of my woe.

Thou sayest, Lord, whoso knock,

to them wilt thou attend:

Undo therefore the lock,

and thy strong pow’r down send.

More enemies I have,

than hairs to crown my head,

Let them not me deprave,

but fight thou in my stead.

On thee my care I cast,

for all their cruel spight:

I set not by their haste,

for thou art my delight.

I arn not she that list

my anchor to let fall

for every drizzling mist:

my ship's substantial.

Not oft use I to write,

in prose, nor yet in rhyme:

Yet will I shew one sight,

which I saw in my time:

I saw a royal throne,

where justice should have sit;

but in her stead was one

of moody cruel wit.

Absorb'd was righteousness,

as by a raging flood;

Satan in fierce excess

Suck'd up the guiltless blood.

Then thought I - Jesu, Lord,

when thou shalt judge us all,

hard is it to record

on these men what will fall,

Yet, Lord, I thee desire,

for what they do to mee

Let them not taste the hire

Of their iniquitee.

That she believed the doctrines of grace, and experienced their power in her own heart, is evident, from the drift, both of the few writings she left behind her, and of her religious behaviour in general. I shall, particularly, instance this, in the article of final perseverance. In an account of her sufferings, written by herself, after observing that the lord chancellor Wriothesley assisted in torturing her on the rack, with his own hands, till she was almost dead; and that, after she was taken off from the rack, she sat for near two hours on the bare floor, disputing with the lord chancellor, who vehemently importuned her to renounce the faith: she adds, "But my Lord God, I thank his everlasting goodness, gave me grace to perservere, and will do, I hope, to the very end.' What, under the pressure of those languishing circumstances, she only expressed an hope of, she shortly after expressed her full assurance of: "I doubt not,” said she, “but God will perform his work in me, like as he hath begun.” I desire no stronger proof of her Calvinism. Whosoever "doubts not,” that the work of grace is of God's beginning, and shall be of God's completing, must either adopt such incoherencies, as would disgrace the meanest understanding, or be clear in those other articles of the gospel with which these are so intimately and necessarily connected.

VIII. I must not forget the eminently learned Doctor Robert Barnes; of whose conversion, pious Mr. Bilney had been the instrument. Lord Cromwell's fall (who was beheaded July 28, 1540.) seems to have involved in it the doom of this illustrious Protestant, who was burned for the gospel on the 30th of the same Month.

Heylin's Arminian pen shall, for the present, suffice to prove the Calvinism of Dr. Barnes.

“It is no marvel,” says that virulent Polemist, "if we find somewhat in his [i.e. in Barnes's] writings, agreeable to the palate of the Calvinists and rigid Lutherans. From whence it is, that, laying down the doctrine, of predestination, he [i.e. Dr. Barnes] discourseth thus: But yet, sayest thou, that he [God] giveth to the one mercy; and, to the other, none. I answer, what is that to thee? Is not his mercy his own? Is it not lawful for him to give it to whom he will? Is thine eye evil, because his is good? Take that which is thine, and go thy way. For, if he will shew his wrath, and make his power known, over the vessels of wrath ordained to damnation; and to declare the riches of his glory, unto the vessels of mercy, which he hath prepared and elected unto glory; what hast thou there with to do? - But here will subtle blindness say, 'God saw before, that Jacob should do good: he saw also that Esau should do evil; therefore did he condemn him.' Alas, for blindness! what? will you judge of that which God foresaw? These children being yet unborn, they had done neither good nor bad: and yet one of them is chosen, and the other of them is refused. St. Paul knoweth no other cause, but the will of God; and will you needs discuss another? He saith not, I will have mercy on him who I see shall do good; but, I will shew mercy to whom I will.

"God, of his infinite power, lets nothing be exempted from him, but all things to be subject unto his action: and nothing can be done by them, but by his principal motion. So that he worketh in all manner of things, that be either good or bad: not changing their nature,” [i.e. God is not the author of sin, as though he changed anything to bad from good,] "but only moving them to work after their natures, so that good worketh good, and evil worketh evil: and God useth them both as instruments. And yet doth he nothing evil, but evil is done alone through the will of man; God working by him, but not evil, as by an instrument.” Old father Heylin, who cites these judicious passages, is not very well pleased with them. He is particulary disgusted with, what he calls, the subtlety in the close thereof: and, because he cannot distil the least drop of Arminianism from these flowers of paracise, he sagely concludes, that Barnes draws nearer to “the Zuinglians, touching God's working on the will, than possible may be capable of a good [i.e. of an Arminian] construction.”

Will the reader permit me to subjoin the testimony of two worthy persons, who suffered for the gospel in Scotland, prior to the Reformation? I am sensible, that their suffrage does not strictly pertain to the argument of the present Section. It is not, however, entirely foreign to it; as martyrs, of all nations, are brethren; and as it will conduce to demonstrate, that the first Protestants of that country, no less than of our own, were companions in faith as well as in patience.

I. Mr. Patrick Hamelton was a person of very illustrious descent; nearly related, both by father's and mother's side, to Jas 5. the then reigning king of Scotland. Early in life, he was made Abbot of Ferme; and his subsequent preferments would have been very great, had not God opened his eyes, to see the Antichristianism of Popery. Making the tour of Germany, he became acquainted with Luther and other learned Protestants; whose conversation was blessed to the conversion of this excellent man. On his return to his own country, he was very assiduous in communicating to others the spiritual light he had received. His sermons were animated with great zeal against the doctrinal corruptions which then prevailed; and his labours were crowned with such success, as alarmed the ruling ecclesiastics; who, from that time forward, marked him for the shambles. Being cited to answer before James Beton, archbishop of St. Andrew's; such was the martyr's courageous zeal, that he made his appearance early in the morning, some hours before the time appointed. The prelate, and his consistory of bishops and abbots, being totally unable to resist the wisdom and spirit with which he asserted the doctimes of Christ, realized the old Popish argument, "you have the word, but we have the sword” by condemning him on the spot: and, in such haste were they to dispatch him, that he was burned the same afternoon, which was either the last day of February, or the first of March, 1527. “Learned men,” says Mr. Fox, “who communed and reasoned with him, do testify, that the following are the very articles for which he suffered:

“1. Man hath no free-will.

“2. A man is only justified by faith in Christ.

“3. A man, so long as he liveth, is not without sin.

“4. He is not worthy to be called a Christian, who doth not believe that he is in grace.

“5. A good man doth good works; good works do not make a good man.

“6. An evil man bringeth forth evil works: evil works, being faithfully repented, do not make an evil man.

“7. Faith, hope, and charity, be so linked together, that one of them cannot be without another, in one man, in this life (l).”

(l) Fox's Acts and Mon. ii. 183.

In exact conformity with the above articles, part of the sentence of condemnation, pronounced on him immediately after his trial, ran thus: “We, James, by the mercy of God, archbishop of St. Andrew's, primate of Scotland; - have found Master Patrick Hamelton many ways infamed with heresy; disputing, holding, and maintaining divers heresies of Martin Luther and his followers, repugnant to our faith: - that man hath no free-will: that man is in sin so long as he liveth; that children, incontinent after baptism, are sinners; that all Christians, who be worthy to be called Christians, do know that they are in grace; that no man is justified by works, but by faith only; that good works make not a good man, but a good man doth make good works; that faith, hope, and charity, are so knit, that he, who hath one, hath the rest. - With divers other heresies and detestable opinions; and hath persisted so obstinate in the same, that, by no counsel nor persuasion, he may be drawn therefrom to the way of our right faith. - All these premises being considered, We - do pronounce, &c. (m)."

(m) Fox, ibid.

This great and holy martyr, who was executed in the 23d year of his age, drew up a short sketch of Evangelical Divinity, which was afterwards published, with a recommendatory preface, by an eminent martyr of our own country, the learned and pious Mr. John Frith (n), who suffered death, at London, in 1533. The whole of this concise treatise is inserted into Mr. Fox's inestimable Martyrology. An extract from it will, I hope, both please and profit the reader.

(n) This Mr. Frith merits a distinct article to himself, in the present essay. But I am forced to omit both him and a multitude of others: else, my Octavo would swell to a Folio. I find myself obliged to be superficial, in order to be tolerably concise. Yet let me just observe, that Mr. Frith might vie with Calvin, or with Zuinglius, or even with Luther himself, as a predestinarian. Heylin affirms, that, in this respect, Frith soared higher than even Mr. Tyndal's penetrating sigiit could follow: and yet, as I have shewn in this very Section, Tyndal looked as far into predestination, as most men ever did. But, it seems, Frith could contemplate the glorious lustre of that Sun, with a still more acute and less dazzled eye. No wonder, therefore that Heylin should stare with affrightment, at what he terms “Frith's high-flying conceits of predestination.” See Heylin's Misc. Tr. p. 544 aud 547.

Mr. Hamelton well knew, that half of our religious mistakes arise from not cleary ascertaining the difference between the law and the gospel, and from not exactly distinguishing the true nature of each. This he does, with great judgment and accuracy in the following remarks.

“The law saith, Pay thy debt. (Viz. the debt of perfect obedience to God). The gospel saith, Christ hath paid it.

“The law saith, thou art a sinner; despair, and thou shalt be damned. The gospel saith, thy sins are forgiven thee, be of comfort, for thou shalt be saved.

“The law saith, make amends for thy sins. The gospel saith, Christ hath made it for thee.

"The law saith, the Father of Heaven is angry with thee. The gospel saith, Christ hath pacified him with his blood.

“The law saith, where is thy righteousness, goodness, satisfaction? The gospel saith, Christ is thy righteousness, goodness, and satisfaction.

"The law saith, thou art bound [over] to me, to the Devil, and to Hell. The gospel saith, Christ hath delivered thee from them all.”

On the subject of faith, he observes, that this important term signifies, “To believe in Christ, and to believe his word, and to believe that he will help thee in all thy need, and deliver thee from all evil.” He affirms, that “Faith is the gift of God,” which he thus proves:

“Every good thing is the gift of God.

"Faith is good.

"Ergo, faith is the gift of God.”

Nor does he stop here; but immediately adds this consecutory proposition: “Faith is not in our power.” Which he likewise argues syllogistically:

“The gift of God is not in our power.

“Faith is the gift of God.

“Therefore, faith is not in our power.”

On the doctrine of works, he expresses himself with great perspicuity and strength of reason. “No man,” says he, “is justified by the deeds of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ. Moreover, since Christ, the Maker of Heaven and Earth and all that is therein, behoved to die for us; we are compelled to grant, that we were so far drowned and sunk in sin, that neither our deeds, nor all the treasures that ever God made or might make, could have holpen us out of it. Therefore, no deeds or works [of our own performing] may make us righteous.” He then obviates an objection which, he foresaw, either the ignorance or the perverseness of some might possibly alledge: “If works make us neither righteous nor unrighteous, then (thou will say) it is no matter what we do. I answer: If thou do evil, it is a sure argument that thou art evil, and wantest faith. If thou do good, it is an argument that thou art good, and hast faith; for a good tree beareth good fruit, and an evil tree evil fruit. Yet good fruit makes not the tree good, nor evil fruit the tree evil. A man is good, ere he do good deeds; and evil, ere he do evil deeds.

“Whosoever believeth or thinketh to be saved by his works, denieth that Christ is his Saviour. For how is he thy Saviour, if thou mightest save thyself by thy works? or whereto should he die for thee, if any works [of thine] might have saved thee? - What is this, to say Christ died for thee? Verily, that thou shouldest [else] have died perpetually; and that Christ, to deliver thee from death, died for thee, and changed thy perpetual death into his own death. For thou madest the fault, and he suffered the pain: and that for the love he had to thee before thou wast born, when thou hadst done neither good nor evil. Now, seeing he hath paid thy debt, thou needest not, neither canst thou pay it; but shouldest be damned, if his blood were not [shed]. But, since he was punished for thee, thou shalt not be punished.

“I do not say, that we ought to do no good deeds: but I say, we should do no good works to the intent to get the inheritance of Heaven, or remission of sin. For if we believe to get the inheritance of Heaven through good works, then we believe not to get it through the promise of God. Or if we think to get remission of our sins by our deeds, then we believe not that they are forgiven us; and so we count God a liar. For God saith, Thou shall have the inheritance of Heaven, for my Son's sake; thy sins are forgiven thee, for my Son's sake: and you say, it is not so, but I will win it through my works.

“Thus, you see, I condemn not good deeds, but I condemn the false trust in any works: for, all the works, wherein a man putteth any confidence, are therewith poisoned, and become evil.

"Wherefore, thou must do good works; but beware that thou do them not [with a view] to deserve any good through them; for, if thou do, thou receivest the good, not as gifts of God, but as debt to thee, and makest thyself fellow with God, because thou wilt take nothing of him for naught. And so shall thou fall, as Lucifer fell for his pride.”

Is it not astonishing, that so young a man, a native and inhabitant of Scotland, should write with such precision, and in so masterly a style, almost two hundred and fifty years ago?

II. No person, who knows anything of the Scottish history, can be entirely unacquainted with the character and sufferings of the famous and venerable Mr. George Wishart, who was burned at St. Andrew's, A. D. 1545. His remarkable history, and the spirit of prophecy with which he more than once proved himself to be endued, are so well known, that I shall enter (o) directly on the evidence of his Calvinism.

(o) The description of Mr. Wishart's person, dress, and demeanour, drawn by one who had been his pupil, at Cambridge (for Mr. Wishart received, his education, and spent some years in that university), present us with an artless, but lively, picture of antique simplicity, too singular to be overlooked. He was a man of tall stature, bald-headed, and on the same a round French cap of the best; judged to be of a melancholy complexion, by his physiognomy. Black-haired, long-bearded, comely of personage, well spoken, after his country of Scotland, courteous, lowly, lovely, glad to teach, desirous to learn, and was well travelled. Having on him, for his habit, or clothing, never but a mantle, or frieze gown to the shoes; a black Milan fustian doublet; plain black hosen; coarse new canvass for his shirts; and white falling bands, and cuffs at his hands. All the which apparel he gave to the poor; some weekly, some monthly, some quarterly, as he liked: saving his French cap, which he kept the whole year of my being with him. He was modest, temperate, fearing God, and hating covetousness: for his charity had never end, night, noon, nor day. He forebore one meal in three, one day in four, for the most part; except something to comfort nature. He lay hard, upon a puff of straw; and coarse new canvass sheets which, when he changed, he gave away. He had commonly by his bed-side, a tub of water; in the which (his people being in bed, the candle put out, and all quiet), as I being very young, being assured, often heard him; and, in one light night discerned him. He taught with great modesty and gravity; so that some of his people thought him severe, and would have slain him: but the Lord was his defence. And he, after due correction for their malice, by good exhortation amended them, and went his way. His learning was no less sufficient than his desire: always prest and ready to do good in that he was able, both in the house privately and in the school publickly; professing and reading divers authors.” See Fox vol. ii. p. 521.

On his examination, before the cardinal archbishop of St. Andrew's, he was accused of representing God as the author of sin. “Thou, false heretic, saidest, that man hath no free-will, but is like to the Stoics, who say, that it is not in man's will to do anything; but that all concupiscence and desire cometh by God, whatsoever kind it be of.”(p) Mr. Wishart in his answer, utterly denied that the doctrine of salvation by grace is pregnant with so blasphemous a consequence: “My lords, I said not so. I say, that as many as believe in Christ firmly, unto them is given liberty; conformably to the saying in St. John, If the Son make you free, then shall ye verily be free. On the contrary, as many as believe not in Christ Jesus, they are bond-servants of sin. He that sinneth is bound to sin.”(q) What is this, but to say? 1. That man's will is not free to good, until after he is converted to the faith of Christ. 2. That, prior to conversion, and in a state of nature, man cannot but offend God. 3. That man can only be made free indeed, by the grace of Christ breathing faith into his beart. - If this be not Calvinism, I am at a loss to know what is.

A clause, occurring in one of Mr. Wishart's last supplications to God, shall conclude this Section:

“We desire thee heartily, that thou conserve, defend, and help thy congregation which thou hast chosen before the beginning of the world; and give them thy grace, to hear thy word, and to be thy true servants in this present life.”(r)

(p) Ibid. 524.

(q) Ibid. 524.

(r) Ibid, 525.

Calvinism XIII - The Judgment of our English Reformers.

SECTION XIII.

The Judgment of our English Reformers.

VERY little need be said, to prove the Calvinism of those illuminated divines, who were made, by Providence, the instruments of extending and fixing the English Reformation. The whole series of our public service, the uniform tenor of our articles, and the chain of doctrine asserted in each Book of Homilies, are a standing demonstration, that the original framers and compilers believed in, and worshipped, the God of their fathers, after that way which Papists and Arminians term heresy.

Even Mr. Sellon does not, in his 7th page, so much as attempt to call in question the Calvinism of our reformers. Finding himself hard drove, he fairly gives up the point: ex claiming, however, at the same time, that the reformers brought their Calvinism with them from the church of Rome. ''Let me tell you,” says the angry conceder, "that our first re formers, in the point of predestination, did say over those lessons which they had learned in the Roman schools.'' I agree with my adversary, in acknowledging, that the reformers were predestinarians; but I pity his weakness in venturing to assert, on the lame authority of Christopher Potter, that those excellent men imported their doctrine of predestination from Rome. I have already shewn, that it has, for ages and ages back, been the ruling endeavour of Popery to stifle, demolish, and exterminate, the whole system of Calvinism, both root and branch. You might as reason ably affirm, that the glory which beamed from the face of Moses was kindled at Hell-fire; as insinuate, that we are indebted to Rome for any of our Thirty-nine Articles. Mr. Sellon's concession, however, induces me to offer him a plain query. To what end have you scribbled a libel, with a professed view to Arminianize the Liturgy, Articles, and Homilies, which you yourself acknowledge to have been composed by Calvinistic divines? Can any man in his senses, really believe, that a set of predestinarians would draw up a plan of national faith and worship on the Arminian model? Impossible. Your quotation, therefore, from Christopher Potter, which you have adopted for your own, has stabbed the whole hypothesis of your pamphlet to the very heart.

In vain do Messieurs Wesley and Sellon disconsolately walk arm in arm, round about our established Zion, surveying her walls, and shaking their heads at her bulwarks; but un able either to find or to make a breach, whereat to enter. Happy would they deem themselves, could they prove that the reformers were Arminians. But, alas! the church of England was settled under King Edward VI. long before Arminius himself was born: and after wards re-settled by Elizabeth, when the same Arminius was an infant in his cradle. Pelagians were (if I may so phrase it) the Arminians of those times; and Pelagians are, expressly and by name, branded for “vain talkers,” in the ninth article. It clearly follows, I. That the original compilers of the articles were not Pelagians. And, 2. That they could not be Arminians: for Arminius was then unborn and unbegotten (s).

(s) He was born at Oudewater, 1560.

Bishop Burnet himself, as I have elsewhere observed, was compelled to grant, That "In England, the first Reformers were generally Sublapsarians (t): "tacitly admitting, that the rest of those apostolic men were (dreadful news to Mr. Sellon!) Supra-lapsarians (u). I could corroborate this assertion, if need required, from other very plain and conclusive passages, scattered through Burnet's historic writings. Waving, however, at present, the farther testimonies of that prelate, I shall adduce the attestations of two more modern historians: neither of whom can incur the remotest suspicion of leaning toward Calvinism. These are, Mr. Tindal, the reverend continuator of Rapine; and David Hume, Esq; whose history, considered merely as a composition, does honour to the author and the age. I begin with the former.

(t) Expos. of the 17th Article.

(u) The Supra-lapsarians suppose, that, in the decree of election and preterition, God did not consider mankind either as fallen or unfallen; but chose some, and rejected others, considered merely as beings that should infallibly exist.—The Sublapsarians suppose, that the elect were chosen, and the reprobate passed by, not merely as creatures; but, complexly, as sinners. Each hypothesis has been adopted by some of the best and greatest men that ever lived. Calvinism is the general name under which the partizans of both are comprehended. The church of England system, as I shall shew hereafter, is, strictly speaking, formed on the Sub-lapsarian principle: though with such moderation as not to exclude the former.

“In England, a middle course was steered: “[i. e. we admitted the doctrines, but rejected the discipline, of Geneva].”Though the articles of religion are a plain transcript of St. Austin's doctrine, in the controverted points of original sin, predestination, justification by faith alone, efficacy of grace, and good works; yet are they composed with such a latitude.” No quibbling, good Mr. Tindal. If the articles of the Church of England, respecting those tenets, are "a plain transcript of St. Austin's doctrine;'' it irresistibly follows, that they only, who believe as St. Austin did, can honestly subscribe to Austin's articles. For, of what value is a fence, whose chasms and apertures are of "such a latitude,” as to admit the very persons, whom it was professedly planted to exclude? To imagine, that the reformers, who had, themselves, gone so heartily and strongly into the doctrines above mentioned; and who, moreover, digested those doctrines into a national creed, to continue as the standing test of ministerial orthodoxy; to imagine that these identical reformers would leave such loop-holes of evasion, as would counteract the very design of that test, and render the test itself null and void; is equivalent to supposing that a man would first fortify the door of his house with as many bolts and bars as he can, and then purposely leave his door on the latch, that every intruder who pleases may enter in.

Mr. Tindal proceeds. “The most rigid Calvinist can give his assent to all the thirty-nine articles, except three, which relate to the discipline of the Church.” Thirty-six, then, out of the thirty-nine, are most rigidly Calvinistic: else, the most rigid Calvinist could not “give his assent to all the articles except three.” And even those three may be both assented, and subscribed to, with full purpose of heart, by every man who is a Calvinist in matters of doctrine only.—”For though the doctrine of the Church of England, as it stands in the articles and homilies, agrees with that of the Calvinists; yet the discipline is entirely different.” I grant that the discipline of our Church is "entirely different" from that mode of discipline embraced by some Calvinists: and may it ever continue so! In nothing did the wisdom of our reformers more strikingly appear, than in connecting the purest doctrines with the best form of ecclesiastical government and discipline. A species of discretion, in which the foreign leaders of the reformation were not so happy. —Now, on weighing the collected amount of Mr. Tindal's (x) testimony, I would submit this natural question to the reader: Would the English reformers have established a summary of doctrines “agreeable to that of the Calvinists,” if the said reformers had not been Calvinists themselves? To solve this enquiry, we need only propose another: would such men (for instance) as Pelagius and Arminius, have drawn up such articles, in particular, as the 9th, 10th, 11th, 12th, 13th, 14th, 15th, 16th, 17th, and 18th?

