fers that he was not God; and thus he falls into the Socinian error, of Christ being a mere man. Another person, in reading the New Testament, is first struck with the passages which assert the Godhead of Christ, and which are at least as numerous and as clear as those which assert his manhood; and by a similar process he infers that Christ was God only; and thus falls into the Sabellian or Patripassian errors, of Christ being God the Father, and of God the Father having suffered upon the Cross. It is the same with respect to divine and human agency: one person observes, in a variety of passages of the New Testament, the redemption of man attributed to the merits of Christ and the inspiration of the Holy Spirit; and hence he concludes that divine grace is necessary to salvation: he dwells upon this as a settled and uncontrovertible point, and being unable to comprehend how the Holy Ghost and man can co-operate, he infers that man has no concern whatever in working out his salvation (i); and that the thoughts, words, and

(i) There is in the language made use of to explain the doctrine of grace, something liable to be abused by ignorant or crafty men. We say, that of ourselves we can do nothing; whence they conclude, that we have nothing to do. We say, that it is the grace of God which enables us to do every thing; from whence they conclude, that every thing must be left to the grace of God, and that we need only work ourselves into a strong

works of those who shall be saved, are the necessary and irresistible effects of divine grace: this is the error of Calvinists. Another person, in reading the New Testament, observes repeated commands to believe in Christ, and numberless exhortations to the practice of the personal and social duties; hence he concludes, that belief in Christ, and moral virtue, are necessary to salvation; and being unable to comprehend how the Spirit of God can influence the Free-will of men, or how the worthiness of Christ can atone for the unworthiness of men, he rejects the doctrines of divine agency and of Christ's meritorious death, and relies solely for salvation upon that faith and those works, which are the effect of his own reflection and exertions. This is another error of the Socinians, or of those who in modern times have denominated themselves Unitarians, to which title they have no more an exclusive right, than Calvinists have to that of Evangelical divines. It is to be observed; that the first conclusions of these different persons were all true, namely, that Christ was man-that Christ was God-that divine grace is necessary to salvation-that belief in Christ, and moral

persuasion that God is at work for us, and may sit still ourselves. And this persuasion, which is generally mere enthusiasm, they dignify with the name of Christian Faith."-Sherlock, v. 2. p. 80.

E

virtue, are necessary to salvation. But though each of these propositions be true, not one of them contains the whole truth. Christ was man, but he was also God-Christ was God, but he was also man-divine agency is necessary to salvation; but we must work together with the Holy Spirit, or we shall have received the grace of God in vain-belief of the Gospel, and moral virtue, are necessary to salvation; but it is a lively faith in the merits of Christ as our Redeemer, which can alone make our good works acceptable in the sight of God; and that lively faith can never be attained without the co-operation of divine grace. It should be remembered, that all Scripture is given by inspiration, and is written for our learning. Every part of

It

it is true, and equally true. is our duty to read and attend to the whole. The whole Bible is the ground of our faith, and the rule of our life. We are to compare Scripture with Scripture; we must add truth to truth; and, disdaining all partial and narrow views of the Deity and his dispensations, search out "all the counsel of God (k)," as far as it is revealed, if we wish to become wise unto salvation.

In appealing to the Public Formularies of our Church, I shall first notice the Article upon Original Sin, in which it is said, that "man is very (k) Acts, c. 20. v. 27.

far

far gone from original righteousness:" this expression implies, that original righteousness is not entirely lost, that all the good qualities and principles, with which man was at first created, are not absolutely destroyed. That this is the plain and obvious sense of the passage, is evident from the following circumstance: when the Assembly of Divines, in the reign of Charles the First, undertook to reform, as they called it, our Articles according to the Calvinistic creed, they proposed to omit the words, " man is very far gone from original righteousness," and to substitute for them, "man is wholly deprived of original righteousness." It was admitted by both parties, that the two sentences conveyed ideas extremely different; and the proposed alteration was rejected by those who wished to maintain the ancient and established doctrine of the Church of England, in opposition to the peculiar tenets of Calvin. The Article proceeds to say, that "man is of his own nature inclined to evil, so that the flesh lusteth always contrary to the Spirit. And this infection of nature doth remain, yea, in them that are regenerated, whereby the lust of the flesh... is not subject to the law of God:" the Article does not pronounce with the Calvinists, that man of his own nature can perform nothing but evil, but that he is inclined to evil; a doctrine fundamentally different, since an inclination, though

E 2

strong,

strong, may be conquered. The continuance of "this infection of nature," even in those who are baptised, and the constant lusting of the flesh against the Spirit, are here asserted, generally and indiscriminately, without any declaration that either the Spirit or the flesh invariably and necessarily prevails in any particular description of persons. It cannot therefore be pretended that this Article gives any countenance to the Calvinistic notions of sinless obedience and unspotted purity in the elect, and of incorrigible pollution and inevitable wickedness in the reprobate.

Before we dismiss this Article, it may be proper to observe, that the Schoolmen () considered "original righteousness" not as a part of the primitive nature of man, but as an adventitious ornament or additional gift from God to Adam and that the Fall consisted in God's withdrawing this ornament or gift, and in leaving him to his own real unassisted nature. This idea has been adopted by very few of our English divines, by far the greater number maintaining, that the Fall produced a positive depravation of the moral and intellectual powers of man. And indeed the words of the Article seem scarcely reconcileable with the scholastic notion; "Original Sin is the

(1) Scholastici disputant quod justitia originalis, non fuerit connaturalis, sed, ceu ornatus quidam additus homini tanquam donum. Luth. Op, v. 6. p. 38.