Imágenes de página
PDF
ePub

66

his poffeffion of it; let him make the best use of it he can. He fancies that what I have faid concerning Chrift being "the object of his Father's love and "wrath, at one and the fame time; that as he was the Son of God, he was always the object of his love and delight; but as he was the finner's furety, "and while bearing the fins of his people in his own body on the tree, he was "the object of his displeasure and wrath," is as fubverfive of the nature and perfections of God, and reprefents him as liable to change as this distinction does; fince here is a change from delight to the greatest displeasure, and from that to delight again. I answer, for the farther explanation of what I have faid, let it be observed, that I conceive that Chrift was in no other sense the object of divine wrath and displeasure, as the finner's furety, than as he had the effects of wrath, that is, punishment due to fin, inflicted on him, which he sensibly felt; but then, at the fame inftant, God took the utmost delight and pleasure in him even as the finner's furety, viewing him ftanding in the room and stead of his elect, with patience, courage, and greatness of foul, bearing all that was laid upon him, and giving full satisfaction to law and juftice. It pleafed the Lord to bruife him, Ifai. liii. 10. Therefore doth my Father love me, fays Christ, because I lay down my life, John x. 17. So that here was no change from delight to difpleasure, even when and while he bore the effects of that wrath, or that itself, which was due to others.

[ocr errors]

6. I cite a paffage from Ariftotle, in which that philofopher affirms, that benevolence is properly neither friendship nor love; and that no man can be said to love, who is not first delighted with the form or idea of the object: and, for my own part, I add, I cannot fee that that can be love, which is without any delight in the object said to be loved; and instance in fome expreffions of a man to his wife, and a parent to a child, declaring love without delight; which feem contradictory. This man at once falls foul upon the poor philofopher, as having afferted what is contrary to reason and experience; and then turning himself to me, fays, "I would afk this gentleman if he never faw an object, "whofe miferable eftate engaged his compaffion, and difpofed him to fhew friendship, by affording some relief to the miserable creature, though there "was no delightful form in the object, nor any thing but mifery to engage "his kindness? What, is not that love, which difpofes one man to relieve "another in mifery and neceffity?" But it should be observed, that the philofopher is speaking of one thing, and this man of another. Ariftotle is not speaking of sugyo, benefaction, beneficence, or doing well, relieving a miferable creature; but of surora, benevolence, wishing well to another: And I hope ευνοία, this will ferve to cool his refentment against him. Let me, in my turn, ask this

[ocr errors]

f Supralapfarian Scheme, p. 125, 126.

Ibid. p. 128.

this man, if, upon the fight of a miferable object, my pity is engaged fo far as to wish him well, but give him nothing, whether this wishing well, this benevolence of mine, is either love or friendship? Nay, fuppofing it is carried farther, and my benevolence paffes into beneficence, I relieve the poor object; should not this be confidered rather as an act of humanity, than either properly of friendship or love? I confess I never thought, when I have given alms to a poor object, I did it to fhew an affection of love, or as any act of friendship to him; I little thought that a relation of friendship between us arose from fuch an act, or that the poor creature and I commenced friends upon it. Upon the inftances of love without delight, I afk what kind of love would this be thought to be? He answers, why, probably, a love of compaffion and benevolence: and, as things will be circumstanced, great love too; that is, when the wife is leud, and the fon rebellious. I reply, that it is very poffible, and fometimes fo it is, when either of these is the cafe, that delight in the object continues; fo that love appears to be great indeed, real, and hearty: But when things are come to such a pass, that there is no delight in the object, I cannot but be of opinion, that real, hearty love and affection, is gone too. And what may be faid or done that looks like love, arifes from the relation which ftill fubfifts, and a sense of duty which that obliges to, and not from real love and affection. But what he thinks is the strongest evidence against the notion of love being attended with delight in the object loved, is the advice of Chrift to his disciples, faying, Love your enemies; blefs them that curfe you; do good to them that hate you; and pray for them which defpitefully use you, and perfecute you: And I do not know but it may, and yet fall fhort of proving what it is brought for. I apprehend, the love with which Chrift exhorts his people to love their enemies, is not to be understood quoad affectus, as refpecting the internal affection of love: I cannot believe that Chrift requires of me that I should love a perfecutor as I do my wife, my children, my real friend, or brother in Chrift; but quoad effectus, as to the effects; that is, I am required to do those things as they lie in my way, and according to my ability, as a man would do to his neighbour, whom he loves; that is, feed him when hungry, and give him drink when thirsty. And fo are we taught to understand this advice of Chrift by the apostle Paul, in Romans xii. 19-21. But after all, fuppofing it could be proved that there is a foundation for fuch a diftinction among men, as a love of pity and benevolence, and a love of complacency and delight, I would not be over-confident about these things. Though I must confefs I cannot fee how mere pity can be love, or barely benevolence, or wishing well, is love; yet I fay, fuppofing this, it does not follow that there is fuch a diftinction in the love of God, especially towards

Supralapfarian Scheme, p. 129.