(x) The passages, here cited from that writer, occur in the third volume of his Continuation (octavo 1758} p. 275. - I cannot pass over, without a moment's animadversion, what this historian imprudently advances, respecting the liturgy of the Church of England. "The liturgy,” says he, p. 276, “or Common Prayers, were chiefly taken from the offices of the Church of Rome.” —This, I well know, is a pretty general opinion. But I cannot help believing it to be unjustly founded. The agreement between some parts of our public service, and some parts of the Romish missals, falls extremely short of proving the main point. We use the Lord's Prayer (for example) in common with the Papists: yet we receive it, not from Rome, but from the New Testament. A pen, not altogether contemptible, affirms, that the compilers of the liturgy examined not only the Popish forms, but likewise “all other service books then in use. These they compared with the primitive liturgies: and whatever they found in them consonant to the Holy Scriptures, and the doctrine and worship of the primitive Church, they retained and improved; but the modern corruptions and superstitious innovations of latter ages, they entirely discharged and rejected.” See Downe's Lives of the Compilers, p. 150. What I shall farther add, I give from an authority incomparably more decisive and respectable. “Our Church of England,” says bishop Stillingfleet, “hath omitted none of those offices wherein all the ancient Churches were agreed: and where the [primitive] British or Gallican [Church] differed from the Roman, our [present] Chinch hath' not followed the Roman, but the other. And therefore our Dissenters do unreasonably charge us with taking our offices from the Church of Rome.” Stillingfleet's Origines Britannicae, chap. 4. p. 237. - The Gallican liturgy (extremely different from the Roman) was introduced, it seems, into England, in the beginning of the fifth century: and is said to have been originally framed by Polycarp and Irenaeus. The learned bishop gives a large account of this ancient form of worship; proves it to have been the basis of that now established; and points out a great variety of particulars, in which it differed from the form imposed by the Roman bishops. See ibid. 216.

Let us next attend to the florid and ingenious Mr. Hume. “The first reformers in England, as in other European countries, had embraced the most rigid tenets of predestination and absolute decrees: and had composed, upon that system, all the articles of their religious creed. But these principles having met with opposition, [viz. about sixty years after,] from Arminius and his sectaries, the controversy was soon [i.e. soon after the rise of Arminianism in the Dutch provinces, at the period aforesaid] brought into this island, and began here to diffuse itself.” Again: *'all the first reformers adopted these principles.” viz. the principles of "Absolute decrees.” No wonder, therefore, when the Arminians started up to oppose the ancient faith, that, "Throughout the nation, they laid under the reproach of innovation and heresy. Their protectors were stigmatized; their tenets canvassed; their views represented as dangerous and pernicious.”

Hitherto, we have dealt in generals. We shall now (though so plain a case is far from requiring it) descend, briefly to particulars,

Those divines, to whom, under God, this kingdom is chiefly indebted for its reformation from Popery, were Wickliff, who laid the basis; and Cranmer, Ridley, Latimer, Hooper, Martin, Bucer, and Peter Martyr. Though the two latter were foreigners, yet, as they greatly assisted in that important work, they deservedly stand high on the list of English reformers, Wickliff's Calvinism has been already proved. I proceed, therefore, to the rest.

I. Dr. Thomas Cranmer, archbishop of Canterbury, went as far as he could, or at least as far as he dared, in promoting the Protestant cause, during the last boisterous years of Henry VIII. For some time after his elevation to the primacy, he was far from possessing that strong evangelical light, which he afterwards attained. God led him from step to step. He advanced rather slowly, but solidly and surely. He was not (for instance) clear, even as to the manner of Christ's presence in the Eucharist, until after the year 1538 (b). But the path of the just is alight that shines more and more to the perfect day. His knowledge of divine things was abundantly brighter, when Edward VI. ascended the throne in 1547. The famous catechism, ascribed to bishop Ponet, and of which I have elsewhere (c) given an account, received the sanction of Cranmer's own subscription. We must, therefore, admit, either that Cranmer was as absolute a predestinarian as Calvin himself; or charge the venerable archbishop with such extreme dissimulation and hypocrisy, as are utterly incompatible with common honesty. For, this catechism (as I have shewn in my tract referred to below) asserted the doctrines of predestination, efficacious grace, free justification, and final perseverance, in the fullest, strongest, and most explicit terms: and, if solemn subscription to so strict a test be not a sufficient proof of a man's real belief, all integrity and social confidence are at an end. That Cranmer actually did set his hand to it, appears from the unexceptionable testimony of his brother-bishop and brother martyr, Dr. Ridley.

(b) “The archbishop was not yet convinced of the falsehood of transubstantiation, but continued a stiff maintainer of the corporal presence; as appears from his being unhappily concerned in the prosecution of Lambert, who was burnt, Nov. 20, 1538.” Downes, ubi supra, p. 13.

(c) In my pamphlet, entitled, The Church of England Vindicated, &c. - Dr. John Ponet was translated, from Rochester to Winchester, in 1550. According to Godwin, he was one of the most learned persons of the age. Graecam linguam callebat ad amussim, mathematicarum porro scientiarum ad miraculum usque peritus:” i.e. a most masterly Graecian, and a prodigy for his skill in mathematics. He excelled also in the mechanic part of Philosophy: witness the curious clock, which he constructed for the use of Henry VIII. It not only pointed to the hours, and to the day of the month; but shewed the lunar variations, together with the ebbing and flowing of the sea. While Edward VI. lived (who had loved him from his earliest childhood, and had reaped much benefit from his sermons; the good bishop enjoyed an uninterrupted series of honours and repose. But on the accession of Mary, he retired to Germany, where he died at Strasburgh, August 11, 1556, aged only 40 years. Vide Godwin. De Praeful. Angl. p. 237, 238.

“A catechism,” says Mr. Strype, “for the instruction of children in the fundamentals of true religion, passed the same synod [viz the synod of 1552]: but who was the author, was not known in those clays. Bishop Ridley was charged to be the author and publisher thereof, by Ward and Weston, in the disputation with him [held, in the succeeding reign of Mary, prior to his martyrdom] at Oxford. Ridley declared he was not: but confessed, that he saw the book, perused it after it was made, and noted many things for it; and so consented to the book. Weston then told Ridley, that he [viz. Ridley], being then a bishop in his ruff, had made him [i.e. had made Weston] subscribe it. But Ridley re plied, he [had] compelled no man to subscribe: indeed, he [himself] had set his hand to it, and so did Cranmer; and that then it [i.e the catechism] was given to others of the convocation to set their hands, but without compulsion. This passage merits a remark or two.

1. The catechism above mentioned (by some called King Edward's Catechism; by some, bishop (e) Ponte’s; by others, Dr. Alexander Nowel's, because afterwards enlarged and re-published by that learned dean, in the reign of Elizabeth) was approved and passed by a public synod, held at London, under the express warrant of king Edward himself. 2. The synod which approved, passed, and subscribed this catechism, was the self-same synod, or convocation, which proved, passed, and subscribed the book of articles (f): though the latter were not published until the summer following. Consequently, 3. The Church of England is indebted for those articles which at this day are subscribed by her clergy, to the care and piety of that very synod, who publicly and solemnly set their seal to that catechism. 4. The catechism being fraught with the highest Calvinism, they who subscribed it (and Cranmer among the rest,) were either temporizing hypocrites, or sincere Calvinists. 5. Bishop Ridley evidently had a hand in compiling it: witness his own words, already quoted, testifying that he had “noted many things for it?" i.e. in modern language, he had furnished some hints towards the materials out of which it had been framed. 6. He owned and assented to the contents of it, in the face of the Popish court at Oxford, by whom he was tried and condemned to the flames. 7. From what passed on that occasion, it is conspicuous, that nothing gives the Church of Rome so much offence as the Calvinistic doctrines asserted in that Protestant catechism: Mr. Sellon, therefore, is prodigiously mistaken, in affirming, that, as Predestinarians, “Our reformers did only say over again those lessons which they had learned in the Romish schools.” 8. The use of this catechism was enjoined by the united authority of Church and State. Both the synod and the king's privy council concurred in giving it their sanction. “In May, the next year,” says Strype, "viz. 1553, the council sent their letters abroad in behalf of this catechism, enjoining it to de taught to scholars, as the ground and foundation of their [religion*] learning; as it is expressed in the Warrant Book(g).” Whence it is evident 9. That the reformers and Protestant clergy of England considered the belief of predestination, and its relative doctrines, as essential and fundamental to the very existence of Christianity itself. 10. The injunctions of the council respecting this catechism were issued at the same time that the articles themselves were published, viz. in May, 1553. The catechism, therefore, was designed as a larger display of those evangelical principles, which were virtually, but more briefly, contained in the articles. The reason is evident. The articles were intended for the clergy, who were supposed not to need so extended and minute a detail of doctrine: a compendious summary would, to them, answer the end, full as well. But the case was judged to be different with the laity of that time. It seemed necessary, that the Church articles should be explained to them in a more particular and expanded manner; especially, to young persons: and therefore the catechism was enjoined, as a kind of familiar and copious elucidation of the articles comprized in a narrower compass. The articles were (if I may so speak) the text: the catechism was the commentary.

(e) Mr. Strype believed, that Dr. Alexander Nowel had the chief hand in framing this catechism. I suppose it is on the authority of bishop Bale, that it is sometimes singly attributed to Dr. Ponet. Possibly Ponet might digest and throw it into form. But it’s rough materials were, most probably, furnished by the joint care of the reformers in general, and of Cramner in particular, who was one of the prime agents, in everything that related to religion during this whole reign.

(f) “While the parliament was sitting this winter, a synod also was held, wherein was framed and concluded a Look of articles of religion, purified and reformed from the errors of Popery and other sects; - for the avoiding of controversy in opinions, and the establishment of a godly concord in certain matters of religion. A catechism, for the instruction of children in the fundamentals of true religion, passed the said synod.” Strype; ut supra.

Dr. Fuller also ascribes the catechism to the same person who drew up the articles: i.e. to the reformers themselves. “With these “[i.e. with the articles of religion agreed upon in convocation,] “was bound a catechism, younger in age (as bearing date of the next year,) but of the same extraction, [relating to this convocation.] as author thereof.” Where let it be observed, that the reformers resided personally in this convocation, and were the very life and movers of all that was acted in it. – Fuller goes on: “indeed it [viz. the catechism] was first compiled (as appears by the King’s patent prefixed) by a single divine, charactered ‘pious and learned:’ but afterwards perused, and allowed by the bishops, and other learned men, &c. and by royal authority commanded to all subjects, [and] commanded to all school-masters to teach it their scholars.” Fuller’s Church Hist. book 7. p. 421. – The “single divine,” charactered, in the King’s patent, as “pious and learned;” was probably, bishop Ponet: to whom the care of revising and methodizing the catechism seems to have been committed: and whom Heylin himself characterizes as “an excellent Graecian, well-studied with the ancient fathers, and one of the ablest mathematicians which those times produced.” Heylin also observes, concerning the catechism itself, that it was “bound up with the book of articles, countenanced by the King’s letters patent prefixed before it, approved by many bishops and learned men, and generally voiced to be another of the products of this convocation:” though himse3lf, for reasons sufficiently obvious, affects to doubt of the latter circumstance. Misc. Tracts, p. 551. 553.

(g) Ibid. p. 369

Peter Heylin's concession, in favour of this catechism, is very observable. “For my part,” says that Arminian, “I can see no possible in convenience which can follow on it, in yielding so far as to admit the passages before recited,” [viz. the passages cited by Prynne from the said catechism, which happened to be the very same passages which I too shall presently cite from it in this Section] “to be fully consonant to the true, genuine sense and proper meaning of all, but more especially of our 9th, 10th, 13th, 16th and 17th articles, then newly composed. So that whatsoever is positively and clearly affirmed in this catechism, of any of the points now controverted, may be safely implied as the undoubted doctrine of our Church and articles.”

The sum of all, so far as concerns Cranmer, is; that, if he was an honest man (which I see no reason to suspect), he must have been, what Arminians would now call, a rigid predestinarian. Nor is this alternative limited to that good archbishop. It holds equally true of all and every divine, who had any hand in our excellent reformation.

As my former Vindication of the Church of England, from the Charge of Arminianism, has been long out of print; an extract from the above celebrated catechism, though already given in that pamphlet, seems due to the readers of this; and the rather, as Mr. Sellon has been so indecently rash as to affirm (p. 53) that this valuable monument of good old Church - doctrine “does not contain much more sound divinity than the old Koran of Mahomet.” Whether Cranmer, and those other excellent men, who were the fathers of our English reformation, deserve the name of Mahometans, with which this ignorant, foul-mouthed writer dares to brand their venerable memories, will best appear, from the following passages which occur in the catechism itself. The speakers are supposed to be master and scholar.'

“As many as are in this faith steadfast, were fore-chosen, predestinated, and appointed to everlasting life, before the world was made.

“Witness hereof, they have within their hearts the spirit of Christ, the author, earnest, and unfailable pledge of their faith. Which faith only is able to perceive the mysteries of God; only brings peace unto the heart; only taketh hold on the righteousness which is in Christ Jesus.

“Master. Doth then the spirit alone, and faith (sleepe we never so securely, or stand we never so rechless or slouthful), so worke all things for us, as without any helpe of our owne, to carry us idle up to Heaven?

“Schol. I use, Master, as you have taught me, to make a difference between the cause and the effect. The first, principal, and most proper cause of our justification and salvation, is the goodness and love of God, whereby he chuse us for his, before he made the world, After that, God granteth us to be called, by the preaching of the gospel of Jesus Christ, when the Spirit of the Lord is poured into us: by whose guiding and governance we be led to settle our trust in God, and hope for the performance of his promise. - From the same Spirit also cometh our sanctification; the love of God and of our neighbour; justice, and uprightness of life. Finally, to say all in summe: Whatever is in us, or may be done of us, honest, pure true, and good; it altogether springeth out of this most pleasant rocke, from this most plentiful fountain, the goodness, love, choice, and unchangeable purpose of God. He is the cause: the rest are the fruits and effects.

“Yet are also the goodnesse, choice, and Spirit of God, and Christ himselfe, causes, conjoinde and coupled each with other; whiche maybe reckoned among the principal causes of salvation. As oft, therefore, as we use to say, that we are made righteous, and saved, by faith only; it is meant thereby, that faith, or rather trust, alone, doth lay hand upon, understand, and perceive our righteous-making to be given us of God freely, that is to say, by no deserts of our own, but by the free grace of the Almighty Father. Moreover, faith doth ingender in us love of our neighbour, and such workes as God is pleased withall; for, if it be a lively and true faith, quickened by the Holy Ghost, she is the mother of all good saying and doing.

“By this short tale it is evident, whence, and by what means we attained to be righteous. For, not by the worthiness of our deservings, were we either heretofore chosen, or long agoe saved; but by the only mercy of God, and pure grace of Christ our Lord: whereby we were, in him, made to doe these good workes, that God had appointed for us to walke in. And although good works cannot deserve to make us righteous before God, yet do they so cleave unto faith, that neither faith can be found without them, nor good workes be anywhere found without faith.

“Immortality and blessed life God hath provided for his chosen, before the foundations of the world were laid.

“As for the sacrifices, cleansings, washings, and other ceremonies of the law; they were shadows, types, images, and figures, of the true and eternal sacrifice that Jesus Christ made upon the crosse; by whose benefit alone, all the sinnes of all beleevers, from the beginning of the world, are pardoned; by the sole mercy of God, and not by any merits of their owne.

“As soon as ever Adam and Eve had eaten of the forbidden fruit, they both dyed: that is, they were not only liable to the death of the body, but they likewise lost the life of the soule, which is righteousnesse. And forthwith the divine image is obscured in them, and those lineaments of righteousnesse, holinesse, truth, and knowledge of God, which were exceeding comely, were disordered, and almost obliterated. The terrene image only remained; coupled with unrighteousnesse, fraud, carnal affections, and grosse ignorance of divine and heavenly things. From thence, also, proceeded the infirmity of our flesh. From thence, that corruption and confusion of the affections and desires. Hence, that plague, hence that seminary and nutriment of all sinne, with which mankinde is infected which is called original sinne. Moreover, nature is so depraved and cast downe, that unlesse the goodness and mercy of Almighty God had helped us by the medicine of grace, as in body we are thrust downe into all the miserys of death, so it was [i.e. it would have been] necessary that all men of all sorts should be cast into eternal torments, and fire which cannot bee quenched.

“The Holy Ghost is called holy, not onely for his owne holinesse, but because the elect of God are made holy by him. The Church, is the company of those who are called to eternal life by the Holy Ghost, by whom she is guided and governed: which, since she can not be understood by the light of sense or nature, is justly placed among the number of those things which are to be beleeved. And it [i.e. the church] is therefore called the Catholicke, that is, the universal assembly of the faithful; because it is not tied to any certaine place."

From the above extracts, an idea may be formed of the doctrines, which Cranmer, and his fellow-reformers, and the members of the church of England, maintained in those days of Protestant purity. In such high estimation was this evangelical catechism held, that king Edward himself honoured it with a prefatory epistle (dated at Greenwich, May 20.) “Commanding and charging all schoolmasters whatsoever, within his dominions, as they did reverence his authority, and as they would avoid his royal displeasure, to teach this catechism, diligently and carefully, in all and every their schools: that so, the youth of the kingdome might be settled in the grounds of true religion, and furthered in God's worship.” Add to this, that it was not only published in English, and annexed to the church-articles, for the instruction of the King's own subjects; but also in Latin, that foreigners might, with the more certainty, judge for themselves, and see, with their own eyes, what were the genuine and authentic doctrines of our reformed church.

Archbishop Cranmer's Calvinism did not expire with the reign of king Edward. The great and good prelate had, it seems, soon after the accession of Mary, been falsely accused of temporizing in some religious matters, with a view to ingratiate himself with the new Popish Queen This he courageously disproved, in a printed paper, to which he set his name; and wherein, among others, is the following remarkable paragraph. “And although many, either unlearned or malicious, do report that Mr. Peter Martyr is unlearned; yet, if the Queen's highness will grant thereunto, I, with the said Mr. Peter Martyr, and other four or five, which I shall chuse, will, by God's grace, take upon us to defend, not only the common prayers of the church, the ministration of the Sacraments, and other rites and ceremonies, but also all the doctrine and religion set out by our sovereign lord, king Edward VI., to be more pure and according to God's word than any other that hath been used in England these thousand years (i).” - Now, the catechism, already cited, was a part, and a very distinguished part, of “the doctrine and religion set forth by king Edward VI.” Consequently in the above challenge, that catechism was one of those Protestant regulations, which Cranmer publicly offered to defend against the whole army of Popish disputants. - Surely, if ever there was a Calvinist on earth, Cranmer (k) was one! And so was,

(i) Fox, vol. iii. p. 77.

(k) Dr. Edwards cites a passage from this renowned archbishop which may serve to confirm the general tenor of the evidences already produced. In Cranmer's second treatise against Gardiner, these words, it seems, occur: “Our Saviour Christ, according to the will of his eternal Father, when the time thereof was fully accomplished, taking our nature upon him, came into the world, from the high throne of his Father; to give light to them that were in darkeness and the shadow of death, and to preach, and give pardon and full remission of sins to all his elected.” - See Edward's Veritas Redux, p. 526.

II. Dr. Nicholas Ridley, that illustrious reformer, prelate, and martyr. He became bishop of Rochester in 1547 5 and was translated to London in 1550, on the deprivation of Bonner. Everybody knows that he was finally burned at Oxford, A. D. 1555, at one stake with bishop Latimer. As the two episcopal martyrs were led out to the place of execution (which was before Balliol College), they looked up to Cranmer's prison-window, in hopes of seeing him at it, that they might bid the last farewell to their beloved metropolitan. But, at that instant, the archbishop was “En gaged in disputation with some friars: so that he was not then at his window. But he looked after them, with great tenderness: and kneeling down, prayed earnestly, that God would strengthen their faith and patience, in that their last, but painful passage.” Being arrived at the stake, Ridley embraced Latimer with surprising cheerfulness, and testified his assurance of divine support, in these remarkable words: “Be of good heart, brother; for God will either assuage the fury of the flame, or else strengthen us to abide it. “Nor was Latimer less filled with joy in the Holy Ghost: for when the fire was kindled a Ridley's feet, the former thus encouraged his blessed fellow-victim, “Be of good comfort, Mr. Ridley, and play the man! We shall, this day, by God’s grace light such a candle in England, as, I trust shall never be put out (m).''

(m) Fox, iii. p. 430.

In producing a specimen of bishop Ridley's rooted attachment to the Calvinian doctrines, I shall begin with a general, but a very decisive proof of it; I mean the extreme veneration, in which, to the end of his life, he held that excellent catechism of the church of England, published in 1553. The abstracts from it, which have been already laid before the reader, demonstrate that it was drawn up in the highest strains of Calvinism. The two following passages, written by bishop Ridley, during his imprisonment, and just before his martyrdom, will, consequently, demonstrate him to have been a very high Calvinist. “Finally, T hear say, that the catechism, which was lately set forth in the English tongue, is now [viz. after the restoration of Popery, by queen Mary] in every pulpit condemned. Oh, devilish malice! and most spitefully injurious to the redemption of mankind purchased by Jesus Christ! Indeed, Satan could not long suffer that so great light should be spread abroad in the world (n).” In his admirable farewell-letter to his relations, he observes, that, while Protestantism flourished under pious king Edward, “the church of England had, through the infinite goodness and abundant grace of Almighty God, great riches of heavenly treasure; great plenty of God's true, sincere word; the true and wholesome administration of Christ's holy sacraments; the whole profession of Christ's religion, truly and plainly set forth in baptism; the plain declaration and understanding of the same, taught in the holy catechism, to have been learned of all true Christians (o).”

(n) Fox, ibid. p. 372. (o) Fox., ibid. p. 432.

Another general proof of Ridley's soundness in the faith may be taken from the pathetic anguish with which he lamented the abolition of the Homilies and Articles. The church of England, says he, “had also holy and wholesome Homilies, in commendation of the principal virtues. She had, in matters of controversy, articles so penned and framed after the holy Scriptures, and grounded upon the true understanding of God's word, that, in short time, if they had been universally received, they would have been able to have set in Christ's true religion, and to have expelled many false errors and heresies. But alas! I may well cry out, O God, the heathens are come into thy heritage: they have defiled thy holy temple and made Jerusalem a heap of scones. These thieves [meaning the Papists, superinduced by queen Mary] be of Samaria. These Sabeans and Chaldeans, these robbers (p) have rushed out of their dens, and robbed the church of England of all the foresaid holy treasure of God (q),” viz. of her catechism, liturgy, homilies and articles. Thus did this plaintive nightingale warble forth his woes. Thus did he hang his harp upon the willows, and mourn over the ruins of Zion.—Blessed be God, there were mercies in reserve for this kingdom, which the weeping martyr little imagined, and which soon reversed the face of things. Ridley was executed, October 16, 1555. On the 17th of November, 1558 queen Mary went to give an account of her butcheries to God; and Elizabeth mounted the throne.

(p) Would to God, that the present age afforded none of these! No Protestant Sabeans, no Samaritans in crape! who even while they deprive their maintenance from the breasts of the church sect to rob her of her choicest “Holy treasure,” the doctrines which are her crown of glory.—The doctrines which the robbers themselves kneeling at God's altar have solemnly vowed to maintain - the doctrines to which they have also deliberately affixed the subscription of the hand—The doctrines, to which they have not only subscribed and vowed at the time of their ordination, but ratified both vow and subscription by immediately receiving the symbols of Christ's precious body and blood as a seal to the whole! - If incontestable fact did not compel us to the contrary, we could hardly believe it possible for the utmost depravity of human nature to aim at the subversion of a Church which the intentional subverters are tied by such a chain of engagements to support.

(q) Fox, ibid. p. 432.

The above general evidences of bishop Rid ley's principles are extremely strong and conclusive. I shall, however, lay before the reader some farther proofs still more explicit and particular.

