tell him, as (if I remember aright) I have done already, that I will not come to him nor any of his companions, to learn to express myself in these things; and moreover, that I despise their censures. The discourses he is carping at in particular in this place, are neither doctrinal nor argumentative, but consist in the application of truths before proved unto the minds and affections of men. And, as I said, I will not come to him nor his fraternity, to learn how to manage such a subject, much less a logical and argumentative way of reasoning; nor have any inducement thereunto from any thing that as yet I have seen in their writings. It also troubles him, p. 208. That whereas I know how unsuited the best and most accurate of our expressions are unto the true nature and being of divine things, as they are in themselves, and what need we have to make use of allusions, and sometimes less proper expressions, to convey a sense of them unto the minds and affections of men, I had once or twice used that iπavóp@wors, if I may so say, which yet if he had not known used in other good authors, treating of things of the same nature, he knew I could take protection against his severity under the example of the apostle using words to the same purpose, upon an alike occasion, Heb. vii. But at length he intends to be serious, and from those words of mine, Here is mercy enough for the greatest, the oldest, the stubbornest transgressor; he adds, Enough in all reason this: what a comfort is it to sinners to have such a God for their Saviour, whose grace is boundless and bottomless, and exceeds the largest dimensions of their sins, though there be a world of sin in them. But what now if the divine nature itself have not such an endless, boundless, bottomless grace and compassion as the doctor now talks of? For at other times, when it serves his turn better, we can hear nothing from him but the naturalness of God's vindictive justice. Though God be rich in mercy, he never told us that his mercy was so boundless and bottomless; he had given a great many demonstrations of the severity of his anger against sinners, who could not be much worse than the greatest, the oldest, and the stubbornest transgressors.'

Let the reader take notice, that I propose no grace in Christ unto or for such sinners, but only that which may invite all sorts of them, though under the most discouraging

qualifications, to come unto him for grace and mercy by faith and repentance. And on supposition that this was my sense, as he cannot deny it to be, I add only in answer, that this his profane scoffing at it, is that which reflects on Christ and his gospel, and God himself, and his word, which must be accounted for. See Isa. lv.7. Secondly, For the opposition which he childishly frames between God's vindictive justice, and his mercy and grace, it is answered already. Thirdly, It is false, that God hath not told us, that his grace is boundless and bottomless in the sense wherein I use those words, sufficient to pardon the greatest, the oldest, the stubbornest of sinners; namely, that turn unto him by faith and repentance; and he who knows not how this consists with severity and anger against impenitent sinners, is yet to learn his catechism. But yet he adds farther, pp. 208, 209. Supposing the divine nature were such a bottomless fountain of grace, how comes this to be a personal grace of the Mediator? for a mediator as mediator, ought not to be considered as the fountain, but as the minister of grace; God the Father certainly ought to come in for a share at least, in being the fountain of grace, though the doctor is pleased to take no notice of him. But how excellent is the grace of Christ's person, above the grace of the gospel, for that is a bounded and limited thing, a straight gate and narrow way, that leadeth unto life. There is no such boundless mercy as all the sins in the world cannot equal its dimensions, as will save the greatest, the oldest, and the stubbornest transgressors.'

I beg the reader to believe, that I am now so utterly weary with the repetition of these impertinences, that I can hardly prevail with myself to fill my pen once more with ink about them; and I see no reason now to go on, but only that I have begun; and on all accounts I shall be as brief as possible. I say then, first, I did not consider this boundless grace in Christ as mediator, but considered it as in him who is mediator, and so the divine nature with all its properties are greatly to be considered in him, if the gospel be true. But Secondly, It is untrue, that Christ as mediator is only the minister of grace, and not the fountain of it; for he is Mediator, as God and man in one person. Thirdly, To suppose an exemption of the person of the Father from being

the fountain of grace absolutely, in the order of the divine subsistence of the persons in the Trinity, and of their operations suited thereunto, upon the ascription of it unto the Son, is a fond imagination, which could befall no man who understands any thing of things of this nature. It doth as well follow, that if the Son created the world, the Father did not; if the Son uphold all things by the word of his power, the Father doth not; that is, that the Son is not in the Father, nor the Father in the Son. The acts indeed of Christ's mediation respect the ministration of grace, being the procuring and communicating causes thereof; but the person of Christ the Mediator is the fountain of grace. So they thought who beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father full of grace and truth.' But the especial relation of grace unto the Father as sending the Son, unto the Son as sent by him and incarnate, and unto the Holy Spirit as proceeding from and sent by them both, I have elsewhere fully declared, and shall not in this place (which indeed will scarce give admittance unto any thing of so serious a nature) again insist thereon. Fourthly, The opposition which he would again set between Christ and the gospel, is impious in itself, and if he thinks to charge it on me, openly false. I challenge him and all his accomplices, to produce any one word out of any writing of mine, that from a plea or pretence of grace in Christ, should give countenance unto any in the neglect of the least precept given, or duty required in the gospel. And notwithstanding all that I have said or taught, concerning the boundless, bottomless grace and mercy of Christ towards believing, humble, penitent sinners, I do believe the way of gospel obedience indispensably required to be walked in by all that will come to the enjoyment of God, to be so narrow, that no revilers, nor false accusers, nor scoffers, nor despisers of gospel mysteries, continuing so to be, can walk therein. But that there is not grace and mercy declared and tendered in the gospel also, unto all sorts of sinners, under any qualifications whatever, who upon its invitation will come to God through Jesus Christ, by faith and repentance, is an impious imagination.

