prayer as if any intercession were worthy of Christ, who had not his full satisfaction and propitiatory sacrifice for its foundation. Indeed these cannot be put asunder, as sufficiently appears from the words cited before, He bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors:' where the Holy Ghost closely joins his intercession, with his satisfaction made by sacrifice. These and a thousand other solid arguments that might be advanced in proof of this fundamental doctrine, overturn all the cavils that flow from corrupt reason, which, indeed, are weak and thin as a spider's web.'

I have dwelt the longer on this head, because of its inexpressible moment. For whether or not the doctrine of justification by faith be, as all Protestants thought at the time of the reformation, Articulus stantis vel cadentis Ecclesia, a doctrine without which there can be no Christian church: most certainly there can be none where the whole notion of justification is ridiculed and exploded : unless it be such a church as includes, according to your account, every child of man of which consequently Turks, Deists, and Pagans, are as real members, as the most pious Christian under the sun. I cannot but observe, that this is the very essence of Deism; no serious Infidel need contend for more. I would therefore no more set one of this opinion to convert Deists, than I would set a Turk to convert Mahometans.

As every one that is justified is born of God, I am naturally led to consider, in the next place, (so far as it is delivered in the tracts now before me,) your doctrine of the new-birth.

"In the day that Adam ate of the tree he died: that is, his heavenly spirit, with its heavenly body, were extinguished. To make that heavenly spirit and body to be alive again in man, this is regeneration." (Sp. of Prayer, P. I. p. 9.) O no; this is not; nor any thing.like it. This is the unscriptural dream of Behmen's heated imagination.

"See the true reason why only the Son of God could be our Redeemer. It is because he alone could be able to bring to life again that celestial spirit and body which had died in Adam." (ibid.) Not so: but he alone could be our Redeemer, because he alone, by that one oblation of himself once offered, could make a sufficient sacrifice and satisfaction for the sins of the whole world.'

"See also why a man must be born again of water and of the Spirit.' He must be born again of the Spirit, because Adam's heavenly spirit was lost." (ibid.) Nay, but because Adam had lost the inward image of God, wherein he was created. And no less than the Almighty Spirit of God could renew that image in his soul.

"He must be born of water, because that heavenly body which Adam lost was formed out of the heavenly materiality, which is called water." (ibid.) Vain philosophy! The plain meaning of the expression, Except a man be born of water,' is neither more nor less than this, Except he be baptized.' And the plain reason why he ought to be thus born of water is, because God hath appointed it. He hath appointed it as an outward and visible sign of an inward

and spiritual grace: which grace is, a death unto sin, and a newbirth unto righteousness."

"The necessity of our regaining our first heavenly body is the necessity," (I presume you mean the ground of the necessity,) "of our eating the body and blood of Christ." (p. 10.) Neither can I believe this, till I find it in the Bible. I am there taught to believe, that our spiritually receiving the body and blood of Christ,' which is most eminently done in the Lord's Supper, is necessary to strengthen and refresh our souls, as our bodies are by the bread and wine.'

"The necessity of having again our first heavenly spirit is shown, by the necessity of our, being baptized with the Holy Ghost." (ibid.) No. That we must be baptized with the Holy Ghost,' implies this and no more, that we cannot be renewed in righteousness and truc holiness,' any otherwise than by being overshadowed, quickened, and animated by that blessed Spirit.

"Our fall is nothing else but the falling of our soul from its heavenly body and spirit, into a bestial body and spirit. Our redemption," (you mean, our new-birth) "is nothing else but the regaining our first angelic spirit and body." (ibid.) What an account is here of the Christian redemption! How would Dr. Tindal have smiled. at this! Where you say redemption is nothing else but the life of God in the soul, you allow an essential part of it. But here, you allow it to be nothing else but that which is no part of it at all: nothing else but a whim, a madman's dream, a chimera, a mere nonentity!

.

"This" (angelic spirit and body) "in Scripture is called our new. or inward man." (ibid.) The inward man in Scripture means one thing, the new man another. The former means the mind opposed to the body: though our outward man,' our body, perish, yet the inward man,' the mind or soul, is renewed day by day.' (2 Cor. iv. 16.) The latter means universal holiness: 'put off the old man which is corrupt; and put on the new man, which, after God, is created in righteousness and true holiness,' (Eph. iv. 22-24.) But neither does the one nor the other ever mean this angelic spirit and body.