The doctrine of election, or predestination to life, appears to have been a favourite article with this eminent servant of God. Making mention of bishop Farrar, bishop Hooper, Mr. Rogers, and others, who had lately poured out their souls unto death for the testimony of Christ; he observes, these “were burned at Smithfield in London, with many others in Essex and Kent: whose names are written in the book of life (r).” Again: "I doubt not in the infinite goodness of my Lord God, nor in the faithful fellowship of his elect and chosen people (s).” His definition of the true invisible church is not a little remarkable: by the church of England, says Ridley, “I mean, the congregation of the true chosen children of God in this realm of England: whom I ac knowledge, not only to be my neighbours, but rather the congregation of my spiritual brethren and sisters in Christ; yea, members of one body, wherein, by God's grace, I am and have been grafted in Christ (t).” In his pathetic "farewell to all afflicted for the gospel,” he thus concludes: "farewell, farewell, O ye, the whole and universal congregation of the chosen of God, here living upon earth; the true Church Militant of Christ; the true mystical body of Christ; the very household and family of God, and the sacred temple of the Holy Ghost; farewell! Farewell, O thou little flock of the high, heavenly pastors of Christ: For to thee it hath pleased the heavenly Father to give an everlasting and eternal kingdom.—Fare well, thou spiritual house of God, thou holy and royal priesthood, thou chosen generation, thou holy nation, thou won spouse; farewell farewell (u).”

(r) See Fox, iii. p. 374.

(s) Ibid. p. 432.

(t) Ibid. p. 432.

(u) Ibid. p. 439.

God's election of his people is founded on his free love to them from everlasting. This love is unalterable and perpetual. Whence the following just observation of Ridley: “In all ages, God hath had his own manner, after his secret and unsearchable wisdom, to use his elect, sometimes to deliver them, and to keep them safe; and sometimes to suffer them to drink of Christ's cup, i.e. to feel the smart and to feel the whip. And though the flesh smarteth at the one, and feeleth ease at the other; is glad of the one, and sore vexed in the other; yet the Lord is all one toward them, in both: and loveth them no less when he suffereth them to be beaten: yea, and to be put to bodily death, then when he worketh wonders for their marvellous delivery.—This his love toward them, howsoever the world doth judge of it, is all one. He loved as well Peter and Paul, when (after they had, according to his blessed will, pleasure, and providence, finished their courses, and done their services appointed them by him, here, in preaching of his gospel) the one was beheaded, and the other was hanged or crucified by the cruel tyrant Nero; as when he sent his angel to bring Peter out of prison, and [as when] for Paul's delivery he made all the doors of the prison to fly wide open (x)."

(x) Ibid. 446.

As Ridley thus believed the love, with which God embraces his people, to be unchangeably and forever the same, amidst all the varying dispensations of Providence; he must, by virtue of that principle, have likewise believed the final perseverance of those who are thus loved and chosen. According to him, perseverance is the special gift of God: “I wish you grace in God,” says he, “and love of the truth: without which, truly established in mens' hearts by the mighty hand of the Almighty God, it is no more possible to stand by the truth in time of trouble, than it is for wax to abide the heat of the fire (z).” Omnipotent grace being the only root of perseverance, the martyr cannot help breaking out, elsewhere, into this pious exclamation! “Well is he that ever he was born, for whom thus graciously God hath provided! having grace of God, and strength of the Holy Ghost, to stand steadfastly in the height of the storm! happy is he, that ever he was born, whom God, his heavenly Father, has vouchsafed to appoint to glorify him, and to edify his church, by the effusion of his blood (a)!"

(z) Ibid. 372.

(a) Ibid. 446. - To the same effect he speaks in his conference with Latimer: "The number,” says Ridley, “of the criers under the altar must needs be fulfilled; if we be secrecated thereto, happy be we. It is thy greatest promotion that God giveth in this world, to be such Philippians, to whom it is given not only to believe, but also to suffer. But who his able to do these things” [viz to believe in Christ, and to suffer for his sake?] “Surely, all our ability, all our sufficiency is of God. He requireth, and promiseth " [i.e. he promises to work in us the duties and graces he requires of us] – “Pray for me; pray for me; I say, pray for me. For I am sometimes so fearful that I would creep into a mouse-hole. Sometimes, God doth visit me again with his comfort. So he cometh and goeth, to teach me to feel and to know my infirmity; to the intent to give thanks to him that is worthy; lest I should rob him of his due, as many do, and almost all the world.” Fox, Ibid. p. 368.

It was an essential branch of Ridley's Theology, that this great gift of perseverance is vouchsafed to all the elect. “The Father,” says he, “who guides them that be Christ's to Christ, is more mighty than all they, [i.e. than all the persecutors of his people ] and no man is able to pull them [i.e. to pull those who belong to Christ] out of the Father's hands (b).” — What a strong affiance in this grand article, do his following words display! “Blessed be God, who has given you a manly courage, and hath so strengthened you in the inward man, by the power of his spirit, that you can contemn, as well all the terrors, as also the vain flatteries and allurements, of the world: esteeming them as vanities, mere trifles, and things of nought. Who hath also wrought, planted, and surely established, in your hearts, so stedfast a faith and love of the Lord Jesus Christ; joined with such constancy, that, by no engines of antichrist, be they never so terrible or plausible, ye will suffer any other Jesus, or any other Christ, to be forced upon you, besides him, whom the Prophets have spoken of (c).” — He that is in us is stronger than he that is in the world: and the Lord promiseth unto us, that, for the elects' sake, the days of wickedness shall be shortened (d).” "Ye, therefore, my brethren, who pertain unto Christ, and have- the seal of God marked in your foreheads; that is, to wit, who are sealed with the earnest of the spirit to be a peculiar people of God; quit yourselves like men, and be strong. Ye know, that all that is born of God, overcometh the world: and this is our victory that overcometh the world, even our faith. Let the world fret, let it rage never so much, no man can take us out of the Father's hands, for he is greater than all. — Who shall lay anything to the charge of God's elect! It is God that justifieth; who then shall condemn? — Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? — We are certainly persuaded, with St. Paul, by the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that no kind of thing shall be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord (e).” I shall cite him but once more on the head of perseverance: “I consider the subtleties of Satan, and how he is able, by his false per suasions, to deceive, if it were possible, even the chosen of God (f).”

(b) Ibid. p. 370. (c) Ibid. 371. (d) Ibid. (e) Ibid. 372. (f) Ibid. 442.

Ridley's view of Providence was equally Calvinistic. "Know ye, that the heavenly Father hath even a gracious eye and respect toward you, and a fatherly provision for you: so that, without his knowledge and permission, nothing can do you harm. Let us therefore cast all our care upon him, and he shall provide that which shall be best for us. For if, of two small sparrows, which both are sold for a mite, one of them lighteth not on the ground without your Father, and all the hairs of our heads are numbered; fear not, saith our master Christ, for ye are of more value than many small sparrows (g)."

(g) Ibid. 437.

His doctrine, concerning the necessity and efficacy of divine influence, may be learned from that striking prayer of his: “The Lord vouchsafe to open the eyes of the blind, with the light of grace; that they may see, and perceive, and understand the words of God, after the mind of his spirit (h)." And that he supposed redemption to be limited to a certain number, the following passage clearly evinces: "The death and passion of Christ our Saviour was, and is, the one, only, sufficient, and everlasting available sacrifice, satisfactory for all the elect of God, from Adam, the first, to the last that shall be born in the end of the world (i).”

(h) Ibid. 445. (i) Ibid. 440.

So much for the doctrine of this great man. A word or two, concerning his general character, and usual manner of living, may not be unacceptable to the reader.

He was born in that part of Northumberland, called Tynedale, near the borders of Scotland; and received the finishings of his education, partly at Paris, and partly at Cambridge. "His behaviour,” say the compilers of his article in the Biographical Dictionary, “was very obliging, and very pious; without hypocrisy, or monkish austerity: for, very often, he would shoot in the bow, and play at tennis; and was eminent for the great charities he bestowed.” While he resided on his vicarage of Herne, in Kent, Providence directed him to the perusal of Bertram's celebrated Treatise on the Lord's Supper, written about seven hundred years before (l) which effectually convinced him of the falsehood and absurdity of transubstantiation. By his acquaintance with Cranmer, and other excellent men of that time; and, above all, by his unwearied application to the Holy Scriptures; his eyes were farther and farther opened: and he settled by degrees into a consistent, evangelical Protestant. After his appointment to the see of London, his exaltation only served to render him more humble, affable, and useful. Nothing could exceed the tenderness and respect with which he treated Mrs. Bonner, mother to his predecessor the superseded bishop of London. “Bishop Ridley, being at his manor of Fulham, always sent for this Mrs. Bonner (who lived in a house adjoining) to dinner and supper; with one Mrs. Mungey, bishop Bonner's sister: saying, Go for my mother Bonner. He always placed her at the head of his table, even though any of the king's council were present (m}.”

(l) Bertram, or Ratramus, was contemporary with Cotteschalc.

(m) See Fox, iii. 360.

“His mode of life was, as soon as he had risen and dressed, to continue in private prayer for half an hour. He then retired to his study, till ten: at which time he went, with his family, to common prayer: and, every day, read a lecture to them. After prayers, he adjourned to dinner; where his conversation was, always, wise and discreet; sometimes, merry and cheerful. This conversation he would indulge for an hour after dinner, or else, in playing at chess. The hour for unbending being expired, he returned to his study, where he continued till five; except suitors, or business abroad, otherwise required. Then he went to common prayers in the evening: and, after supper, having diverted himself another hour as before, he re turned to his study, where he continued till eleven at night. From thence, going apart to private prayer, he retired to bed: where he, and his household (made virtuous by his example and instruction) enjoyed the sweet re pose of a day well spent. A little before king Edward died, he was nominated to the bishopric of Durham. But, great as the honours were, which he received, and were intended him; the highest were reserved for him under queen Mary: which were, to be a prisoner for the gospel, a confessor of Christ in bonds, and a martyr for his truth.”

He was esteemed the most learned of all the English reformers: and was inferior to none of them in piety, sanctity, and clearness of evangelical light (o). His doctrinal system was, as I have already shewn, formed entirely on the plan of Scripture; to which sacred volume his love and attachment were inexpressible. “In a walk in the orchard at Pembroke Hall (Cambridge), which is to this day called Ridley's Walk, he got by heart almost all the epistles in Greek (p)” To this circumstance, himself alludes, in the following passage, written a little before his martyrdom: “Farewell, Pembroke Hall, of late my own college, my cure and my charge. What case thou art in now, God knoweth: I know not well. Thou wast ever named, since I knew thee, which is not thirty years ago, to be studious, well learned, and a great setter forth of Christ's gospel, and of God's true word. So I found thee, and blessed be God, so I left thee, indeed. Woe is me for thee, my own dear college, if ever thou suffer thyself by any means to be brought from that trade. In thy orchard (the walls, butts, and trees, if they could speak, would bear me witness) I learned without book almost all St. Paul's Epistles: yea, and, I ween, all the canonical epistles, save only the Apocalypse, Of which study, though in time a great part did depart from me, yet the sweet scent thereof, I trust, I shall carry with me into Heaven. The profit thereof, I think, I have felt in all my life-time ever after (q)." Were more of our modern divines thus intimately versed in the book of God, the Church of England would not be in such danger from the Arminianism of some who call themselves her sons.

(o) He was a person small in stature, but great in earning: and profoundly read in divinity. His fine arts, and his great improvements in all the branches of literature necessary to a divine, gave him the first rank, in his profession; and his life was answerable to his knowledge. He had a hand in compiling the Common-Prayer Book; and of all, who served at the altar of the Church of England, he bore, perhaps, the most useful testimony, both in life and death to her doctrine.” Rolt’s Lives of the Reformers, p. 172.

(p) Ibid. p. 305.

(q) Fox, iii. 434.

III. Mr. Hugh Latimer, some time bishop of Worcester, was another of our reformers and martyrs. Though he did by no means shine as a scholar, but appears to have been rather deficient in human learning; he was, nevertheless, conspicuous for his piety, zeal, and undisguised simplicity. His talents, as a preacher, were plain; and not unpopular. His sermons, more practical than speculative (r) were chiefly calculated to expose the reigning immoralities of that age, in a style (though he often preached at court) altogether suited to the capacities of the vulgar and the unlettered. But the coarse sounding of Latimer's ram's-horn was, perhaps, as useful to the common people, as the softer music of the silver trumpet modulated by Cranmer, Ridley, and the other reformers, was to the learned and polite.

(r) His zeal and sincerity inspired him with figures of speech, to which learning and study cannot rise. His discourses were directed, rather to the: reformation of manners, than to the controversies of religion. In short, Latimer, with a moderate share of learning and abilities, was a much greater man, a much better Christian, and a much worthier bishop, than many of his order, who have shone with a more conspicuous figure.” Holt, p. 174.

Though we must not always expect to find in the discourses of Latimer, that exactness of logical accuracy, and that strictness of systematic harmony, which mark the performances of more accomplished divines; still we shall be sure to meet with genuine signatures of a gracious heart, and with lively vestiges of the knowledge that comes from above. And, notwithstanding the Arminians affect to claim this reformer for their own, the absolute want of truth, on which that claim is founded, will abundantly appear from the many striking and decisive passages, which I shall shortly lay before the reader.

Before I produce those passages themselves, permit me, as usual, to premise a general observation, in favour of our martyr's Calvinism. I mean the terms of respect and affection, in which he mentions the names of Austin, Luther, and Peter Martyr, who were all strenuous champions for absolute predestination. St. Austin, whom Mr. Sellon ignorantly and abusively styles “The great and giddy apostle of the Calvinists;” this same St. Austin is called, by Latimer, “A good Christian, and a defender of Christ's religion and of the faith (*).” —Mr. Sellon terms Luther “A weather-cock:’ but Latimer terms him, "That wonderful instrument of God, through whom God hath opened the light of his holy word unto the world (/).''—Nor does Latimer speak less respectfully of Peter Martyr: “There are yet among us,” said he, in a sermon preached before king Edward, “two great learned men, Peter Martyr, and Bernard Ochi-nus, which have an hundred marks apiece: I would the King would bestow a thousand pounds on that sort."

The hand likewise, which Latimer had in drawing up the first part of our book of Homilies, must be considered as a loud and standing evidence of his Calvinism. He had resigned his bishopric (which he never afterwards resumed), about seven years before the death of Henry VIII. on the passing of the six articles: and, about a twelvemonth after, was committed prisoner to the tower; where he lay till the accession of Edward VI. On his release, “he accepted an invitation from his friend archbishop Cranmer, and took up his residence at Lambeth: where he assisted the archbishop in composing the Homilies, which were set forth by authority in the first year of king Edward.” These homilies are still a part of our ecclesiastical establishment. Let any man but read them; and then doubt if he can, whether the composers were not Calvinist; i.e. Anti-Pelagians; for, at that time, and long after, the very name of Arminians was utterly unknown.

Now for some particular proofs of Latimer's orthodoxy. In producing these, I shall begin,

(1) With what he advances concerning election, or predestination unto life. “Cursed be he that doth the work of God negligently, or guilefully. A sore word for them, [i.e. for those ministers] that are negligent in discharging their office, or have done it fraudulently: for that is the thing that maketh the people ill. But true it must be, that Christ saith; Many are called, but few are chosen.”

“Some will say, now, why need' we preachers then? God can save his elect without preachers? A goodly reason! God can save my life, without meat and drink: need I none therefore? God can save me from burning, if 1 were in the fire: shall I run into it therefore? No, no. I must keep the way that God hath ordained, and use that ordinary means that God hath assigned (z).” According, therefore, to Latimer (and, indeed, according to the Scripture and right reason), the decree of predestination does not render the use of ordinary means unnecessary. On the contrary, the decree is that very root, from whence the means originally derive their efficacy.

Every Calvinist maintains, that good works arc the consequence, and the evidence, of election: and, of those good works, restitution, to such persons as we may have wronged, is certainly one. Bishop Latimer was exactly of our mind. “Some examples have been, of open restitution: and glad may he be, that God v/as so friendly unto him, as to bring him unto it in this world. I am not afraid to name him: it was master Sherington; an honest gentle man and one that God loveth. He openly confessed, that he had deceived the king • and he made open restitution. O, what an argument may he have against the devil, when he shall move him to desperation! God brought this out, to his amendment. It is a token, that he is a chosen man of God, and one of his elected.”

The passage immediately following, though it may tend to prove the vanity of making any calculation respecting those times and seasons which the Father hath put in his own power; demonstrates, however, the undoubting firmness, with which Latimer held the doctrine of election. “The world was ordained to endure, as all learned men affirm, and prove it with Scripture, six thousand years. Now, of that number, there be passed 5552: so that there is no more left, but 448. And, furthermore, those days shall be shortened. It shall not be full 6000 years. The days shall be shortened for the elects' sake.”

“St. Paul, that elect instrument of God, shewed a reason wherefore God layeth afflictions upon us. We cannot come to that unspeakable felicity, which God hath prepared for his, except we be clean in our hearts.”

The hypocrisy of too many religious professors, and the frequent deceitfulness of appearances, occasioned Latimer to make the following remark: “There is no great difference, here in this world, between the elect and the reprobate. For the very unfaithful give alms, &c. So that, I say, we cannot tell, as long as we be here in this world, which be elect, and which not. But at the last day, then it shall appear who is he that shall be saved; and, again, who shall be damned.” There were some, however, of whose election the good bishop could have no doubt: witness what he said, above, concerning “master Sherington.”

He justly observes, that the certainty of our election is to be inferred from the truth of our conversion. No Calvinist says (nor, indeed, will the nature of the case permit any reason able man to argue so perversely and absurdly), I am elected, and therefore I shall be saved, whether 1 am converted or not. On the contrary, this is our language: God would not have converted me, if he had not elected me. We are for beginning at the bottom of the ladder, and for taking the chain by the right end. Hence (as bishop Bancroft very properly observed at the Hampton-court conference), we argue, not descendendo, but ascendendo: i.e. we rise to the fountain, by following the stream; or arrive at the knowledge of our own particular election, by the solid marks of sanctification. We judge of God's objective purposes concerning us, by that subjective work of grace which he hath wrought within us. As election is the radical cause of regeneration; so regeneration, and its fruits, are the clue, by which we are guided to the sight and sense of election. This was the precise view in which Latimer considered the point: whence he says, and we say with him, “We need not go about to trouble ourselves with curious questions of the predestination of God: but let us rather endeavour ourselves that we may be in Christ. For, when we be in him, then are we well: and then we may be sure that we are ordained to everlasting life.” Again, “When you find these three things in your hearts, [viz. repentance, faith, and a desire to leave sin,] then you may be sure your names are written in the book, and you may be sure also, that you are elected and predestinated to everlasting

Elsewhere, he comes more expressly to the point: “If thou art desirous to know, whether thou art chosen to everlasting life, thou mayest not begin with God; for God is too high: thou canst not comprehend him. Begin with Christ, and learn to know Christ, and wherefore he came: namely, that he came to save sinners, and made himself subject to the law, and a fulfiller of the law, to deliver us from the wrath and danger thereof. If thou knowest Christ, then thou mayest know further of thy election (h).”

(h) Ib. p. 886, 887, so again, p. 889. “Here is now taught you, how to try out your election; namely, in Christ: for Christ is the accounting-book and register of God: even in the same book, that is, Christ, are written all the names of the elect. Therefore we cannot [viz. at first] find our election in ourselves neither yet in the high counsel of God. ‘Where then shall I find my election?’ In the counting-book of God, which is Christ.”

Speaking of Joseph and his afflictions, he adds, “Here you see how God doth exercise those which appertain to everlasting life. Treating of the last day, he still keeps God's election in view: “The trumpet shall blow, and the angels shall come and gather all those that offend, from among the elect of God. All the elect shall be gathered unto him, and there they shall see the judgment; but they themselves shall not be judged, but shall be like as judges with him. After that the elect are separated from the wicked, he shall give a most horrible and dreadful sentence unto the wicked. Then shall the elect shine as the sun in the kingdom of God.” Thus, says this worthy martyr, will Christ come, “in great honour and glory, and will make all his faithful like unto him, and will say, unto them that be chosen to everlasting life, Come, ye blessed of my Father, possess that kingdom which is prepared for you from the beginning of the world." We shall find this valuable man no less clear and scriptural,

(2). In his sentiments concerning Providence. “Remember the hair how it falls not without God's providence. Remember the sparrows, how they build in every house, and God provideth for them. And are you not much more precious to me, saith Christ than sparrows, or other birds! God will defend you, that, before your time cometh, ye shall not die, nor miscarry. God hath appointed his times, as pleaseth him: and, before the time cometh that God hath appointed, they shall have no power against you. Till thy time come, thou shall not die."

According to Latimer, God's will is distinguishable into secret and revealed. His secret will is his will of decree, known only to him: His revealed will is his will of command, discovered and made known in his written word. His secret, or decreeing will, is the rule of his own conduct: His revealed or preceptive will ought to be the rule of our conduct. Christ, says Latimer, “Teacheth us to pray, thy kingdom come -- thy will be done. Here we must understand, that the will of God is to be considered after two sorts. First, as it is omnipotent, unsearchable, and that cannot be known to us. Now, we do not pray that his will, so considered, maybe done: for his will, so considered, is, and ever shall be fulfilled, though we would say nay to it. For nothing either in Heaven or earth, is able to withstand his will. Wherefore it were but folly for us to pray to have it fulfilled, otherwise than to shew thereby that we give our consent to his will, which is to us unsearchable. But there is another consideration of God's holy will; and that consideration we, and all faithful Christians, desire may be done: and, so considered, it is called a revealed, a manifested, and declared will; and it is opened unto us in the Bible, in the New and Old Testament. There God hath revealed a certain will: therefore, we pray that it may be done, and fulfilled of us.”

Latimer has already pronounced God's secret, or “unsearchable “will, to be “omnipotent: “i.e. God's decrees must and shall be accomplished and brought to pass by his providence. No wonder, then, that our re former, in exact harmony with that grand maxim, should assert as follows: “He [i.e. God] filleth the earth; “that is to say, he ruleth and governeth the same: ordering all things according to his will and pleasure." From whence it is very naturally inferred, that “We ought to be at his pleasure: whensoever and whatsoever he will do with us, we ought to be content with all.” That is, in modern language, we ought to believe, whatever is, is right: seeing “all things" are “ordered according to God's will and pleasure.” Does not Latimer speak the very quintessence of Calvinism?

One would imagine, that, if any of mankind might be supposed to be more exempt, than others, from the immediate and constant control of absolute Providence, kings and sovereign princes would be the men. Yet even these, according to honest Larimer's, theology, are as much tied and bound from above, as the meanest of the human race. “God saith, Through me kings reign. Yea, they be so under God's rule, that they can think nothing, nor do anything, without God's permission. For it is written, The heart of the king is in the hands of the Lord, and he turneth the same whithersoever it pleaseth him. All those great rulers, that have been from the beginning of the world till now, have been set up by the appointment of God; and he pulled them down, when it pleased him.”

Wealth and poverty are distributed by the hand of Providence. "It is written, The blessing of God maketh rich. Except God bless it, it [i.e. human labour] standeth to no effect: for it is written, They shall eat, but yet never be satisfied. Eat as much as you will, except God feed you, you shall never be full. So likewise, as rich as a man is, yet he cannot augment his riches, or keep that he hath, except God be with him, except he bless him. Therefore let us not be proud: for we be but beggars the best of us.”

