mere "

all holy sincerity and truth, have fallen from the engagements which were made in their name: does their misconduct revoke or contradict the engagements which their godfathers made? Does it annul their declared regeneracy? Does it evacuate baptism of all its inward grace, and abolish its federal nature? And does it reduce this sacrament to a mere outward sign, a sprinkling of water in the name of the Divinity," as it was designated in the time of the controversy upon regeneration? And it is thus that baptism, a means and assuring pledge of grace, a sign of regeneration, whereby, as by an instrument, they that receive baptism rightly are grafted into the Church, is degraded and dishonoured for the support of the precarious and problematical doctrines of Calvinism, the indefectibility of faith and grace in the elect; and the assumed abiding permanence of justification.

The Bishop's eighth, ninth, and tenth questions, naturally lead to some discussion of the doctrine of final perseverance. It appears from the inferences which he draws, that the Bishop understands the sixteenth Article rather in its plain than in its full sense, and that he is satisfied with a cursory apprehension of its import, without inquiring into its more recondite meaning and design. His adversaries, in opposing his inferences, insist upon the original purpose for which, according to Burnet, it was constructed, and which was to declare, that they who had sinned might be re-admitted to the communion of the Church, from which it would be unlawful to exclude them for ever. It is, however, an important circumstance in the history, as it contributes to the interpretation of this Article, that the Puritans at the Hampton Court Conference, admitted that it teaches the defectibility of grace, and proposed the insertion of certain words, as a saving clause in favour of the doctrine of final perseverance. Their

proposition was rejected, and the opinion, which they endeavoured to establish as an Article of the Church, is variously held by modern Cal vinists. In the present controversy, Mr. Wilson, though he opposes the Bishop's conclusions, does not argue whether the doctrine itself be "true or false," and the author of Episcopal Innovation, though he himself maintains it, has no dispute with "pious divines who hold the spirituality of our Articles, but who still admit the possibility of falling finally from grace."

The Bishop's sixth chapter is upon predestination, another doctrine upon which it is generally believed, that the modern Calvinists are not agreed, that many hold what are called liberal notions, and that the few who maintain the doctrine to its full extent, and in all its consequences, are far from requiring the acquiescence of others in their positions. It is not our intention to offer any particular remarks upon the questions proposed by the Bishop. The doctrine has been but recently before us in the review of Mr. Young's Sermons (see Christian Remembrancer, for August, 1820, p. 474-486.) a work which ought to be in the hands of every student in divinity, and of every person who is perplexed with doubts, or desirous of information, upon a doctrine, unquestionably abstruse, but with a scriptural guide, not incapable of a satisfactory exposition, and we are persuaded that no reader will weigh the argument of Mr. Young's Discourse upon Predestination, together with the prefixed Synopsis of the Epistle to the Romans, in conformity with which it is constructed, without deriving whatever benefit proceeds from clear and dispassionate reasoning, and an accurate collation and investigation of scriptural truths.

There are, however, some positions, advanced in the present controversy with the bishop, which it would be unjust to overlook. Mr.

Wilson, and the author of the Legality of the Questions considered, object to the precision and particularity which the bishop, in their judgment, has introduced into the interpretation of the seventeenth article: while Mr. Budd, and the author of Episcopal Innovation, expatiate upon it at such length, as hardly leaves them exempt from a similar imputation. There is one point, upon which all these writers appear agreed, namely, that election does not depend upon foreseen works:

"So long as the seventeenth article remains as it is, it never can be made to mean that our election depends upon our foreseen good works. We are indeed elected according to the everlasting purpose of God' -UNTO good works but not BECAUSE of them. Here then his lordship affixes a new sense to the article." Wilson, p. 57.

Mr. Wilson affixes a new sense to the bishop's words, but it is not the sense or signification of the words themselves, as they are recited and commented upon by Mr. Wilson in the opposite page:

"Hence he says, questions fifth and sixth, Does not St. Peter declare that we are elect according to the foreknowledge of God unto obedience? Is it not there fore a contradiction both to Scripture and the seventeenth article, to assert that the decrees of God are absolute or that elec fion on the part of God has no reference to foreseen good works on the part of man? Now this is to assert that our election depends upon FORESEEN good works: Le. BECAUSE of our foreseen good works, an assertion which gives to the seventeenth article a meaning, which no ingenuity of man can prove it has." P. 56.

