that it will probably be better when their polity is improved and their theology corrected: when greater deference is paid to wisdom, and less to excited feelings; and when those things cease to be criteria of piety which few can understand, but which all may abuse.

CHAP. XXXVII.

CALVINISM AND ANTINOMIANISM.

IF the subject of Parties, said Henry, be in some respects painful, yet it is interesting and instructive. Much may be learned from the errors and improprieties of mankind.

A great deal is advanced in our day, said Maria, about Calvinism ; let us hear your sentiments on that subject.

It is easy, said Bernard, to cavil, rail, and foster prejudice; but it requires some exertion of our thinking powers to examine things impartially. Calvinism may be considered as a thing that has no existence, and as a thing that has existence: in the former case it is a terrific phantom, a mere creature of the fancy; in the latter case, it must be sought for, I suppose, in the volumes of Calvin, and of those who have advocated his peculiar tenets.

The question is, said Osborne, what ought to be our views of Calvinism? But few, I apprehend, read the volumes of Augustine and of Calvin.

As to myself, said Bernard, I never entered much

into the quinquarticular controversy. Predestination, will, perseverance, and so forth, are points too much connected with metaphysical speculation to engage much of my time. I look upon the Gospel as a redeeming, illuminating, sanctifying, spiritual, and practical system, to be used for guidance, edification, and comfort, and not for abstract speculation and clamorous logomachy. Bacon, I believe, was a Calvinist; so were many of the great Divines of our Church; Augustin in the primitive, and Calvin in the modern Church, are great names; surely then Calvinism ought to be treated with respect.

Many great names, said Henry, may be mentioned who shine brightly in the annals of Calvinism; men of exalted piety and of profound learning.

Undoubtedly, said Bernard; some of my sentiments might be accounted Calvinistic; but improperly; for what is directly Scriptural ought not to be designated by that name. The epithet Calvinistic can only be applied with justice to certain human deductions from sacred truth. But I shrink from the peculiar dogmata of Calvin. There are inscrutable things with God, of which he has only given us a glimpse; and it is our wisdom not to systematize and dogmatize about such topics, but to think about them humbly and devoutly, and to use them practically.

I wish, said Henry, that all persons were as modest and cautious about them as you are.

But what, said Eliza, is the cardinal offence of Calvinists? Where there is an evil report, it is not in general altogether groundless.

Perhaps, said Bernard, it consists in boldness and presumption. I do not pretend to understand the make of those minds that are continually soaring above the clouds; that are always wandering on the bleak and perilous mountains of speculation. Such persons have a few favourite ideas, and forget the harmony and universality of divine truth; the greatness of God, and the weakness of man.

I agree with you, said Osborne; the Calvinist decides where it would be better to hesitate; is bold where it would be more becoming to tremble; and delights to be on the wing of speculation when it would be better to be a plain thinking and plain acting disciple of Christ.

And yet, said Bernard, we cannot censure such men as Usher, Hall, and Leighton. Their humility and devotional spirit forbade them to be harsh, cold, and audacious speculators in religion.

In many cases, said Osborne, the perverseness of opinion is neutralized, at least in a great degree, by the preponderance of genuine piety; but we only speak of the system itself.

As for myself, said Bernard, I read the volumes of a Calvinist or of an Arminian without prejudice. I disregrad the peculiar tenets of each, and value the

statements of truth which contribute to edification ; but I do not think that the real edification of any one is promoted by the study of the peculiar sentiments of any human school.

I do not find Calvinism in the Bible, said Eliza ; at least the term " reprobation" does not occur in it. Surely that doctrine must be a human invention.

I think, said Henry, that the Bible contains both Calvinism and Arminianism, and yet contains neither. It has positions which favour both parties, and which may easily be made the basis of conflicting systems.

If men, said Bernard, would take the Bible as it is, human systems would fall to the ground: but too many seem to treat it as the statuary does the marble, who impresses his own idea on the material on which he works.

Well then, said Henry, we shall not become Calvinists, in the proper sense of the term, until we are more inclined than we are at present to perplex our minds with what is high and obscure.

But, said Osborne, Calvinism is generally thought to have an Antinomian tendency; and this is a strong ground of objection to it.

Of that, said Bernard, I am perfectly aware. I look upon Antinomianism as a most deplorable corruption of the Christian faith: I do not, however, view it as necessarily connected with Calvinism, or arising out of it: at the same time, I would admit