expreffion, kept him for many years from speaking expli- √ citly on that head. Nor indeed had he leisure to speak fo largely as was necessary to obviate many difficulties. But Dr Goodwin has done it to his hand, and confirmed whatever he advances by fcripture and reason.

Let me briefly review this narrative. The imputation of the righteousness of Chrift for justification, is an expreffion generally used to fignify the imputation both of his active and paffive obedience. If, therefore, he uses the expreffion, who denies the firft, his trumpet gives an uncertain found: I might have said, a deceitful found; espe cially when other phrases are used along with this, which feem to imply the common doctrine; e. g.

Jefus hath lived, hath died for me.
Fefu! thy blood and righteousness
My beauty are, my glorious dress:

where the blood and righteousness of Chrift seem to be diftinguished.

But whatever apology may be made for Mr Wesley's ufing these hynins twenty years ago, what apology can be made for his republishing them, after the danger of ufing fuch phrafes was difcerned? what apology for their being daily fung by Mr Wefley, and his teachers, focieties, and congregations throughout Britain and Ireland? Mr Wesley fays of a collection of hymns printed at Edinburgh 1763, where the above cited verfes appear, "There is not an hymn, not one verse inferted here, but "what relates to the common falvation." From all this I conclude, and Mr Kershaw has done fo before me, p. 53. that these hymns contain Mr Wesley's present fen.

timents.

But it was not only in verfe, where, it is pled, allow ance may be made for phrases not exactly proper, that Mr Wesley has used these phrafes. He has used those, nay other phrafes more explicit, on occafions where the greatest precifion was requifite. One would expect, if any where, to find his opinions clearly stated in his Principles of a Methodist, of which I have by me the third edition, published at London, 1756. Yet there he says, p. 6, 7. “ Christ "therefore is now the righteousness of all them that truly "believe

B

❝ believe in him. He for them paid the ransom by his "death he for them fulfilled the law in his life. So "that now in him, and by him, every believer may be "called a fulfiller of the law." Was it charity to the fouls of men, to suffer affertions to remain in fuch a book, which, Before that edition, he had obferved, made thoufands easy, though not saved from their fins? Was fear of grieving good men, a reason for ambiguous and enfnaring expreffions, or even for filence, when from the former use of fuch expreffions, bad men (as Mr Wesley tells us in the above-cited advertisement) blessed themselves in their unrighteousness, congratulating themselves upon their being the only men, who understand, enjoy, and defend the pure gospel?

From that advertisement, however, it appears, that Dr Goodwin's treatise on justification is to be confidered as the most full and explicit account of Mr Wesley's prefent fentiments of that article. If it exhibits a different view of them from what is exhibited in the hymns, and other writings, which also contain his present sentiments, Arminians may take the first, and Calvinists the last, and both may admire the fagacity of the teacher, who has fhown the fame marks of regard to two fyftems fo diametrically oppofite.

I make no observations on what Mr Kershaw says about Cudworth's fentiments, p. 44. et seq. I have small acquaintance with his works. If he denies the neceffity of inherent holinefs derived from Chrift, he dangerously errs. But that error cannot justly be charged upon Mr Hervey, and other afferters of the imputation of Christ's active obedience, though their fubject has not led them to infift at length on the neceffity of real perfonal holiness.

I know not what focieties Mr Kershaw aims at in what

he fays, Appeal, p. 49. "They who cause discord and di❤

"vifion are from the devil; but the Methodists do not "caufe difcord and division, &c. ergo. I should not have "took notice of this, if it had not been to express my for

row, that many of those called religious focieties, that "have been fet up in this kingdom for many years before, "feem not fo warmly attached to the worship and disci"pline established in the church of Scotland. How do

"you

1

you know but God may have fent us to help to heal your breaches?" If this is levelled at the religious fo cieties of the Seceffion, or Prefbytery of Relief, great inju ftice is done them. Thofe of the Secession have uniformly profeffed a warm attachment to the doctrine, worship, and difcipline of the church of Scotland, though they think it their duty to separate from her prefent judicatories. Thofe of the Prefbytery of Relief often occafionally communicate with minifters of the church of Scotland: and if they are under the ordinary inspection of paftors not in full communion with her, this proceeds, partly, from laudable attachments to one who did not feparate from her, but was deposed for refusing to do what he thought inconfiftent with his ordination-vows: partly, from fcruples to fubinit to the ministry of prefentees violently intruded upon them. Both thefe breaches I fincerely lament, as depriving the church of Scotland of many who would be an honour and bleffing to her: though I rejoice that, so far as I can learn, the most important truths of the gofpel are taught in their religious affemblies. But hardly do I think these breaches are likely to be healed by Mr Wefley's fyftem gaining ground among members of the church of Scotland, as the principles of these feparatifts are no way favourable to that fyftem.

