cise of every Christian grace; and that all the hearers of the gospel are required, both by the nature of the thing, and by the constant tenor of Scripture, to try themselves, whether they are in the number of the elect, by the fruits of their election. The second lesson which naturally results from our researches upon this subject is, that men of speculation should exercise mutual forbearance. It is not a matter of surprise, that persons of the most enlightened minds should now differ upon points which have divided the opinions of mankind ever since they began to speculate. It is not to be supposed that all the consequences which may be shown to flow from any system are held by every one who defends that system; for he may either not see that the consequences arise, or he may find some method of evading them. The Calvinists are not answerable for the various abuses of their doctrine which gave birth to the Fanatics and Antinomians of different ages; for they are able to show that in all these abuses their doctrine is perverted. Nor are the Arminians to be charged with those unworthy conceptions of the Deity which to many appear inseparable from their system; for they mean to place the justice and goodness of God in the most honourable light; and it appears to them that they err on the safe side, and that they derive a sufficient excuse from the sublimity of the subject, and the weakness of our faculties, if, in their zeal to maintain the honour of the moral attributes of the Deity, they seem to derogate from his sovereignty and independence. While our researches upon this subject suggest these two lessons, there are also two rules to be observed in reading upon this controversy, which are rendered necessary by the manner of its being handled in former times. The first is, not to form an opinion of either system from the writings of those who oppose it, but to do both sides the justice of considering what they say for themselves. The Arminians and the Calvinists are very much upon a footing in respect of the foul abuse which they have poured upon one another. But it should always be remembered, and, as far as my observation goes, it is a rule which you may safely follow in reading upon every subject, that from whomsoever abuse proceeds, it deserves to be treated with equal contempt; that if it is not a sure mark of the weakness of the reasoning with which it is connected, it certainly does not make the reasoning stronger; and that every candid reader sets aside all the expressions of mutual reproach, which find a place in the discussion of any question, as of no avail to the argument. The second rule which is necessary in reading upon this controversy, is not to think yourselves obliged to defend every position of those writers whose general system you approve, or every view of the subject which they may have presented, and to beware of conceiving any prejudice against the truth, because you find it impossible to adopt all that has been said by the friends of the truth. It has happened that many Calvinists in former times, with gloomy notions of the Deity, with a slender knowledge of philosophy, and with much animosity against their adversaries, have exhibited their system in a dress very little fitted to recommend it to the world: and it is common with Arminian writers to give a picture of that system in a number of the most exceptionable passages quoted from books of those times. This is an art very likely to succeed with men who have not leisure or capacity to inquire: and I have no doubt that the disrespectful terms in which Calvinism is often mentioned by many shallow thinkers, and even by some respectable clergymen in the church of England, arises entirely from their having read such quotations, and perhaps little more, upon the subject. Although the style of writing upon this controversy, which occurs in many books, renders these rules necessary, it is our happiness to live in a more enlightened and polished age, when the asperity of former times is universally condemned, when the views of men are very much enlarged, and when Calvinism has formed an alliance with. philosophy. The celebrated metaphysician Leibnitz, who flourished in the beginning of the eighteenth century, although a member of the Lutheran church, illustrated and established the doctrine of philosophical necessity, or the perfect consistency of the freedom of a moral agent with the infallible determination of his conduct, which is the foundation of Calvinism. There is a small book of his entitled, "Essais de Theodicée, sur la bonté de Dieu, la liberté de l'homme, et l'origine du mal," which contains almost all the principles upon which I have rested the defence of the Calvinistic tenets. Wolfius trod in the steps of Leibnitz. Canzius published a book, entitled "Philosophiæ Leibnitianæ et Wolfianæ usus in Theologiâ per præcipua fidei capita ;" and several systems of theology, written in the course of the eighteenth century, by divines of the Reformed churches on the continent, as Wyttenbach, and Stapfer, and by Edwards in America, have applied the philosophy of Leibnitz and Wolfius to explain and vindicate the doctrines of Calvin. These doctrines, instead of appearing liable to that charge of absurdity, which the Arminian writers in all times, and even in the present day, have not scrupled in opprobrious terms to advance, now assume a rational and philosophical form, and appear to be a consistent whole, arising out of a few leading ideas followed out to their consequences: while the Arminians appear to be only half-thinkers, who stop short before they arrive at the conclusion; and although they will not, like the Socinians, deny the principles, yet refuse to follow the Calvinists in making the application of them. I have no difficulty in concluding the subject, which has engaged our attention for so long a time, by declaring it to be my conviction. that the Calvinistic system is the most philosophical. The Arminians indeed have often boasted that all the men of learning and genius are on their side, and that those only who choose to walk in trammels adhere to Calvinism. But there is reason to think that the progress of philosophy will gradually produce a revolution in the minds of men; that those opinions concerning the nature of human liberty, and the extent of the providence of God, from