Section 4: Reconciling Sentiments

Now that I may proceed in this reconciling Work, I shall follow this Method.

1. Represent the different Apprehensions and different Language of Men in Preaching the Gospel.

2. Mention some of the Causes or Occasions of these different Apprehensions.

3. Give a Hint or two of the Conveniences and Inconveniences of each of these Ways of Preaching.

4. Show the Safety and Sufficiency of each, with regard to Salvation.

5. Conclude with a Word or two of Request or humble Advice.

First, Let me represent the various Apprehensions of Men in those Matters. But here I would be understood to describe only the moderate Men among those who are called Calvinists, and those that are named New-Methodists. As for the High-Flyers, or extreme and rigid Party-Men of either Side, I leave them out in my present Account, while I mention the little Differences among the Men of Moderation, among whom I reckon far the greatest part of the Protestant Dissenters in England, to be at this time, and I hope I am not mistaken in this Opinion.

Some when they read or pronounce the Words Law or Gospel, take them generally in their loosest and largest Sense, and so they unite their Names, and make them consistent together. Others are ready to take those Words in their limited and proper Sense, and then they divide them into very distinct Things, and will not allow their Names so promiscuous a Use.

Some Ministers love to explain the Gospel in a more legal way, and describe it as a conditional Covenant that requires Agreements and Restipulation from Men. They insist much on vowing and resolving to submit to the Commands of Christ, and with a lively Zeal and powerful Eloquence, they enforce the Duties of Repentance, sincere Obedience, Watchfulness and Perseverance. And show how much the Promises of Life, Heaven and Glory, Peace and daily Pardon depend on these Qualifications and Performances, pronouncing the terrible Threatenings of Damnation on the Impenitent, the Unbelieving, and the Disobedient, to awaken the secure Sinner, and stir up the slothful Christian. Others delight more in representing the Gospel as a Declaration of Grace and free Promise of Salvation to Sinners; a Promise of pardoning Mercy, Sanctifying Grace, and everlasting Glory to sinful and perishing Criminals, and invite Sinners to receive all this Grace, to accept of this Salvation, and to trust in this Saviour, according to the Offers of the Gospel. When its Truths are revealed, the first Sort choose to say, that the Moral Law of Nature in the Hand of Christ, commands us to believe them. When its Duties are mentioned, they rather say, the Law of Nature in the Hand of Christ requires Obedience to them. And that while the Gospel in its proper Language promises Salvation to Believers, the Moral Law, or Law of Nature, binds Condemnation on the Unbeliever, and the Impenitent; but the pure Gospel is all Grace and Mercy. And they preach the Law of Works in the Perfection of its Demands and Terror of its Penalties, to drive Sinners for Refuge to the Gospel. And they press the Duties of Holiness on their Hearers from a comfortable Sense of their Deliverance from Hell, and from Gratitude to Christ, as Evidences of their Faith, as Preparatives for Heaven, and as necessary, both in the Nature of Things, and by divine Appointment in order to our final Happiness.

Those that follow the conditional Way of preaching the Gospel, describe the chief Act of Faith, as a Consent of Will to submit themselves to him in all his Offices. A Consent to take him for their Prophet, and Resolution to make all his Instructions their Rule and Guide. A Consent to take him for their Priest, to make their Peace with God, and obtain their Pardon. A Consent to own him for their King, and promise sincere Obedience to him as their Lord in all his Commands; but still with an humble Dependence on his Spirit and Grace, to enable them to fulfill these Resolutions.

Those that preach the Gospel in its more free and absolute Form describe Faith in Christ as the Flight of a poor, guilty, perishing Sinner to an only Refuge. And they make its chief Act to consist in a trusting or committing the Soul, ignorant, guilty, hard-hearted and sinful as it is, into the Hand of Christ, with a sincere Desire to have it enlightened by him as their Prophet, pardoned and reconciled to God through him as their Priest, and subdued to all willing Obedience to him, and by him, as their Lord and King; humbly expecting that he will do all this for them. And this is in their Opinion the best way of addressing themselves to poor Sinners, who find themselves so dark, so sinful, so feeble and inconstant in their best Obedience and Purposes, that they dare not resolve upon any thing, and can hardly say, they heartily vow and promise a Submission to Christ in all Things. But that they can better apply to him in a way of Trust and Dependence, humbly desiring and hoping he will work all this in them by his free Grace, while they wait upon him in his appointed Means.

