SECTION X. Mr. Toplady attempts in vain to retort the charge of Antinomian- ism, and to show that Calvinism is more conducive to holiness, than the XII. Some encouragements for those who, from a principle of conscience, bear their testimony against absolute election and reprobation, PREFACE. Reasons of the title given to this tract-The doctrines of the heathens, the Papists, and Calvinists, concerning the purgation of souls from the remains of sin-The purgatory recommended in this book, . 485 SECTION I. The doctrine of Christian perfection placed in a Scriptural light, 491 II. Pious Calvinists dissent from us chiefly because they confound the law of innocence, and the law of liberty, or Adamic and Christian perfection, 495 III. Objections against this doctrine solved merely by considering the nature IV. The ninth and fifteenth articles of our Church, properly understood, are not against the doctrine of Christian perfection-That our Church holds it, is proved by thirteen arguments, V. St. Peter and St. James declare for Christian perfection, VI. St. Paul preached Christian perfection, and professed to have attained it, 521 VII. St. Paul was not carnal, and sold under sin-The true meaning of Gal. VIII. An answer to the arguments by which St. Paul's supposed carnality is IX. St. Paul presents us with a striking picture of a perfect Christian, by occasionally describing his own spirituality, X. St. John is for Christian perfection, and not for a death purgatory, XI. Why the privileges of believers under the Gospel cannot be justly mea- sured by the experience of believers under the law of Moses, XII. A variety of arguments to prove the absurdity of the twin doctrines of XVI. The distinction between sins and infirmities is truly Scriptural-An answer to Mr. Henry's grand argument for the continuance of indwell- ADVERTISEMENT. It is the author's desire that the following pages should be considered as written for all those whom they exactly suit. And in order to this, he informs the reader that, in general, ZELOTES represents any zealous Solifidian, who, through prejudice, looks upon the doctrine of free will as heretical. HONESTUS-any zealous moralist, who, through prejudice also, looks upon the doctrine of free grace as enthusiastical. LORENZO-any man of sense, yet unsettled in his religious principles. CANDIDUS any unprejudiced inquirer after truth, who hates bigotry, and would be glad to see the differences among Protestants settled upon rational and Scriptural terms. A SOLIFIDIAN is one who maintains that we are completely and eternally saved [solâ fide] by sole faith-by faith alone; and who does it in so unscriptural a manner as to make good works unnecessary to eternal salvation; representing the law of Christ as a mere rule of life; and calling all those who consider that law as a rule of judgment, legalists, Pharisees, or heretics. A PREFATORY EPISTLE, HUMBLY ADDRESSED TO THE TRUE PROTESTANTS IN GREAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND. Containing some remarks upon the distinguishing character of true Protestants, and upon the contrary disposition-True Protestants are chosen judges of the doctrines advanced in this book—A sketch of the author's plan-Observations upon the manner in which it is executed-General directions to the reader-True Protestants are encouraged to protest against religious absurdities, and unscriptural impositions-The author enters a double protest against the ANTINOMIAN and PHARISAIC gospels of the day, and continues to express his love and esteem for the good men, who, through the force of prejudice, espouse and defend those partial gospels. The re BRETHREN AND FATHERS,-Ye know how hard the Romanists fought for their errors at the time of the reformation. They pleaded that antiquity, synods, councils, fathers, canons, tradition, and the Church were on their side: and they so obscured the truth by urging Scripture metaphors, and by quoting unguarded passages from the writings of the fathers, that thousands of simple people knew not which of the contending parties had the truth on its side. The great question debated in those days was, whether the host, that is, the bread consecrated by the priest in the Lord's Supper, was to be worshipped as the identical body of our Lord. The Romanists produced Christ's own words: "Take and eat, THIS is my body-this is my blood-drink of it. Except you eat my flesh, and drink my blood, ye have no life in you." formers answered, "That those expressions being figurative, it was absurd to take them in a literal sense ;" and they proved their assertion by appeals to reason and to the Scriptures, where the consecrated bread is plainly called bread. The Romanists replied, "that in matters of faith we must set aside reason:" and some of them actually decried it as the greatest enemy to faith; while others continued to produce crude quota. tions from all the injudicious, inconsistent, overdoing fathers. reformers seeing that at this rate there would be no end to the controversy, protested three things in general: (1.) That right reason has an important place in matters of faith. (2.) That all matters of faith may and must be decided by Scripture understood reasonably, and consistently with the context. And, (3.) That antiquity and fathers, traditions and councils, canons and the Church, lose their authority when they depart from sober reason and plain Scripture. These three protests are the very ground of our religion, when it is contradistinguished from popery. They who stand to them deserve, in my humble opinion, the title of true Protestants; they are, at least, the only persons to whom this epistle is inscribed. The |