Page images
PDF
EPUB

work.

Secondly, Let it be considered, Whether such an election will consist with Dr. Priestley's own scheme of Necessity. This scheme supposes, that all virtue, as well as every thing else, is necessary. Now, whence arose the necessity of it? It was not self-originated, nor accidental: it must have been established by the Deity. And then it will follow, that, if God elect any man on account of his foreseen virtue, he must have elected him on account of that which he had determined to give him: but this, as to the origin of things, amounts to the same thing as unconditional election.

As to men's taking liberty to sin, from the consideration of their being among the number of the elect; that, as we have seen already, is what no man can do with safety or consistency; seeing he can have no evidence on that subject, but what must arise from a contrary spirit and conduct. But suppose it were otherwise, an objection of this sort would come with an ill grace from Dr. Priestley, who encourages all mankind not to fear, since God has made them all for unlimited ultimate happiness, and (whatever be their conduct in the present life) to ultimate unlimited happiness they will all doubtless come.t

Upon the whole, let those who are inured to close thinking, judge whether Dr. Priestley's own views of Philosophical Necessity do not include the leading principles of Calvinism? But, should he insist upon the contrary, then let it be considered, whether he must not contradict himself, and maintain a system which, by his own confession, is less friendly to piety and humility than that which he opposes. "The essential difference," he says, "between the two schemes is this: the Necessarian believes his own dispositions and actions are the necessary and sole means of his present and future happiness; so that, in the most proper sense of the words, it depends entirely on himself, whether he be virtuous or vicious, happy or miserable. The Calvinist

* See also those scriptures which represent election as the cause of faith and holiness; particularly Ephes. i. 3, 4. John. vi. 37. Rom. viii. 22. 30. Acts xiii. 48. 1 Pet. i. 1. Rom. ix. 15, 16. But, if it be the cause it cannot be the effect of them.

+ Doctrine of Necessity, pp. 128, 129.

maintains, on the other hand, that so long as a man is unregenerate, all his thoughts, words, and actions are necessarily sinful, and in the act of regeneration he is altogether passive."* We have seen already, that on the scheme of Dr. Priestley, as well as that of the Calvinists, men, in the first turning of the bias of their hearts, must be passive. But allow it to be otherwise; allow what the Doctor elsewhere teaches, that "a change of disposition is the effect, and not the cause of a change of conduct ;" and that it depends entirely on ourselves, whether we will thus change our conduct, and, by these means, our dispositions, and so be happy for ever all this, if others of his observations be just, instead of promoting piety and virtue, will have a contrary tendency. In the same performance, Dr. Priestley acknowledges, that "those who, from a principle of religion, ascribe more to God and less to man than other persons, are men of the greatest elevation of piety."‡ But, if so, it will follow, that the essential difference between the necessarianism of Socinians and that of Calvinists, (seeing it consists in this, that the one makes it depend entirely upon a man's self, whether he be virtuous or vicious, happy or miserable; and the other, upon God;) is in favour of the latter. Those who consider men as depending entirely upon God for virtue and happiness, ascribe more to God, and less to man than the other, and so, according to Dr. Priestley, are "men of the greatest elevation of piety." They on the other hand, who suppose men to be dependent entirely upon themselves for these things, must, consequently, have less of piety, and more of "heathen stoicism;" which, as the same writer, in the same treatise, observes, "allows men to pray for external things, but admonishes them, that, as for virtue, it is our own, and must arise from within ourselves, if we have it at all."§

But let us come to facts. If, as Dr. Priestley says, there be "something in our system, which, if carried to its just consequences, would lead us to the most abandoned wickedness;" it might be expected, one should think, that a loose, dissipated, and abandoned life would be a more general thing among the Calvinists than p. 107.

* Doctrine of Necessity, p. 152-154. + Ibid p. 156. + Ibid § Ibid p. 67.

