es prevails over those, that are 1 that Dr. Crifp himself, in an eftimony to undefiled religion. olume of the Rev. Mr. Whited published by Gurney, p. 119, muft work FOR fpiritual life, 53, 154, he declares: "There

to perifh; and if you drop take care to repay you when t one fault with this doctrine. guard free grace fo well as Mr. ays intimate, that there is no abundant life of grace, but from in Chrift BEFORE any workto prejudice the reader against im not fo prejudiced in favour hitefield, in an unguarded exragement of free grace.

refpect for them, I think it my duty to oppofe their mistake, as a pernicious refinement of Satan tranfformed into an angel of light: I therefore attack it by the following arguments.

(1) This doctrine makes us wife above what is written. We read, that hunger, and want of bread, brought back the prodigal fon. His father knew it, but instead of treating him as an hired fervant, he entertained him as a beloved child,

of

(2) It fets afide at a ftroke a confiderable part the bible, which confifts in threatenings to deter evilworkers, and in promises to encourage obedient believers For, if it is base to obey in order to obtain a promifed reward, it is bafer ftill to do it in order to avoid a threatened punishment. Thus the precious grace of faith, fo far as it is exercised about divine promifes and threatenings, is indirectly made void.

(3) It decries godly fear, a grand spring of action, and prefervative of holiness in all free agents, that are in a flate of probation; and by this means it indirectly charges God with want of wifdom, for putting that fpring in the breast of innocent man in paradife, and for perpetually working upon it in his word and by his Spirit, whom St. Paul calls the Spirit of bondage unto FEAR; because he helps us to believe the threatenings denounced against the workers of iniquity, and to fear left ruin fhall overtake us, if we continue in our fins.

If ever there was a vifible church without spot and wrinkle, it was when the multitude of them that believed, were of one heart and of one foul. The worldlymindednefs of Ananias and Sapphira was the first blemish of the Chriftian, as Achan's covetoufness had been of the Jewish Church on this fide Jordan. God made an example of them as he had done of Achan, and St. Luke obferves, that upon it, GREAT FEAR came upon ALL THE CHURCH; even fuch fear as kept them from falling after the fame example of unbelief. Now were all the primitive chriftians mean-fpirited people, because they were filled with great fear of

being punished as the first backfliders if they apoftatiz ed? Is it a reproach to righteous Noah, that Being moved with FEAR he prepared an ark for the SAVING of his houfe? And did our Lord legalize the gofpel, when he began to say to his difciples first of all, &c. I fay unto you, MY FRIENDS, be not afraid of them that kill the body, &c. but FEAR him, who, after he hath killed, hath power to caft into hell; yea, I say unto YOU, fear him? Does this mean: Be mercenary: Yea, I fay unto you, be mercenary ?

(4) Hope has a particular, neceffary reference to promifes, and good things to come. Excellent things are fpoken of that grace: If St. Paul fays, Ye are faved thro' FAITH, he fays alfo, We are faved by HOPE. Hence St. Peter obferves, that " exceeding great PROMISES are given unto us, that we might be partakers of the divine nature: And St. John declares, Every man, that has this HOPE in him, purifieth himself even as God is pure. Now hope never itirs, but in order to obtain good things in view: a motive this, which our gofpelrefiners reprefent as illiberal and bafe. Their scheme therefore, directly tends to ridicule and fupprefs the capital, chriftian grace, which Faith guards on the left hand, and Charity on the right.

(5) Their error fprings from a falfe conclufion. Because it is mean to relieve a beggar with an eye to a reward from him, they infer, that it is mean to do a good work with an eye to a reward from GoD ; not confidering that a beggar promifes nothing, and can give nothing valuable; whereas the Parent of good promifes, and can give eternal life to them that obey him: Their inference is then just as abfurd as the following argument : "I ought not to fet my heart upon an earthly, inferior, tranfitory good; therefore I muft "not fet it upon the chief, heavenly, permanent good. It is foolish to fhoot at a wrong mark, there. "fore I must not fhoot at the right; I muft not aim at the very mark, which God himself has fet up "for me ultimately to level all my actions at, next

66

60

M 2

44 to

to his own glory, viz. the enjoyment of himself, "the light of his countenance, the fmiles of his open "face, which make the heaven of heavens."

