his only begotten Son." He speaks of his "divine power,' of "his power to difpenfe pardon," of "his fuper-eminence of dignity above the highest of the angelic hosts :" he fpeaks of him as our Redeemer," as making atonement for fin," as "being our high Prieft, our facrifice, our "propitiation." But what Socinian has not used these expreffions? and how can it be otherwife? While they pretend to hold by the Bible, they are under an invincible neceffity of retaining its language. But does this alter the cafe? No. For every particular expreffion they have a fense of their own. Every particular text is caft into their own corrupt mould. Our author introduces the most illuftrious paffages of scripture, which refer to these doctrines, as if they all confirmed his own, as if he meant to publish no doctrine but what is contained in them; while the evident defign of his conduct is to pervert them to his own corrupt meaning; to expunge the fenfe of the Spirit of God in them by fome filly glofs; or, by feeming to speak the fame language with others, to throw a mist over the eyes of the illiterate or careless reader: while either from the immediate connection, or in other places of the Eflay, he clearly fhows that he will not do the fcripture so much justice, as to interpret it according to the common meaning of language. Former writers, of the fame corrupt fentiments, have laboured to fhow, that these texts, which were brought against them, were not fo much their enemies as others thought. This writer is justly entitled to the glory of a new plan of defence. He inlifts them all in his fervice, as if they were his firmest friends. They have ftruggled to obviate the difficulties arifing from them. But he boldly overleaps every ancient ftumbling-block, and tramples every difficulty under foot. There is one thing that we ought always to remember in reading the word of God, without which we can never make it confiftent with itself; and that is, carefully to diftinguish between the divine nature of Chrift, and his mediatory character. But to this our author pays no regard. All that is afcribed to him as God equal with the Father, he applies to him only as mediator, that is, in his fenfe, as a mere man, although poffeffed of great holiness and tranfcendent dignity. Indeed, this is the great ftumbling-block, before which all the votaries of reafon fall. They will not acknowledge the juftness and

neceflity

neceffity of this diftinction. Therefore, finding many things in fcripture afcribed to one perfon, incompatible with each other in the fame nature, they reduce them all to fuch a fenfe, as, if poffible, to make them applicable to one nature only.

It is not meant particularly to take notice of the writer's Arminian tenets, because he does not once attempt to difguife them, and because they have been, alas! too openly vented by minifters of the church, without any judicial evidence of the church's disapprobation. From the whole Structure of this Effay, indeed, it undeniably appears that Arminians juft erect a platform for Socinians. They, however undefignedly, work to their hands, and in effect deliver up the truth to them. If they give them not a model, they at least afford them a foundation for their doctrines. By denying Abfolute Predeftination, because of its incomprehenfible nature, they clear the way for the denial of Myfery altogether. For, if we may juftly reject any one doctrine, because of its myfterious and unaccountable nature, why not every other? For, "greater and lefs do not vary "the kind." By denying the efficacy and irresistible nature of the Spirit's gracious operations, they prepare their difciples for rejecting the work of the Spirit as a divine and diftinct perfon altogether. For he cannot be God whom man can withstand. For "who hath refifted his will?" Even a heathen could fay, "Who may ftay his hand, or fay "unto him, What doeft thou?" By maintaining Univerfal Redemption, as preparing a poffibility of falvation for all men, upon the conditions of faith and repentance, as in their own power, the fluices are opened for the denial of the atonement for fin. For if it be a real atonement, it muft he effectual for all for whom it was made; elfe Chrift died in vain. The affertion of man's Free-will to good, in his fallen ftate, naturally lays a foundation for the doctrine of faith and obedience as the proper ground of acceptance with God. The denial of the faint's perfeverance has the fame tendency with the doctrine of Univerfal Redemption; for if Chrift really fuftained the punishment due for the fins of all his people, there can be no condemnation to them. "Who is he that condemneth? It is Chrift that died." The author divides his Effay into two parts, the first of which

Majus et minus non variant fpeciem.

which contains the history, and the fecond, the doctrine of the death of Chrift. In our animadverfions on the first part, we fhall follow his order, because he does not difcover his principles fo fully and regularly as in the second; in confidering which, without regard to his plan, we propofe to gather together the fcattered fragments of error under proper heads, that we may have a more juft and comprehenfive view of them. But it must be obferved, that it is not meant, in reviewing either of thefe parts, to attempt a full refutation of his doctrines. This would be by far too wide a field. We are fenfible of being unfit for the task; and it has been well executed by many Proteftant divines, who have long ago answered all that can be offered by adverfaries on that fcheme. Our principal defign is to fhew you, who are more apt to be enfnared by this treatise, what is its real tendency. We therefore proceed to take notice of fome things in the first part, in the fame order in which they occur in the Eflay.

