under heaven." Thus, to unchurch Mr. Wesley and me, you unchurch Dr. Guyse and yourself. To support your assertion you quote Bishop Cowper, Dr Fulke, and Mr. Hervey, who agree to maintain, that "justification is one single act, and must therefore be done or undone." As neither you, nor they, have supported this proposition by one single argument, I shall just observe, that a thousand bishops and doctors are lighter than vanity, when weighed in the balance against the authority of Christ and his apostles. However, if you forget your proofs, I shall produce mine; and by the following syllogism I demonstrate, that justification in the day of our conversion, and justification in the last day, are no more one single act, than the day of a sinner's conversion, and that of judgment, are one single day. Two acts, which differ as to time, place, persons, witnesses, and circumstances, &c., cannot be one single act; the one may be done, when the other remains undone. But our first justification at conversion thus differs from our second justification in the great day. Therefore our first and second justification* cannot be one single act, &c. The second proposition, which alone is disputable, may be thus abundantly proved. Our first and second justification differ, 1. With respect to time: the time of the one is the hour of conversion; and the time of the other the day of judgment. 2. With respect to place: the place of the former is this earth; and the place of the latter the awful spot in the new heaven or on the new earth, where the tribunal of Christ shall be erected. 3. With respect to the witnesses: the witnesses of the former are the Spirit of God and our own conscience; or, to speak in scripture language, "the Spirit bearing witness with our spirit that we are the children of God:" but the witnesses of the latter will be the countless myriads of men and * I still call them first and second, not only to accommodate myself to the Rev. Mr. Shirley's expression in his Narrative; but because they may with propriety be thus distinguished, when considered with respect to each other. 66 angels assembled before Christ. 4. With respect to the justifier in the former justification, "one God justifies the circumcision and uncircumcision;" and in the latter, one Mediator between God and man, even the man Christ Jesus," will pronounce the sentence; for 66 the Father judgeth no man, but has committed all judgment to the Son." 5. With respect to the justified: in the day of conversion, a penitent sinner is justified; in the day of judgment, a persevering saint. 6. With respect to the article upon which justification will turn: although the meritorious cause of both our justifications is the same, that is, the blood and righteousness of Christ, yet the instrumental cause is very different: by faith we obtain (not purchase) the first, and by works the second. 7. With respect to the act of the justifier: at our conversion, God covers and pardons our sins; but in the day of judgment, Christ uncovers and approves our righteousness. And, lastly, with regard to the consequences of both: at the first justification, we are enlisted by the Friend of sinners to "fight the good fight of faith" in the church militant; and at the second, we are admitted by the righteous Judge to "receive a crown of righteousness, and shine like the sun" in the church triumphant. Is it not strange, that the enchanting power of Calvinian logic should have detained us so long in babel, where things so vastly different are perpetually confounded? Is it not deplorable, that when Mr. Wesley has the courage to call us out of mystic Geneva, so many tongues and pens should be sharpened against him? Shall foreign logic for ever prevail over English good sense, and Christian brotherly kindness? Have we SO "leaned towards Calvinism," as to be totally past recovery? And is the balance between St. Paul's and St. James's justification lost among pious Protestants for ever? O ye regenerate Britons, who have unfortunately fallen in love with the Geneva Delilah, "awake! awake! put on strength,” and leap out of the arms of that enchantress. If she rocks you asleep in her bosom, it is only to bind you fast with cords of antinomian errors, and deliver you up to the horrors of antinomian practices. Has she not already cut off the locks, and put out the eyes, of thousands? And does not Samson publicly grind for the Philistines? Have we not seen Mr. Hill himself tell the world, that "all sins work for good to the pleasant children, who go on frowardly" from adultery to treachery, and from treachery to murder? But you have an answer ready. Page 6, you insinuate, that it is I who have "erected a babel," by denying that the two above-described justifications are one and the same. And, to prove it, you advance a dilemma, which is already obviated in the Third Check, vol. i., p. 432. We readily grant you, honoured sir, that if a man dies the moment he is justified by faith, the inward labour of his love (for living faith always works by love) will justify him in the day of judgment. But you must also grant us, that if he lives, and "turns from his righteousness;" or, which is the same, if his faith, instead of working by love and obedience, works by lust and malice, by adultery and murder, it