To the same effect he speaks elsewhere: We must labour; for so we are commanded to do: but we must look for the increase at God's hands. For, though a man labour much, yet, for all that, he shall have no more than God hath appointed him to have: for even as it pleaseth God, so he shall have. For the earth is the Lord's, and all is therein."

I have already shewn, that Latimer believed that the duration of every man's life is fixed and predestinated by God- The good bishop inculcates the same great truth, again and again. "Every man hath a certain time appointed him of God; and God hideth the same from us: for some die in young age, some in old age, according as it pleaseth him (u).”Once more: “of that we may be sure, there shall not fall one hair from our head, without his will: and we shall not die, before the time that God hath appointed unto us. Which is a comfortable thing: especially in time of sickness, or wars.”

Latimer, very justly, maintained, that afflictions also are an effect of God's predestination and providence: from whence he drew this practical conclusion: “Let us learn not to be peevish, when God layeth his cross upon us. Let us not despair, but call upon him. Let us think we be ordained unto it.'' Again, “Seeing that there is nothing done without his will, I ought to bear this cross which he layeth upon me, without murmering or grudging.”

Notwithstanding Latimer was thus so strenuous an assertor of God's decrees and providence; we yet find him making use of the word chance. But he evidently means, by that term, the occurrence of some event, unexpected and unforeseen by us ourselves. For, he takes care to let us know, that, by this word, he still intends no other than a providential dispensation. “Now,” says he “when I come to poverty by chance, so that God sendeth poverty unto me; then I am blessed, when I take poverty well, and without grudging.”

Every Christian will allow, that the putting of Christ to death, was, in itself, infinitely the greatest crime ever perpetrated by man. And yet, so absolute a predestinarian was Latimer, that he represents this greatest of crimes as exactly corresponding to the predestination and providence of God concerning it. Nay, he even supposes, that Satan would have hindered the Messiah's crucifixion, but was not able to hinder it, because “God's council and purpose “were, that the Messiah should be crucified. Let us attend to Latimer's own words. “After that, when Christ was born into the world, he [i.e. Satan] did what he could to rid him [viz. Christ] out of the way: therefore he stirred up all the Jews against him. But, after he perceived that his death [i.e. the death of Christ] should be our deliverance from everlasting death; he [Satan] did what he could to hinder his death; and therefore he stirred up mistress Pilate, who took a nap in the morning, as such fine dames are wont to do, that she should not suffer her husband to give sentence against Christ. For, as I told you, when he [Satan] perceived that it was to be his [Satan's] destruction, he would hinder it, and did what he could, with hand and foot, to stop it. But yet he was not able to disannul the counsel and purpose of God.” Far be it from me to vindicate the whole of this remarkable paragraph. On the contrary, I think it very exceptionable, in more respects than one. But it certainly proves, that Latimer carried his idea of predestination to the highest pitch it is possible for man to do.

'Tis now time, that I should produce his judgment.

(3) Concerning original sin, or man's total fall from God: on which important article, no less than on the preceding ones, the doctrine of this reformer was essentially different from that embraced by the sect of Arminius. “It was not for nought,” says Latimer, that “Jeremiah describeth man's heart in its colours: the heart of man is naughty, and crooked, and a froward piece of work.” But, how came the human heart to be thus spiritually and morally depraved? Latimer traces it all to the sin of our first parent. “Our fore-father Adam willfully ate of the apple forbidden. Wherefore he was cast out of the everlasting joy in Paradise, into this corrupt world, amongst all vileness: whereby of himself he was not worthy to do anything laudable and pleasant to God; ever more bound to corrupt affections, and beastly appetites; transformed into the uncleanest and variablest nature that was made under Heaven: of whose seed and disposition, all the world is lineally descended. Insomuch that this evil nature is so diffused, and shed from one into another, that at this day there is no man or woman living, that can of themselves wash away their abominable vileness: and so we must needs grant of ourselves to be in like displeasure unto God, as our father Adam was. By reason hereof, as I said, we be, of ourselves, the very children of the indignation and vengeance of God: the true inheritors of Hell, and working all towards Hell. Which is the answer to this question, made to every man and woman by themselves, what art thou?” I will add but one citation more: “This our nature David, the holy king and prophet, describeth with few words, saying, Lo, in iniquity am I born, and in sin hath my mother conceived me. He doth signify by his words, what he had inherited of his parent Adam; namely, sin and wickedness. And he speaketh not of himself only, but of all mankind. He painteth us out in our own colours, shewing, that we all are contaminate, from our birth, with sin; and so should justly be fire-brands in Hell, world without end. This the holy prophet shewed in these words to put us in remembrance of our own wretchedness: to teach us to despair of our own holiness and righteousness, and to seek our help and comfort by that Messias whom God hath promised to our fore-fathers. Another Scripture signifieth to us, farther, what we be of ourselves, of our own nature: for it is written, all men are liars. Therefore, man is not clean; but full of falsehood, and deceit, and all manner of sin and wickedness; poisoned and corrupt with all manner of uncleannes.3. What found he [i.e. God], when he made inquisition? marry, this: all men have declined from God; there was none that did good, no not one. Here, we may perceive what we be of ourselves, of our own nature.''

Such being Latimer's view of original sin, and its effects, no wonder, that,

(4.) He utterly denied those powers, which Arminians ascribe to what they term man's free-will.

The unceremonious prelate even goes so far as to suppose, that the will of Satan, and the will of man, are joint warriors against the will of God. “We desire,” says Latimer, on those words, Thy will be done; “We desire, that he [viz. our heavenly Father] will fortify and strengthen us, so that we may withstand the Devil's will, and our own, which fight against God's will." But in vain is the will of God fought against: for, as the martyr observes in another place, “No man's power is able to stand against God, or disappoint him of his purposes.”

He likewise pays a very rough compliment to free-will, in the subsequent passage: "I am, of myself, and by myself, coming from my natural father and mother, the child of the ire and indignation of God, and the true inheritor of Hell; a lump of sin, and working nothing of myself, but all towards Hell, except I have better help of another than I have of myself.”

What is the influence of this truth upon the hearts of those who are born again and converted to God? The bishop shall tell us. “Here we may see, how much we be bound and indebted to God, who has revived us from death to life, and saved us that were damned “[i.e. who were naturally condemned by the divine law]: “which great benefit we cannot well consider, unless we do remember what we were of ourselves, before we meddled with him and his laws. And the more we know our feeble nature, and set less by it, the more we shall conceive and know in our hearts what God hath done for us: and, the more we know what God hath done for us, the less we shall set by ourselves, and the more we shall love and please God. So that, in no condition, we shall either know ourselves or God; except we do utterly confess ourselves to be mere vileness and corruption.''

Whoever has such an opinion of human nature and its powers, must likewise hold, that man is, in no respect, nor in any degree, the architect of his own salvation. Hence,

(5.) Latimer believed, that, in the whole business of conversion and sanctification, God's free and efficacious grace is all in all. With an eye to this point, we find him expressly declaring, that his ministry was nothing, unless God made it effectual: “Whether it be unfruitful, or no,” says he, “I cannot tell. It lieth not in me to make it fruitful. If God work not in your hearts, my preaching can do but little good.”

Speaking of some, who reviled him for preaching the gospel, he acknowledged that the grace, by which alone those persons could be amended, was solely at the sovereign disposal of God himself: "As for me, I owe them no ill-will; but I pray God amend them, when it pleaseth him.” Again: “Preachers can do no more but call: God is he that must bring in. God must open the hearts, as it is in the Acts of the Apostles. When Paul preached to the women, there was a silk-woman, whose heart God opened. None could open it, but God. Paul could but only preach: God must work; God must do the thing inwardly.”

On those words of our Lord, If ye then being evil, &c.; he observes, that Christ here “Giveth us our own proper name: he paint-eth us out; he pincheth us; he cutteth off our combs; he plucketh down our stomachs. And here we learn to acknowledge ourselves to be wicked, and to know him to be the well-spring and fountain of all goodness, and that all good things come of him.” If this is not “pinching" and "cutting the comb" of free-will, I know not what is.

In his third sermon on the Lord's Prayer, he remarks, that, in the petition of hallowed be thy name, Christ would have us to confess our own imperfections, that we be not able to do anything according to God's will, except we receive it first at his hands. Therefore he teacheth us to pray, that God will make us able to do all things according to his will and pleasure. Farther, by this petition, we be put in remembrance what we be, namely, captives of the Devil, his prisoners and bondmen; and not able to come at liberty through our own power. Wherefore, we may say with St. Austin, Lord, do thou with me what thou commandest, and then command what thou wilt. For we, of our own strength and power, are not able to do his commandments.” Latimer, in another place, quotes, St. Austin's word more exactly: “Like as St. Augustin saith, Lord give that thou commandest, and then command what thou wilt: as who would say, if thou wilt command only, and not give; then we shall be lost, we shall perish.” Which, by the way, is another proof of Latimer's agreement with Austin on the article of grace. One or two testimonies more shall conclude this head.

Except a man be born again from above, he cannot see the kingdom of God. He must have a regeneration. And what is this regeneration? It is not to be christened in water, as these fire-brands [i.e. the papists] would have it. How is it to be expounded then? St. Peter sheweth, that one place of Scripture declareth another. St. Peter saith, And we be born again. How? not by mortal seed, but by immortal. What is this immortal seed? By the word of the living God: by the word of God preached and opened. Thus cometh in our new birth. This is a great commendation of this office of preaching. It is God's instrument, whereby he worketh faith in our hearts.”

As Latimer thus believed that men are regenerated, not by themselves, nor by the mere water of baptism, nor simply by the word preached, but by the power of God himself “working faith in their hearts;” of which supernatural power the word preached is no more than the usual instrument and channel: so he taught, that, after the work of regeneration has passed upon the soul, man's own ability can no more preserve him in a state of grace, than it could at first bring him into it. “St. Paul saith, Be strong in the Lord. We must be strong by a borrowed strength: for we of our selves, are too weak and feeble. Therefore let us learn where we shall fetch our strength from; namely from above. For we have it not of our own selves."

“This is a good doctrine, which admonisheth us to give all praise unto God: and not to ascribe it to our own selves. It shall be necessary unto all men and women of this world, not to ascribe unto themselves any goodness of themselves; but all unto our Lord God.” Surely, if Latimer was a free-wilier, there is no meaning in words!

(6.) Let us consult him, next, on the important doctrine of justification. According to this good old Churchman, justification in the sight of God is absolutely free and entirely unmerited by man; and accrues to us only by an interest in the active obedience, or personal righteousness, of Jesus Christ.

[1.] For the absolute freeness of justification. “We must believe that our Saviour Christ hath taken us again into his favour, that he hath delivered us by his own body and blood, and by the merit of his own passion, of his own mere liberality."

“Do I now, in forgiving my neighbour his sins which he hath done against me; do I, I say, deserve, or merit, at God's h md, forgive ness of my own sins? No, no: God forbid. For, if this should be so, then farewell Christ. It taketh him clean away. It diminisheth his honour, and it is very treason wrought against Christ. Remission of sins wherein consisteth everlasting life, is such a treasure that passeth all men's doings. It must not be our merits that shall serve, but his. He is our comfort; he is the majesty of God; and his blood-shedding it is that cleanseth us from our sins. Therefore, whosoever is minded contrary unto this, he robbeth Christ of his majesty, and so casteth himself into everlasting danger. As touching our salvation, we must not go to work, to think to get everlasting life by our own doings. No. This were to deny Christ's salvation, and remission of sins, and his own and free gift. Thou must beware, as I said before, that thou think not to go to Heaven by such remitting of thy neighbour's ill doings. But, by such forgiving, or not forgiving, thou shalt know whether thou have faith or no.”

''There be many folk, which, when they be sick, say, O, that I might live but one year longer to make amends for my sins! which saying is very naught and ungodly: for we are not able to make amends for our sins. Only Christ, he is the Lamb of God which taketh away our sins. As for satisfaction, we cannot do the least piece of it.”

“Reward! This word soundeth as though we should merit somewhat by our own works. But we shall not think so: for ye must understand, that all our works are imperfect; we cannot do them so perfectly as the law requireth, because of our flesh whichever letteth us. Wherefore is the kingdom of God called, then, a reward? because it is merited by Christ. For as touching our salvation and eternal life, it must be merited: but not by our own works, but only by the merits of our Saviour Christ.”

“All the Papists in England, and especially the spiritual men [i.e. their priests], be the enemies of the cross of Christ, two manner of ways. First, when he is a right Papist, given unto monkery, I warrant you he is in this opinion. That with his own works he does merit remission of his sins, and satisfieth the law through and by his own works: and so thinks himself to be saved everlastingly. This is the opinion of all Papists: and this doctrine was taught, in times past [i.e. in the Popish times], in schools and in the pulpits. Now, all those, that be in such an opinion, are the enemies of the cross of Christ, of his passion and blood-shedding. For they think in themselves" [i.e. such an opinion is tantamount to thinking, that] “Christ needeth [needed] not to die: and so they despise his fritter passion. They do not consider our birth-sin, and the corruption of our nature: nor yet do they know the quantity of our actual sins, how many times we fall into sin; or how much our own power is diminished, or what might and power the Devil hath. They consider not these things: but think themselves able with their own works to enter into the kingdom of God. And, therefore, I tell you, this is the most perilous doctrine that can be devised. We must do good works: we must endeavour ourselves to live according to the commandments of God: yet, for all that, we must not trust in our doings. For, though we do to the uttermost, yet it is all imperfect, when ye examine them by the rigour of the law: which law serveth [not to justify us, but] to bring us to the knowledge of our sins, and so to Christ; and, by Christ, we shall come to the quietness of our con science. Therefore, it is not more necessary to do good works, than it is to beware how to esteem them. Therefore take heed, good Christian people: deny not Christ; put not your hope in your own doings: for if ye do, ye shall repent.”

“He will reward our good works in everlasting life, but not with everlasting life; for our works are not so much worth, nor ought to be esteemed so, as to get us Heaven. For it is written, The kingdom of Heaven is the gift of God. So likewise St. Paul saith, Ye are saved freely, without works. Therefore, when ye ask, Are ye saved? Say, yes. How? marry, gratis; freely. And here is all our comfort to stay our consciences.”

We read, in a book, which is entitled 'The Lives of the Fathers,' that there was once a great, holy man (as he seemed to all the world) worthy to be taken up into Heaven. Now, that man had many disciples, and, on a time, he fell into a great agony of conscience; insomuch that he could not tell what in the world to do. Now, his diciples standing about him, seeing him in this case, they said unto him, How chanceth it that ye are so troubled, father? for, certainly, there is no body so good a liver, or more holy than you have been: therefore you need not fear: for, no doubt, you shall come to Heaven. The old father made them answer again, saying, Though 1 have lived up rightly, yet for all that, it will not help me, I lack something yet. And so he did indeed. For certainly, if he had followed the counsel of his disciples, and put his trust in godly conversation, no doubt he should have gone to the Devil.”

Bishop Latimer was immoveably radicated in that great scriptural and Protestant axiom, that good works do not go before justification, but justification goes before good works. Hence his following excellent remark: “I pray you note this: we must first be made good, before we can do good. We must first be made just, before our works please God. For, when we are justified by faith in Christ, and are made good by him; then cometh our duty, that is to do good works, to make a declaration of our thankfulness.” Now, if good works cannot possibly exist prior to justification, it invincibly follows, that justification cannot possibly be caused or conditionated by good works. On the contrary, justification is itself the cause of good works, instead of good works being the cause of justification.

Though Christ will, in the last day, con descend to make mention of the good works which he enabled his people to perform; and will appeal to those works, as evidences of his people's belonging to him; yet the works, so appealed to, will not be the ground even of that public and declarative justification, which will be predicated of the elect at that awful season. So at least good Latimer thought: witness his own testimony. “If we shall be judged after our own deservings, we shall be damned everlastingly. Therefore learn here, every good Christian, to abhor this most detestable and dangerous poison of the Papists, who go about to thrust Christ out of his seat. Learn here, I say, to leave all Papistry, and to stick only to the word of God; which teacheth thee, that Christ is not a judge, but a justifier, a giver of salvation, a taker-away of sin. For he purchased our salvation through his painful death; arid we receive the same through believing in him: as St. Paul teacheth, saying, Freely ye are justified, through faith. In these words of St. Paul, all merits and estimation of works are clear taken away. For, if it were for our works' sake, then were it not freely. But St. Paul saith, freely. Whether will you now believe St. Paul, or the Papist?"

Nor does this inestimable truth lead, in the least, to licentiousness. Let the apostolic re former obviate the unreasonable surmise. “But you will say, seeing we can get nothing with good works, we will do nothing at all; or else do such works as shall best please us: seeing we shall have no rewards for our well doings. I answer, we are commanded, by God's word, to apply ourselves to goodness, everyone in his calling: but we must not do it to the end to deserve Heaven thereby. We must do good works, to shew ourselves thankful for all his benefits, which he hath poured upon us; and in respect of God's commandment; considering, that God willeth us to do well, not to make a merit of it; for this were a denying of Christ, to say, I will live well and deserve Heaven. This is a damnable opinion. Let us rather think thus: I will live well, to shew myself thankful towards my loving God, and Christ my redeemer.” What a double-dyed Antinomian must such a writer as bishop Latimer appear, in the eyes of such jaundiced theologs, as John Wesley and Walter Sellon! Especially when they consider,

[II.] That according to the bishop's scheme of divinity, the righteousness or personal obedience of Jesus Christ, is the sole meritorious cause of this free justification.

“Our sins lett us [i.e. they hinder us}, and withdraw us from prayer. But our Saviour maketh them nothing. When we believe in him, it is like as if we had no sins. For he changeth with us; he taketh our sins and wickedness from us, and giveth us his holiness, righteousness, justice, fulfilling of the law; and so, consequently, everlasting life. So that we be like as if we had done no sin at all. For his righteousness standeth us in so good stead, as though we of ourselves had fulfilled the law to the uttermost.”

“All faithful and true Christians believe only in his death. They long to be saved, through his passion and blood-shedding. This is all their comfort. They must know, and steadfastly believe, that Christ fulfilled the law; and that his fulfilling is theirs. So that they attribute unto Christ the getting and meriting of everlasting life. And so it followeth, that they, who attribute the remission of sins, the getting of everlasting life, unto themselves, or their works, that they deny Christ, they blaspheme and despise him.”

He himself had no sin at all. He suffered, to deliver us from everlasting damnation. He took our sins, and gave us his righteousness. Our Saviour is clearly open unto us. He hath suffered for us already, and fulfilled the law to the utmost: and so, by his fulfilling, taken away the curse of the law. By his passion, which he hath suffered, he merited, that as many, as believe in him, shall be as well justified by him as though themselves had never done any sin, and as though they themselves had fulfilled the law to the uttermost. He was very man, and was bound to the law. To what end? That he might deliver us from the law, to which we were bound; and that we might receive the right of the children of God by adoption, through God's goodness, by his deserving: that we might have, through his fulfilling of the law, remission of sins and eternal life. These are the gifts, which he hath deserved with his keeping of the law." Once more: “he was a lamb undefiled, fulfilling the law for us to the uttermost; giving us, freely as a gift, his fulfilling to be ours; so that we are now fulfillers of the law by his fulfilling. So that the law may not condemn us, for he hath fulfilled it: that we believing in him are fulfillers of the law, and just, before the face of God. Our unrighteousness is forgiven us through the righteousness of Christ: for, if we believe in him, then are we made righteous. When he [God the Father] gave us his only Son, he gave us also his righteousness and his fulfilling of the law. So that we are justified by God's free gift, and not of ourselves, nor by our merits; but the righteousness of Christ is accounted to be our righteousness.”

The justification of God's people, thus founded upon, resulting from, and secured by, the imputed righteousness of Christ; this justification, according to Latimer, and according to the Scriptures, is absolute and total. “Our Saviour hath taken away our sins, so that they cannot hurt us. For they be no sins, in the sight of God. For he hath taken away the guiltiness of sins, and the pains and punishments which follow sins. Christ hath de served, that those, who believe in him, shall be quit from all their sins.”

No people are more crumbled into sub divisions among themselves, than the Arminians. That particular sort of them, whose shameless and fruitless efforts to blacken the Church of England have given rise to this pre sent work, are Arminian-Perfectionists. I mean Mr. John Wesley, and his junto. For the sake of these people, and by way of demonstrating, still farther, the palpable falsehood with which they lay hold on Latimer's robe, and claim him for their kinsman; I will subjoin

[7.] Some part of what this reformer delivers, concerning the doctrine of sinless perfection.

By way of substratum, let us hear his testimony, respecting the spirituality, perfection, and extent of the moral law revealed in the Scriptures. “If he, [i.e. if Christ] had not kept the law, the law had such power, that it would have condemned us all. For so it is written: Cursed be he, who abideth not by all that which is written in the law. So that, the least cogitation that we have against the law of God, bringeth this curse upon our heads. So that there was never man, nor shall be one, that could remedy himself by this law; for it is spiritual. It may not be fulfilled, but by the spirit. It requireth us to be clean from all spot of sin; from all ill thoughts, words, and deeds. But we be carnal; and, as St. Paul saith, sold under sin and wickedness: therefore, he concludes thus: By the works of the law no man can be justified. As Christ did them, they merit: for he did them perfectly, as they ought to be done. But as we do them, they condemn. And yet the lack is not in the law, but in us. The law, of itself, is holy and good. But we are not able to keep it; and therefore we must seek our righteousness, not in the law, but in Christ, who hath fulfilled the same, and given us freely his fulfilling. And this is the chiefest cause, why Christ would fulfil the law [namely, for our justification]. But all the Papists think themselves to be saved by the law: and I myself have been of that dangerous, perilous, and damnable opinion, till I was thirty years of age. So loug I walked in darkness, and in the shadow of death. And, no doubt, he that departeth out of this world in that opinion, he shall never come to Heaven. For, when we will consider the works of the law, which the law requireth; and, again, how we do them; we shall find, that we may not be justified by our doings. For the flesh reigneth in us; it bear-eth rule, and hindereth the spirit: and so we never fulfil the law. Certain it is, that they that believe in Christ have the Holy Ghost, which ruleth and governeth them: yet, for all that, there be a great many lacks in them. So that if they would go about to be saved by their works, they should come too short: for their works are not able to answer the requests of the law. The law requireth a perfect righteousness and holiness. Now, all they that believe in Christ, they are holy and righteous.' for he hath fulfilled the law for us which believe in him.”

