VII. 344 Dr. Tully considers all works opposed to grace. SECT. Scripture, and the general meaning of the Articles of the Church of England according to them." Just. Paul. p. 46. I could also bring forward other tenets of the Doctor, in which he has departed from the judgment of the English Church but these are of less importance, and what I have already said will abundantly prove our point, namely, that Dr. Tully, in certain points of Christian doctrine, teaches altogether contrary to the English, and others of the chief reformed Churches, and even of the Catholic Church. And now let us return to his Justification as taught by St. Paul. SECTION VIII. ON THE REMAINING CHAPTERS. § 1. Every thing that Dr. Tully has brought forward against the author of the Harmony in the remaining chapters of his work, at least whatever was of importance, has been refuted at some length in our Examination of the Censure. In truth, the Censurer had already taken out of his hands nearly all matter for argument. And indeed, those short strictures or censures, which, as it seems, he wrote on the margin of my book, however little they amount to, look more like a fair answer than what Dr. Tully has replied to us in this his elaborate work. I shall leave it to the candid reader to decide whether I say this truly or not. I confess, some of Dr. Tully's arguments are peculiarly his own! as for instance; "All the works commanded in the Divine law, are in justification opposed to grace: all kinds of good works are commanded in such a law: therefore they are so far opposed to grace." According to which argument, 'faith' and 'repentance,' commanded in the Gospel law are 'works opposed to grace:' and this too, because they are commanded in some law: as if it were repugnant to grace and the liberty of the Gospel for a Christian to be under Just. Paul. obligation to some law. Again, (and he is excessively pleased with this argument,) "If we are justified by works, not on account of any worthiness in them, what is there to prevent our being justified by indifferent works, as well as adiapópois by good ones?" As if indeed there were no good work intermediate between an indifferent and a meritorious one, p. 47. "Fitness' or 'Worthiness' explained. 345 tas VIII. and by which we are disposed and rendered fit to receive the SECT. free gifts of God; which fitness' is sometimes called in Scripture 'worthiness P:' or as if any of us had detracted the dignitas worthiness of this 'fitness' from good works, or attributed ideoneithat of merit to them: or, lastly, as if it were true that a man was made fit to receive Divine blessings as well by indifferent as by good works. He, indeed, must have much leisure who has time to refute at any length such sophistry as all this. It therefore would have been enough for me to let these remaining chapters go without any further answer, had not certain monstrous calumnies stopped me, (I would with Dr. Tully that the indignity of the thing admitted of milder expressions!) and which, unless I wished to appear altogether careless about my reputation, it was necessary for me to answer. 3. In his fifth chapter, Dr. Tully says that "the p. 43. Harmonist mildly attacks the orthodox who are opposed to him under the name of Solifidians: and that with him and his companions all are Solifidians who would separate this 'bugbear' of works from righteousness: namely, the Fathers, the English, and all the reformed Churches." And yet he, the very same person, in another place confesses Just.Paul. that "I am not averse to an alliance with those veteran P. 13. champions and leaders, but that I rather anxiously court one:" he acknowledges that "I at least pretend that all the p. 28. Confessions of the reformed Church, or at least the chief of them, are on my side." What consistency is there in all this? Certainly, I never intended to declare war against the reformed Church, not to say against the Fathers. This "In the Holy Scriptures the faithful are called' worthy,' in this or that respect, not because their merits are equal or commensurate to the obtaining such a thing, but because they are so disposed, that according to the Divine dispensation they are fit persons to whom God shall be pleased to give such a reward. The word 'worthiness' therefore does not prove that there is any merit, properly so termed, in him who is called worthy of the kingdom of heaven, but only shews that he has that disposition or that fitness which God requires beforehand in those to whom the kingdom of heaven is given. For as he that is truly contrite is said 346 Charge of time-serving answered. SECT. however I constantly affirm, (which also I have proved above,) VIII. that there are very many persons who though they chatter of nothing more than of Fathers and reformed Churches, nevertheless are very far from the true doctrine either of the Fathers or of the most ancient reformed Churches; and they surely deserve to be called Solifidians who attribute justification to 'faith only,' a single virtue to the exclusion of true repentance, as being in nowise necessary for obtaining justification. I leave it to the judgment of all to decide whether I have not proved Dr. Tully to be guilty of this Solifidianism, and have not liberated the Church of England and the rest of the reformed Churches from that charge. Not content, however, with these accusations, Dr. Tully thus proceeds in his attacks upon the Harmonist and his friends. "What more can be said, but that these and the like 'stigmata' branded upon the truth, if they are not to be time-serving, which is much to be feared, are either the follies of sciolists, or the calumnies of malicious persons ?" Which is just as much as saying the Harmonist and his friends are either fools or rogues. No sensible person will care to be despised as a fool or sciolist by the Doctor who shall just consider what kind of spirit manifests