(6) God fays to Abraham, and in him to all believers, I am thy exceeding great REWARD: Hence it follows, that the higher we rife in holiness and obedience, the nearer we fhall be admitted to the eternal throne; and the fuller enjoyment we fhall have of our God and Saviour, our reward and Rewarder. There. fore, to overlook divine rewards, is to overlook God himfelf, who is our great REWARD; and to flight the life to come, of which godliness has the PROMISE.

(7) The error I oppofe can be put in a still stronger light. Not to ftrive to obtain our great reward in full, amounts to faying: "Lord thou art beneath my aim and purfuit: I can do without thee, or without fo much of thee. I will not beftir myfelf, and **do one thing to obtain either the fruition, or a ful

ler enjoyment of thy adorable felf."— An illuftration or two, fhort as they fall of the thing illuftrated, may help us to fee the great impropriety of fuch a conduct. If the king offered to give all officers, who would diftinguish themselves in the field, his hand to kifs, and a commiffion in the guards, that he might have them near his perfon; would not military gentlemen defeat the intention of this gracious offer, and betray a peculiar degree of indifference for his Majefty, if in the day of battle they would not strike one blow the more, on account of the royal promise?

Again: When David afked: What fhall be done to him that killeth the giant? and when he was inform. ed, that Saul would give him his daughter in marJiage; would the young fhepherd have fhewed his regard for the princefs, or refpect for the monarch, if he had faid: "I am above minding rewards: what I do, I do freely I fcorn acting from fo base a motive as a defire to fecure the hand of the princefs, and the honour of being the king's fon-in-law "Could any thing have been ruder, and more haughty than fuch a speech? And yet, O fee what evangelical refine

ments

ments have done for us! We, who are infinitely lefs before God than David was before king Saul - we, worms of a day, are fo blinded by prejudice, as to think it beneath us to mind the offers of the King of kings, or to ftrive for the rewards of the Lord of lords!

Wo to him that ftriveth in generofity with his Maker! Let the potsherd frive thus with the potsherds of the earth: but let not the clay say to him that fashioneth it, What doeft thou when thou ftirreft me up to good works by the promise of thy rewards? Surely, Lord, thou forgetteft, that the nobleness of my mind, and my doctrine of finished falvation, make me above running for a reward, tho' it should be a life of glory, and Thyself. Whatever I do at thy command, I am determined not to demean myfelf; I will do it as Araunah, like a king.' What depths of antinomian pride may be hid under the covering of our voluntary humility!

(8) The Calvinifts of the last century, in their lucid intervals, faw the abfolute neceflity of working for heaven and heavenly rewards. We have a good, practical difcourfe of J. Bunyan upon these words, So run that you may obtain. The burden of it is, "If you will have heaven you must run for it." Whence he calls his fermon, "The heavenly footman." And Matthew Mead, ta ftaunch Calvinist, in his treatife on The

M 3

good

+ As a proof of his being found in the doctrines of Calvinistic grace and confufion, I prefent the reader with the following paffage taken from the fame book printed in London 1683-p. 307. "A believer "is under the law for conduct, but nct for judgment, &c. It is the guide of his path, but not the judge of his ftate. The believer is "bound to obey it, but not to ftand or fall by it" [That is, in plain english, He should obey, but his difobedience will never bring him under condemnation, and hinder him to ftand in judgment] "It is

a rule of life, &c. and therefore it obliges believers as much as "others, tho' upon other motives, &c. For they are not to expec "life or favour from it, nor fear the death and rigour that comes by. "it. The law has no power to justify a believer, or condemn him, " and therefore can be no rule to try his ftate by."— In flat oppofi