The one are ever persuading their Hearers to bind their Souls to God, by solemn Vows and Covenants, even in particular Duties, believing this to be the most effectual Way to guard against every Sin, and best secure their Obedience and Constancy under every Temptation. The other are afraid to urge so much vowing and resolving on the Consciences of Men, lest they thereby lead them into a legal Frame, under a Spirit of Bondage, and lest their Consciences be more troublesomely entangled and ensnared after every broken Vow, and their Faith and Hope be too much discouraged; that Faith and Hope which ought to be the constant Springs of their Obedience. They advise their People, therefore, rather to commit their Souls afresh continually to the Care of Christ, as 2 Timothy 1, to believe he accepts them, and to walk watchfully, without any particular, formal, and explicit Vows. Though it must be confessed, that with regard to Christians of different Tempers and Temptations, both these Methods have had very good Success.

Some are Sons of Thunder, Boanerges, and frighten the Profane out of their Security, by many Terrors that are written against those who obey not the Gospel. And they enforce Obedience on the Consciences of Believers, chiefly by way of Rewards and Punishments. The other are like Barnabas, Sons of Consolation, and persuade Sinners to accept of the offered Grace, by all the Allurements of the Compassion of God, and by the dying Love of a Redeemer, beseeching them to be reconciled. And they draw out the Hearts of Believers to Repentance, and lead them with the Spirit of Power and Love to an easy and connatural Obedience by the Constraints of the Love of Christ, and by a humble Persuasion of their Acceptance in him unto eternal Life.

In short, the one dwell most upon the Duties of the Gospel in their Sermons, in order to qualify their Hearers for the Privileges. The other insist most on the Privileges and Comforts of the Gospel, in order to invite and allure them to fulfill the Duties, and to give their Hearers Strength and Delight in the Discharge of these Duties.

I would not here be understood, as though I supposed either of those Ministers never to mingle Mercy and Terror, Precepts, Penalties, and Promises. For it must be acknowledged, there are some Persons of each Opinion, in whom all the Talents of a Preacher happily unite, and they honourably sustain both Characters, the Sons of Thunder, and the Sons of Consolation. And all of them make Conscience of publishing to Men both Divine Grace and their Duty, all of them preach Repentance toward God, and Faith in our Lord Jesus Christ. But those who have chosen one Scheme of Divinity for their own, more generally bend their Ministry the one way, and those who have chosen the other preach more usually in the other way.

All our Protestant Confessions of Faith, and I would persuade myself that our Ministers, at least among the Nonconformists, agree that, though Duties are required to be performed by us, yet the Grace that is necessary to perform them is given freely to us. That though Faith and Repentance, and sincere Obedience, are indispensably necessary, in order to our final Salvation, yet they are not the justifying Righteousness upon account of which our Sins are pardoned, and eternal Life is bestowed upon us. That the Obedience and Death, and Intercession of Christ, as a proper High-Priest and Sacrifice, are the only Foundation of our Acceptance with God, and ground of all our Hopes. And that from him, as a Head of Influence, we must receive all Grace, whereby we are conducted safe to Glory.

Both Sides agree that we are to work out our Salvation with Fear and Trembling, but that it is God who works in us to will and to do, Philippians 2:12, 13. That we are saved by the Faith of the Son of God, and not by Works, lest any should boast; yet that we must also be created in Christ Jesus unto good Works, for God has appointed that we should walk in them, Ephesians 2:8, 9, 10.

2. In the next place, that I may make a little further Apology for those that are humble, honest and sincere on both Sides, I would consider the various Causes or Occasions, whence different Apprehensions of Men about these things may arise. And here we shall find poor frail Mankind, almost universally born and brought up in Prejudices to some Party or other, encompassed with thousand things that tend to influence the Judgment, and incline it insensibly toward some particular Opinion. So that a whole Scheme of Doctrines built upon a pure and zealous and laborious Search after Truth, without any manner of Bias or Corruption on any Side, is scarce to be found in human Nature. There is no Man alive free from these Weaknesses. Happy the Mind that has the fewest of them.

Nam vitiis nemo sine nascitur, optimus ille est Qui minimis urgetur. Horace.

It may be these Ministers themselves, who differ in Opinion, are of very different natural Complexions and Tempers, and this has a secret Influence in swaying their Mind, their Studies, their Judgment and Ministry one way or the other. Though all those who agree in natural Temper, are not always of the same Opinion.

