Burdenfome pharifaic rites, and who impofed them upon others, excluded themfelves from the liberal provifions of the gofpel; which requires nothing but fuch a faith in Chrift and his doctrine, as will influence men to the practice of univerfal virtue.

Mr. W. p. 124, cenfures fome whom he calls. “ nominal chriftians,” for “advifing finners to amend "their ways as a preparative for their coming to "Chrift, rather than exhort them to throw them"felves with deep proftration at the foot of the "crofs." He does not feem to have recollected, that the advice of the apostle Peter, Acts iii. 13. to men in fimilar circumstances, and even to the actual murderers of Jefus, was, "Repent, and be con"verted, that your fins may be blotted out." But perhaps St. Peter was "a nominal chriftian," and "ignorant of the gofpel;" and, truly, it is more than probable that he was totally ignorant of the gospel of Mr. W. At any rate, it is fafer and better, in a cafe of fuch moment, to follow the advice and example of an apofile, than to adopt the unfcriptural jargon of modern fyflems, which, whatever appearance of humility and fancity it may affume, when it is thoroughly examined, will be found to convey as little meaning as "the founding brafs, or the tinkling cymbal."

I am, Madam, &c.

LETTER

LETTER XI..

Strictness of practical Chriftianity.

Rational Religion not unfavourable to Virtue. Obfervations on Chriftian Idolatry.

MADAM,

I SO much approve of the general strain of what Mr. Wilberforce advances upon "the strictness of "true practical chriftianity," in the firft fection of his fourth chapter, that I am forry to meet with any thing from which I am obliged to diffent, and flill more that any remarks should have efcaped from his pen which are open to just animadversion.

I entirely agree with Mr. W. p. 147," That it "is the grand effential practical characteristic of "true chriftians, that they have renounced and ab"jured all other masters, and have cordially and "unrefervedly devoted themfelves to God;"-that this, p. 148, "must be the master principle to which every other must be fubordinate;"-that "they "deliberately purpose, that, fo far as they may be “able, the grand governing maxim of their future "lives fhall be, to do all to the glory of God;"that, p. 150, "the example of Chrift is their pat tern, and the word of God their rule;"--that "their determination to obey the will and to cultivate the favour of God, hath its foundations in a

"deep

deep and humiliating fenfe of his exalted majesty "and infinite power;"-but, p. 151, that "these aw

ful impreffions are relieved and ennobled by an ad"miring fenfe of the infinite perfections and infinite "amiableness of the divine character, animated by

a confiding though humble hope of his fatherly "kindness and protection, and quickened by the "grateful recollection of immenfe and continually "increasing obligations. This is the chriftian love "of God; a love compounded of admiration, of

preference, of hope, of truft, of joy, chastised by "reverential awe, and wakeful with continual gra ❝titude."

I confefs that, when I read this just and animating account of the affection due from all his creatures to the Supreme Being, I can hardly believe it was written by the fame author, who a few pages before has represented the fame Being as having brought his creatures into exiftence "radically "tainted with fin," and as having left the great majority of them to perish, in hopeless and eternal mifery. To fuch a God as this, fome persons may, for aught I know, experience "a love compounded "of admiration, preference, hope, truft, and joy". the only fenfation that I could feel respecting him, if fuch were my idea of the divine character, would' be that of terror and abhorrence.

But I have no doubt that God is really worthy, in the higheft degree, of thofe affections which are

here

here fo eloquently defcribed; for he is infinitely wife and good, and is incapable of acting unjustly by any of his creatures. "His tender mercy is over all his "works."

Our author prudently, or rather inadvertently, declines to combine the different parts of his fyftem; and while he overlooks the injuftice of leaving the great mafs of mankind to fuffer eternal torments, he infifts wholly upon the goodness of God to the chofen few, who are regenerated by the influencesof his fpirit, and who certainly have no reafon to complain. But the character of a Being fo capricious and malignant, whatever partial kindness he: may occafionally manifeft, can never be the object of rational veneration and confidence.

Mr. W. does not fee this confequence, which tomany others appears fo obvious and palpable. Nay,, he even thinks, that the fyftem which he has stated lays a proper foundation for that love to God which the gofpel requires as the most powerful principle of virtue. And he very unjustly, and I must fay uncandidly, charges chriftians whofe principles do not reach his own ftandard of orthodoxy, with a defign. to lower the standard of chriftian morality. "They,” fays he, p. 139, "who hold the fundamental doc"trines of fcripture" (that is, his own unfcriptural opinions)" in their due force, hold alfo in its due"degree of purity the practical system which scripture inculcates. But they who explain away the

"former"

«former" (that is, who do not think with the author) "foften down the latter also, and reduce it to "the level of their own defective scheme. It is "not from any confidence in the fuperior amount "of their own performances, or in the greater vigour of their own exertions, that they reconcile themselves to their low views of the fatisfaction "of Chrift, and of the influence of the fpirit; but

66

it should rather feem their plan fo to deprefs the "required standard of practice that no man need "fall fhort of it, that no fuperior aid can be wanted ❝ for enabling us to attain to it. It happens, how

ever, with refpect to their fimple method of mo"rality, as in the cafe of the fhort ways to know

ledge, of which fome vain pretenders have vaunt«ed, that these have failed of conducting them to "the right object, and have iffued only in ignorance ❝ and conceit."

I am forry to obferve, that this is a very illiberal paragraph, which I hope that Mr. W. will, upon reconfideration, retract. Let him recollect that we, who reject his pretended fundamentals as unfcriptural and untrue, have an equal right to charge him with a design to fubvert the foundations of virtue, and "to depress the required ftandard of practice.” But I trust we are too well acquainted with the fpirit of christianity to retort the charge upon our uncandid affailant. We can give him credit for writing from the best motives, and with an earnest

defire