You yourself know better what the new-birth is. You describe. it better, though still with amazing queerness of language, where you say, "Man hath the light and water of an outward nature to quench the wrath of his own life, and the light and meekness of Christ, as a seed. born in him, to bring forth anew the image of God."

But it is not strange, that you speak so confusedly and darkly, as you generally do, of the New-Birth, sceing you seem to have no conception of that faith whereby we are born again, This abundantly appears from your frank declaration, "We are neither saved by faith nor by works." (Part II. p. 36.) Flatly contrary to the declaration of St. Paul, By grace we are saved through faith.'

To put the matter out of dispute, you declare that you mean by

faith, "a desire to be one with Christ." (P I. p. 50.). Again. "The desire of turning to God is the coming of Christ into the soul. This faith will save thee." (p. 76.) So in your judgment, saving faith is "a desire of coming to God, or of being one with Christ." I know the contrary from experience. I had this desire many years before I even knew what saving faith was.

Faith is so far from being only this desire, that it is no desire at all. It differs from all desire toto genere, although doubtless all good desires accompany it. It is, according to St. Paul, an exos, an evidence or conviction, (which is totally different from a desire,) of things not seen a supernatural, a divine evidence and conviction of the things which God hath revealed in his word; of this in particular, that the Son of God hath loved me, and given himself for me. Whosoever hath this faith is born of God Whosoever thus believeth is saved; and if he endure therein to the end,' shall be saved everlastingly.

The process of this work in the soul, of the present salvation. which is through faith, you likewise describe confusedly and obscurely. The sum of what you say is this: "The painful sense of what you are, kindled into a working state of sensibility by the light of God, is the light and fire from whence the spirit of prayer proceeds. In its first kindling nothing is found but pain, wrath, and darkness. And, therefore, its first prayer is all humility.”. (P. II. p. 172.)

Would it not be more intelligible, if one had said, "The convincing Spirit of God, gives you to see and feel, that you are a poor, undone, guilty, helpless sinner. At the same time, he incites you to cry for help to him who is mighty to save.' This is true. But it is not true, that in the first kindling of this fire, in plain terms, during the first convictions, "nothing is found but pain, wrath, and darkness." Very often there are found even in the first conviction, sweet gleams of light, touches of joy, of hope, and of love, mixed with sorrow and fear. Much less is it true, that the first prayer of an awakened sinner is all humility. (ibid.) On the contrary, a sinner newly awakened, has always more or less confidence in himself, in what he is, or has, or does, and will do: which is not humility, but downright pride. And this mingles itself with all his prayer, till the day-star is just rising in his heart.

You add, "This prayer is met by the divine love, and changed into hymns, and songs, and thanksgivings." (ibid.) It is so, when being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ.' "The state of fervour melts away all earthly passions and affections, and leaves no inclination in the soul, but to delight in God alone." (ibid.) It is certain, this is the genuine effect of the love of God shed abroad in the heart:' which expression of St. Paul, I suppose, means the same with this state of fervour. "Then its prayer changes again, and continually stands in fulness of faith, and purity of love, in absolute resignation, to do and be what and how his Beloved pleaseth. This is the last state of the

spirit of prayer, and is our highest union with God, in this life." (p. 173.)

Assuredly it is: fulness of faith, beholding with open face the glory of the Lord;' purity of love, free from all mixture of its contrary, yielding the whole heart to God; absolute resignation, excluding every degree of self-will, sacrificing every thought, word, and work to God. But do we change directly, from our first love, into the highest union with God? Surely not. There is an intermediate state between that of babes in Christ, and that of fathers. You yourself are very sensible there is; although you here speak as if there were not.

You go on. 66 • People who have long dwelt in this fervour are frighted when coldness seizes upon them." (p. 174.) That is, when they lose it, when their love grows cold. And certainly, well they may, if this fervour was to bring them to "fulness of faith, purity of love, and absolute resignation." Well may they be affrighted, if that fervour be lost, before "it has done its work."