Such being the unrelaxing perfection, which the law inflexibly requires: it necessarily follows, that the supposition of possible perfection on earth, is the most fanatic dream, and the most gigantic delusion, which can whirl the brain of a human being. So it appeared to Latimer. "No man born into this world,'' says he, “is without sin, save Christ only. Who is there, in this world, that hath not need to say, Lord, forgive me? No man living. Nor ever was, nor shall be, our Saviour only excepted. There is neither man, nor woman, that can say they have no sin: for we be all sinners. We be ever in that case, that we have ever need to say, Lord, forgive us: for we ever do amiss. St. Paul saith, Let not sin reign in your corruptible body. He doth not require us that we should have no sin, for that is impossible unto us: but he requireth, that we be not servants unto sin. There is no saint in Heaven, neither St. Peter, nor Paul, but, when they were here, their nature was corrupt, and given to wickedness. How doth he [i.e. Christ] save us from sin? In this manner: that sin shall not condemn us; sin shall not have the victory over us. He saved us, not so that we should be without sin, that no sin should be left in our hearts: No. He saved us not so. For all manner of imperfections remain in us: yea in the best of us: so that, if God should enter into judgment with us, we shall be damned. For there neither is, nor was, any man born into this world, who could say, I am clean from sin, except Jesus Christ. Therefore he saved us not so from sin in taking clean away the same from us, that we should no more be inclined to it; but rather the power and strength of the same sin he hath so vanquished, that it shall not be able to condemn those that believe in him: for sin is re mitted, and not imputed, unto believers.''

They, who, after this, can set down bishop Latimer for a perfectionist may, with equal reason, set him down for a free-wilier. I proceed,

(8). To take his vote on the subject of universal redemption.

His doctrine, concerning redemption itself, is, that the people for whom Christ died are, by his death, totally discharged from the punishment due to their sins. “It is,'' says he “much like as if I owed another man twenty thousand pounds, and should [i.e. must] pay it out of hand, or else go to the dungeon of Ludgate: and when I am going to prison, one of my friends should come, and ask, Whither goes this man? and, after he had heard the matter, should say, Let me answer for him: I will be surety for him; yea, I will pay all for him. Such a part, played our Saviour Christ with us.” Elsewhere he repeats the same illustration; but in yet stronger terms: “In such distress cometh a good friend, and saith, Sir, be of good cheer; I will pay thy debts: and forthwith payeth the whole sum, and setteth me at liberty. Such a friend is our Saviour. He hath payed our debts, and set us at liberty.”

From these premises, it incontestibly follows, that not one of those for whom “Christ payed all,” not one of those for whom he discharged “the whole sum,” not one of those whom he died to “set at liberty” from punishment; can be finally condemned: since, if condemned and punished they were to be, either the justice of God the Father would fail, or it would not be true that Christ had discharged “all their debts,” and payed off “the whole sum,” and really "set them at liberty.'' Hence, it is evident, that, according to Latimer's argument, Christ was very far from dying for every individual of mankind; it being Latimer's avowed opinion, that very many will, in the last day, be sentenced to suffer the vengeance of eternal fire. He supposed, for instance, that unpreaching bishops only will fill up a gap in Hell, of seven leagues wide (e). Surely, the “debts” of these, at least, were not “all paid,” nor the debtors set at liberty!” Consequently, if Latimer may be credited, some of mankind must have been left unredeemed. Observe I am not here professedly delivering my own opinion. I am only deducing the opinion of Latimer from Latimer's premises.

(e) “If,” says Latimer, “one were admitted to view Hell thus, and, beholding it thoroughly, the Devil should say, On yonder side are punished unpreaching prelates; I think, a man should see as far as a Kenning, and perceive nothing but unpreaching prelates. He might look as far as Calais, I warrant you.’ p. 138.

But his judgment does not stand in need of deduction. It has the seal and sanction of his own express declaration. He peremptorily affirms, that Christ did not die for such as shall be eventually lost. “Mark here,” says he, “Scripture speaketh not of (f) impenitent sinners: Christ died not for them; his death remedieth not their sins (g).” Now, if there be any, for whom Christ “died not,” and whose sins his death "remedieth not;” it follows, that, in this reformer's idea, redemption is not universal.

(f) By “impenitent sinners,” he necessarily means the finally impenitent: such as shall actually be banished from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power, when Christ comes to judge the world in righteousness.

(g) Ibid. p. 322.

His frequently affirming, that Christ expiated the sins of “the whole world,” does by' no means clash with his doctrine in the above passages. Indeed, it is saying no more than the Scripture has repeatedly said before him. The point of enquiry is, what does that phrase, the whole world, import? Surely, not every person, without exception, who did, does, or shall exist; for, in that sense of the phrase, it seems impossible that Christ could die for all. Some, for instance, in our Lord's time at least, were guilty of that sin which he himself has pronounced absolutely unpardonable: and would he die for the pardon of those, whose sin, he avers, shall never be pardoned? This would be like a man's paying down an inestimable ransom for such as, he knows at the very time of his paying it, neither will nor can ever be set at liberty. Besides, what shall we say of those many final impenitents, whose departed souls had been in the place of torment, ages and ages before Christ was crucified at all? Full four thousand years had elapsed from the creation, ere the Messiah was even manifested in the flesh. And Scripture will not permit us to believe, that the whole of mankind, who died within that extensive period, were glorified in Heaven. Now, it would both impeach the wisdom, and affront the dignity of Christ, as well as infinitely depreciate the value of his sacrifice, to sup pose, that he could possibly shed his blood on the cross, for those very souls which were, at that very time, suffering for their own sins in Hell. The tenet, therefore, of a redemption absolutely universal, will not stand the test either of Scripture, reason, or the analogy of faith. Shall we, for example, affirm, that Christ died for the salvation of Judas? The fact seems to be impossible. 'Tis plain that Judas slew himself, subsequently to the apprehension, but antecedently to the actual crucifixion of Christ (h). The soul of Judas, therefore, went to its own place of punishment, before Christ had offered himself in sacrifice to God. And I cannot, for my own part, see, with what propriety Christ could die to save a person from going to Hell, who was actually there already.

(h) This observation throws light on that passage of Latimer, where he says, that Christ shed as much blood for Judas, as for Peter. Not that Christ actually died for Judas (whose death was prior to that of Christ himself); but that the mediator's blood was as much sufficient (so infinite was its value) to have redeemed even Judas had it been shed for that purpose, as to have redeemed any other person. A sentiment, to which I subscribe, with heart and hand.

Whether these particular topics ever occurred to the mind of bishop Latimer, or not, I will not take upon me to decide. But one would imagine they had: or, at least, that his judgment, concerning the extent of redemption, was determined by considerations equally weighty. For, when he speaks of Christ's having redeemed the whole world, he takes care to apprize us, that he uses this large term in a very restricted sense. My proofs follow.

“God is not only a private Father, but a common Father unto the whole world, unto all the faithful, be they never so poor and miserable. (i) We know that Christ is offered once for us, and that this one offering remedieth all the sins of the whole world; for he was the Lamb which was killed from the beginning of the world: that is to say, all they that believe in him, since Adam was created, they were saved by him (k).” 'Tis plain then, that, by the whole world, Latimer means no more than the whole world of the faithful, the whole world of them that believe. One more testimony shall stand for all. "He only hath merited, with his painful passion, to be a Saviour of the whole world: that is, to deliver all them that believe in him, from their sins and wickedness (l).” So speaks Latimer. And Calvinism says the very same.

(i) Ibid. p. 332. (k) Ibid. p. 557, 558. (l) Ibid. p. 775.

If Christ died only for them that (m) believe, or in whom faith is wrought; it follows, that faith is an exceeding great and precious gift. It may be worth our while to enquire into Latimer's definition of what faith is: and the rather, as his definition of faith will conduce, still farther, to demonstrate, that redemption is, in his judgment, not strictly universal, but limited.

(m) No objection can hence arise against the salvation of such as die in infancy (all of whom are undoubtedly saved): nor yet against the salvation of God’s elect among the Heathens, Mahometans, and others. The Holy Spirit is able to inspire the grace of virtual faith into those hearts (especially at the moment of dissolution), which are incapable of exerting the exlicit act of faith.

“We must,” says this honest master in Israel, “have the right faith, the lively faith, the faith that bringeth salvation: which consisteth in believing that Christ died for my sin's sake. I must not stand in generalities, as to believe that Christ suffered under Pontius Pilate: but I must believe that that was done for my sake, to redeem with his passion my sins, and all theirs which believe and trust in him. If I believe so, then I shall not be deceived (n) I must believe, for myself, that his blood was shed for me (o).” Such an account of true faith as this necessarily infers the actual limitation of redemption. For, where is the peculiar privilege of believing that ‘Christ shed his blood for me,’ if it be true, that he actually shed his blood for everybody? If he redeemed the entire race of mankind, without exempting so much as one (which the Arminian doctrine of universal redemption supposes), his blood must of course have been shed for me among the rest, whether I believe it or not. Where, then, is either the use, or the importance of this faith, on the hypothesis of an unlimited ransom (p)? I conclude, therefore, that the reformer, who has laid down such a definition of “the faith which bringeth salvation,” could never, in the very nature of things, suppose the ransom to be unlimited. And, indeed, as we have already shewn, he himself has expressly declared that he did not suppose it.

(n) Ibid. p. 436 (o) Ibid. p. 699.

(p) Add to this, that the tenet of universal redemption would, instead of inducing us to seek for an application of Christ’s death to ourselves in particular, be the ready and effectual way to make us “stand in generalities:” which, as we have just heard, good Latimer so expressly cautions us against standing in.

But, though he believed redemption not to be absolutely universal, this belief of his did by no means arise (any more than ours) from a diminutive idea of the worth and value of Christ's atonement. He acknowledged its intrinsic sufficiency to redeem every individual of the human species, though he denied its actual universality. Thus he speaks. “Notwithstanding his death might be sufficient for (q) all the whole world, yet, for all that, no man shall enjoy that same benefit, but only they that, believe in him (r).” And who are they that shall believe and be saved? Let Latimer answer the question. “Therefore he is called Jesus, because he shall save his people from their sins; as the angel of God himself witnesseth (s).”

(q) Observe how carefully Latimer varies his phraseology: he does not say, merely, for the whole world; but for all the whole world. When he affirmed, in the passage quoted above (See p. 298.), that Christ died for the whole world; he explains his meaning, by adding, all the faithful, all those that believe. But here, when he speaks of the dignity and sufficiency of Christ's propitiation; he enlarges the term, and says for all the whole world Making it evident, that as, by the whole world, he meant only the world of believers, whom alone he supposed to be actually redeemed by Christ; so, by the still more extensive term of, for all the whole world, he designed, in this place, to signify all mankind at large: for whose redemption, the death of Christ was certainly, in itself, sufficient, and super-sufficient.

(r) Ibid. p. 600. (s) Ibid. p. 609.

All, that now remains, is,

(9). To enquire into what he has delivered concerning the doctrine of final perseverance.

There was a time, when Latimer seems to have rather symbolized with some of the Lutherans, on this article. Luther himself did not believe the being of a God, more firmly, than he believed the total and final perseverance of the regenerate elect. But soon after Luther's death, some of those Protestants, who called themselves by his name, began to deviate from the purity and strictness of that reformer's system. One of these deviations respected the degree of possible apostacy. A branch of nominal Lutherans begun to teach, that, though a truly sanctified person could not fall finally from grace, he might nevertheless fall totally: he might make utter shipwreck of faith, for the time being; though he should certainly (by virtue of God's immoveable covenant and election) be regenerated over again, and saved at last. Though this was rather a bungling idea of perseverance, equally illogical and unscriptural, yet it did not clash with that part of the Christian system which asserts the certainty of eventual salvation to all true believers: and so came infinitely short of the absurdity of Arminianism, which supposes, not only a total, but a final defectibility of grace; than which nothing can be more monstrous and profane.

That Latimer once imagined divine grace in the hearts of the regenerate to be totally (though not finally) defectible, appears from that passage, in one of his sermons, where he speaks of a person's being sometimes in, and sometimes out of, Christ and the book of life. The passage runs thus: “But you will say, How shall I know that I am in the book of life? how shall I try myself to be elected of God to everlasting life? I answer; first, we may know, that we may one time be in the book, and another time come out again: as it appeared by David, who was written in the book of life; but, when he sinned, he was out of the book of the favour of God, until he had repented, and was sorry for his faults. So we may be in the book one time; and, afterward, when we forget God and his word, come out of the book: that is, out of Christ, which is the book. And in that book are written all believers (t).” God forbid, that I should so much as wish to represent anything differently from what it really is. I acknowledge, that, when Latimer delivered the above paragraph, he seemed, on this head, to have coincided in judgment with the new Lutherans. And I likewise add, that he was the only one of all our English reformers who trod in this bye-path. Consequently, his private opinion, in which he was perfectly singular, and absolutely stood alone, affects not the public doctrine of the Church of England.

(t) Ibid. p. 846, 847.

But if Latimer was, at one time, somewhat eccentric, in point of total defectibility; he was stedfast as a rock, and true as a needle to the magnet, in point of final perseverance. This I aver; and now proceed to prove.

“All they,'' says Latimer, “that believed in Christ, since Adam was created were saved by him (u).”

(u) Ibid. p. 558.

Speaking of the fear of death, from which many eminent saints are not entirely delivered, he thus goes on: "Yea, the elect people of God, the faithful, having the beholding of his face, though God hath always preserved them (such a good God is he to them that believe in him, that he will not suffer them to be tempted above that that they are able to bear); yet, for all that, there is nothing that they complain of more sore, than this horror of death (x).”

(x) Ibid. p. 208.

To that artful question, asked by the Papists, Do you think that all your Catholic forefathers are damned? Bishop Latimer judiciously answers, that, as many of them as went to Heaven were saved by virtue of God's electing-grace and were finally preserved by it to life eternal. “To the question, of our forefathers: God knoweth his elect, and diligently watcheth and keepeth them, so that all things serve to their salvation. The nature of fire is, to burn all that is laid in it: yet God kept the three young men in Babylon, that they burnt not. And Moses saw a bush on fire; but it burnt not. So false doctrine burneth as the fire: it corrupteth. But God kept his elect, that they were not corrupted with it; but always put their trust in one ever-living God, through the death of Jesus Christ our Lord. In Elias's time, idolatry and superstition reigned: so that Elias said, Lord, they have destroyed thy altars, and slain thy prophets and preachers, and I am left alone. But the Lord answered him, I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed their knees to Baal. So God, I trust, reserved our fore-fathers, in so perilous times, more graciously than we can think (y).''

(y) Ibid. p. 261.

According to this good man, Satan is an enemy whom every true believer is certain of overcoming. "The Devil hath no farther power than God will allow him. The Devil can go no farther than God permitteth him to do. Which thing shall strengthen our faith: insomuch that we shall be sure to overcome him (z).”

(z) Ibid. 463.

God, "is able to help us in our distress, and grant our requests. And though these be great things, yet we need not to despair; but consider that he is Lord over Heaven and earth, that he is able to do for us, and that he will do so, being our Father and our Lord, and King over all things (a).”

(a) Ibid. p. 466.

Latimer very rightly deduces the final perseverance of the saints from the love which God bears in Christ to his believing people. “In the prophets, everywhere, he setteth out his great love which he hath towards us, saying, Can a woman forget her own child, which she hath born into the world? yea, and though she do forget the same, yet I will not forget thee. It is a rare thing, when the Devil so much prevaileth in parents, that a mother should neglect or forget her own child. Yet, saith God, though it were so, that she could forget her child, yet will not I forget thee when thou believest in my Son Christ. For the Devil cannot prevail against me, though he prevail against [such] women, so that sometimes they forget their own children, or kill them: yet he shall not prevail against me, for I am mightier than he is (b).” This is hinging the question on the right point. While God perseveres in his love to the saints, the saints cannot but persevere in the grace of God. So that God himself must cease to persevere, ere they can.

(b) Ibid. p. 575.

Latimer justly observes, that the comfort of faith may be suspended, though the grace of faith is perpetual and inamissible “It is said, in Scripture, that God leadeth [as it were] into Hell, and bringeth up again. And so it is with such fearful men: for God doth cast them into Hell, [i.e.] he hideth himself from them; but at length he bringeth them out again, and establisheth them with a constant faith, so that they may be sure of their salvation and everlasting life. I knew once a woman who was seventeen years in such an extacy and fear: but at length she recovered again, and God endued her with a strong and stedfast faith in the end (c)"

(c) Ibid. p. 670.

Nothing can be more comfortable to an awakened mind, than this blessed infallibility of perseverance. “This is now an exceeding comfort to all Christian people: for they may be assured, that when they believe in Christ, and Christ taketh their parts, there shall be nothing neither in Heaven nor on earth, that, shall be able to hurt them or lett [i.e. hinder] them of their salvation (d).” Again: “By this text [viz he that spared not his own Son, &c.] it appeareth, that he that hath Christ hath all things: he hath Christ's fulfilling of the law: he hath remission of his sins; and so, consequently everlasting life. Is not this a comfort (e)?"

(d) Ibid. p. 692. (e) Ibid. p. 795.

“Whoever thus believeth, mistrusting himself and his own doings, and trusting in the merits of Christ: he shall get the victory death, the devil, and hell: so that they shall not hurt him, neither all their powers be able to stand against any of those who are in Christ Jesus (f). Who is a just man? He is just that believeth in our Saviour. For, as you have heard before, those, who believe in Christ, are justified before God: they are clean delivered from all sins, and therefore may be called just; for so they are in the sight of God. Such, saith the Prophet, he hath never seen forsaken of God (g).”

(f) Ibid. (g) Ibid. p. 818.

So far was Latimer from not holding the final perseverance of true believers, that he held it sinful in true believers to doubt of their own final perseverance. "We must always consider that God is able to save us, and believe undoubtedly that he will save us. So that, when I am sick, as is said before, I may doubt whether God will deliver me from my sickness, or no: but I may not doubt of everlasting life (h).”

(h) Ibid. p. 844.

He considered the doctrine of perseverance as a powerful support and consolation, under even the outward afflictions of the present life. Christ “Is everywhere: and will be with us unto the end of the world, as he promised to his apostles after his resurrection, saying, Lo, I will be with you unto the end of the world. Which is the greatest comfort that may be unto a Christian heart: for it is a stay to all trouble (i).”

(i) Ibid. p. 851.

Perseverance is but another name for retaining the grace of God. And, according to Latimer, grace is retained by all who are made truly good. “To retain is the property of the good seed. Therefore if thou canst find the keeping of God's most holy word in thy heart, then thou art in the good ground, and shalt bring forth much fruit: thou shall keep the word of God with patience. For God hath ever a Church: and those that be of the church will keep his word with patience. (k)” Such, therefore, as do not keep it with patience, or perseverance, were never of God's church, but reprobates and hypocrites.

(k) Ibid. p. 900, 901.

Were I to adduce all bishop Latimer's assertions in behalf of final perseverance, they would amount to a little volume. The three following shall close the subject.

"We may learn here [viz. from Mt 8:23, (&c.)], that the ship signified the congregation of Christ and his church. The disciples, being in the ship, are preserved, through Christ. So all those which are in the church of Christ, shall be saved and preserved by him. The others, which are without this church [i.e. the reprobate], shall be damned and perish (l).”

(l) Ibid. p. 855

“If thou believest in him, then thou art written in the book of life, and shall be saved (m).”

(m) Ibid. p. 846.

“The Lord knoweth which are his. Also Christ himself saith, No man shall take those from me whom my father hath given to me that is to say, which are ordained to everlasting life (n).”

(n) Ibid. p. 564.

Thus have I laid before the reader some (and only some of those proofs, which are on record, of bishop Latimer's Calvinism. And I have done it, with much more amplitude, than I otherwise should, for this plain reason; viz. To show, that, though this worthy martyr was (as already observed) by far the most unlearned, and by much the least, guarded and accurate, among the whole choir of English reformers; still he was, in reality, a Calvinist, a strict Calvinist, a zealous Calvinist, and, in most respects, a consistent Calvinist.

I have produced upwards of a hundred passages from Latimer himself, in support of the above assertion: and, if need had required, could have augmented the list with a hundred more. But enough has been alledged, to turn the balance of Latimer's testimony on the side of our established doctrines. Though a million of Wesleys and Sellons, with their whole ragged regiment of coblers, tinkers, shoe-blacks, and old women, were to hang by the opposite scale; they would all mount and sprawl aloft in the air, till they tumbled off in clusters, not without execrating the insuperable gravity of Latimer and the Church of England.

Some readers, perhaps, may think, I have been too extensive and diffuse, in my quotations from this venerable bishop. If the reason, already assigned, will not avail for my apology, the only farther amends, I am able to make, is, to promise, that my extracts, from each of the remaining reformers, shall be less prolix.

Calvinism XIV - The Judgment of our English Reformers concluded.

SECTION XIV.

The Judgment of our English Reformers concluded.

IV. DOCTOR John Hooper, bishop of Gloucester and Worcester, comes next to be considered. He was born in Somersetshire, A. D. 1495; and received the academical part of his education at Merton College, Oxford. The exact time of his conversion to the Protestant faith, is unknown: but it certainly was previous to the year 1539. For, upon the passing of the six bloody articles into a statute, which happened in that year, we find Mr. Hooper quitting England for the sake of a good conscience, and wandering, like a partridge hunted on the mountains, first into France, Ireland, and Holland; and thence to Switzerland in which latter, he lived partly at Basil, and partly at Zurich, where he became intimately acquainted with the learned Henry Bullinger.

On the death of Henry VIII. in 1547, our venerable exile returned to his native country. Prior to his setting out from Zurich, he dropt a very remarkable expression, in his parting interview with Bullinger. "In all probability," said Bullinger, “king Edward will raise you to a bishoprick. If so, don't suffer your elevation to make you forgetful of your old friend, in Switzerland. Let us, from time to time, have the satisfaction of hearing from you." Hooper answered, “No change of place, nor of station, no accession of new friends, shall ever render me unmindful of yourself and my other benefactors here. You may depend on my carefully corresponding with you. But it will not be in my power, to write you an account of the last news of all: for" [taking Bullinger by the hand]” others will inform you of my being burned to ashes in that very place where, in the meanwhile, I shall labour most for God and the gospel (o)." The holy man was not mistaken in his prediction. Gloucester was, afterwards, the principal seat of his religious labours; and, at Gloucester, he sealed those labours with his blood, Feb. 9, 1555, in the 60th year of his age: being, as Burnet observes, the first of our Protestant bishops that suffered death for the gospel.

(o) See Fox. vol iii. p. 119.

He is universally allowed to have been eminently pious, extensively learned, and of the most unimpeacable morals. A noble instance of the steadiness and impartiality with which he laboured to discountenance vice, occurs in the history last referred to. Being in his diocese of Gloucester, he denounced the censures of the church against some persons of inferior station, who had been convicted of open lewdness. One of them had the courage to say to him, We poor people must do penance for these things; while great and rich men, though as guilty as ourselves, are suffered to escape unpunished and unnoticed. The bishop answered, Name any person, how great soever, who can be convicted of adultery; and I will give you leave to use me as roughly as you please, if I do not proceed against him with all the severity of justice. The intrepid prelate was soon as good as his word: for, in a few days after, he cited Sir Anthony Kingston, a man of high consequence in that country, into the Ecclesiastical Court: and though, for sometime, the knight behaved with great haughtiness and outrage, he was at last forced to do penance, and pay a fine of 500l. besides.

As Dr. Hooper was thus a resolute assertor of virtue, so he asserted, with no less resolution, those grand evangelical doctrines, from the experimental belief of which, all genuine virtue flows. He observes, that, in Heaven, the souls of the faithful are “forever praising the Lord, in conjunction and society everlasting with the blessed company of God's elect, in perpetual joy (r)." And he mentions it as one capital instance of the patience of God's people on earth, that "They wait until the number of the elect be fulfilled (s)." With an eye to the same precious doctrine of election, he adds, in a letter, written a few weeks before his martyrdom, that the glorified spirits of them who had, in all ages, suffered death for the cause of Christ, were joyfully expecting the happy day, “When they shall receive their bodies again in immortality, and see the number of the elect associated with them in full and consummate joys (t)."

