fluence or virtue to purchase heaven; but that it is ne ceffary in order of means (as they fpeak) towards the poffeffion of it; in regard that God requires holiness in every believer, as the means of preparing and making him meet for poffeffing heaven. So that the Affembly's fenfe is plainly this, That as Chrift's righteousness is neceffary in the way of merit and purchase for obtaining the believer's right and title to heaven, fo holiness in a believer (which alfo Chrift hath purchased) is neceffary in the way of preparation and meetnefs for qualifying him for the poffeffion of heaven. Now, we fee, it is God himself that makes it so neceffary, by fixing an infeparable connection betwixt holiness and happiness, declaring, Heb. xii. 14, that'" without holiness no man fhall fee the Lord." Wherefore, that our brethren after all this should pafs fuch a fevere cenfure against the Affembly's doctrine, as opening a wide door for Arminian and Socinian errors, is very unjust, and unbecoming the duty of children to their mother. And it is yet more fo, for them to affert (as they do in the fame place, p. 41. without any proof for it) that Arminian and Socinian errrors have actually overflown this church like a flood; whereas they may fee a late act of Affembly, as well as older acts, condemning all Arminian and Socinian errors, viz. act 7th Affembly 1736. Had they charged fome members of the church with fuch errors, the fault had been lefs; but to affert that a flood of Arminian and Socinian errors do overflow the church herself, as if all were covered with them, is a charge most terrible and shocking! I scarce have any words to answer to it, except to regret that any of the reverend and dear brethren, whom I muft ftill regard, should allow themselves to go on in fuch a Latitudinarian way of fpeaking and calumniating their brethren. Some may think to excufe themfelves, that it is from zeal for a good caufe, and a defign to promote the interest of Chrift, that they fpeak fo reproachfully of other minifters: but let fuch remember what Job faid to his three friends when they took the fame courfe, Job xiii. 7. "Will you fpeak wickedly for God, and talk deceitfully for him?" After all, however ill-grounded this charge

3 R

1

be, yet, feeing it comes from a body of men within the land, the church is called to take fome course to vindicate herself and her doctrine, though it were no more but to maintain her credit among foreign churches. Surely fuch a bold charge from our brethren, with other confiderations, fhould at length roufe us, and prevail with the General Affembly to fall in with the defire of many minifters and prefbyteries, to give a teftimony against thefe errors which abound in the land, to declare their abhorrence of them, and to give warning to all the minifters, preachers, and members of this church, to guard carefully against them, and against every appearance, or approach of error.

There is not room here to notice any other thing in the brethren's act concerning the doctrine of grace, in which though there be many precious truths, yet there are alfo fome affertions too loofe, unguarded, and even bordering too near the doctrine called Antinomian; which fhould be carefully avoided, as well as that called Neonomian. But, notwithstanding of all these uncharitable fallies, unguarded affertions, and extravagant heights, which our brethrens defire to fupport their interest against the established church may drive them to at prefent; there is ground to expect, that, after calm and cool thinking, they will not approve themselves in these things, but will come at length to a more charitable temper, and fhew regard to others whom they fee to be found in the faith, and zealous for the doctrine of grace as well as themselves. And confidering our brethrens great refolution, and their zeal for the purity of doctrine, I would fain hope God will yet honour them to be useful for maintaining his truths, and make them a witneffing remnant for Calvinift principles, and the doctrine of grace, against all kinds of Pelagian and Arminian errors, which this backfliding age feem too much inclined to fall in with. Upon which account I ftill with well to them.

There is also joined with the forefaid act, another act for renewing the covenants national and folemn league, with a new covenaut of the brethrens framing, in which fome things might be noticed: not that I quarrel the

duty

duty, itfelf; No: I approve of covenanting work, whether it be national, prefbyterial or congregational, when rightly managed and gone about; and I pray earneftly for a covenanting frame and difpofition to the whole land. I likewife own, there are several excellent things in the brethrens covenant, which we are all bound to by the word of God and our national engage. ments; and alfo in their Confefion of fins, there are ma ny evils enumerate, which all ranks amongst us ought to be deeply humbled for before the Lord: but, alas ! they have marred their Confeffion, by throwing into it feveral things which either are doubtful, or elfe plain mistakes or falfhoods; and yet all these must be confeffed and condemned as fins and evils, as if they were the most plain and undoubted facts, and that by a folemn oath For their confeflion of fins (which is very long) is adopted and fworn to in their covenant. Yea, the Affociate Brethren have carried this matter to a prodigious height, by making an act, dated at Edinburgh, February 14th 1744, wherein they agree and determine, that the fwearing the forefaid covenant fhall be the term of ministerial communion with them, and likewife the term of Chriftian communion to the people, with refpect to their partaking of the seals of God's covenant. A furprising act indeed! This now oath and covenant of theirs is called in it, not a term, but the term of Christian communion, as if it were the only qualification for admiffion required, and as if it answered for the want of others; and indeed there is 3 not another qualification befides fwearing this covenant, mentioned in their act. Now, by this new act, let a man be never so well qualified according to the terms Chrift hath determined in his word, yet, if he have not freedom to go in to this term of the brethrens making, he must be excluded both from minifterial and Chrif tian communion; that is, he must neither be owned as minister of Chrift, nor allowed any of the Childrens bread, fo far as their authority can go. Wherefore I cannot but teftify against this act, as framing new terms and conditions of access to the benefits of Chrift's pur