1 Matt. v. 44

the

k

the fame perfons, as they pafs into different estates; which is to make the love of God to change by degrees, as the love of mutable creatures; and from one kind of love to pafs into another, and from a lower to an higher degree: A thought to be abhorred by all those who know and believe what he fays to be true; I am the Lord, I change not. This author next reverts to the inftance which I mention of a man's faying to his wife, "I love you well, though I can "take no delight in your perfon, nor pleasure in your company;" as a contradiction to his expreffions of love; and obferves, that I have wounded my notion of God's delighting in his elect, whilst in a state of nature, unless I can prove that he dwells with, and takes pleafure in the company of thefe his enemies. I reply, that I do not think that God loves or delights either in the perfons, or in the company of his people, confidered as finners, as unconverted persons, as in a state of nature, as enemies to him; but as confidered in Chrift, and viewed in all that glory he designs to bring them to. And thus as the delights of the Son, fo the delights of the Father, from everlasting, before the earth was, were not only in, but with them: They were not only rejoicing in them, but delighting themselves with them, in the fore-views of their dwelling with each other, and enjoying each other's company to all eternity.

And thus I have gone as far in my answer, as this author has in examining the Supralapfarian doctrines. It is much, when his hand was in, that he did not take under his examination fome other doctrines handled in the letter he refers to; fuch as God's feeing no fin in his people, the non-neceffity of good works to falvation, mortification, and the like; which he might as well have forced into the Supralapfarian scheme, as fome others. He has indeed a fling or two at the doctrine of repentance, feems greatly concerned' that legal repentance is not to be valued and regarded, and thinks that this reflects upon the preaching of John the Baptift, Chrift, and his apoftles; whereas it was an evangelical repentance, and fruits meet for the fame, which were preached up by them. He concludes ", that the repentance which I allow finners may be exhorted to, ftands more remote from the power of the creature than legal repentance; as though I thought finners were to be exhorted to it, as within the compass of their own power: whereas my exprefs words are, "To exhort even to evan"gelical repentance, as within the compass of the power of man's will, and as

a condition of the covenant of grace, and a term of acceptance with God; "and in order to make peace with God, and gain the divine favour, which is "the rant of fome mens miniftry; I fay, to exhort to repentance with such views, and on fuch confiderations as thefe, is low and mean ftuff; too mean VOL. II. for,

P

[ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small]

for, below and unworthy of a minifter of the gospel." One vile reflection upon the doctrine of forgiveness of fins, through the blood of Chrift, I cannot omit taking notice of, when he fays", "I am ready to believe that God, in in"finite wisdom, does require it (legal repentance) as necessary to forgiveness, in "all capable beings." What! is not the blood of Chrift, which was fhed for the remiffion of fin, fufficient to procure it, without legal repentance being neceffary to it? I obferve this author is very fond of this way of preaching, and is very defirous that others would engage in it. Was I thought worthy, or capable of giving advice, my advice to him would be not only to preach repentance towards God upon the gospel-fcheme, but faith in our Lord Jefus Chrift; only I should be afraid the man will put unbelief for faith. I fhould advise him to content himself in making use of what talents he has in preaching the word, and not fcribble in the manner he does: But if he must needs be an author, let him write upon moral subjects, against the prevailing vices of the age, open profaneness, and impiety, things he may be better acquainted with, than evange lical truths, or Supralapfarian principles.

- Page 136.

AN

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small]

HAVI

AVING lately met with a pamphlet, intitled, A Dialogue between a Baptist and a Churchman, occafioned by the Baptifts opening a new Meeting-house for reviving old Calvinistical doctrines, and spreading Antinomian, and other errors, at Birmingham in Warwickshire, Part I. by a Confistent Christian; I prevailed upon myself to give it a reading, and make fome remarks upon it. The author of it has thought fit to write in a dialogue-way, probably for this reason, that he might have the opportunity of making the Baptist speak what he pleases, and what he thought he was beft able to reply to: So far he has acted wifely, that he has not made him fay fuch things, he was confcious to himself, he was not able to answer. However, this must be acknowledged, that though he has reprefented the Baptist in the debate as a very weak man; yet, as very mild, calm, and good-natured, and by far a better chriftian, and of a more christian spirit and temper than himself; who, notwithstanding all his pretences to a calm and charitable religion, cafts firebrands, arrows, and death; reproaching, in a very mean and scandalous manner, both men and doctrines that are not agreeable to his own fentiments. One would think his Baptift never attended upon, at least, muft not have received any ill impreffion, from the wild, furious, and uncharitable preachers at Birmingham; or elfe that the preachers that come there are not such persons this writer would have them thought to be.

• Prov. xxvi. 18.

P 2

I obferve,

« AnteriorContinuar »