Indeed they might be affrighted, when it is not lost, if that which follows be true. "Fervour is good and ought to be loved; but distress and coldness are better." (p. 176.) "It brings the soul nearer to God, than the fervour did." (p. 175.) The fervour, you said, "brought the soul to its highest union with God in this life." Can coldness do more? Can it bring us to an union, higher than the highest?

To explain this, you say, "The fervour made the soul delight in God. But it was too much an own delight. It was a fancied selfholiness, and occasioned rest and satisfaction in itself, in a spiritual self." (ibid.) Either fervour does bring us to purity of love, and absolute resignation, or not. To say it does not, contradicts what you said but now. And if it does, we. cannot say, "Coldness does the work which fervour did, in an higher degree.'

I should not insist so long on these glaring inconsistencies, were not the doctrine you are here labouring to support, absolutely inconsistent with that of St. Paul, and naturally productive of the most fatal consequences. St. Paul asserts, the present kingdom of God' in the soul is righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost.' He continually teaches, that these which God hath joined, man ought not to put asunder: that peace and joy should never be separated. from righteousness, being the divine means both of preserving and increasing it, and that we may, yea, ought to rejoice evermore,' till 'the God of peace sanctifies us wholly." But if these things are so, then "Distress and coldness are not better" than fervent love and joy in the Holy Ghost.

Again. The doctrine, that it is better and more profitable for the soul, to lose its sense of the love of God than to keep it, is not only unscriptural, but naturally attended with the most fatal consequences. It directly tends to obstruct, if not destroy the work of God in the heart, by causing men to bless themselves in those ways, which Jamp the fervour of their affections; and to imagine they are con

siderably advanced in grace, when they have grieved, yea, quenched the Spirit. Nay, but let all who now feel the love of God in their hearts, and walk in the light, as he is in the light,' labour by every possible mean to keep themselves in the love of God.' Let them be ever fervent in spirit.' Let them rejoice evermore,' and stir up the gift of God, which is in them. And if at any time, "Coldness seizes upon them," let them be assured, they have grieved the Spirit of God.' Let them be affrighted: let them fear lest they sink lower and lower: yea, into total deadness and hardness of heart. At the peril of their souls, let them not rest in darkness, but examine themselves, search out their spirits, cry vehemently to God, and not cease, till he restores the light of his countenance.

5. If this doctrine of the unprofitableness of coldness above fervour, directly tends to make believers easy, while they are sliding back into unbelief, you have another which tends as directly to make them easy who never believed at all, I mean, that of Christ in every man. What you advanced on this head, I desire next to consider, as the importance of it requires.

"The birth of Christ is already begun in every one. Jesus is already within thee, (whoever thou art,) living, stirring, calling, knocking at the door of thy heart." (Spirit of Prayer, part I, p. 55.) "Every one has Christ in his spirit, lying there as in a state of insensibility and death." (Spirit of Love, part II. p. 34.) But he is living for all that. And though "in a state of insensibility," he is "stirring, calling, knocking at the door of the heart!"

"Something of heaven" (you use this phrase as equivalent with Christ) "lies in every soul in a state of inactivity and death." (p. 35.) "All the holy nature, tempers, and Spirit of Christ, lie hid as a seed in thy soul." (Spirit of Prayer, part I. p. 68.) But are they active or inactive? Living and stirring, or in a state of insensibility

and death?

"Thou art poor, and blind, and naked, and miserable, while all the peace and joy of God are within thee." (p. 74.) This is most wonderful of all! Are these within him who is dead in sin? Who is a "stranger to all that is holy and heavenly ?" If they are, how can he be miserable, who has "all the peace and joy of God within him?". Will you say, "They are in him, but he does not feel them?" Nay, then they are not in him. I have peace in me, no longer than I feel peace. I feel joy, or I have it not.

"See here the extent of the Catholic church of Christ! It takes in all the world." (p. 56.) So Jews, Mahometans, Deists, Heathens, are all members of the church of Christ! Should we not add devils too? Seeing these also are to dwell with us in heaven! "Poor sinner, Christ dwelleth in the centre, the fund, or bottom of thy soul." (p. 59.) What is this? What is either the centre, the top, or bottom of a spirit?

“When Adam fell, this centre of his soul became a prisoner in an earthly animal. But from the moment God spoke Christ into Adam, all the treasures of the divine nature, the light and Spirit