itself in nearly every thing he writes. But when he speaks of us as time-serving, this cannot be passed over in silence. Far be it from me to make the same answer as a great man once did to a charge not unlike the present: "Low and venal minds are wont to judge of others by themselves" for I trust that it is far different with Dr. Tully. Nor will I say any thing for the Harmonist's friends, who are old enough to answer for themselves. But as far as I myself am concerned, I am as ignorant as man can be of that base art of so tempering my divinity.that it may serve the times against the truth. When I first devoted myself to divinity and the Church, God knows how sincerely I did so, and how zealous and anxious were my desires for promoting His glory and the salvation of souls. For having experienced in my youth the immense mercy and favour of God towards most grievous sinners, that saying of our Lord to Peter was ever sounding in my ears, "when thou art converted strengthen thy brethren." Hence, when the Church of England was well-nigh deserted by most of her own children, and openly How St. Paul rejects ritual works. 347 VIII. derided by her enemies, having been admitted to Holy Orders sECT. according to her rites, I devoted myself to her, and for some years served her almost gratuitously. And I can truly affirm that I have spent a large part of my patrimony in the service of the Church: for which duty I think I may surely claim this one reward, and with this I shall be content, namely, to be considered by the Doctor and others as a true son of the Church. Those doctrines for which Dr. Tully taunts me as an innovator and a temporizer, (though I know not for whom,) and which I am most persuaded are no other but the very decrees of the Catholic and our own Church, these I say, I have openly, freely, and constantly held and taught during the very overthrow both of our Church and kingdom, and was for so doing attacked on all sides by the hatred and reproaches of schismatics. But would that the reverend gentleman had not driven me to this foolishness of boasting! 14. § 4. P. 167. τον § 4. In the seventh chapter, Dr. Tully quotes an argu- p. 57. ment of mine from the Harmony, which is as follows. Diss. ii. c. "In whatever sense St. Paul rejects ritual and external works as not necessary, in that sense he admits spiritual and internal works as necessary: but he rejects ritual works as not necessary to justification: therefore he admits spiritual works as necessary to justification." What is Dr. Tully's remark on this? He says, "How does he prove this false proposition, (not to say any thing stronger of it?) by perfect silence: as if it were a self-intelligible principle, or abrovónthat a strong assertion of it was the same as proving the reason of it." Here is straightforwardness indeed! let any dióti fair-minded person read the passage for himself and he will see that I confirmed the proposition by very weighty arguments. In the first place I prove it by most express passages of Scripture; as Gal. v. 6; vi. 15; 1 Cor. vii. 19, where the Apostle opposes 'faith perfected by love,' 'a new creature,' 'the keeping of the commandments of God,' to ' circumcision,' and consequently to the rest of the Mosaic rites, and affirms of these that they are of no avail in Christ Jesus, that is, that they do not profit for the justification and salvation of man. But what he takes from these, (i. e. the 'Mosaic rites,') he evidently attributes to the others, to 'faith perfected by love, a διότι VIII. SECT. new creature, and the keeping of the commandments of God,' namely, that they are most necessary, and do avail greatly in the justification and salvation of man. To which passages I add the following, Col. ii. 11, 12, 13; Rom. xi. 28, 29; Phil. iii. 2, 3. With these premises I lay down the argu$4,5.p.167. ment that follows. Then I confirm my proposition by an argument taken from the primary end or object of the Mosaic ritual law: that God with no other design did exact under so severe penalties this external righteousness, than to shew that spiritual righteousness, to be more clearly revealed in the Gospel, and shadowed out in that legal righteousness, was equally and still more necessary: that as external justification, which was given by the law, was the shadow of the true justification to be obtained through Christ, so the circumcision of the flesh, which was required for that external justification, fully represented that circumcision of the heart, (namely by faith, repentance, and the true love of God,) which according to the Gospel is absolutely necessary for obtaining remission of sins or justification. What can be plainer than this? Lastly, as a finish to what I had said, I give in a note a remarkable passage from Justin Martyr's Dialogue with Trypho: "We, therefore, in the unParis 1636. circumcision of our flesh believing in God through Christ, [§ 92. p. 189.] and having a circumcision profitable to us who possess it, namely, the circumcision of the heart, hope to appear righteous and well-pleasing in the sight of God. Where he clearly teaches that according to the Gospel not merely faith in God through Christ, but the circumcision of the heart, shadowed forth in that external circumcision of the Mosaic law, is absolutely required for any one who would be righteous and well-pleasing before God. And now let all honest men judge how fairly Dr. Tully could say that I had proved the proposition of my argument by mere silence. pro coronide p. 320. p. 58. § 5. Shortly after, the reverend gentleman runs off into certain logical subtleties having nothing to do with the subject. He then returns to the Harmonist (whom he now styles the "Dissertator"), as follows: "But since the Dissertator in his postscript has candidly told us that the whole of the Harmony was written when he was quite young, without any mark, as it appears, of his having looked |