is no longer a living faith; it is the dead faith, of which St. James says, "What does it profit, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? Can that faith save him? Faith, if it hath not works, is dead." You see then, how that, in what you call "the intermediate state," as well as in the last day, "by works a man is justified, and not by faith only." James ii. Page 6, you assert, that "my favourite scheme is rather overthrown than supported by the instance of the collier," on whose evidence I supposed myself acquitted in a court of judicature. “His testimony," say you, "proves indeed your innocence, but it does in no degree constitute that innocence.” Are, then, “to justify a man," and "to constitute him innocent," expressions of the same import? Nay, some believe, that when God justifies returning prodigals at their conversion, he does not constitute them innocent, but for Christ's sake mercifully pardons their manifold sins, and graciously accepts their guilty persons; and that when Christ shall justify persevering saints in the last day, he will not constitute them innocent, but only declare, upon the evidence of their last works, that they are pure in heart," and therefore qualified to "see God," and "worthy to obtain that world where the children of the resurrection are equal to angels." your To show that the instance of the grafted tree overthrows also the doctrine of a twofold justification, you quote that great and good man, Mr. Hervey. But you forget that his bare assertion is no better than your own. I appeal from both assertions to the common sense of any impartial man, whether there is not a material difference between declaring that a crab-stock is properly grafted; and pronouncing that an apple-tree is not cankered and barren, but sound and fruitful. Mr. Hervey's mistake appears to me so much the more surprising, as the distinction which he explodes is every where obvious. Look into our orchards, and you will see some trees that were once properly grafted, but are now blasted, dead, rotten, and perhaps torn up by the roots. Consider our congregations, and you will cry out, as the pious divine under whose ministry you sit at present,* "O what sad instances does the present state of the church afford us of persons who set out with a most vehement zeal at the beginning, seemed to promise great things, and carry all before them, who are now like the snuff of an extinguished taper, devoid of any apparent life! We swarm with slumbering virgins on the right hand and on the left. The Delilah of this world has shorn their locks: their former strength is gone; their frame is totally enervated; and the Philistines are upon them." But, above all, search the oracles of God, and there you will see various descriptions of apostates; that is, of men who to the last "tread under foot the Son of God, and account the blood of the covenant, wherewith they were sanctified," and, consequently, justified, "a common," despicable "thing." These, in a dying hour, have no right to say, "I have kept the faith;" for, alas! by "putting away a good conscience, concerning faith they have made shipwreck." These, like withered branches The Rev. Mr. De Courcy, in his "Delineation of True and False Zeal," a little edifying tract, which does justice to St. James's pure religion, and shows that some pious Calvinists clearly see the growth, and honestly check the progress of antinomianism, so far as their principles will allow. of the heavenly vine, in which they once blossomed, shall be "taken away, cast forth, and burned," in the last day, together with the "chaff," for "not bearing fruit," and "ending in the flesh;" agreeable to that awful clause of the gospel charter: "The works of the flesh are adultery, fornication, uncleanness, idolatry, hatred, variance, wrath, strife, envying, murder, drunkenness, revellings, and such like; of which I tell you," justified believers, "as I have told you in time past, that they who do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of heaven." Thus, the numerous tribe of apostates, after having been justified by faith in the day of their conversion, shall be condemned by works in the day of judgment: so real, so important, is the distinction which Mr. Hervey looks upon as needless, and you, sir, as "full of deadly poison." However, says Bishop Cowper, "This distinction confounds two benefits, justification and sanctification." To this assertion, which, according to a grand rule of your logic, is also to pass for proof, I answer, that our sanctification will no more be confounded with our justification in the last day, than our faith is confounded with our acceptance in the day of our conversion. When you shall demonstrate, that the witnesses upon whose testimony a criminal is absolved are the same thing as the sentence of absolution pronounced by the judge, you will be able to make it appear, that sanctification is the same thing as justification in the last day; or, which is all one, that there is no difference between an instrumental cause, and its proper effect. May both our hearts lie open to the bright beams of convincing truth! And may you believe, that my pen expresses the feelings of my heart, when I subscribe myself, Honoured and dear sir. Your most obedient servant in Him |