(r) Fox iii. 132. (s) Ibid. p. 133. (t) Ibid. p. 135.

He is equally explicit, as to the necessity of grace. He justly observes, that true contentment under affliction is the fruit of supernatural regeneration. “It is not the nature of man that can be contented, until it be regenerated and possessed with God's spirit, to bear patiently the troubles of the mind, or of the body (u)." Again: "These things" [viz. the knowledge and love of heavenly objects]" are easy to be spoken of, but not so easy to be practised. Wherefore, seeing they be God's gifts, and none of ours to have of our own when we would, we must seek them at our Heavenly Father's hand (x) Howbeit, no man of himself can do this [i.e. can pray and hope aright]; but the Spirit of God, that striketh the man's heart with fear, prayeth for the man stricken and feared, with unspeakable groaning’s (y)." Once more: “Christ saith to every one of his people, By your own patience ye shall continue your life: not that man hath patience in [i.e. of] himself, but that he must have it for himself of God, the only giver of it (z)."

(u) Ibid. p. 131. (x) Ibid. p. 132. (y) Ibid. (z) Ibid. p. 183.

On the great article of justification, also, Hooper was a thorough Calvinist. This appears from the confession of faith (an extract of which is preserved in Burnet), which was signed, not only by Hooper himself, but by two bishops besides, and seven eminent ministers; all, at that time, prisoners for the gospel: viz. Coverdale, bishop of Exeter; Farrar, bishop of St. David’s; with Taylor, Philpot, Bradford, Crome, Sanders, Rogers, and Lawrence. In this excellent declaration, the heroic sufferers publicly certified, that they “held justification by faith; which faith," said they, “is not only an opinion, but a certain persuasion, wrought by the Holy Ghost, which doth illuminate the mind, and supple the heart to submit itself unfeignedly to God." They add, that they "acknowledged an inherent righteousness; yet they believed that justification, and pardon of sins, came only by Christ's righteousness imputed to them."

Let me, next, subjoin a word or two, concerning Hooper's doctrine of providence. “God," says he, “hath such care and charge of us, that he will keep, in the midst of all troubles, the very hairs of our head: so that one of them shall not fall away without the will and pleasure of our Heavenly Father. Whether the hair, therefore, tarry on the head, or fall from the head, it is the will of the Father (b).'' Again: "They [i.e. all afflictions] be servants of God, to go and come as he commandeth them (c)." Once more: “Of this I am assured, that the wicked world, with all its force and power, shall not touch one of the hairs of our heads, without leave and license of our heavenly Father (d)."

(b) Fox, vol. iii. p. 131. (c) Ibid. p. 132. (d) Ibid. p. 134.

A specimen of what he advances, respecting final perseverance, shall, for the present, conclude his testimony. To a company of Protestants who had been surprised at a religious meeting, and committed to prison, he thus wrote: God will go in and out with you, and will be present in your hearts and in your mouths. He that hath begun that work in you, will surely strengthen you in the same." In a letter to his own lady, he says; “Remember, that although your (f) life, as all Christian men's be, be hid, and appeareth not, what it is; yet it is safe, (as St. Paul saith) with God in Christ: and when Christ shall appear, then shall our lives be made open [i.e. be rendered conspicuous] with him in glory(g).” He adds, a little lower: we may be tempted of the Devil, the flesh, and the world; but yet, although these things pinch, they do not pierce: and though they work sin in us, yet in Christ no damnation to those that be grafted in him. Hereof may the Christian man learn both consolation and patience. Consolation, in that [notwithstanding] he is compelled, both in his body and goods, to feel pain and loss; and, in soul, heaviness and anguish of mind; howbeit, none of them both shall separate him from the love that God beareth him in Christ. He may learn patience, forasmuch as his enemies, both of body and soul, and the pains also they vex us withal for the time; if they tarry with us long as we live, yet, when death cometh, they shall avoid, and give place to such joys as be prepared for us in Christ (h)." To one Mrs. Anne Warcop, who was in danger on account of the gospel, the holy bishop wrote as follows: “I did rejoice, at the coming of this bearer, to understand of your constancy; and that you are fully resolved, by God's grace, rather to suffer extremity, than to go from the truth of God which you have professed. He that gave you grace to begin so infallible a truth, will follow you in the same unto the end (i)."

(f) He means, the soul of each person who is regenerated by the Holy Ghost.

(g) Fox, u. s. p. 132. (h) Ibid. (i) Ibid. p. 135.

From bishop Hooper, I pass on,

V. To Doctor Martin Bucer: a man, whose discretion, mildness and benevolence, procured him the name of “the moderate reformer;" and whose admirable talents obliged even Vossius to style him, Ter Maximum Bucerum. His judicious labours, during his residence in this kingdom, greatly assisted in the reformation of our church, at home; and his learned pen was, no less jealously and successfully, engaged, in defending and vindicating her doctrine, worship and discipline, from the calumnies of the Papists, and from the ill-judged exceptions of some foreign Protestants, abroad. Taking everything into the account, he was, perhaps, in point of temper, conduct, and abilities, one of the most amiable and unexceptionable divines that ever lived: though few persons have been more insulted and traduced by bigots of all denominations.

He was born, A. D. 1491, at Schelestadt, in Alsace. In his early part of life he entered himself of the order of Dominican Friars; but, after a time, God shewed him a more excellent way. Some writings, of Erasmus are said to have given his mind the first shock against Popery. His doubts were afterwards improved into a full conviction of the truth, by the books of Luther. As Luther's writings had driven the nail to the head; so some personal interviews, which Bucer had with that reformer, first at Heildberg, and then at Worms, in 1521, clinched the nail so effectually, that Bucer determined from that time forward, to profess the doctrines of the gospel more openly than ever. The conversations of these two great men, during those memorable interviews, appear to have turned chiefly on the articles of free-will and justification.

In the year 1548, Bucer was (not at the recommendation of Melancthon, but at the recommendation of archbishop Cranmer) invited, by king Edward, from Strasburg to England. The learned Fagious was invited at the same time; and accompanied Bucer hither. Being arrived, Bucer was made divinity professor at Cambridge; with a salary, treble to what any of his predecessors had enjoyed. "These grave and learned Doctors," says Mr. Strype, meaning Martin Bucer and Peter Martyr, “were placed there [viz. in the two Universities; Bucer at Cambridge, and Martyr at Oxford]: the Lord Protector and the archbishop judging them the fittest persons to inform the students in their notions and doctrines concerning religion. Because, as they were very learned in other sciences: so in divinity, they took the Holy Scripture for their guide, and gathered their tenets from no other authority but from thence; according to the constant principle of the great and good archbishop." I shall quickly shew, that the archbishop and the Lord Protector were not mistaken, in their favourable opinion of the two celebrated foreigners; and that these illustrious divines did indeed "gather their tenets from no other authority but the Holy Scriptures."

But Bucer's business in England, and that of Martyr, was not restrained to the divinity-chairs of Cambridge and Oxford, or to the instruction of the youth who were to serve in the ministry of this Protestant Church. Those learned professors had likewise a hand in the reformation and settlement of the Church herself. Even the fierce-flaming and high-flying Mr. Samuel Downes, notwithstanding all his redundant bitterness against Calvinism, both foreign and domestic, is compelled to own (though with grievous reluctance, and with no little mincing and twisting,) that the liturgy itself was submitted to the judgment and correction of Bucer and Martyr. These divines, says Mr. Downes, “being men of great learning, and of a moderate and peaceable disposition, had been invited over by archbishop Cranmer: and had, by their prudent carriage, and affection to our regular constitution, which they had given a remarkable instance of in their answers to Hooper's scruples concerning the episcopal habit, so well recommended themselves to the esteem of our bishops; that it was thought expedient to lay a Latin translation of the liturgy before them, and desire their opinion concerning what explanations, or amendments, were requisite to be made." Thus far, all is fair, candid and true. And, if this be indeed (as indeed it is) a just state of the fact; I should be glad to know, with what propriety and consistency the Arminian life-compiler has subjoined, in the very next words to those last cited, “But there is a wide difference between asking their advice, and adding, or omitting, according to their humour and fancy." Is not this, indirectly, saying that Bucer and Martyr were humoursome fanciful men? And how does such an unjust and ungenerous implication comport with the character which this very writer has, a moment before, given, of these very persons viz. That “their disposition was peaceable and moderate, that their carriage was prudent, and their affection to our regular constitution so remarkable as to recommend them to the esteem of the reforming bishops?" It does not appear, that either Bucer or Martyr, had any singularity either of "humour," or of “fancy," to indulge. On the contrary, their modesty and moderation were known to all men, and have pressed even Mr. Downes himself into an acknowledgement of both. It may be asked, Did the English reformers actually make any alterations in the book of Common Prayer, conformably to the judgments of Martyr and Bucer? I answer, yes. And the aforesaid Mr. Downes shall second my testimony. Though, through an excess of bigotry, he faulters in pronouncing his evidence, still the evidence itself is full to the point. “If some particulars were altered agreeable to their judgment, it was because our bishops thought the reasons which they [i.e. which Martyr and Bucer] gave, for making those alterations, conclusive and convincing." Admitted. It remains, then, that these two foreign Calvinists were actually concerned in the modeling of our English liturgy: and, consequently, that they had some hand in the reformation of the Church of England.

But were they indeed doctrinal Calvinists? Let their own works answer the question. I shall begin with Bucer: and cite his observations, not under distinct heads, but in the same order as I extracted them, from such of his books as I could have present recourse to.

"Predestination," says Bucer, “is neither more nor less than pre-limitation, or fore-appointment: and God, who consigns everything to its proper use, worketh all things agreeably to his own pre-determination; and, accordingly, separates one thing from another, so as to make each thing answer to its respective use. If you desire a more extensive definition of this predestination, take it thus: predestination is an appointment of everything to its proper use; by which appointment, God doth, before he made them, even from eternity, destine all things whatever to some certain and particular use. Hence it follows, that even wicked men are predestinated. For, as God forms them out of nothing, so he forms them to some determinate end: for he does all things, knowingly, and wisely. The Lord hath made all things for himself, even the wicked for the day of evil [Pr 16:4]. Divines, however, do not usually call this predestination; but reprobation, ‘Tis certain, that God makes a good use of evil itself: and every sin we commit, hath something in it of the good work of God(p). Scripture does not hesitate to affirm, that there are persons, whom God delivers over to a reprobate sense, and whom he forms for destruction: why, therefore, should it be deemed derogatory from God, to assert, that he not only does this, but resolved beforehand to do it?”

(p) Every sin we commit, has something in it of the good work of God. I cannot clearly understand, what Bucer intends by this extraordinary, and seemingly harsh mode of expression. Be his meaning what it may, the reader will observe, as usual, that I am not advancing the above proposition, as my own; the good work of God. I cannot clearly understand, but simply quoting the words of another.

Nothing can be more plain and nervous than the following remarks of Bucer respecting God's obduration of Pharaoh. Whether the remarks be, or be not, carried too far, is beyond my province to enquire. “The apostle says, Who may resist the will of God? By the word will, Paul gives us to understand, that God actually willeth those very things unto which men are hardened by him. When Paul adds, Who may resist? he, in fact, points out the necessity which they, whom God hardens, are under, of doing those things. When God would harden Pharaoh, in order that he might not obey the commandment, it was the actual will of God that Pharaoh should not obey. Yea, God himself wrought in Pharaoh to op pose the commandment sent him. Pharaoh, therefore, did what God in reality willed him to do; yea, he did no more than what God himself had wrought in him: nor was it in Pharaoh's power, to act otherwise than he did.'' Such was the doctrine taught by this able and courageous Cambridge professor. Willing, however, to obviate any exceptions which those persons might raise who had not studied these deep points so carefully and so extensively as he had been enabled to do, he, presently after, shelters both his doctrine and himself under the following words, and the correspondent practice, of the great apostle whom he had quoted before: "Nay but, O man! [who art thou that repliest against God?] St. Paul does not accommodate nor soften down, a single syllable of what he had just asserted. The sacred penman does not deny that they who are hardened by God perish according to the will of God. The apostle does not admit it to be even possible that a person who is hardened from above can perform what is good. Paul [instead of set ting himself to answer our vain reasonings on the matter] contents himself with merely giving us a solemn caution not to sit in judgment on the decrees of God: assuring us, that we cannot arraign the Deity at our own bar, without being guilty of the uttermost boldness and impiety." If Bucer was not a Calvinist, where shall we find one?

I cannot prevail on myself to defraud the reader of a few more citations, which I lately extracted from another most valuable work of Bucer, entitled, A continued Interpretation of the Four Gospels. And I the rather subjoin them, as the book itself is exceedingly scarce, though I have been so happy as to meet with it in a neighbouring library.

“They who are at any time able to fall quite away from Christ, did never really belong to him. Consequently, they never truly believed, nor were indeed pious, nor had the Holy Spirit of adoption: on the contrary, all their performances were nothing but hypocrisy, how sanctified and ready soever unto good works they, for a time, pretended to be. They, whom Christ loves, are loved by him even unto the end: and he doth not cast away those whom the Father giveth him; neither can any snatch them from his hand. Therefore, admitting that these may fall, yet they cannot fall utterly; for they are elect unto life: and God's election cannot be made void by any creature whatever. Seeing, then, that the purpose of God, according to election, may stand, not of works, but of him that calleth [Ro 9:11.]; he not only elected his own people before they were born, and had done either good or evil [Ro 9:11.], but even before the very foundations of the world [Eph 1:4. ] Hence, our Lord said, concerning his apostles, I pray not for the world, but for them whom thou hast given me; for they are thine: that is, they were chosen by thee unto life. As, therefore, on one hand, Christ never knew [i.e. never loved] the reprobate, whatever deceitful appearance of virtue they might have; so, on the other, he always knew [i.e. always loved] the elect, how ungodly so ever they might seem for a time. Consequently, as these [i.e. the elect] are predestinated and called, they shall, sooner or later, be formed anew, according to the likeness of Christ: while those [i.e. the reprobate] shall be stripped of that artificial mask, under which they passed for children of God; and be made to appear in their own proper colours."

On those words of Christ, Ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, Bucer thus remarks: "They were not of our Lord's sheep, i.e. they were not in the number of those who were given to him by the Father; they were not elected unto life. Therefore it was, that they were totally destitute of God's good spirit, and were utterly immersed in flesh: neither were they able to believe in our Lord, nor to embrace him as a Saviour."

A little farther on, we find this admirable commentator observing as follows: “My sheep hear my voice, &c. In these words our Lord expressly teaches, that all good things are dependent on God's election; and that they, to whom it is once given to be sheep, can never perish afterwards. Christ here tells us, that they alone hear his voice: that is, they who are indeed his sheep, are made partakers of faith. Now, whence is it, that some people are Christ's sheep, or susceptible of his doctrine, while others are not? Undoubtedly, because the former are inspired by the good Spirit of God, whereas the latter are not inspired at all. But whence is it, that the former are endued with the Holy Spirit, and not the latter? For this reason: because the former were given to Christ, to be saved by him; but the latter were not given him. Let us therefore allow God the honour of being the bestower of his own Spirit, without supposing him to need or receive any of our assistance. Christ adds, and I know them: i.e. they are committed to my trust; I have them in especial charge. And, doubtless, from hence it is, that his sheep follow him, and live the life which never ends. The Father gave them to him, that he might endue them with life eternal, and they can no more be plucked from Christ's hand, than from the hand of the Father, who is mightier and greater than all. Christ and the Father are one: their power and strength are the same. Consequently, as none can pluck the elect from the Father's hand, so neither from the hand of Christ. We are to observe moreover, that it flows only from God's election, that we are the sheep of Christ, and follow him. We must observe, too, that such can never entirely fall away. For, the Father and the Son being undivided, their hand, that is, their power, must be undivided also: and out of their hand none shall never snatch those whom that hand has once laid hold on for salvation. Now, unto whomsoever it shall be given to hear the voice of Christ, and to follow him; they may be said to be thus laid hold on [by the hand, or power, of divine grace]: seeing, none but the sheep, are able to hear and follow the Redeemer. And if they are sheep now, they are so held in the hand of Christ and of the Father, as never to perish, but to have eternal life.”

Bucer was also a Calvinist on the article of limited redemption. He was too well acquainted with the Scriptures, and too accurate a reasoner, as well as entertained too exalted an idea of the dignity of Christ's sacrifice, to imagine that the Messiah died at sixes and sevens, for anybody and everybody, but effectually for nobody. The learned reformer's sentiments on this subject appear, among other passages, from his pious and judicious paraphrase on our Lord's answer to Peter (Mt 16:23.), which was, says Bucer, as if Christ had said, “If I am the Messiah, I must, according to the Scriptures, be slain for the elect. If I am the son of God, why should I not obey my father, whose will it is, that I should be a victim and a sacrifice for the sins of all those whom he hath ordained unto life?"

I shall only add, concerning this great man, that he died at Cambridge, A. D. 1551; of which melancholy event, good king Edward VI. made the following entry in his journal: “Feb. 28. The learned man Bucerus died at Cambridge; who was, two days after, buried in St. Mary's church, at Cambridge; all the whole University, with the whole town, bringing him to his grave, to the number of 3000 persons. Also there was an oration of Mr. Haddon, made very eloquently, at his death; and a sermon of [Dr. Parker]: after that, Master Redman made a third sermon. Which three sermons made the people wonderfully to lament his death. Last of all, all the learned men of the University made their epitaphs in his praise, laying them on his grave (y)."

(y) See king Edward's journal of his own reign p. 20. Annexed to Burnet's Hist. of the Ref. vol. 2.

Bucer's death was occasioned by a complication of disorders: particularly the cholic, and the stone: intestinoram dolor (says Melch. Ad. p. 220.), calculus, fastiaum ciborum, alvi, siccitas, catarrhi copiosi capitis. During his whole illness, that illustrious mother in Israel, Catharine Brandon, duchess dowager of Suffolk, attended him, watched with him, and deigned to undergo the offices and fatigues of a nurse: in hopes that providence might make her the instrument of saving so valuable a life; or, at least, that her generous assiduity might conduce to soften the last agonies of her beloved friend and pastor. This was the same lady, who, in the succeeding reign of Mary, to avoid the resentment of the Papists, was obliged to follow her second husband, Mr. Richard Bertie, into voluntary banishment: where they suffered such hardships, and ran such dangers, as cannot be read without the strongest feelings of sympathetic distress. On the accession of queen Elizabeth, the religious and noble exiles returned to England; where, many years after, they finished their course, in wealth, honour and felicity.

Some short time before Bucer's decease, Mr. John Bradford (the celebrated martyr) coming to see him, with tears, said, "I am going to preach, and will not fail to remember you in my prayers with the congregation." Bucer devoutly answered, weeping, “Cast me not away, O Lord, in my time of old age, when my strength faileth me!" Immediately on pronouncing which words, he seems to have received a fresh and powerful manifestation of the Divine presence: for he added, Castiget fortiter, abjiciet autem nunquam; nunquan abjiciet: “God may chasten me greatly, but he'll never cast me away; no, he'll never cast me away.'' Somebody advising him to arm himself against the assaults of Satan: he replied, I have nothing to do with Satan: I am only in Christ. I should be sorry, indeed, if I did not now experience the sweetest consolations. Among his last words (they seem to have been the very last) were, with his eyes cheerfully thrown up toward Heaven, Ille, ille regit, et moderatur omnia! i.e. “He, he reigns, and governs all!" Thus comfortably did this blessed saint of God expire in the 61st year of his age.

Paul Fagius, who accompanied him to this kingdom, and was fixed at Cambridge, in quality of Hebrew Professor, died there, the November preceding: and the famous Tremellius, an Italian Protestant, of great piety and learning, and as rooted a Calvinist as Fagius himself, succeeded to the Hebrew chair; and was, afterwards, made Prebend of Carlisle. On the death of king Edward, Tremellius retired into Germany: and, after several removes, died at Sedan, in France A. D. 1580.

In the reign of Queen Mary, the bones of Bucer and Fagius were dug out of their graves, and publicly burned, together with as many of their writings as could be collected.

VI. Peter Martyr, another reformer and luminary of the Church of England, was born at Florence, A. D. 1500. “His family name was Vermilius: but his parents gave him that of Martyr, from one Peter, a martyr, whose church happened to stand near their house." Providence had given him a vast capacity: and his acquired learning was prodigious. The writings of Bucer and Zuinglius were the first means of bringing him to the knowledge of the truth.

For some time after his conversion, Martyr seemed to follow those words of St. Paul too literally, Hast thou faith? have it to thy self before God (Ro 14:22.). But Providence would not suffer such a burning and shining light to be always under a bushel. By degrees, God gave him more and more boldness; and at length called him forth, in the fulness of the blessing of the gospel of Christ. He preached salvation by grace, with the demonstration of the Spirit and with power. Many were converted under his ministry; some of whom proved eminently useful in the Church of God: particularly those two illustrious divines Zanchius and Tremellius.

Martyr's courage and success soon made his native country, Italy, too hot to hold him. Switzerland and Germany afforded him safe retreat; till, in the latter end of the year 1547, he was invited to England, to help forward the good work of reformation then beginning in this kingdom. Melchior Adam, a writer of great accuracy and fidelity, observes, that “On the death of Henry VIII. the young king Edward was resolved to abolish Popery, and to reduce the English Church to the standard of God's Word, under the auspices of his uncle, the duke of Somerset, and of Cranmer, archbishop of Canterbury. And, since the Universities may be considered as the nurseries in which the clergy of the rising generation are trained up for the ministry; it seemed a point of the first importance, to reform those nurseries: that, from them, as from a pure fountain, the streams of sound doctrine might water every corner of the nation. Now, Peter Martyr being in the judgment of the most learned men, a person of singular erudition, and of such general knowledge as almost seemed incredible, he was thought the properest divine, on earth, to preside in the divinity chair at Oxford. He was accordingly, with the king's concurrence, invited to England, by the archbishop. The specimens, which I shall shortly produce, of the doctrines, with which Dr. Martyr seasoned the minds of the students that were designed for the established ministry, will demonstrate, that he was indeed one of the “properest divines on earth," to be intrusted with that important charge. Would to God that all his successors, in the said chair, had been as "proper" for the task as himself.

But there was also another reason that induced Cranmer to wish for Martyr's settlement in England; and which, in concert with the cause already assigned, lay at the bottom of the invitation. Even old Anthony Wood doth not scruple to declare, in express terms, that "in 1547, he [viz. Peter Martyr] was invited into England, by Edward [duke of somerset and] lord protector, and Dr. Cranmer, archbishop of Canterbury; to the end that his assistance might be used to carry on a reformation in the church." In assisting to carry on which reformation of our church, as also in the care and zeal with which he infracted the Oxford students in our church doctrines; he acquitted himself so much to the satisfaction of the king, and the rest of the reformers here, that he was made canon of Christ-church, and a prebendary of Canterbury. Nay, so much was he admired and revered by queen Elizabeth herself, that, after she ascended the throne, “she invited him to return into England, and there to accept of what preferment he pleased.” But, it seems, he “modestly refused" the offer; being fearful lest Popery might get the ascendency in this kingdom again: in which case, he might run the risk of being a martyr in reality, as well as name. He therefore continued at Zurich; where he died in peace, A. D. 1562. So much for the good man himself. Now for his Calvinism.