among their opponents. This seems to be a consequence of which he feels the force, and therefore discovers an inclination to make it good. In answer to the question, "Why those persons who hold these opinions are not abandoned to all wickedness, when they evidently lay them under so little restraint?" he answers, "This is often the case of those who pursue these principles to their just and fatal consequences;" adding, "for it is easy to prove, that the Antinomian is the only consistent absolute predestinarian."* That there are persons who profess the doctrine of absolute predestination, and who, from that consideration, may indulge themselves in the greatest enormities, is admitted. Dr. Priestley, however, allows, that these are "only such persons whose minds are previously depraved;" that is, wicked men, who turn the grace of God into lasciviousness. Nor are such examples "often" to be seen among us; and, where they are, it is commonly in such people who make no serious pretence to personal religion, but who have just so much of predestination in their heads, as to suppose that all things will be as they are appointed to be, and therefore that it is in vain to strive,-just so much as to look at the end, and overlook the means; which is as wide of Calvinism, as it is of Socinianism. This may be the absolute predestination which Dr. Priestley means; namely, a predestination to eternal life, let our conduct be ever so impure; and a predestination to eternal death, let it be ever so holy: and, if so, it is granted that the Antinomian is the only consistent believer in it: but then it might, with equal truth, be added, that he is the only person who believes in it at all. The Calvinistic doctrine of predestination supposes, that holiness of heart and life are as much the object of divine appointment as future happiness, and that this connexion can never be broken. To prove that the Antinomian is the only consistent believer in such a predestination as this, may not be so easy a task as barely to assert it. I cannot imagine it would be very easy, especially for Dr. Priestley; seeing he acknowledges, that "the idea of every thing being predestinated from all eternity is no objection to prayer, because all means are appointed as well

* Considerations on Difference of Opinion, III.

and who, many of them, sacrificed their earthly all for his name, have lived and died in the belief of the deity and atonement of Christ. Our opponents often speak of these doctrines being embraced by the apostate church of Rome; but they say little of those who, during the long period of her usurpation, bore testimony for God. The Waldenses, who inhabited the vallies of Piedmont, and the Albigenses, who were aftewards scattered almost all over Europe, are allowed, I believe, on all hands, to have preserved the true religion in those darkest of times: and it is thought by some expositors, that these are the people who are spoken of in the twelfth chapter of the Revelation, under the representation of a woman, to whom were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness-and there be nourished for a time, from the face of the serpent. It was here that true religion was maintained, and sealed by the blood of thousands from age to age, when all the rest of the Christian world were wondering after the beast. And as to the doctrines which they held, they were much the same as ours. Among the adversaries to the church of Rome, it is true, there might be men of different opinions. Arius and others may be supposed to have had their followers in those ages; but the body of the people called Waldenses are not to be reckoned as such on the contrary, the principles which they professed were, for substance, the same with those embraced afterwards by the Reformed Churches; as is abundantly manifest by several of their catechisms and confessions of faith, which have been transmitted to our times.

Mr. Lindsey, in his Apology, has given a kind of history of those who opposed the doctrine .of the Trinity; but they make a poor figure during the above long and dark period, in which, if ever, a testimony for God was needed. He speaks of "churches and sects, as well as individuals, of that description, in the twelfth century:" and there might be such. But can he produce any evidence of their having so much virtue as to make any considerable sacrifices for God? Whatever were their number, according to Mr. Lindsey's own account, from that time till the Reformation, (a period of three or four hundred years, and during which the Waldenses and the Wickliffites were sacrificing every thing for the pres

ervation of a good conscience,) they "were driven into corners and silence:"* that is, there is no testimony upon record which they bore, or any account of their having so much virtue in them as to oppose, at the expense of either life, liberty, or property, the prevailing religion of the times.

Mr. Lindsey speaks of the famous Abelard:" but surely he must have been wretchedly driven for want of that important article, or he would not have ascribed it to a man who, as a late writer observes, "could with equal facility explain Ezekiel's prophecies, and compose amorous sonnets for Heloise; and was equally free to unfold the doctrine of the Trinity, and ruin the peace of a family, by debauching his patron's neice." Mr. Lindsey also in the Appendix to his Farewell Sermon to the Congregation in Essex-street, lately published, holds up the piety of Servetus, by giving us one of his prayers addressed to Jesus Christ; in which he expresses his full persuasion, that he was under a divine impulse to write against his proper divinity. Surely, if Socinian piety had not been very scarce, Mr. Lindsey would not have been under the necessity of exhibiting the effusions of idolatry and enthusiasm, as examples of it.

Religion will be allowed to have some influence in the forming of a national character, especially that of the common people, among whom, if any where, it generalty prevails. Now, if we look at those nations where Calvinism has been most prevalent, it will be found, I believe, that they have not been distinguished by their immorality, but the reverse. Geneva, the Seven United Provinces, Scotland, and North America, (with the two last of which we may be rather better acquainted than with the rest,) might be alleged as instances of this assertion. With respect to Scotland, though other sentiments are said to have lately gained ground with many of the clergy; yet Calvinism is known to be generally prevalent among the serious part of the people. And, as to their national character, you seldom know an intelligent Englishman to have visited that country, without being struck with the pecul*Chap. I. p. 34.

+ Mr. Robinson's Plea for the Divinity of Christ.

[blocks in formation]
« PreviousContinue »