chafe

chafe, for which the framers have no warrant in God's word; and therefore it must be a manifeft ufurpation and incroachment upon the Headship of the King of Zion, and an infringement upon that precious article of our Creed, the Communion of Saints which is too much for any judicatory or power on earth to adventure upon. Though the forefaid oath were in things indifferent or lawful, yet it were unwarrantable to impose it as a term of communion, but much more when it is in things finful, doubtful or falfe.

Quest. How do you make it appear that the brethrens new oath and covenant (which they make the term of communion) is in itfelf finful?

Anf. Becaufe by this oath they adopt and approve a Confeffion of fins prefixed to it, and fwear by the great name of the Lord our God, with their right hand lifted up to the Lord, that they fhall teftify against the evils named in that confeffion, fundry of which are false in fact, calumnious, unjuft and uncharitable; and yet, by the forefaid folemn oath, the takers own them to be real, juft and true. As for inftance, they fwear that the General Affembly difmiffed Profeffor Simfon without any cenfure or exprefs teftimony against his errors, p. 104. which is falfe. Also, they fwear that the taking the oath of abjuration is a national fin, p. 103 which they cannot make out. They fwear that Alfembly 1736 adopted Profeffor Campbell's error against felf love, p. 106. which is falfe. They fwear that Affembly 1738 condemned the brethrens teftimony in bulk, p. 107. which is not fact. They fwear that Af fembly 1739 condemned their Declinature, as containing nothing but groundlefs prejudices, p. 107. which is not fact. They fwear that the kind reception of Mr. Whitefield hath increased the fins of the land, and is a denying any particular from of church-government as being of Divine inftitution, p. 109. which is falfe. They fwear that a fcheme is now laid for uniting par ties of all denominations in church-communion, in a way deftructive of any teftimony for Chrift's declarative glory, p. 110. which they can never make appear.

that

They fwear that the bleffed work in the Weft of Scotland is a delufion, p. 110. though it hath been demonstrate to have the plain Scripture tokens of a glorious work of the Spirit of God. They alfo by their oath condemn all the old perfecuted Prefbyterian minifters, who accepted of the liberty of preaching the gofpel, under king James's toleration, as involving the land in heinous guilt: Which is a most rash and uncharitable cenfure of thefe worthies, who were honoured to be great fufferers for truth, were men of eminent piety and tenderness of confcience, were fignally owned of God in their miniftry during that liberty, and never faw cause to repent of their accepting of it to their dying hour. And now, after these glorified faints and fufferers have for many years been triumphing before the throne of the Lamb, a heavy blot and flur must be cast. upon their memory by a folemn oath; and they, who have not freedom to join in that calumnious oath, must be denied Chriftian communion: This indeed feems to be an act exceeding hard and tyrannical. Alas! there are thousands who are appointed to fwear this oath, and the things above-mentioned, befides many other things in it, who cannot say they know any thing of the truth of them from their own proper knowledge, but only have them by hearfay, or by information from others and yet they must fwear to the truth of them as fully as if they had been eye or ear-witneffes of them, or had read all the hiftories concerning them. Now, what is this but to make people fwear rafhly or inconfiderately, or upon implicit faith? which is contrary to the Bible, that requires us to "fwear in truth, judgment, and righteoufnefs," Jer. iv. 2. and alfo contrary to our Confeilion of Faith, which declareth, chap. 22. "That whofoever taketh an oath, muft avouch nothing therein, but what he is fully perfuaded is the truth." O that God'in mercy would open the eyes of those who impofe this oath, and those who are drawn in or intend to take it, that they may bethink themfeives, repent and proceed no further! For becaufe of fwearing the land mourneth" already, and there is no need to add to the grounds of this mourning.