We will not pretend to this impracticable and unavailing ingenuity; we are content with the less arduous effice of exposing Mr. Wilson's pers ersions, which are indeed of no ordinary kind. The bishop asks, whether it is not a contradic. tion to Scripture and the article to assert, that election "has no reference to foreseen good works:" Mr. Wilson observes, "this is to assert that our election depends upon foreREMEMBRANCER, No. 26.

seen good works." There is surely some difference between having re ference to a thing, and depending upon a thing. But Mr. Wilson must give another version of his own translation; he adds, "i. e. because of our foreseen good works:" and it is thus by changing "having reference to," into "depending upon," and "depending upon," into "because," that he has the complacency to say, the bishop "affixes a new sense to the article." He takes the same liberty with the scriptural part of the bishop's question; imputing to the bishop a word which he does not use, and then exclaiming with an air of triumph:

"But how strangely illogical is his reasoning upon 1 Peter i. 2. He argues, that since God elects us UNTO obedience, he elects us BECAUSE of obedience. But most certainly before any person can perceive the truth of this reasoning, he must in a very great degree give up his reason." P. 58.

Mr. Wilson proceeds with another objection.

"Nor is this the only instance in this chapter of what is strangely illogical, for in the eleventh question he speaks of an indiscriminate election,' which is a contradiction in terms. Election of necessity supposes choice and discrimination, nor is it possible in the nature of things for election to be indiscriminate. An indiscriminate election is as contradictory as a round square." P. 58.

Agreed: but by whom is this anomaly, of an indiscriminate election, maintained? If from a mass all corrupt, are taken some particles not less corrupt than those which are left, what is this but an indiscriminate election; an election on the part of the elector, without discrimination of the parties elected. The Calvinist will no doubt appreciate Mr. Wilson's invention of a round square. If Mr. Wilson should, at

any

future time, be disposed to resume the investigation of the seventeenth article, we would recommend to his especial attention Mr. Young's synopsis prefixed to his sermons, Q

where especially in p. 83. (Christian Remembrancer, vol. ii. p. 479.), he will find a masterly and incontrovertible argument, throwing no inconsiderable light on the expression of our article, the "vessels made to honour," a scriptural expression, both worthy and capable of a scriptural interpretation.

The following extracts from Episcopal Innovation, sufficiently shew the real nature and tendency of the Calvinistic election, and the high importance which the writer attaches to it; at the same time that they disqualify him from preferring against others a charge of Antinomianism.

"The end of the decree is TO DELIVER from curse and damnation and to bring them by Christ to everlasting life.' There is no condition or qualification required: all is gratis." P. 72.

"Take away election, and the only hope of morality, the genuine source of holiness, and the only foundation of salvation to fallen man are gone." Ibid.

"A man's want of religion and good works, though it proves him to be unregenerate, proves nothing against predestination,' unless he die in that state; because all the elect were naturally under the same depravity, and subject to the same 'curse and damnation." P. 73.

"Holiness is a thing, which is made visible in 'good works: but election' is · secret to us,' except indeed so far as wǝ infer our election from the possession of holiness which results from it. But we cannot infer non election from the want of holiness, because election is prior to its existence." Ibid.

This would be no unsuitable place to retort Mr. Wilson's declamation upon multitudes of elected "sinners, thieves, liars, &c. &c." But the doctrine thus expounded is too unscriptural, too unreasonable, to be consistently maintained; common sense and good feeling will interfere in defiance of the restraint which is put upon them, and even this writer, in contradiction of his previous positions, does not hesitate to assert:

"Fifthly, their SANCTIFICATION; the divine image is again restored to their souls, they are holy in the same kind as God is holy, and pure as Christ is pure :

they be made like the image of his only begotten son Jesus Christ.'

