oufy confidered, and faithfully tried by the word of God, will appear to be of no force at all. Let the matter be humbly and calmly reviewed, as to the following heads.

Firft, you say, “ if this be so (i. e. if there be an election) then is all preaching vain: it is needless to them that are elected; for they, whether with preaching or without, will infallibly be faved. Therefore, the end of preaching to fave fouls is void, with regard to them. And it is useless to them that are not elected; for they cannot poffibly be faved; they, whether with preaching or without, will infallibly be danined. The end of preaching is therefore void, with regard to them likewife. So that in either cafe our preaching is vain, and your hearing alfo vain." Page 10th, paragraph the 9th.

O dear Sir, what kind of reasoning, or rather fophiftry is this! Hath not GOD, who hath appointed falvation for a certain number, appointed alfo the preaching of the word, as a means to bring them to it? Does any one hold election in any other fenfe? And if so, how is preaching needless to them that are elected; when the gofpel is defigned by God himself, to be the power of GOD unto their eternal falvation? And fince we know not who are elect, and who reprobate, we are to preach promifcuously to all. For the word may be usefu}, even to the non-elect, in reftraining them from much wickednefs and fin. However, it is enough to excite to the utmost diligence in preaching and hearing, when we confider, that by these means, fome, even as many as the LORD hath ordained to eternal life, fhall certainly be quickened and enabled to believe. And who, that attends, especially with reverence and care, can tell but he may be found of that happy number?

Secondly, you fay, "that it, [the doctrine of election and reprobation] directly tends to deftroy that holiness, which is the end of all the ordinances of GOD." For, (fays the dear · miftaken Mr. Wesley) it wholly takes away thofe first mo- tives to follow after it, fo frequently propofed in fcripture. The hope of future reward, and fear of punishment, the hope of heaven, and the fear of hell, &c." page 11th.

I thought, that one who carries perfection to fuch an exalted pitch as dear Mr. Wefley does, would know, that a true lover of the LORD JESUS CHRIST Wwould strive to be holy for the fake of being holy, and work for CHRIST out of love and

gratitude,

gratitude, without any regard to the rewards of heaven, or fear of hell. You remember, dear Sir, what Scougal fays, "Love's a more powerful motive that does them move." But paffing by this, and granting that rewards and punishments (as they certainly are) may be motives from which a chriftian may be honestly stirred up to act for GOD, how does the doctrine of election destroy thefe motives? Do not the elect know that the more good works they do, the greater will be their reward? And is not that encouragement enough to fet them upon, and cause them to perfevere in working for JESUS CHRIST? And how does the doctrine of election destroy holiness? Whoever preached any other election, than what the Apostle preached, when he said, "Chofen through fanctification of the Spirit?" Nay, is not holiness made a mark of our election by all that preach it? And how then can the doctrine of election destroy holiness?

The inftance which you bring to illuftrate your affertion, indeed, dear Sir, is quite impertinent. For you fay, "If a fick man knows, that he must unavoidably die or unavoidably recover, though he knows not which, it is not reasonable to take any phyfic at all," page 11. Dear Sir, what abfurd reafoning is here? Was you ever fick in your life? If fo, did not the bare probability or poffibility of your recovering, though you knew it was unalterably fixed, that you must live or die, encourage you to take phyfic? For how did you know, but that very phyfic might be the means GoD intended to recover you by? Juft thus it is as to the doctrine of election. I know that it is unalterably fixed, may one fay, that I muft be damned or faved; but fince I know not which, for a certainty, why should I not ftrive, though at present in a state of nature, fince I know not but this striving may be the means GOD has intended to bless, in order to bring me into a state of grace? Dear Sir, confider these things. Make an impartial application, and then judge what little reafon you had to conclude the 10th paragraph, page 12, in thefe words: "So directly does this doctrine tend to fhut the very gate of holiness in general, to hinder unholy men from ever approaching thereto, or striving to enter in thereat."

"As directly," say you paragraph 11, "does the doctrine tend to destroy feveral particular branches of holiness, fuch as

meekness,

own.

meekness, love, &c.". I fhall fay little, dear Sir, in answer to this paragraph. Dear Mr. Wesley perhaps has been difputing with fome warm narrow fpirited men that held election, and then infers, that their warmth and narrowness of spirit, was owing to their principles? But does not dear Mr. Wefley know many dear children of GoD, who are predeftinarians, and yet are meek, lowly, pitiful, courteous, tender-hearted, kind, of a catholic fpirit, and hope to see the most vile and profligate of men converted? And why? because they know GOD faved themselves by an act of his electing love, and they know not but he may have elected those who now feem to be the most abandoned. But, dear Sir, we must not judge of the truth of principles in general, nor of this of election in particular, entirely from the practice of fome that profess to hold them. If fo, I am fure much might be faid against your For I appeal to your own heart, whether or not you have not felt in yourfelf, or obferved in others, a narrow-fpi-. ritedness, and fome difunion of foul refpecting those that hold particular redemption. If so, then according to your own rule, univerfal redemption is wrong, because it deftroys several branches of holinefs, fuch as meeknefs, love, &c. But not to infift upon this, I beg you would obferve, that your inference is entirely set aside by the force of the Apostle's argument, and the language which he exprefly uses, Col. iii. 12, 13. "Put on, therefore, (as the elect of GOD, holy and beloved) bowels of mercy, kindness, humblenefs of mind, meekness, long-fuffering, forbearing one another, and forgiving one another, if any 'man have a quarrel against any, even as CHRIST forgave you, fo alfo do ye." Here we see that the Apostle exhorts them to put on bowels of mercy, kindness, humbleness of mind, meeknefs, long-fuffering, &c. upon this confideration, namely, because they were elect of GOD. And all who have experimentally felt this doctrine in their hearts, feel that thefe graces are the genuine effects of their being elected of GOD.