Or it may be, they had an Education under Teachers and Tutors of different Sentiments, or have met with Books of different Principles and Opinions, which have made a strong and lasting Impression upon their Minds, and engaged them betimes into one Party, before they had Strength of Judgment to determine their Opinions upon just Arguments.

Some Persons in order to settle their Judgments in these Points, have studied more and prayed less, and some have prayed more and studied too little. And some on both Sides have studied hard, and prayed much, and sought earnestly the Instructions of the blessed Spirit, and yet have fallen into different ways of thinking in those parts of Christianity which are not of Necessity to Salvation, and have been suffered to follow different Forms of Speech for wise Purposes in the Providence of God.

Some little Accident or Occurrence of Life, or some sudden start of Thought, while the Balance of the Judgment was in Suspense, has perhaps given it a turn to one Side or the other, and perhaps determined it for their whole Lives.

Some have happened to form their Set of Doctrines at first more by their own reasoning Powers, and drawn their Schemes of Religion from what they imagine the most natural Connection, the Necessity or Congruity of things, and they call the Bible only to their Assistance, and seek proper Texts to confirm their own System. Others draw the whole Scheme of Doctrines from a constant and intent Application to the holy Scripture, and call in Reason to their Assistance, only in order to understand and methodize those Doctrines. And though the first way of Study in Matters of the Christian Religion, is by no means to be justified, yet too many have unhappily practiced it. And though the latter way is much to be preferred, and most likely to come near the Truth, yet it is not followed by all who preach the Gospel. And no wonder then that Ministers may differ in their Thoughts.

Such is the weakness of human nature, that as some of us form and build up our first opinions upon very slight and insufficient grounds, and there are many who persist in them, and strongly maintain them without an honest re-examination, so others of us change our opinions upon reasons as slight and feeble and insufficient. Some persons having been perplexed with one or two great difficulties in that scheme of sentiments which they have professed, and being unable to grapple with them, have by swift or slow degrees, abandoned that whole scheme, and fell in with another, which perhaps has equal or greater difficulties in it; never considering that the whole system of Christianity, with all its appendices, is so vast, and our view of things is so narrow, and our knowledge so imperfect, that a sharp disputant may push some parts of all our human schemes into great perplexities, even such as human reason can hardly solve; and perhaps God alone knows how to reconcile them, in whose single view all things lie for ever fair and open, perfectly consistent, and are comprehended at once.

Or it may be the way and method of divine grace in the first conversion of the one and the other was very different. Some were wrought upon at first more by legal methods, and the terrors of the law of God, and they find them still to have the greatest and most powerful influence on their consciences; others from their wild wanderings were brought home to Christ by gentle discoveries of divine love in the death of a Savior. Some, like the Jailer, Acts 16:26-30, have had their consciences shaken as with an earthquake, they came in trembling and crying out, What must I do to be saved? Others had their hearts softly opened, as was the heart of Lydia, 14th verse of the same chapter, and they received the word of grace and the gospel; and they find the work of God carried on upon their own souls, still by the most evangelical methods. Now a man's own early experiences in the things of religion, will naturally have a great influence on his opinions; and God in his infinite wisdom hath ordered it should be so, that persons of every sort and temper, and humor, young and old, sinners and saints, under every kind of temptation, might meet with some ministers of the gospel, and some sermons and writings to suit their taste, to hit their case, and be the most effectual means of their salvation.

The third thing I proposed here was to show briefly, that as each of these ways of preaching have their several advantages, so each of them have their special inconveniences too, if they are perpetually and only insisted on, unless well managed by the extraordinary prudence of the preacher.

The one aims most at the glory of divine equity, in rewards and punishments, and contends much for the sincerity of God in all his transactions with men. The other seems to look most at honoring the sovereignty, the riches and freedom of divine grace, and God's infinite condescension and compassion to sinful creatures.

One seems to lead Christians more to a strict scrupulosity in every action, in order to make up the undoubted evidences of a gospel-perfection, which they call sincerity, and thereby to raise their hopes of escaping hell and obtaining heaven; it drives the soul to duties, and maintains a trembling watchfulness; but is in danger of governing it by a spirit of bondage, and of keeping our faith and comfort very low. The other leads to equal holiness, or perhaps to higher degrees of it by the delightful constraints of a filial love, by the sweet influences of divine consolation; but there may be some danger of encouraging negligence and presumption, and that not only in sinners, but even sometimes in believers themselves, if not wisely managed and guarded.