(1.) “If" says he, “by fate, be meant, a certain power resulting from the stars, and an irresistible implication of causes, by which God himself is reduced within the bounds of restraint - we justly reject the word fate, in this signification of it. But if by fate, you mean a train of causes governed by the will of God - such a fate as this, can by no means seem injurious to true religion, however expedient we may think it to abstain from using the word."

He very justly observes that the wiser stoics themselves asserted fate, in the Christian sense of the term. “There are some, who dream of an iron or adamantine fatality, impressed on the stars and natural causes, unalterable by God himself. This is erroneous; nay, 'tis impious: 'tis even contrary to the judgment of the ancient sages themselves; for they plainly declare, that, by fate, they mean no more than the will and providence of the Supreme being. Witness those verses of Cleanthes the stoic:

Father, and king of Heav'n, my footsteps guide!

My wish with thy decrees shall' coincide.

Too feeble for denial or delay,

I follow where thy purpose marks my way.

Were I reluctant, still the chain proceeds;

Fate drags the unwilling, and the willing leads.

Resign'd I stand, to suffer and to do

What must be borne and done, resign'd or no.

now," (continues Peter Martyr,) “though fate is strongly asserted in these lines; still, the reigns and government of fate are placed in the hand of God: for the philosopher invokes the Supreme Father, and supplicates the guidance of him, whose will is affirmed to be certain and infallible."

Nothing can be more judicious, than Martyr's reasoning, relative to the true meaning of that blameless fate, which was so wisely and so solidly asserted by the best philosophers of the portico. And our reformer's vindication of that doctrine, as settled and ascertained in the golden verses which he quotes, is a very conclusive proof of his own candour, good sense, and regard to truth. I wish I could have done justice to those admirable lines, by translating them better: but, even as I have rendered them, the maxims which they convey, and the implicit submission to Providence which they inculcate, most certainly breathe the very language of Christianity. They express what Milton so finely sings, in those majestic words, which he supposes to be spoken by God the Father:

---Necessity and chance

Approach not me; and what I will is fate.

The verses of Cleanthes are cited, by Peter Martyr, as they stand in Seneca's translation of them into Latin, Seneca's beautiful lines, are, however, rather a paraphrase, than a version. Cleanthes' prayer ran thus, as cited by Epictetus:

Age dh me, w Zeu, k su, ‘h Petrwmenh,

Opoi poq’ umin eimi diatetagmenov,

Wv eyomai spwdaiov hde aoknov

Ean de mh eqelw, ouk ‘htton eyomai.

Lead me, O Jove, and thou, O fate,

Where'er your pleasure has ordain'd

I wish with cheerfulness to meet

What no reluctance can withstand.

By Jove, is meant the God and Father of all. By fate, not a power independent on him, or a separate deity in joint-commission with him; but his own superintending providence. When I consider such exalted sentiments as these; sentiments, so directly tending to give unto God the honour due to his name, and so completely calculated for the general happiness of man; I cease to wonder at those tributes of high, but just encomium on the ancient stoics, which have fallen from the pens even of some learned Arminians themselves. Dr. Cave informs us, that, "Of all the sects of philosophy, St. Pantaenus principally applied himself to the stoics, with whose notions and rules of life he was most enamoured. And no wonder," says the learned Doctor, “seeing, as St. Jerom observes, their doctrines [i.e. the doctrines of the stoics,] in many things come nearest to the doctrines of Christianity. As indeed they do: especially as to the (m) moral and practic part of their principles. They held, that nothing was good, but what was just and pious; no thing evil, but what was vicious and dishonest: that a bad man could never be happy, nor a good man miserable: that the deity was perpetually concerned for human affairs; and that there was a wise and powerful Providence, which particularly superintended the happiness of mankind: that, therefore, this God was, above all things, to be admired, adored, and worshipped, prayed to, acknowledged, obeyed, praised; and that it is the most comely and reasonable thing in the world, that we should universally submit to his will, and aspazesqai ec ‘olhv thv yuxhv ta sunbainonta tanta, cheerfully embrace, with all our souls, all the issues and determinations of his Providence: that we ought not to think it enough to be happy alone, but that it is our duty apo kardiav filein, to love men from our very heart; to relieve and help them, advise and assist them, and contribute what was in our power to their health and safety: and this, not once, or twice, but throughout our whole life; and that unbiassedly, without any little designs of applause or advantage to ourselves: that nothing should be equally dear to a man, as honesty and virtue; and that this is the first thing he should look at, whether the thing he is going about be good, or bad, and the part of a good, or a wicked man; and, if excellent and virtuous, that he ought not to let any loss or damage, torment, or death itself, deter him from it. Whoever runs over the writings of Seneca, Antoninus, Epictetus, Arrian, &c. will find these, and a great many more, claiming a very near kindred with the main rules of life prescribed in the Christian faith. And what wonder, if Saint Pantaenus [or, indeed, every other saint] was in love with such generous and manly principles? which he liked so well, that as he [viz. St. Pantaenus] always retained the title of the Stoic Philosopher, so, for the main, he owned the profession of that sect, even after his being admitted to eminent offices and employments in the Christian Church."

(m) Here let me ask a very natural and reasonable question. If the Stoics, who believed an absolute, over-powering fate in all things, were, nevertheless, the most virtuous and exemplary in their morals, of all the heathen philosophers; with what decency can it be insinuated by Arminianism, that the Christian doctrine of predestination has any degree of tendency to practical ungodliness?

I must make two short remarks on this observable quotation. 1. We see, that, in the judgment of St. Jerom, St. Pantaenus, and Dr. Cave himself, the main branches of the stoical theology and ethics were supposed to come very near the theology and ethics of Christianity: yea, that there was “a very near kindred" between them. So different was the idea, which those eminent persons entertained, concerning stoicism, from the illiterate and ungenerous prejudices which breed in the bosoms of some puny, piddling sciolists among the Arminians, against that ancient and respectable philosophy. 2. May not the lives and morals of the stoical fatalists put the generality of free-willers to the blush?

One testimonial more, and that from a very capable hand, shall finish this digression. “I cannot but think," says the learned and celebrated Mr. Ditton, “that the doctrines of that sect [meaning the stoics] have been much misrepresented. And the truth of it is, that there is, generally speaking, a nearer approach to Christianity, in the morals, discipline, and doctrines of that noble sect, than in those of any other sect whatsoever."

But I willingly return, from even the excellencies of Paganism, to the school of Christ. Let us now listen to those precious, satisfying truths of the gospel, which do indeed render the soul wise unto salvation, and, beyond all the exterior disquisitions in the world, make glad the city of God.

Peter Martyr, the thread of whose testimony I now resume, shall set before us some of those precious truths, pure and genuine as he drew them from the oracles of Scripture. We have heard his judgment concerning fate: let us

(2.) Attend to him on the subject of predestination.

"Forasmuch as God worketh all things by his determinate purpose, and doth nothing by chance, or accidentally; it is a most indubitable axiom, that whatsoever he creates and makes, is destined by him to some certain end and use. Consequently, neither ungodly men, nor Satan himself, nor even sins themselves, can be exempted from predestination: for, of all these, God makes what use he pleases. Hence, those of the unrighteous, who are devoted to final condemnation, are stiled by St. Paul, skeuh, or vessels, i.e. God's vessels: vessels, in whom God makes known his wrath. Thus it is said, respecting Pharaoh, To this very end have I raised thee up, that in thee I might display my power. Take the word predestination in this extensive sense, and it reaches to all things: it will import no other than God's eternal appointment of his creatures to their respective use."

(3.) “We may distinguish between the knowledge and the foreknowledge of God. His knowledge extends not only to everything past, present, and future; but even to what shall never come to pass: neither possibles, nor impossibles, are unknown to him. But his foreknowledge is conversant with those things only which are certainly future. God's will is the foundation of his prescience: for nothing could be future if God did not will its futurition. Whatever he does not will should come to pass, he takes care to hinder from coming to pass. God, therefore, foreknows a thing, because it was his will and pleasure that the thing should exist and take place."

(4.) “Providence is God's well-ordered, fixed, and incessant management of all things whatever. When I say, that his providence extends to all things whatever, I advance no more than I am able to prove. And I prove it thus:

“God has a perfect knowledge and comprehension of everything: else his wisdom would be defective. Now the government of this Allwise Being is either unlimited as his knowledge, or partial and confined. If his government be confined and limited, such limitation must arise either from want of will, or from want of power. If from want of power, he would cease to be Almighty: if from want of will, he would cease to be all-excellent. But to deny the infinity either of his knowledge, power, or excellence, would be the same as to deny that he is God. It remains, therefore, that the supreme Being superintends all things: and this the Scripture, in numberless passages, most expressly declares. For it affirms, that the over-sight of God reaches even to the leaves of the trees, to the hairs of our heads, and to the meanest birds of the air.'' The sum of this reasoning is, that to deny the absolute universality of God's incessant providence is neither more nor less than plain, direct, palpable Atheism.

"I term divine providence," says he “the administration of all things whatever; because nothing can elude its influence: nor, without it, could anything even continue to exist. I term it well-ordered, because it is so conjoined with unerring wisdom, as to preclude all possible confusion and embarrassment. I term it fixed, or immovable; because the knowledge of the Divine Administrator cannot be disappointed, nor his power defeated: he is equally incapable of mistake, and of disconcertment. Moreover, I term his providence perpetual, or incessant, because he himself is constantly and most intimately present with the things which he has made. When he created them he did not leave them to themselves; but he is, himself, within them, as their perpetual principle of motion: for in him we live, and are moved, and do exist. (Ac 17:28.) So much respecting providence: to which, and to its correlative articles, fate is nearly allied. I have already observed, that, if you suppose the word fate to signify such an inevitable necessity as results from the influence and position of the stars; the ancient Christians did, with very just reason, abstain from the use of the word, in that sense of it. But if it [i.e. if the word fate] mean no more than a sure concatenation of second causes, which is not carried on, either with a blind precipitancy, or with an unmeaning accidentally; but is regulated by the providence of God, and may be varied according to the sovereign pleasure of his will; I can see no reason why the thing called fate should, in this view of it, he disrelished or rejected by any man. "

(5.) I shall just touch on this reformer's doctrine concerning reprobation: requesting the reader still to bear in mind, that I am not, professedly, delivering my own judgment, but simply setting before him the judgment of Peter Martyr. According to him, “Reprobation may be denned, that most wise determination of God, whereby he did, before all eternity, immutably decree not to have mercy on those whom he loved not, but passed by: and this without any injustice on his part.''

Martyr does not scruple to affirm, that “God withholds his grace from [some] men: which grace being withheld, those men cannot but fall. “He even ventures to add, that, “since we all live and move by actuation from God, it is certain, that all the deeds which we perform, are, of necessity, some way or other, wrought under a divine impulse.'' Yet though he expresses himself with such strength and plainness, he will not admit that this doctrine makes God the author of sin: “There is no need," says he, “for God to infuse additional evil into our hearts. There is enough there already. We have it sufficiently, of ourselves: partly, through the foulness of original sin; and partly, because a created being doth, of himself, degenerate, without measure and without end, unless he is succoured by God." From hence, we may easily anticipate his opinion

(6.) Concerning free-will. “Paul plainly saith, It is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy. Our salvation is the work of Gad, and not the achievement of our own strength. For he it is who worketh in us both to will and to accomplish. Before God thus worketh in us, he has to do [as it were] with stones: for our hearts are hearts of stone, till Christ transforms them into hearts of flesh."

"They who are born again ought never to forget, that they obtained this freedom, not by their own deserts, but by the favour of God. It was owing, not to themselves, but to their heavenly Father, that they were drawn to Christ. For unless God the Father had inwardly won them over by main efficacy, they would have shunned and avoided Christ, even as others."

Luther, in his answer to Erasmus, had, after his blunt, but nervous manner, compared the human will to a horse: “If grace," says he, “be in the saddle, the will moves to what is good; but man's will, if rid by the Devil, is sure to rush headlong into sin." This comparison, unceremonious as it is, was adopted and subscribed to by Peter Martyr; whose words are, “Christ hath said, Ye shall then be free, when the Son makes you so: from whence it follows, that so long as men are unregenerated, they cannot, with truth, be pronounced free. Besides, the tyranny of Satan is such, that he detains men in captivity, till they are rescued by Christ: for our Lord has declared, That the strong man armed keeps peaceable possession of his palace, and continues master of the spoils; till One stronger than he, arrives, and dispossesses him by force. Likewise, in the 2d Epistle to Timothy, the apostle affirms, that such as oppose the truth are kept prisoners by Satan at his will. And it is a well-known illustration, that the will of man resembles a horse, which sometimes has grace for his rider, and sometimes the Devil. Now, perhaps, it is set in motion by the former: anon, it is whipp'd and spurr'd by the latter. Human liberty, therefore, is cut short by manifold slavery. And, seeing the freedom of the will is so exceedingly small, during the present state of things, it is wonderful to me, that men do not, with Luther, rather term the will a slave and a bond-woman, than free. If a man was shut up in prison, manicled and fettered; could he justly call himself free, only because he were able to move his head and lift up his eye lids? “Thus much for free-will.

(7.) Now for justification. So far was Martyr from supposing that men are justified and accepted of God on account of their works, that there is a sense, in which he would not admit justification even by faith itself. And very justly. For, though the grace and principle of faith are of God's giving, and of God's infusing, yet faith, as acted and exercised by us, is attended with extreme imperfection: and we cannot be justified, in the strict meaning of the term, by anything which is defective. Hence the following remark of our judicious reformer: “If faith itself be considered as our act, 'tis impossible we should be justified by it: because faith, in this view of it, is lame and imperfect, and falls far short of that completeness which the law requires. But we are therefore said to be justified by faith, because it is by faith that we lay hold upon, and apply to ourselves, the promises of God and the righteousness and merits of Christ. A beggar (we'll suppose) extends his foul and leprous hand, to receive an alms from a person that offers it: certainly it is not from the leprosy and foulness of his own hand, that he derives any benefit; but from the donation given, and which he receives with such a hand as he has.'' This single paragraph is so full to the point, that it supersedes the necessity of multiplying quotations on the subject in question. Let us hear him

(8.) On the article of perseverance.

"If we consult the sacred writings, we shall there find, not only, in general, that God is good and powerful; but likewise, that he is good and powerful for our particular benefit'' [i.e. for the particular benefit of us who truly believe]: “and that in consequence of his power and goodness, he'll so confirm our will, that it shall never entirely revolt from him. For he will not suffer us to be tempted above what we are able to bear; but will, with the temptation, make a way for our escape. He will establish you, even unto the end, blameless to the day of our Lord Jesus Christ. God is faithful, by whom ye are called. Very numerous are the Scripture attestations which promise us perseverance through Christ, and the establishment of our wills [in holiness]."

So much shall suffice, at present, for Peter Martyr's judgment concerning the points in contest.

And let it be further observed, that this excellent divine appears to have had some hand in drawing up the articles of religion adopted by the Church of England. Heylyn himself confesses as much: tho' he labours, as usual, to mince, and qualify the concession by every diminishing quirk, in his power to apply. I can compare him to nothing, but to a miser, who, forced, against the grain, to pay a sum of money, counts it out, with grudging reluctance, and draws it back again and again, till obliged to part with it indeed. Heylyn's words are these: “Though Peter Martyr lived to see the death of king Edward, and consequently the end of the convocation, Anno 1552, in which the articles of religion were first composed and agreed on; yet there was little use made of him in advising, and much less in directing, anything which concerned that business, tho' some use might be made of him as a labourer to advance the work."

There are testimonies of Martyr's orthodoxy and usefulness still in reserve; able, if need required, to enlarge these gleanings into a harvest. But I must not dismiss this great reformer and ornament of our church, without observing, that he and Bucer were the principal instruments of persuading Dr. Hooper into a compliance (as far as he did comply) with king Edward's reformation, respecting some matters of exterior ceremony: which (however indifferent those matters were in their own nature,) became important, because adopted by the church, and enforced by the state.

Few readers need to be informed, that, when Hooper was nominated to the see of Gloucester, he entertained some unhappy scruples, more nice than necessary, concerning the form of the episcopal habit. He supposed, that the robes, in which a bishop was expected to appear, favoured more of superstition and Popish pomp, than comported with the scriptural simplicity of Protestantism. Amazing, that a person of Hooper's learning, piety, and exalted sense, could look for Popery in the fold of a garment; and extract superstition out of an angular cap! Groundless, however, and ill-timed, as his scruples were, they had such weight with himself, that he refused to be consecrated after the usual mode, and even suffered himself to be imprisoned in the Fleet, for his contempt of legal authority. But I must also do him the justice to add, that he lived long enough to see the weakness and absurdity of opposing things which the law of God has left indifferent. The seventies of Mary's reign taught the honest, but over scrupulous, bishop that Popery consisted in something more than a robe, a scarf, or a four-cornered cap.

While Hooper's obstinacy continued, Bucer and Martyr took all imaginable pains to solve his objections, and, if possible, reduce him to conformity. They gained on him so far that he consented to wear the usual habit on some principal occasions. One of Martyr's letters to him may be seen at full length, in an appendix to that edition of his Common Places, which has supplied me with the preceding extracts. It is written with such modesty, learning, candour, and force of reason, as are a standing honour to the writer, and demonstrate that his attachment to the Church of England extended to her rites, as well as her doctrines.

The letter itself being very long, I shall only give the substance of Martyr's arguments, in Mr. Roll's judicious abridgement of them. “He commended Hooper, for his pains in preaching; but advised him not to exert his zeal on points that are indefensible, or things of little moment, lest the people should from thence be led to call in question the judgment of the reformed preachers, and give no credit to what they delivered on the most important articles. In answer to one objection of Hooper's, that we ought to have an express warrant from Scripture for everything belonging to religion; Martyr told him, that, if the general rules of order were observed, the governors of the church had a discretionary latitude in little matters. Thus, for instance, our receiving the communion in a church, in a forenoon, not in a reclining posture, [nor] in a congregation [consisting] of men only; stood upon no other than ecclesiastical, that is, upon human authority: to which [nevertheless"], he presumed, Hooper had always submitted without any scruple. He told him, further, that it would be difficult to produce any warrant, from the New Testament, for singing Psalms in public worship. And that the Christian church, from the beginning, had a regard, in many particulars, to the Jewish polity: especially, in the great festivals of Easter and Whitsunday. Supposing, what he [Martyr] could not grant, that the episcopal habit and vestments had been introduced into the church by the see of Rome; yet he did not think the contagion of Popery so very malignant, as to carry infection into everything which it touched. That to govern by such narrow maxims would lay an inconvenient restraint on the Church of God: and that our ancestors moved much more freely, who made no difficulty of turning heathen temples into Christian churches; and of translating, to pious uses, the revenues [once] sacred to idolatry." Had Martyr's coolness and moderation been universally prevalent in the Protestant world, how much vain wrangling and party-division would it have prevented!

Bucer was no less assiduous, than Martyr, in respectfully combating the pertinacity of Hooper. They united in assuring him “That in the business of religious rites, they were for keeping as close as possible to the holy Scriptures, and to the most uncorrupt ages of the church: but, however, they could not go so far as to believe that the substance of religion was effected by the clothes we wear; and they thought things of this nature altogether indifferent, and left to our liberty by the word of God (f)." Thus, it incontestably appears, that these two learned Calvinists, Bucer and Martyr, were church of England men not in word and tongue only, but indeed and in truth.

(f) Rolt, Ibid. p. 96. - N.B. Two of Bucer's letters, viz. One to Hooper, and the other to A. Lasco, both in vindication of the received modes, are extant in Strype’s Eccl. Mem. Vol. ii. Appendix, from p. 118 to p. 132. The whole letter to A. Lasco was (says Mr. Strype, p. 225.) “translated into English, and set forth, not far from the beginning of queen Elizabeth’s reign, for the use of the church, that then was exercised afresh with the same controversy."

Before I conclude this Section, I beg leave to subjoin an observation, that would more properly have fallen under the immediate article of Bucer; but which, though omitted in its due place, is too important to the design of this undertaking to be entirely passed over. It has been affirmed (and what is there, which some Arminians will not affirm?) that Bucer held the doctrine of justification by works, and believed human obedience to be meritorious in the sight of God.

That he was once of this opinion, is not at all wonderful, when we consider that he was born and educated in the bosom of the Romish church, with whom the tenet of legal justification is a fundamental principle. And, for a considerable time after God had called him out of Papal darkness, his improvements in divine knowledge were progressive. His spiritual growth resembled the gradual vegetation of an oak; not the rapid prosiliency of a mushroom. Bucer seems to have expressed himself the most incautiously, in the disputation at Leipsic, A. D. 1539; yet, even then, he roundly declared, that “those good works, to which so great a reward is given, are themselves the gifts of God." And that passage, which Vossius quotes from Bucer, falls extremely short of proving that the latter was, even at the early period in which he penned it, an assertor of justification by performances of our own. Impartiality obliges me to subjoin that celebrated passage, which so many Arminians and merit-mongers have since caught at, as if it made for the Popish doctrine of justification. “I cannot but wish," said Bucer, in the year 1529, “a more sound judgment to some persons, who have disturbed many in this our age with this paradox, that we are saved by faith only: tho' they saw the thing was carried so far, as to confine righteousness only to the opinion of the mind, and excluding good works. Where is their charity, who refuse to cure this evil by one word or two? It is only to say that, when faith is formed, we are justified; and that, through faith, we obtain a disposition to good works, and, consequently, a righteousness: or, that faith is the foundation and root of a righteous life, as Augustin said." Is there a single sentence, in this paragraph, to which the strictest Calvinist would not consent? Observe the order in which Bucer arranges faith, justification, and obedience. Faith goes before; justification follows faith; and practical obedience follows justification: we first believe; we no sooner believe, than we are justified; and the faith which justifies disposes us to the after-performances of good works: or, in other words, justifying faith "is the root and foundation of a righteous life." Says not every Calvinist the same?

As Bucer advanced in years and experience, he learned to express his idea of justification with still greater clearness and precision, than he had done on some past occasions. Finding that the enemies of grace had greedily laid hold of some inadvertent phrases, and taken ungenerous advantage of some well-meant concessions, which he had made, before his evangelical light was at the full; he deemed it necessary to retract such of his positions as countenanced the merit of works; and to place justification on the scriptural basis of the Father's gratuitous goodness, and the Son's imputed righteousness: still, however, taking care to inculcate, that the faith, by which we receive the grace of God and the righteousness of Christ, is the certain source of all good works. For being thus honest to his convictions, he was loaded, by his adversaries, with accumulated slander and reproach. How modestly and forcibly he vindicated his conduct, may be judged from the following passage: "The Lord," says Bucer, “has given me to understand some places [of scripture] more fully than I formerly did: which, as it is so bountifully given to me, why should I not impart it liberally to my brethren, and ingenuously declare the goodness of the Lord? What inconsistency is there, in profiting in the work of salvation? And who, in this age, or in the last, has treated of the Scripture, and has not experienced, that, even in this study, one day is the scholar of another?"