"

But, perhaps dear Mr. Wesley may be mistaken in this point, and call that paffion, which is only zeal for God's truths. You know, dear Sir, the Apoftle exhorts us to contend earnestly for the faith once delivered to the faints," and therefore you must not condemn all that appear zealous for

the

the doctrine of election, as narrow-fpirited, or perfecutors, because they think it their duty to oppofe you. I am fure, I love you in the bowels of JESUS CHRIST, and think I could lay down my life for your fake; but yet, dear Sir, I cannot help ftrenuously oppofing your errors upon this important subject, because I think you warmly, though not defignedly, oppose the truth, as it is in JESUS. May the LORD remove the fcales of prejudice from off the eyes of your mind, and give you a zeal according to true chriftian knowledge!"

Thirdly, fays your fermon, page 13, paragraph 12, "This doctrine tends to deftroy the comforts of religion, the happinefs of christianity, &c."

But how does Mr. Wefey know this, who never believed election? I believe they who have experienced it, will agree with our 17th article, "That the godly confideration of predeftination, and election in CHRIST, is full of fweet, pleafant, unfpeakable comfort to godly perfons, and fuch as feel in themfelves the working of the Spirit of CHRIST, mortifying the works of the flesh, and their earthly members, and drawing their minds to high and heavenly things, as well because it does greatly establish and confirm their faith of eternal falvation, to be enjoyed through CHRIST, as because it doth fervently kindle their love towards GOD, &c." This plainly fhews, that our godly reformers did not think election deftroyed holiness, or the comforts of religion. As for my own part, this doctrine is my daily fupport: I fhould utterly fink under a dread of my impending trials, was I not firmly perfuaded that GOD has chofen me in CHRIST from before the foundation of the world, and that now being effectually called, he will fuffer none to pluck me out of his almighty hand.

You proceed thus: "This is evident as to all those who believe themselves to be reprobate, or only fufpect or fear it ; all the great and precious promifes are loft to them; they afford them no ray of comfort.”

In anfwer to this, let me obferve, that none living, efpecially none who are defirous of salvation, can know that they are not of the number of GoD's elect. None, but the unconverted, can have any just reason, so much as to fear it. And would dear Mr. Wefley give comfort, or dare you apply the precious promises of the gofpel, being children's bread, to men

in

in a natural ftate, while they continue fo? GOD forbid! What if the doctrine of election and reprobation does put fome upon doubting? So does that of regeneration. But, is not this doubting, a good means to put them upon fearching and striving; and that striving, a good means to make their calling and their election fure. This is one reafon among many others, why I admire the doctrine of election, and am convinced that it fhould have a place in gospel miniftrations, and fhould be infifted on with faithfulness and care. It has a natural tendency to rouze the foul out of its carnal fecurity. And therefore many carnal men cry out against it. Whereas univerfal redemption is a notion fadly adapted to keep the foul in its lethargic fleepy condition, and therefore so many natural men admire and applaud it.

Your 13th, 14th, and 15th paragraphs come next to be confidered. "The witness of the Spirit, (you fay, paragraph 14, p. 14.) experience fhews to be much obstructed by this doctrine." But, dear Sir, whofe experience? Not your own; for in your Journal, from your embarking for Georgia, to your return to London, page the laft, you seem to acknowledge that you have it not, and therefore you are no competent judge in this matter. You must mean then the experience of others. For you say in the fame paragraph, "Even in those who have tafted of that good gift, who yet have foon loft it again, (I fuppofe you mean loft the fense of it again) and fallen back into doubts and fears and darkness, even horrible darkness that might be felt, &c." Now, as to the darkness of desertion, was not this the case of JESUS CHRIST himself, after he had received an unmeasurable unction of the Holy Ghoft? Was not his foul exceeding forrowful, even unto death, in the garden? And was he not furrounded with an horrible darkness, even a darkness that might be felt, when on the crofs he cryed out, "My GOD! My GOD! why haft thou forfaken me?" And that all his followers are liable to the fame, is it not evident from fcripture? For, fays the Apostle, "He was tempted in all things like unto his brethren, that he might be able to fuccour those that are tempted." And is not their liableness thereunto, confiftent with that conformity to him in fuffering, which his members are to bear? Why then fhould perfons falling

I