undertook this before the foundation of the world, and that by a positive covenant between Him and the Father?

You think this appears from four texts. 1. From that, Thou gavest them to Me. Nay, when any believe, the Father gives them to Chrift. But this proves no fuch previous contract. 2. God hath laid upon him the iniquities of us all. Neither does this prove any fuch thing. 3. That expreffion, The counfel of peace shall be between them, does not neceffarily imply any more, than that both the Father and the Son would concur in the redemption of man. 4. According to the counfel of his will,-that is, in the way or method he had chofen. Therefore neither any of thefe texts, nor all of them, prove what they were brought to prove. They do by no means prove, That there ever was any fuch covenant made between the Father and the Son.

P. 367. "The conditions of the covenant are recorded. Lo, I come to do thy will." Nay, here is no mention of any covenant, nor any thing from which it can be inferred. "The recompenfe ftipulated in this glorious Treaty."-But I fee not one word of the Treaty itfelf. Nor can I poffibly allow the existence of it, without far other proof than this. Ibid. "Another copy of this grand Treaty is recorded Isaiah xlix. from the first to the fixth verse." I have read them, but cannot find a word about it in all those verses. They contain neither more nor lefs than a prediction of the salvation of the Gentiles.

P. 368. "By the covenant of works, man was bound to obey in his own perfon." And fo he is under the covenant of grace; though not in order to his juftification. "The obedience of our Surety is accepted instead of our own." This is neither a fafe nor a fcriptural way of speaking. I would fimply fay, We are accepted through the Beloved. We have redemption through his blood.

P. 369. "The fecond covenant was not made with Adam, or any of his pofterity, but with Chrift, in those words, The feed of the woman fhall bruife the ferpent's head." For any authority you have from thefe words, you might as well have faid, It was made with the Holy Ghoft. These words were not fpoken to Chrift, but of Him, and give not the leaft intimation of any fuch covenant as you plead for. They manifeftly contain, if not a covenant made with, a promise made to Adam and all his pofterity.

P. 369. "Chrift, we fee, undertook to execute the conditions." We fee no fuch thing in this text. We fee here only a promife of a Saviour, made by God to man.

P. · 370. "'Tis true, I cannot fulfil the conditions." 'Tis not true. The conditions of the new covenant are, Repent and believe. And these you can fulfil, through Chrift ftrengthening you. ""Tis equally true, this is not required at my hands." It is equally true, that is, abfolutely falfe. And most dangerously falfe. If we allow this, Antinomianifm comes in with a full tide. "Chrift has performed all that was conditionary for me." Has he repented and believed for you? You endeavour to evade this by faying, "He performed all that was condi tionary in the covenant of works." This is nothing to the purpose; for we are not talking of that, but of the covenant of grace. Now he did not perform all that was conditionary in this covenant, unless he repented and believed. "But he did unspeakably more." It may be fo. But he did not do this.

P. 375. "But if Chrifl's perfect obedience be our's, we have no more need of pardon than Chrift himfelf." The confequence is good. You have ftarted an objection which you cannot answer. You fay indeed, "Yes, we do need pardon; for, in many things ave offend all." What then? If his bedience be ours, we ftill perfectly obey in him,

P. 376. "Both the branches of the law, the preceptive and the penal, in the cafe of guilt contracted, muft be fatisfied." Not fo. "Chrift, by his death alone, (fo our church teaches), fully fatisfied for the fins of the whole world." The fame great truth is manifeftly taught in the 31ft Article. Is it therefore fair, is it honeft, for any one to plead the articles of our church in defence of abfolute predeftination? feeing the 17th Article barely defines the term, without either affirming or denying the thing: whereas the 31ft totally overthrows and razes it from the foundation.

Ibid. "Believers who are notorious tranfgreffors in themselves, have a finlefs obedience in Chrift." O Siren fong pleafing found, to James Wheatly! Thomas Williams! James Reiley!