A discourse much of the same nature follows, concerning the love of Christ, after he hath treated his person and grace at his pleasure. And this he takes occasion for, from

some passages in my book (as formerly) scraped together from several places, so as he thought fit and convenient unto his purpose; p. 209. Thus the love of Christ is an eternal love, because his divine nature is eternal; and it is an unchangeable love because his divine nature is unchangeable; and his love is fruitful, for it being the love of God, it must be effectual and fruitful in producing all the things which he willeth unto his beloved. He loves life, grace, holiness into us, loves us into covenant, loves us into heaven. This is an excellent love indeed, which doth all for us, and leaves nothing for us to do. We owe this discovery to an acquaintance with Christ's person, or rather with his divine nature, for the gospel is very silent in this matter. All that the gospel tells us is, that Christ loveth sinners so as to die for them; that he loves good men who believe and obey his gospel, so as to save them; that he continues to love them while they continue to be good, but hates them when they return to their old vices; and therefore, I say, there is great reason for sinners to fetch their comforts not from the gospel, but from the person of Christ, which as far excels the gospel, as the gospel excels the law.'

I do suppose the expressions mentioned are for the substance of them in my book, and shall therefore only inquire what it is in them which he excepteth against, and for which I am reproached, as one that hath an acquaintance with Christ's person, which is now grown so common and trite an expression, that were it not condited unto some men's palates by its profaneness, it would argue a great barrenness in this author's invention, that can vary no more in the topic of reviling. It had been well if his licencer had accommodated him with some part of his talent herein. But what is it that is excepted against? Is it, that the love of Christ as he is God is eternal? or is it that it is unchangeable? or is it that it is fruitful or effective of good things unto the persons beloved? The philosopher tells us, that to love for any one is, Βούλεσθαί τινι ἅ οἴεται ἀγαθὰ, καὶ τὸ κατὰ δύναμιν πρακτικὸν εἶναι TOUTWV. It is this efficacy of the love of Christ which must bear all the present charge. The meaning of my words therefore is, that the love of Christ is unto us the cause of life, grace, holiness, and the reward of heaven. And because it is in the nature of love to be effective, according unto the

ability of the person loving, of the good which it wills unto the object beloved, I expressed it as I thought meet, by loving these things to us. And I am so far on this occasion, and [notwithstanding] the severe reflection on me for an acquaintance with Christ, from altering my thoughts, that I say still with confidence, he who is otherwise minded, is no Christian. And if this man knows not how the love of Christ is the cause of grace and glory, how it is effective of them, and that in a perfect consistency with all other causes and means of them, and the necessity of our obedience, he may do well to abstain a little from writing, until he is better informed. But, saith he, this is an excellent love indeed, which doth all for us, and leaves us nothing to do.' But who told him so? Who ever said so? Doth he think that if our life, grace, holiness, glory, be from the love of Christ originally, causally, by virtue of his divine gracious operations in us, and towards us, that there is no duty incumbent on them who would be made partakers of them, or use, or improve them unto their proper ends? Shall we then to please him say, that we have neither life, nor grace, nor holiness, nor glory, from the love of Christ, but whereas most of them are our own duties, we have them wholly from ourselves? Let them do so who have a mind to renounce Christ and his gospel; I shall come into no partnership with them. For what he adds, 'all that the gospel teaches us,' &c. he should have done well to have said, as far as he knows, which is a limitation with a witness. If this be all the gospel which the man knows and preaches, I pity them whom he hath taken under his instruction. Doth Christ in his love do nothing unto the quickening and conversion of men? Nothing to the purification and sanctification of believers? Nothing as to their consolation and establishment? Nothing as to the administration of strength against temptations? Nothing as to supplies of grace in the increase of faith, love, and obedience, &c. This ignorance or profaneness is greatly to be bewailed, as his ensuing scoff repeated now usque ad nauseam, about an opposition between Christ and his gospel, is to be despised. And if the Lord Christ hath no other love but what this man will allow, the state of the church in this world depends on a very slender thread. But attempts of this nature will fall short enough of prevailing with sober Christians to forego their