done what was needful on his part, and the finner justly condemned, for not concurring with the grace of God, as he might have done; which fhews that we are not merely paffive in this work; but fomething is expected from us, after God hath done his part, which if we neglect to do, our destruction is of ourfelves. Whereas the contrary fuppofition, upon pretence of glorifying God's grace, by making him to do all in the converfion of finners, indangers the honour of his juftice, by laying the impenitency of finners, and their ruin confequent upon it, at his door, which is to advance one attribute of God upon the ruin of another; whereas it is a fundamental principle of religion, to take care to reconcile the attributes and perfections of God to one another; for that is not a divine perfection which contradicts any other perfection.

The 3d Objection is grounded upon that question of St. Paul, Cor. iv. 7. Who maketh thee to differ? which they think impoffible to be answered, if the efficacy of God's grace depend upon our concurrence and compliance with it. For, fay they, when God offers his grace to two perfons for their repentance, if the true reafon why the one repents, and the other remains impenitent, be this, that the one complieth with this grace of God, and yieldeth to it, the other refifts and ftands out against it; then it is not the grace of God which makes the difference, for that is equal to both, but fomething in themfelves, and fo it is not God that makes them to differ but they themfelves.

But this question is impertinent to this cafe. The Apoftle fpeaks it concerning fpiritual gifts, upon account of which they factiously admired fome of the Apostles above others, and concerning them the queition is very proper, who maketh thee to differ? Miraculous gifts were fo ordered by God, that men were merely paffive in the receiving of them, and contributed nothing to the obtaining of them; and therefore, if one had greater gifts than another, it was merely the pleasure of God that made the difference. But the cafe is not the fame in the graces of God's

Spirit,

Spirit, towards the obtaining and improving whereof, we ourselves may contribute fomething; our Saviour having affured us, that to him that hath, hall be given. And here the queftion is not proper, nor is it true that the grace of God makes all the difference. It is indeed the foundation of all the good that is in us but our different improvement makes different attainments in grace and goodness. Among thofe to whom the talents were intrufted, what made the difference between the man who wrapt his talent in the napkin, and buried it, and those who gained double by theirs, but that the one improved the grace conferred on him, the other neglected it, and this without any manner of reflexion upon, or diminution of the grace of God, or any danger from St. Paul's queftion, who maketh thee to differ? Put the case a pardon is offered to two malefactors, the one accepts, the other refufes it; their own choice makes the difference between them; but he that is faved is nevertheless beholden to the King's pardon for his life; and it were a fenfelefs ingratitude in him, because he accepts the pardon, when the other refufeth it, to fay that he did not owe his life to the grace and fa-, vour of his Prince, but might thank himself for it; whereas that he was in a capacity to accept a pardon, was wholly due to the clemency of his Prince, who offered it to him when he nowife deferved it. In this cafe the thing plainly appears as it is, by which every man may fee, that it is against common fenfe to pretend that the grace of God is deftroyed, if there be any compliance on our part with it; that it is no grace, if it be not forced upon us, and we be not merely paffive in the reception of it. I proceed in

the

Second place, to give a clear ftate of this matter," fo as is moft agreeable to the doctrine of the holy fcriptures, and the effential attributes and perfections of God. In order to which, I will give you a fhort view of the feveral opinions concerning this matter. And there are two extreme and two middle opinions, concerning the operation of God's grace, in the converfion of a finner.

D d 3

The

The first of the extreme opinions is, that which all this while I have been arguing against, namely, that all that are converted and regenerated, are wrought upon in an irresistible manner, and are merely paffive in it; and that thofe who are not thus wrought upon, their repentance and converfion is impoffible. What the inconveniencies of this opinion are, I have fhewed at large.

The other extreme opinion is, that none are thus wrought upon, because it would be a violence and injury to man's natural liberty; but that fufficient grace is offered to all, one time or other, who live under the gofpel, which they may comply with or refift, and confequently, if they be not brought to repentance, their impenitency and ruin is the effect of their own choice, and God is free from the blood of all men. But this opinion, though infinitely more reasonable than the other, feems not to have any neceffary foundation either in fcripture or reafon. There are fome inftances in Scripture of the converfion of men after a very violent, if not an irrefiftible manner, which feems to be attributed to a particular predeftination of God; as that of St. Paul, who fays of himfelf, Gal. i. 15. that he was feparated from his mother's womb to that work to which he was called; and the manner of his converfion was anfwerable to fuch a predeftination; and there is nothing in reafon against this, fince it is no injury to any man to be made good and happy against his will.