I know not one fentence in the eleventh dialogue, which is liable to exception: but that grand doctrine of Christianity, original fin, is therein proved by irrefragable arguments.

The Twelfth, likewife, is unexceptionable, and contains fuch an illuftration of the wisdom of God, in the ftructure of the human body, as, I believe, cannot be parallelled, in either antient or modern writers.

The former part of the thirteenth dialogue is admirable. To the latter I have fome objection.

It

P. 538. "Elijah failed in his refignation, and even Mofes fpake unadvisedly with his lips." is true: but if you could likewife fix fome blot upon venerable Samuel and beloved Daniel, it would prove nothing. For no fcripture teaches, That the holinefs of Chriftians is to be measured by that of any Jew.

P. 540. "Do not the best of men frequently feel diforder in their affections? do not they often complain, When I would do good, evil is prefent with I believe not. You and I are only able to

anfwer for ourselves. "Do not they fay, We groan being burthened,-with the workings of inbred corruption?" You know, this is not the meaning of the text. The whole context fhews, the cause of that groaning was their longing to be with Chrift. P. 541. "The cure" of fin "will be perfected in heaven." Nay, furely, in paradife, if no fooner. "This is a noble prerogative of the beatific vision." No: it would then come too late. If fin remains in us till the day of judgement, it will remain for ever. "Our present blessedness does not confist in being free from fin." I really think it does. But whether it does or no, if we are not free from fin, we are not Chriftian believers. For to all these the apostle declares, Being made free from fin, ye are become the fervants of righteousness, Rom. vi. 18.

Ibid. If we were perfect in piety (St. John's word is, Perfect in love) Chrift's prieftly office would be fuperfeded." No: we fhould ftill need his fpirit (and confequently his interceffion) for the continuance of that love from moment to moment. Befide, we should still be encompassed with infirmities, and liable to mistakes, from which words or actions might follow, even though the heart was all love, which were not exactly right. Therefore, in all these refpects, we should still have need of Christ's priestly office and therefore, as long as he remains in the body, the greateft faint may fay,

Every moment, Lord, Í need

The merit of thy death.

The text cited from Exodus afferts nothing lefs than, That iniquity "cleaves to all our holy things till death."

Ibid. "Sin remains, That the righteousness of faith may have its due honour." And will the righteoufnefs of faith have its due honour no longer than fin remains in us? Then it must remain, not only on earth and in paradise, but in heaven alfo→

"And the fanctification of the Spirit its proper efteem." Would it not have more esteem, if it were a perfect work?

P. 542. "It (fin) will make us lowly in our own eyes." What, will pride make us lowly? Surely the utter deftruction of pride, would do this more effectually." It will make us compaffionate.” Would not an entire renewal in the image of God make us much more fo?"It will teach us to admire the riches of grace." Yea, but a fuller experience of it, by a thorough fanctification of spirit, foul and body, will make us admire it more. "It will reconcile us to death." Indeed it will not: nor will any thing do this, like perfect love.

.

P. 544. "It will endear the blood and interceffion of Chrift." Nay, thefe can never be fo dear to any, as to those who experience their full virtue, who are filled with the fulness of God. Nor can any "feel their continual need" of Christ, or "rely on him" in the manner which thefe do.

Vol. II. Dialogue XIV. P. 10. "The claims of the law are all answered." If so, count Zinzendorf is abfolutely in the right: neither God nor man can claim my obedience to it. Is not this Antinomianifm without a mask?

P. 11. Your fins are expiated through the death of Chrift, and a righteousness given you, by which you have free accefs to God." This is not fcriptural language. I would fimply say, By him we have access to the Father.

There are many other expreffions in this dialogue, to which I have the fame objection, namely, 1. That they are unfcriptural, 2. That they directly lead to Antinomianism.

The first letter contains fome very useful heads of felf-examination. In the fecond,

P. 45. I read, "There is a righteousness which fupplies all that the creature needs. To prove this