Sixthly, their RELIGIOUS WALK.... Lastly, their GLORIFICATION." Budd's Sermon, p. 25, note.

The reader will not fail to observe, that in this interpretation Mr. Budd admits that the effectual calling of the elect, is "by the operation of the spirit in the word, influencing the soul, whether at baptism or any other season ;" and, that their adoption takes place in baptism, for this is the only meaning of the words of the catechism, on which Mr. Budd grounds his argument: "for being by nature children of wrath, we are hereby made the children of grace." Does Mr. Bidd then main

tain the doctrine of baptismal election, and thus offer an exposition of the words, in which the child says that the Holy Ghost "sanctifieth me and all the elect people of God;" words on which the adversaries of the bishop are pleased to remark, that on this supposition BAPTIZED should have been substituted for ELECT. The golden chain of the seventeenth article, will receive its best proof and assay from that originally constructed by the apostle: Romans viii. 29, 30.; and the reader will excuse another reference to Mr. Young's work, p. 73, and note B. p. 286-297.

The bishop in his seventh chapter treats of Regeneration. Some good men have thought, that the controversy upon this doctrine has at length been brought to a final and happy issue, and that the accumulation of various arguments, the historical and critical inquiry into the language of our several articles and offices, including the collect for the nativity, into the traditional phrase ology of the Church in the east and the west, from the age of the apostles to the time of the Reformation, and into the sense which the Jews are known to have attached to the word, and the investigation and collation of scriptural authorities with the catholic exposition of those authorities, have achieved for the one party in the contest an imperishable triumph, and inflicted upon the other an irretrievable defeat. It is certain, that some of the professors of Calvinistic regeneration, have become extremely cautious of the effects and powers of the controversy; and when the excellent sermons of Bishop Sandford were recommended by a friend to a gentleman of the popular persuasion, he answered; "I will not read them; I will have nothing to do with them; I hear he holds bad opinions on Regeneration." This is a fact, and it is probably not an isolated fact. On the present occasion, there is such an insolent vehemence of invective, as

leaves no room for calm and deliberate discussion; and while the fol. lowing specimens betray the temper in which the controversy is now conducted, they suggest a useful caution, not to mistake confidence of assertion for the strength of reasonable conviction, rather than the inveterate vigour of habitual and insuperable prejudice.

"Numbers of children are baptized, whose parents and sponsors at the time of such baptism are notoriously wicked, and which children when they come to age foland give no proof of repentance or faith: low the wicked example of their parents, and such as these can in no proper sense be said to be regenerated. They have indeed been admitted into the visible Chris tian Church, but they are not the true members of that Church; they are the tares, and unless they be born again, unsense, by the agency of the Holy Ghost, less they be regenerated in a true spiritual they will perish everlastingly. So far from our Church maintaining, that all who are baptized are regenerated in a true spiritual sense, she abjures, abhors, and detests the doctrine; and resolutely declares, that they to themselves damnation.' And I use this, who receive baptism unworthily 'purchase what some may call strong language, advisedly and wittingly; I use it in the most cool and solemn manner; for, if any one thing more than another leads men to everlasting perdition, it is the doctrine that baptism INDEPENDENT OF FAITH AND REPENTANCE, either conveys, or is regeneration, in any proper sense of the word. It is the essence of Popery and Antinomiauism! What! has the blood of our holy martyrs been shed in vain? Did they freely give themselves to the stake to be burnt, to resist and oppose the soul destroying errors of Popery? and are those errors to be now revived: and not only revived, but maintained ; and not only maintained, but imposed upon others by an actual demand of subscription to them? Forbid it, thou merciful God, who didst in the days of the Reformation give strength to thy servants to resist these errors even unto death; but if, in thy inscrutable providence, thou art again pleased to call thy servants to suffer for thy truth's sake, Ŏ give them courage and strength to endure the fiery trial, and to suffer death rather than betray their church, their souls, and the souls of their fellow men." Wilson, p. 63-65.

There are many errors and falla