The two middle opinions are thefe. First, That irrefiftible grace is afforded to all the elect, and fufficient grace to all others who live under the gofpel, (for of thofe only we fpeak, the cafe of others being peculiar, and belonging to the extraordinary mercy of God) but then they fay, that none of thofe to whom this fufficient grace is afforded fhall effectually comply with it and be faved. This opinion feems more moderate, and hath this advantage in it, that it acquits the juftice of God in the condemnation of thofe, who having fufficient grace afforded to them,

did

did yet notwithstanding continue impenitent; but yet it hath two great inconveniencies in it.

First, That this fuppofition is to no purpofe, as to any real effect for the falvation of men, because not one perfon more is faved, notwithstanding this univerfal fufficient grace, which they fay is afforded to all; for they take it for granted it is never effectual; and then it seems very unreafonable to fuppofe that a means fufficient to its end fhould univerfally prove ineffectual; nay, on the contrary, it is next to a demonftration against the fufficiency of a means, if perpetually, and in all instances it fails of its end. This would tempt any man to think that furely there is fome defect in it, or fomething that hinders the efficacy of it; if being perpetually and generally afforded, it doth perpetually and univerfally miscarry, without fo much as one inftance among fo many millions to the contrary. So that this opinion feems rather to be contrived for a colour and shelter against fome abfurdity, which men know not how to avoid otherwife, than to ferve any good purpofe, or to be embraced for the truth and probability of it.

The other middle opinion is, that fome are con verted in an irrefiftible manner, when God pleaseth, and whom he defigns to be extraordinary examples and inftruments for the good of others, and that fufficient grace is afforded to others, which is ef fectual to the falvation of many, and rejected by a great many.

And this avoids all the inconveniency of the other opinion, and is evidently moft agreeable both to the tenor of scripture, and to the beft notions which men have concerning the attributes and perfections of God, and gives greatest encouragement to the endeavours of men. It agrees very well with the fo lemn declarations of fcripture, that God is not wanting on his part, to afford men fufficient means to bring them to repentance; that he defires not the death of a finner, but rather that he should turn from his wickedness and live; that he would have all men to be faved, and come to the knowledge of the truth; that he would not that any fhould perish, but that all Should

hould come to repentance; that mens deftruction is of themselves. And this makes all the exhortations and motives of fcripture to repentance, to be of some force and fignificancy, and gives encouragement to the refolutions and endeavours of men to become better. This clearly acquits the juftice of God in the condemnation of impenitent finners, and fixeth the reafon of their ruin upon their own choice. This perfectly reconciles the operation and affiftance of God's grace in our converfion and regeneration, in our fanctification and perfeverance in a good course, with the concurrence of our own endeavours, and makes thofe plain texts of fcripture have fome fenfe and fignificancy in them; work out your own falvation; repent and turn yourselves from all your evil ways; make ye new hearts and new fpirits. These are more than a thousand metaphors to convince a man, that we may and ought to do fomething towards our repentance and converfion. And if any man be fure that we neither do, nor can do any thing in this work, then I am fure that thefe texts fignify nothing. Finally, thofe texts which speak most clearly of the neceffity of the divine grace and affiftance, to our doing of any thing that is fpiritually good, do fuppofe fomething to be done on our part. That of our Saviour, without me ye can do nothing, implies that with his grace and affiftance we can. That of St. Paul, I am able to do all things through Chrift strengthening me, implies, that what we do by the ftrength of Chrift, is truly our own act; I am able to do all things. And this does not in the least prejudice nor obfcure the glory of God's grace. St. Paul, it feems, knew very well how to reconcile thefe two, and to give the grace of God its due, without rejecting all concurrence of our own industry and endeavour, 1 Cor. xv. 10. But by the grace of God I am what I am; and his grace which was bestowed upon me was not in vain, not because it was irrefiftible, and he merely paffive in the reception of it; but becaufe he did concur and co-operate with it. So he tells us, his grace that was bestowed upon me was not in vain, but I laboured more abundantly than

they