66

Speaking of the death of Christ as a "capital doctrine of that great mystery of godlinefs," he fays, "Some have "regarded this part of the Chriftian scheme as altogether myfterious and inexplicable." Compare this with what is faid afterwards+: "Now I humbly conceive it may be "fhown, that this is not fo great a ftumbling-block, as "the worthy Prelate (Abp. Tillotfon) apprehended." Here is a pretty bold introduction. The fcripture hath reprefented the crofs of Chrift, including the whole doctrine of his obedience, fufferings and death, as "a ftumbling-block to "the Jews, and foolishness to the Greeks;" yea, as "the "wifdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wifdomt" This fame mystery of which our author speaks, was, in the apoftle's days, "great without controverfy." And how can it be otherwife, when the fubject of it is "God mani

feft in the flesh." But, whatever Paul and the Chritians of his time thought, the mystery here will not be admitted without controverfy" by our author. His reafons will appear more fully afterwards.

"This prayer (if it be poffible, let this cup, &c.) betrays no fenfe of his (God's) difpleasure§." And again, “An angel was fent from heaven to strengthen him-to convince us, that he was not now any more than at other

B

"times,

* P. r. 1. 8. P. 1. note. 1 Cor. ii. 7. || 1 Tim. iii. 6. P. 15. 1. 3.

times, the object of his Father's wrath." Perhaps, you may charitably understand it as the author's meaning, that the Father's wrath had not yet fallen on Chrift, that the curfe did not properly light upon him, till he was nailed to the accurfed tree. This, at any rate, would be a very unfound opinion; for, the moment that Chrift was "made of a woman," he "was made," or legally conftituted under the law :" and the moment that he was "made under the law," he was brought under its curfe as our Surety. No man, who believes that the Son of God was truly incarnate, can deny that his whole life was a life of fuffering, because it was wholly a life of humiliation : And is not humiliation really fuffering to a divine perfon? But his own words elfewhere afford us a key to his meaning. For, "what paffed in the garden of Gethsemane was an introduction to, and, as it were, an abridgement of his paffion; where he deliberately tafted, by anticipation, all "the horrors of his crofs." If his agony in the garden was "an introduction to, an abridgement of his fufferings, a "tafting of all the horrors of his crofs;" if, at the fame time, he had no fenfe of God's difpleafure," and was not any more than at other times, the object of his Father's "wrath;" then it plainly follows, that even when he hung on the crofs, he had no fenfe of his displeasure, he was not, in any refpect whatsoever the object of his wrath. The conclufion is undeniable. No wonder, then, that he explains thefe aftonifhing words of the Son of God, "My "foul is exceeding forrowful even unto death," of his being only "agitated with mortal forrows, and already feel

cr

ing fomething like the pangs of diffolution." He finds no fenfe of the load of guilt, or of the Father's vindictive anger here. But how is this confiftent with the clearest expreffions of fcripture to this purpofe?" He was made a "curfe for us §." "He who knew no fin, was made fin "for us." Was he "made a curfe for us" in a metaphorical fenfe only? Then, in no other fenfe can " we in

herit the bleffing." For the effect can never be greater than the caufe. Is it then a metaphorical bleffing only that Chrift hath purchased for his people. Alas! my brethren, were this the cafe, "our faith would be vain, our hope 66 vain, and we should yet be in our fins." But he was

*P. 17. 1. 21. † P. ir. 1. 2. + #2 Cor. v. 21.

really

really made a curfe" for his people, as fuftaining all that load of wrath due for their fins. For if, according to the ceremonial law, hanging on a tree was an accurfed death; if the fhadows and ceremonies were all fulfilled in Christ, then he must have been really subjected to the curse; other wife, what was figuratively fpoken of the type, was only figuratively fulfilled in the antitype. "It pleated the "Lord to bruife him, he hath put him to grief."

this word, which is rendered pleased†, does not fignify a mere act of God's fovereignty, as if he had permitted him to fuffer without any cause but his own will, to make him an exaniple of patience. For it properly fignifies an inexpreffible delight and complacency in any object. It is ufed to denote that complacency which God hath in a righteous perfon: "He delivered me, because he delighted in me;" which words may be viewed as thofe of Chrift himself, expreffive of the reafon why God delivered him from death. It fometimes denotes JEBOVAH's fupreme fatisfaction in the exercise of mercy: "He delighteth in mercy §." It fignifies the love of God the Father to God the Son; "Let "him deliver him, feeing he delighted in him ||'. It alfo fignifies the infinite complacency that God hath in the work of Chrift: "The Lord is well-pleafed for his righ"teoufnefs fake T.' 22 It is a derivative of this word which is used in this very verfe to denote the inconceivable fatiffaction of the Father in the fuccefs of Chrift's death: "The pleafure of JEROVAR fhall profper in his hand." Thus it is plain, that it muft here be understood of fuch a pleasure as denotes complacency. But how can it be faid, by the ufe of the very fame word, that the Father both "delighted "in him;" that he is "well-pleafed for his righteoufnels "fake ;" and that it pleafed him to bruife him " No juft reafon can be affigned for this, unless we grant, that notwithstanding his infinite love to the perfon, there was fome relation fuftained by him, or fomething viewed in connection with him, that excited the anger of the Father. There can be no reconciliation of thefe apparent contradictions, unless we reft fatisfied with that which the infpired prophet gives us a few verfes before: "The Lord hath laid," or "made to meet on him, the iniquity of us all." The Father

B 2

Pf. xviii. 19. ¶ Ifa. xlii. 21.

* Ifa. liii.ro. + Haphetz. Pf. xxii. 8. alfo xlii 11.

Mic. viii, 18.