Mr Kershaw proceeds, Appeal, p 74. to confider my. other objections. Speaking of the extracts upon which they are founded, he says, "What sort of an extract we "have here, thofe who have feen the whole mafs may "judge for themselves." Something very ugly is here infinuated, which he does not chufe to speak out. I did in the preface, as I do in this defence, fometimes give an account in a few lines of the intention of many pages: but if I had represented that intention falfely, Mr Kershaw's zeal for Mr Wefley would have led him to detect me.

Mr Kershaw has endeavoured to wrap in obfcurity Mr Welley's account of predestination, and to lead away the reader from the only question in hand, if his doctrine correfponds with that of the church of Scotland on this head, and therefore if those warmly attached to the doctrine of the church of Scotland act wifely in encouraging Methodifm.

What are indeed Mr Wesley's fentiments, learn from his own words.

Dialogue between a predeftinarian and his friend, 2d edition, Lond. 1741. p. 12. " Predeftinarian. What then do you mean by the words election and reprobation? Friend. I mean this. 1. God did decree from the beginning to elect or chufe in Chrift all that should believe to falvation; and to reprobate all who should obftinately and finally continue in unbelief. Predeftinarian. What then do you think of abfolute unconditional election and reprobation? Friend. I think it cannot be found in holy writ, and that it is a plant which bears dismal fruit; an instance of which we have in Calvin himself, who confesses that he procured the burning to death of Michael Servetus, a wise and holy man, purely for differing from him in opinion in matters of religion *."

Scripture-doctrine concerning predeftination, &c. Lond. 1741.-P. 4. "As Chrift was called the Lamb flain from

the

*However unjustifiable the burning Servetus may be, predeftination was no more acceffory to his death than Methodifm. He had attacked the doctrine of the Trinity in a most infolent and outrageous manner : representing it as an impoffible monfter, an impofture of the devil, a three-headed Cerberus and afferting that all Trinitarians were truly Atheists. It was therefore no wonder if this provoked the utmost severity, in an age, when the principles of toleration were little understood, and Proteftants as well as Papists agreed that heretics ought to be put to death. Urbanus Regius, a Lutheran divine, published a book A. D. 1558, to justify such severity. Nay, even fo late as A. D. 1687, one Peter Gunther was put to death at Lubec for denying the divinity of Chrift, the Lutheran univerfities of Kilan and Witteberg having fignified their approbation of the sentence against him. See Bibliothec. Brem. class. 1 fafc. 5. p. 739.—768. Whatever right Servetus might have to diffent from an established religion which appeared to him abfurd, and, if you will, to reafon against it, furely he had no right to rail at it, to infult it, and to blafpheme what it accounted most facred and venerable. The Apostles demonftrated the folly of idolatry by unanfwer able arguments; they enforced their reafonings by the most amazing miracles; and yet the town clerk of Ephefus did them the juftice to teftify that they were no robbers of churches, nor blafphemers of the Ephefian goddefs. Had they been either, infidels might have fpeciously urged, that their being perfecuted unto death was the juft reward of their rude, uncivil, hot-brained enthufiafm. Painting new opinions or practices in ludicrous

colours,

the foundation of the world, and yet not flain till several thousand years after, till the day of his death; so also men are called elect from the foundation of the world, and yet are not elected perhaps till feveral thousand years af ter, till the day of their converfion to God."

Ib. p. 5. "If the faints are chosen to falvation through a believing of the truth, and were called to believe that truth by the hearing of the gospel, then they were not chofen before they believed the truth, and before they heard the gospel, whereby they were called to believe. But they were chosen through belief of the truth, and called to believe it by the gospel; therefore they were not chosen before they believed; much lefs before they had a being, any more than Chrift was flain before he had a being. So plain is it, that they were not elected till they believed; although God calleth things that are not as though they were."

I had faid, "Many fober-minded Arminians would be fhocked at the virulent reflections Mr Wesley has caft on the Calvinist doctrines of election, &c." To this Mr Kerfhaw replies, p. 74. "I. As this is something of a perfonal reflection, and has been already anfwered by the gentleman it concerns, I have nothing to do with it. I leave the editor and Mr Wesley to decide the point. 2. I have read thofe pieces, but do remember no reflections, without confequences go by that name."

In Mr Wefley's letter to the fuppofed editor, there is not a fyllable about the above charge. If he has answered it any where else, I have not heard of the answer. The fecond part of Mr Kershaw's apology is good for nothing. Horrible confequences falfely afcribed to a doctrine, may fonetimes contain the most virulent reflections; and this

colours, and expofing the folly or knavery of thofe who would introduce them, may often do much to stop their progrefs. But of all weapons that have been used against an eftablished religion, ribaldry is the very worst. None difobliges and offends more, and yet none does lefs execution. Of Calvin's confeffing that he procured Servetus's death, I know no evidence. He has denied the charge, Opufc. p. 817. Ex quo convictus eft, me nullum de pana verbum feciffe, non folum boni omnes viri mihi teftes erunt; fed malis etiam concedo, ut proferant, fi quid habent.