which the Calvinistic system is easily deduced, although they have not received the countenance of Dr. Reid in his essays on the active powers, will, even in opposition to his respectable name, find a place in every system of pneumatics; and that there will thus be diffused amongst calm inquirers a more general impression that the doctrine of the first reformers, with regard to predestination, admits of a better defence than it received from them. It gives me particular satisfaction to observe, that the late Dr. Horsley, bishop of St. Asaph, one of the profoundest scholars that ever adorned the church of England, although he has not adopted all the Calvinistic tenets, has laid down in the most precise and satisfactory manner, those principles from which all the tenets of Calvin that we are obliged to hold appear to me readily to flow. In a sermon upon providence and free agency, he has declared his conviction with regard to the certain influence of motives as final causes, in reference to which the mind puts forth its powers, and as the means by which God governs the intelligent creation; and also with regard to the infallible predetermination of those events which the Almighty in this manner accomplishes. The friends of Calvinism require nothing more. We may reject every tenet which does not result from these principles; and we may solace ourselves under the scorn of many superficial writers in the church of England who condemn what they do not understand, with the countenance of this respectable auxiliary, who, without declaring himself a partisan, has lent his assistance in clearing that strong ground which every sound and able Calvinist will now occupy. BOOK V. INDEX OF PARTICULAR QUESTIONS ARISING OUT OF TERMS IN THEOLOGY. THE fifth book is the conclusion of that part of my course which is properly theological, and means to present a short view of many particular questions which have arisen out of the general principles, and of the technical terms, which, having occurred in discussing these questions, now form a part of the language of theology. Some of the questions turn upon the Nature of the Remedy; much the greater part upon the Extent and the Application of it. But none of them will require to be handled with any detail; for the length to which they are spread out in ordinary systems is only a repetition under different forms of the same principles. My object is simply to furnish you with an index of the questions to which they have been applied, and a vocabulary of the language, which has acquired a currency amongst the writers upon that science which you profess to study. CHAPTER I. REGENERATION-CONVERSION-FAITH. To men considered as sinners, i. e. both guilty and corrupt, the gospel brings a remedy. The remedy is of saving benefit only to those by whom it is embraced. It cannot be embraced unless it be known; but it is made known to all to whom the gospel is published; and the intimation given by publishing it, together with the invitation and the command to embrace it which always accompanies the intimation, has received, according to an expression frequent in the 4 K 53 601 Epistles, the name of a call. "God hath called you by our gospel to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ." 2 Thess. ii. 14. The Arminians admit no other call but that which is common to all who live in a Christian country, and which is obeyed or rejected according to the disposition of the person who receives it. But the Calvinists are led by their principles to make a distinction between external and effectual calling, in support of which they quote these words of our Lord,-"Many are called, but few are chosen." The external call, which is addressed to all who live in a Christian country, carries along with it such evidences of the divine original of the gospel, so striking an exhibition of the love of God to mankind, and so strong an obligation upon every reasonable being to attend, that it aggravates the condemnation of those by whom it is rejected. But finding men alienated from the life of God, corrupted in their understandings, their will, and their affections, it has not the effect of inducing them to embrace the remedy, unless it be accompanied by the operations of the Spirit of God. These operations, in their full extent, are peculiar to the elect for whom they were purchased, and to whom they are applied through the mediation of Christ; and therefore to them only the external call becomes effectual; in other words, they only accept the invitation, and obey the command given them by that call. The call is rendered effectual with regard to them by the removal of that corruption which renders it ineffectual with regard to others;-by a change of character, which, in respect of the understanding, is such an illumination as qualifies them for receiving knowledge; in respect of the will, is an influence so powerful as effectually inclines them to follow the inducements that are proposed in the word of God; and in respect of the whole soul, produces a refinement and elevation by which the affections are determined to the worthiest objects. This introduction of the principles of a new life, into those who are considered as spiritually dead, is called, in conformity to Scripture language, regeneration.* It is also called conversion, a turning men from that state of mind and those habits of life, which enter into our view when we speak of human nature as corrupt, to those sentiments and habits which proceed from the Spirit of God. And it is evident that when a man is thus converted, all the obstacles to his accepting the invitation in the gospel cease to exist, and the remedy there provided, approving itself to his understanding and his heart, is cordially embraced. Infinite is the number of questions which have been agitated in different periods concerning the manner of this conversion. But as there are two extremes in the opinions upon this subject, in the middle between which the Calvinistic system professes to lie, it is easy, without entering into any detail as to the shades of difference that distinguish particular opinions, to apprehend the leading principles of those who lean to either extreme, and to perceive the caution with which the Calvinists keep clear of both. Upon the one side are the Pelagians, the Semi-Pelagians, and all those who, under whatever |