Indeed, no stronger proof need be given, of Bucer's soundness in the article of justification, than the rapture and admiration with which he mentions the English book of Homilies. "No sooner," says Mr. Strype, "were the homilies composed, and sent abroad; but the news thereof (and the book itself, as it seemed, already translated into Latin) came to Strasburgh, among the Protestants there: where it caused great rejoicing. And Bucer, one of the chief ministers there, wrote a gratulatory epistle hereupon to the Church of England, in November, 1547: which was printed the year after. Therein that learned and moderate man shewed, how these pious sermons were come among them, wherein the people were so godlily and effectually exhorted to the reading of the Holy Scriptures; and faith was so well explained, whereby we become Christians; and justification, whereby we are saved; and the other chief heads of the Christian religion so soundly handled. And therefore, as he added, these foundations being rightly laid, there could nothing be wanting in our Churches, requisite towards the building here upon sound doctrine and discipline. He commended much the Homily of Faith, the nature and force of which was so clearly and soberly discussed; and wherein it was so well distinguished from the faith that was dead. He much approved of the manner of treating concerning the misery and death we are all lapsed into, by the sin of our first parent; and how we are rescued from this perdition, only by the grace of God, and by the merit and resurrection of his Son."

No wonder, that this excellent man was, soon after, called into England, to assist in perfecting that reformation, whose beginnings he so heartily approved. When here, vast deference was paid to his judgment and advice, by Cranmer and the other Protestant bishops. This is confessed, even by Burnet himself; whose words are, "About the end of this year (1550), or the beginning of the next, there was a review made of the Common-Prayer Book. Martin Bucer was consulted in it: and Alesse translated it into Latin for his [i.e. for Bucer's] use. Upon which, Bucer wrote his opinion; which he finished the 5th of January in the year following: and, almost in every particular, the most material things, which Bucer excepted to, were corrected afterwards." This acknowledgement of Bishop Burnet's confirms what is delivered by Guthrie: who, in his English History, observes, concerning Bucer and Peter Martyr, that their authority was great in England.”

Calvinism XV - Of the Share which Calvin had in the Reformation...

SECTION XV.

Of the Share which Calvin had in the Reformation of the Church of England.

To what has been already observed, concerning our principal reformers, a word or two must be added, relative to that grand ornament of the Protestant world, Dr. John Calvin. It has been furiously affirmed, by more than one Arminian, that Calvin had not the least hand, directly or indirectly, in any part of our English reformation. Old Heylyn plays to this tune: “Our first reformers had no respect of Calvin." And again: they “had no regard to Luther or Calvin, in the procedure of their work." To Heylyn's pipe, dances Mr. Samuel Downes; with the same reverential glee, as poor Wat Sellon squeaks to the quavers of Mr. John Wesley. Let us, however, examine for ourselves, and attend to facts. Mr. Rolt informs us, from Guthrie, that Bucer's “remonstrances, together with those of Martyr and Calvin, prevailed with archbishop Cranmer, and the other prelates of the reformation, to suffer it [i.e. to suffer the liturgy] to be revised and corrected." Such an acknowledgment, from a historian of Guthrie's principles, must have decisive weight with every rational enquirer. So must the testimony that follows. “Calvin advised Bucer how to conduct himself before king Edward VI. He [i.e. Calvin] corresponded with the duke of Somerset “(who was the king's uncle, protector of the realm, and, in concert with Cranmer, the main instrument in conducting the reformation) “and gave him his opinion how the reformation should be carried on. In one of his [i.e. of Calvin's] letters to the lord protector, he expressed his dislike of praying for the dead. Calvin, in his epistolary correspondence with the protector, was instrumental, not only in pushing some severity against the Papists, but in some advances towards bringing the Church of England to a nearer conformity with the Churches abroad, where the worship was more plain." The Church, therefore, stood indebted for part of her purity and simplicity, to the discreet and friendly offices of this most eminent divine, “whose decisions” (as an elegant modern historian truly observes) “were received among the Protestants of that age, with incredible submission."

Even bishop Burnet takes some notice of Calvin's correspondence with Somerset. “Calvin wrote to the protector, on the 29th of October (1548), encouraging him to go on, notwithstanding the wars, as Hezechias had done, in his reformation. He [i.e. Calvin] lamented the heats of some that professed the gospel: but complained, that he heard there were few lively sermons heard in England, and that the preachers recited their discourses coldly. He much approves a set form of prayers, whereby the consent of all the Churches did more manifestly appear. But he advises a more complete reformation. He taxed the prayers for the dead, the use of chrism, and extreme unction, since they were nowhere recommended in Scripture. He (Calvin) had heard, that the reason why they (the English reformers) went no further, was, because the times could not bear it: but this was to do the work of God by political maxims; which, though they ought to take place in other things, yet should not be followed in matters in which the salvation of souls was concerned. But, above all things, Calvin complained of the great impieties and vices that were so common in England; as swearing, drinking, and uncleanness: and prayed him (the lord protector) earnestly, that these things might be looked after (s)."

(s) Burnet's Reform, vol. ii. p. 83. - Dr. Fuller gives a much more satisfactory abstract from Calvin's letter, than does his lordship of Sarum. “Master Calvin," says Fuller, “is therein very positive for a set form: whose words deserve our translation and observation. Formulam precum [saith Calvin] et rituum ecclesiasticorum, valde probo, ut certa illa existet; a qua ne pastoribus disedere in functione sua liceat: 1. Ut consulatur quorundam simplicitati et imperitiae. 2. Ut certius constet omnium inter se ecclesiarum consensus. 3. Ut obvium ineatur desultoriae quorundam levitati, qui novationes quasdam affectant. Sic igitur statum esse catechismum oportet, statam sacramentorum administrationem, publicam item precum formulam. That is: I do highly approve that there should be a certain form of prayer, and ecclesiastical rites; from which it should not be lawful for the pastors themselves to discede. 1. That provision may be made for some people's ignorance and unskilfulness. 2. That the consent of all the churches among themselves may the more plainly appear. 3. That order may be taken against the unsettled levity of such as delight in innovations. Thus there ought to be an established catechism, an established administration of sacraments, as also a public form of prayer." Fuller's Church Hist, book vii. p. 426.

Calvin did not remonstrate in vain. The communion office underwent a farther reform, in 1550: as did the whole liturgy, in 1551; when among many other alterations, the chrism in baptism, the unction of the sick, and prayers for the dead, were totally expunged.

That the reasonings and representations of Calvin had great influence on the protector, and on the conduct of ecclesiastical affairs in England, is evident, amidst a multiplicity of additional proofs that might be offered, from what is observed by the candid and learned Mr. Hickman: than whom, no person, perhaps, was better acquainted with the religious history of this kingdom. "Bucer, at Cambridge," says that excellent writer, “understood that Calvin's letters prevailed much with Somerset: and therefore entreats Calvin, when he did write to the protector, to admonish him not to suffer the churches to be left void of preachers."

Heylin himself, in his History of the Reformation, virtually contradicts what he elsewhere delivers, concerning the “no-respect “which, he would have us believe, was shewn to Calvin. Speaking of king Edward's first liturgy, he says, “And here the business might have rested,'' [i.e. the liturgy would not have been reviewed and reformed] “if Calvin's pragmatical spirit had not interposed (w)." The concession is important, though maliciously expressed: for, what is this, but allowing, that the Church of England was obliged to “Calvin's interposition," for her deliverance from the alb, the cope, the introits, the exorcism, the trine immersion, the unction, prayers for souls departed, &c. which were all retained by the first liturgy? Surely, if Heylyn's complaint be justly founded, that “if Calvin's pragmatical spirit had not interposed” the first liturgy might have stood as it did, it will follow, 1. That the Protestant religion in England is under the highest obligations to Calvin, for his successful zeal in occasioning all this rubbish to be wheeled away: and, 2. That Heylin himself, by whom this very circumstance is affirmed, was guilty of a most palpable deviation from truth, in asserting, elsewhere, that “Calvin offered his assistance to our reformers, and that his interposition was refused (x)."

(w) Heylyn Hist, of the Reform. Pref. p. 3. - Mr. Whiston, likewise, honestly confesses, that king Edward's first liturgy was then [i.e. in the year 1551.] “plainly altered out of human prudence, and out of compliance with Calvin and other foreigners." Whiston's Memoirs, vol. ii. p. 423.

(x) See Heylyn's Quinquart. Hist. Ch. viii. s. 2. Misc. Tr. p. 548. And yet this very Heylyn, in the very next page but one, says, that the first liturgy, “being disliked by Calvin, was brought under a review." Ibid. p. 550.

'Tis not a little amusing to see such rank Arminians, as Heylyn, pressing themselves, whether they will or no, into the service of truth. Take, therefore, a farther taste of his testimony, occurring in another work of his. He observes, that “Cranmer, Ridley," and “the rest of the English bishops “concerned in the reformation, resolved that "they would give Calvin no offence." The Arminian found himself constrained even to add, that Calvin, “In his letters to the king and council, had excited them to proceed in the good work which they had begun: that is, that they should so proceed as he [i.e. as Calvin] had directed. With Cranmer he is more particular, and tells him, in plain terms, that, in the liturgy of this church [viz. the first liturgy"], as it then stood, there remained a whole mass of Popery, which did not only blemish, but destroy, God's public worship (2)." It appeared, by the subsequent revisal and reformation of that liturgy, that king Edward, his council, and archbishop Cranmer [or, as Heylyn himself there, for a wonder, vouchsafes to ex press it, “the godly king, assisted by so wise a council, and such learned prelates''] were entirely of Calvin's mind. Doubtless, those good and great men reformed the first liturgy, more from a conviction of the force of Calvin's arguments, than from a principle of mere deference to Calvin's authority. Mr. Heylyn, however, inclines to the latter supposition: and, by a concession which places Calvin's authority with the reformers in the most exalted point of view, expressly declares, that “the first liturgy was discontinued, and the second superinduced upon it after this review, to give satisfaction unto Calvin's cavils; the curiosities of some, and the mistakes of others, of his friends and followers."

In such esteem was Calvin held at the English court, that Bucer (though invited hither by the king himself, and the archbishop of Canterbury) would not, on his arrival here, wait on the lord protector, till he had obtained, from Calvin, letters of introduction and recommendation to that personage. “Of this," says Heylyn, viz. of the state of religion in England, “he (i.e. Bucer,) gives account to Calvin; and desires some letters from him to the lord protector, that he might find the greater favour, when he came before him: which was not till the tumults of the time were composed and quieted.''

What, moreover, shall we say, if it appear, that Calvin's interest was so considerable as to be a means of extricating Dr. Hooper from the Fleet-prison, to which he had been committed on account of his aforementioned objections to the episcopal habit? Let us, once more, attend to Heylyn. “In which condition of affairs Calvin addresseth his letters to the lord protector, whom he desireth to lend the man (viz. Hooper) a helping hand, and extricate him out of those perplexities into which he was cast. So that, at last, the differences," adds Heylyn, "were thus compromised, that is to say, that Hooper should receive his consecration, &c.”

Add to this, that, according to the said Heylyn, the order for removing altars, and placing communion tables in their room, was chiefly owing to the influence of Calvin. "The great business of this year (1550) was the taking down of altars in many places, by public authority: which, in some few, had formerly been pulled down by the irregular forwardness of the common people. The principal motive whereunto was, in the first place, the opinion of some dislikes which had been taken by Calvin against the (first) liturgy."

A correspondence was also carried on, between Calvin and archbishop Cranmer. Nay, so high did Calvin stand in the regards of king Edward himself, and so thoroughly satisfied was Cranmer, of Calvin's abilities and integrity, that “Cranmer admonished Calvin, that he could not do anything more profitable than to write often to the king."

Nor was Calvin unworthy of the distinguished honours that were everywhere shewn him, by the learned and moderate of all denominations. “He was '' (says Dr. Edwards,) “reputed a great man, not only at Geneva, but in England, and, accordingly, he had a great stroke here, and his judgment was much valued by our Church: as is evident from this, that, when some things in the first English liturgy were disliked by him, there was presently an alteration made in it, and another edition of it was put out, with amendments. That accomplished prelate, Bishop Andrews, said, that Calvin was an illustrious person, and never to be mentioned without a preface of the highest honour. (Determ. Theol de Usur.) Bishop Bilson tells us (Dial. p. 509) that Mr. Calvin was so well known, to those that are learned and wise, for his great pains and good labours in the church of God, that a few snarling friars could not impeach his good name. Mr. Hooker gives him this short but full character: He was incomparably the wisest man that ever the French church enjoyed: and in the same place (Pref. to Eccles. Polity) he styles him, a worthy vessel of God's glory. Bishop Morton speaks as honourably of him. For understanding the Scripture, he was endued with an admirable gift of judgment, saith Mr. Lively, the famous Hebrew professor. And the generality of our church men, in those times, were ready to bestow on him that brief encomium our Bishop Stillingfleet gives him, viz. that excellent servant of God.'' Now, as Dr. Edwards farther observes, “It is certain, that our churchmen did not admire and esteem Calvin and Beza, and their followers, for their ecclesiastical government, and some other things which were peculiar to their churches; therefore it must be their doctrines which they had a respect for."

It would be almost endless to refer to the just praises with which Calvin's memory has been honoured. "Joseph Scaliger, who scarce thought any man worth his commending, could not forbear admiring Calvin: whom he owned, for the happiest of all the commentators, in apprehending the sense of the prophets. And Pasquier says, Calvin was a good writer, both in Latin and French; and our French tongue is highly obliged to him, for enriching it with so great a number of fine expressions.''

The character given of him, by the immortal Monsieur de Thou, is, Johannes Calvinus, “acri vir ac vehementi ingenio, et admirabili facundia praeditas; inter Protestantes magni nominis theologus; a person endued with a quick and lively genius, and of admirable eloquence; a divine highly accounted of among Protestants."

"Bishop Hooper so much valued Calvin, that he wrote to him, even when he [Hooper] was imprisoned; saluting him with the compellation of vir praestantissime, earnestly begging his church's prayers, and at last subscribing himself, tuae pietatis studiosissimus, Johannes Hooperus."

"Whenever he was quoted, in the press, or in the pulpit, it was done with epithets of honour; as, the learned, the judicious, the pious Calvin. And I am more than confident, there cannot be produced one writer of credit, in the established Church of England, that ever fell foul on Calvin, 'till about 60 or 70 years after his death, when the tares of Arminius began to be sown and cherished among us. Dr. Featly styles him, that bright, burning taper of Geneva, as warm in his devotions, as clear and lightsome in his disputes (Ep. Ded. to Dippers Dipt). How respectfully do Jewel, Abbot, Usher, &c. mention him!"

Calvin has been taxed with fierceness and bigotry. But his meekness and benevolence were as eminent as the malice of his traducers is shameless. I shall give one single instance of his modesty and gentleness. While he was a very young man, disputes ran high between Luther and some other reformers, concerning the manner of Christ's presence in the holy sacrament. Luther, whose temper was natully warm and rough, heaped many hard names on the divines who differed from him on the article of consubstantiation; and, among the rest, Calvin came in for his dividend of abuse. Being informed of the harsh appellations he received, he meekly replied, in a letter to Bullinger, “Saepe dicere solitus sum, etiamsi me diabolum vocaret, me tamen hoc illi honoris habiturum, ut insignem Dei servum agnoscam; qui tamen, ut pollet eximiis virtutibus, ita magnis vitiis laboret: i.e. 'Tis a frequent saying with me, that, if Luther should even call me a devil, my veneration for him is, notwithstanding, so great, that I shall ever acknowledge him to be an illustrious servant of God; who, tho' he abounds in extraordinary virtues, is yet not without considerable imperfections."

The same learned historian, who relates this, has an observation, concerning Calvin, which deserves attention. "John Calvin," (says he,) “was a man whose memory will be blessed in every succeeding age. He instructed and enlightened, not only the church of Geneva, but also the whole reformed world, by his immense labours. Insomuch that all the reformed churches are, in the gross, frequently called by his name." Thus wrote this candid Arminian, so lately as the year 1734.

I might here add some account of the consummate veneration in which the name and doctrines of Calvin were held, by our bishops and Universities, before the clergy of our establishment were debauched into Arminianism by Laud. But this shall, if Providence permit, be the subject of some succeeding Section.

In the meanwhile, I should be equally unjust to the church of England, and to the moderation of Calvin, if I did not annex a passage or two, from Mr. Strype, relative to the remarkable candour with which Calvin expressed himself, concerning the ceremonies and discipline of our religious establishment.

"The mention of Calvin," (says this excellent historian,) “must bring in a very remark able letter, which he wrote in the month of August this year [1561], concerning certain ecclesiastical rites, used in our office of private prayer [an evident mistake for common-prayer newly [re-] established [on the accession of queen Elizabeth]: which were scrupled by some of the English exiles, upon their return; chiefly, because not used by the reformed Church in Geneva: concerring which they had sent to Calvin, for his resolution and judgment. Wherein he gave his opinion generally in favour and approbation of them;" i.e. in favour of the “ecclesiastical rites": which the historian particularizes in several instances: and then adds:

"To this judgment of this great divine, concerning rites used in this Church, I will briefly subjoin his approbation of the episcopal government of the Church: which is alledged out of his institutions, by Dr. Whitgift:

‘That every province [saith Calvin] had among their bishops, an archbishop; and that the council of Nice did appoint patriarchs, who should be, in order and dignity, above archbishops; was for the preservation of discipline. Therefore for this cause especially were those degrees appointed, that if anything should happen, in any particular Church, which could not be decided, it might be removed to a provincial synod. This kind of government some called Hierarchia: an improper name. But if, omitting the name, we consider the thing itself, we shall find, that these old bishops did not frame any other kind of government in the Church, from that which the Lord hath prescribed in his word.' And so much concerning Calvin's sense of our Church's liturgy and government."

Nor did Calvin's learned colleague and successor, the illustrious Beza, entertain a less respectful idea of our national establishment. Towards the decline of queen Elizabeth's reign, when puritanic opposition ran high against the outworks of the Church, the opposers affected to give out, that their objections were authorized, and their measures countenanced, by the most learned foreign Protestants: and, especially, by Beza. This being soon known at Geneva, that great man thought it his duty to exculpate himself from a charge so ungenerous and unjust: which he took care to do, in a letter to Whitgift, then Archbishop of Canterbury. “While the archbishop," says Strype, "was endeavouring to suppress the male-contents against episcopacy and the Church of England in its present establishment, he receiveth, March 8th [1591], a letter from Theodore Beza, the chief minister of Geneva, wherein lie by owning, with all respect, the archbishop, and the rest of the English bishops, and their government of this Church, gave a notable check to these new reformers, who bore out themselves much with his authority. It seemed to have been written by him, in answer to one from the archbishop, blaming him for his (supposed) meddling with the Church and state of England, without any lawful commission. In defence of himself, he (Beza) returned an answer; part whereof was as followeth: That whereas his lordship thought it meet, in his letters, to move them (i.e. to move the Geneva divines) to think well of this kingdom, and of the Church here, and the government thereof: it indeed troubled both him and Sadeel (another of the ministers of Geneva), in some sort: as being greatly afraid, lest some sinister rumours were brought to him (to the arch-bishop) concerning them; or lest what they had written, concerning Church-government properly against the antichristian tyranny [of the Roman church], as necessity required, might be taken, by some, in that sense, as tho' they ever meant to compel to their order those churches that thought otherwise. That such arrogancy was far from them: for [added Beza] who gave us authority over any church? And that they by no means thought, so substantial matters were kept, that there ought nothing to be granted to antiquity, nothing to custom, nothing to the circumstances of places, times, and persons.'' So wrote Beza: or, to use Mr. Strype's own words, on the occasion, “Thus did Beza and Sadeel, in the name of their church, profess to the archbishop their respect, honour, and approbation of the Church of England."

About two years afterwards, Dr. Bancroft (who at length became archbishop of Canterbury), in a treatise, which he published against the obstinacy of some restless Puritans, "produced divers letters of Zanchius, in approbation of episcopacy; and of Bullinger and Gualter, to several English bishops, in disallowance altogether of those innovators (s)."

(s) Ibid. p. 404. - In another work of Mr. Strype, that useful and laborious collector gives a large account of Zanchius's attachment to church-government by archbishops and bishops. “We do not disallow the fathers," said Zanchy, "in that, after a diverse way of dispensing the word, and governing the church, they multiplied divers orders of ministers. It was lawlul so to do: seeing they did it for honest causes, appertaining, at that time, to the order, decency and edification of the church. - For this reason, viz. that the nurseries of dissentions and schisms might be taken away, we think that those things which were ordained before the council of Nice, concerning arch bishops, nay, as touching the four patriarchs, may be excused and defended." Some others of the reasons assigned by Zanchy, for his approbation of the hierarchy, were, l. The practice of the primitive church, presently after the apostles' time. 2. Because he thought it his duty to have regard to those reformed churches [the churches of England and Ireland, for instance] which retained both bishops and archbishops. And, 3. Because all the reformed churches generally, although they had changed the names, yet, in effect, they kept the authority: as where they had superintendents, &c. “And what," added Zanchius, “can be shewed more certainly, out of histories, out of the councils, and out of the writings of all the ancient fathers, than that those orders of ministers, of which we have spoken, have been ordained and received in the church, by the general consent of all Christian commonwealths? And who then am I, that I should presume to reprove that which the whole church hath approved!” See Strype's Annals, vol. ii. p. 653, 654.

On the whole, it appears, that the learned, the modest, the judicious Zanchy, was a fast friend, not only to the doctrines, but also (a circumstance not very usual with the foreign Protestants of that age) to the hierarchy, of the church of England. Nor was the church unmindful of his worth and affection: for, by the voice of the University of Cambridge, in the year 1595, this great man was, expressly, and by name, numbered among "the lights and ornaments" of our established church. - See my account of Zanchy, prefixed to my Translation of his Treatise on Predestination.

As to Beza, if he was afterwards so far wrought upon, by dint of misrepresentation, as to countenance, in any measure, the forwardness of the more rigid disciplinarians; it ought, in justice, to be imputed, neither to any levity, nor duplicity, in him (for he was equally incapable of both); but to the wrong informations that were sent him: by which, a foreigner, who resided at so great a distance from England, might, easily enough, be liable to undue impression.

Table of Contents

Title Page

Book I - Works of Augustus Toplady

Memoirs

Last Will of Toplady

Elegiac Poem on the death of the Author

Calvinism Introduction & Advertisement

Calvinism I - Free-willers...

Calvinism II - Arminianism charged...

Calvinism III - The Judgment of the council of Trent...

Calvinism IV - The Arminianism of the Church of Rome...

Calvinism V - The Objection,...

Calvinism VI - The Charge of Ranterism...

Calvinism VII - An Enquiry into the Judgment of the earliest Fathers,...

Calvinism VIII - The Judgment of some eminent Christians,...

Calvinism IX - The Judgment of some eminent Persons,...

Calvinism X - The Judgment of several eminent Persons,...

Calvinism XI - The Charge of Mahometanism refuted.

Calvinism XII - The Judgment of the most eminent English Martyrs,...

Calvinism XIII - The Judgment of our English Reformers.

Calvinism XIV - The Judgment of our English Reformers concluded.

Calvinism XV - Of the Share which Calvin had in the Reformation...