Upon this subject I might here give my pen into the hand of some sprightly advocate of each party, and have forty more pages written for me speedily, without any thought or labor of mine; this would swell my essay up finely, and enlarge it to a volume, with many a name of Arminian and Antinomian dealt about freely on the opposite opinions. For the supposed advantages and disadvantages on both sides, are frequently mentioned as arguments of each party against the other; but I shall not think necessary to insist longer on them here for that very reason. And though these sort of moral arguments drawn from the design and tendency of things, may be justly used on both sides, and on both sides have some degree of truth and force in them, yet both may not have equal force. Nor do I think it inconsistent with my design in this reconciling discourse, to declare my own sentiments. For a man may be very happy in making peace between two quarreling neighbors, though he is well persuaded that one has the better side of the cause, and in a friendly manner expresses it too.

I will not be ashamed then to declare, that in my opinion, one method of preaching the gospel has greater advantages in it, and fewer inconveniences than the other; supposing still that we guard against extremes: that one seems more connatural to the genius of the gospel, as it is distinct from a covenant of works, and seems to suit better with the most glorious designs of divine grace. My own experience in the things of religion, my observations of some others, and my diligent search of the holy scriptures (I hope not without divine aid) has led my thoughts rather to favor and practice the more evangelical method of preaching most frequently. But another person who follows a different way may tell me, he came by his turn of thoughts the same way as I did by mine, and my charity demands that I believe it. Yet while both sides maintain those great truths, wherein I mentioned the general agreement of our Protestant confessions of faith, I cannot conceive that either of them can lead sinners astray from salvation.

And that is the fourth proposal I made, (namely) to show the real safety of each of these methods in ministering the gospel both to saints and sinners, and that is evident, because they agree in the most necessary and essential parts of it. Both of them preach grace and duty, justification by Christ, and sanctification by the Holy Spirit, and teach men all that is of necessity to be believed and practiced in order to salvation.

If two men sitting under a different ministry are brought sincerely to repent of all sin, and to love God with all their heart, can I imagine that one shall be damned, because he tells me he repents in obedience to the commands of the gospel? Or the other, because he does it in obedience to the moral law in the hands of Christ, supposing the pure gospel to have no commands in it? If two sinners are persuaded to accept of Christ Jesus for their Lord and Savior, can I ever believe, that God will condemn one of them, because he first resolved to obey Christ as his Lord, and thereby took encouragement to trust in him as a Savior? Or that God will punish the other for ever, because he first trusted in Christ as a Savior, and thereby found his will sweetly inclined to submit to him as his Lord? Where all duties required in the gospel are sincerely performed, can I ever be persuaded men shall be ever sent to hell, merely because they do not agree about the logical relations that these duties have to one another, or to their salvation, while both agree to lay the Lord Jesus Christ, and his righteousness, or his obedience and death, as the only foundation of all their hopes?

If either of these ways of preaching the gospel were so contrary to scripture, and such abominable and pernicious errors in the sight of God as angry and quarreling men of both sides represent them, I cannot persuade myself that God would so far have favored both, in these instances following (namely).

I. If either of these ways of preaching were so criminal and dangerous as some have supposed, I cannot think the Spirit of God would have used those expressions in scripture, which sometimes seem to represent the covenant of grace in one form, and sometimes in another; nor that he would have suffered the penmen of his holy word to have given occasion to such different sentiments on this subject among his favorites, his holy worshippers, and those who have sought his directions and his grace with much importunity and perseverance.

II. If either of these ways of preaching were so dangerous as some have imagined, I cannot believe that the blessed God would ever have attended both these ways of preaching with his blessing, so far as to convert great numbers of sinners by them, and edify his saints; but it is sufficiently evident that ministers of very different apprehensions in these points have been owned and blessed of God to the conversion, comfort and salvation of many souls.

III. If either of these representations of the gospel were so very dangerous, I cannot imagine, that persons of good understanding, of deep learning, of large knowledge in religion, of long experience, and of great holiness, should maintain their opinions in these things so very different to their lives' end, if their salvation were in such extreme hazard thereby, however in the infancy of their Christianity they might have received and embraced these different apprehensions. Surely if these points had been of so dreadful and dangerous importance on either side, God would have granted a greater union in sentiment to so great a number of his children, who labored in sincere inquiry after truth, constant and fervent prayer for the teaching of the blessed Spirit, and were truly zealous for his honor. Divine goodness surely would not have suffered such multitudes of holy souls on either side to continue always in mistakes of so terrible consequence as some disputers have represented them.