Page images
PDF
EPUB

grace of God by Chrift preventing us, we have no power to do good works," and that "we are accounted righteous before God ONLY for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jefus Chrift by faith."

But, to proceed to the doctrine of the moft orthodox of thefe Divines, at their most orthodox moments; this is, that we are justified by faith and good works together; or, as they often express it, that faith and good works are the Conditions of our juftification. Little need be advanced in support of this affertion, the matter of it will be fo generally avowed. Thus, Mr. Gray, treating on the doctrine of juftification, fays, Our church differs " from the Calvinifts, in confidering Good Works not merely as effects, but as co-efficient conditions with Faith." Mr. Foley adds, "The Chtistian religion is founded on a mutual covenant between the Creator and the Creature, Faith and good works are the conditions, falvation the reward of obediences." Mr. Daubeny expreffes the doctrine fully. Having mentioned the part which he conceives, belongs exclufively to God in the act of man's juftification; "the other parts of the gofpel covenant," he fays, " as faith, repentance, and good works through the operation of the Spirit, are the CONDITIONS upon which God engages to vouchsafe that JUSTIFICATION to him." Again, "Good Works," he fays, " are neceffary as parts of the condition upon which the free grace of God has been fufpended." And, to be concife where the case is fo clear, the learned Bishop Bull, to whom Mr. Daubeny refers has having ftated this fubject fo clearly as to render further difcuffion ufelefs ; whofe Pupil Mr. D. is confidered by the British Critic; and to whofe divinity the most orthodox of our opponents would, doubtless, subscribe ;

(f) Bamp. Lect. p. 246, Note.

(g) See A Defence of the Church of England, by the Rev. R. Foley, M. A. Sermon. vi. (h) Guide, p. 311.

(i) Appendix, p. 173.

(k) See

Guide, p. 312.

1

fpeaks thus upon it. "A man is faid, i§ igyw, dinaiŝobzi, to be juftified by works, because GooD WORKS ARE THE CONDI TION, according to the Divine appointment, established in the gofpel covenant requifite and necessary to his juflification; that is, to his obtaining remiffion of pins through Chrift, and acceptance into the Divine favour '.' In attempting to prove this pofition a little after, he says, "The first class of these teftimonies fhall be those which speak of Good Works in a general fenfe as the requifite and neceffary condition of justification." And then having cited feveral paffages from the word of God, "Who," he asks," does not believe that in thefe fcriptures there is an abundance of good works required, which if a man do not perform he is altogether excluded from the hope of pardon and remiffion of fins ?"

But is this indeed the doctrine of our Church? Is this language congenial with what we have produced from her writings on the subject? Surely it must require no ordinary courage to maintain this. If her doctrine indeed is, that we are thus juftified by faith and good works; or that faith and good works are thus the conditions of justification, is it not very ftrange that in none of her express writings on the subject she should have affirmed this? And is there a single expreffion that founds like it, or that can be fairly conftrued into it, either in her Articles or Homilies on the point? Let the Advocates of the doctrine produce it. On the contrary, does the not in the most explicit, uniform, positive, and earnest manner, reject this fyftem, and maintain the very opposite one? In respect to merit, the places, we have seen, Faith and Works precifely on the fame footing; and ascribes this, wholly, in all fenfes, to our Redeemer: and then, when treating directly on the means, or condition, or whatever it is called, by which we obtain juftification, fhe fays, "It is BY FAITH ONLY;" "by faith WITHOUT WORKS;" by faith

(1) Bull. Harmon. Apoft. Cap. i. § 8. and quoted by Mr. Daubeny.

as it is perfectly diftinct from obedience to the law, namely, "as it directly fends us to, and embraces Christ." She affirms, expressly and repeatedly, that in this act of approaching the Saviour for juftification, "we must forfake or leave behind us, all our fuppofed good virtues;" "that we must not do good works to the intent to be made just by doing of them;" that whatever good works are joined with faith in every man that is justified, "it SHUTTETH THEM OUT FROM THE OFFICE OF JUSTIFYING;" that "however good works and faith be present together in him that is justified, yet that THEY JUSTIFY NOT ALL TOGETHER.” She fhows, that the confiders it as impoffible for good works to be a condition of juftification, as it is for the effect to precede its cause, by constantly representing thefe works as the fruits and effects of juftification.

But we must not here repeat the whole body of her evidence to the fame purport. Enough must have been faid to convince all impartial judges, that even this most favourable ground of our opponents is not fairly tenable; and that on this most important of all doctrines, they do not, as they would pretend, teach, as it is taught in the standard writings of our church, and was taught by our Reformers.

Whether regard is had to the nature of juftification, to the nature and province of justifying faith, or to the means by which justification is obtained, their deviation from this acknowledged ftandard, and our strict adherence to it, are thus equally confpicuous.Our pofition therefore, we conceive, is again established on a double basis; and that of our opponents doubly overthrown. But whether our premises warrant this conclufion; or whether, at any rate, our claim to Churchmanship on this point is not the best founded of the two, let every competent judge decide.

CHAP. VII.

The question of adherence pursued in respect to the doctrine of GOOD WORKS; with a vindication of our tenets on this head,

BUT let us pursue this investigation of particulars to the

doctrine of Good Works, or Chriftian Morality, concerning which fo much has already incidently been said.

This then, it must be remarked, is the point in which we are fuppofed unquestionably the most vulnerable. It is chiefly from a respect to their bearings here, that the objections to our other doctrines would be understood to originate. The moft open clamour, the moft frequent infinuation, against our whole fyftem, is, that we depreciate good morals. Because we exclude morality from the office of justifying, it is fagacioufly concluded, that we muft either deny its neceflity; or, at the least, greatly underrate its value; as if because we should maintain that our eyes cannot perform the functions of our hands, we should deny the neceffity or depreciate the value of our eyes. Juft fo it was argued by the rigidly virtuous Papifts against the doctrines of the Reformers. And the fame objection, under a little more disguise, is preferred by the fame kind of

(a) See Antijac. Review for April, 1799, p. 368,; and for May, p. 77; Nor. Lect. Vol. iii. p. 264, 296, 332; Review of Policy, &c. p. 22-32; Mr Clapham's Sermon, p. 16, 17, 21; Mr. Haggitt's, p. 16, and Preface, p. 15; Mr. Fellowes', p. 12, and Preface; Mr. Daubeny's Appendix, p. 330; &c. (b) See Jewel's Apology; and the Corpus Confeffionum, paffim ; the Homily on Fafting, p. 174; and Nor. Lect. Vol. iii. p. 292.

perfons, against the Church herfelf. This undoubtedly is implied in the affirmation of Dr. Croft, that her "Articles concerning Grace, Faith, and Good Works lean towards the fide of Enthufiafim." This clearly is expreffed in their conceffions already noticed, that "the Reformers went too far in depreciating good works; that the compilers of our eleventh article mifunderflood St. Paul; that the expreffions of the homily about works are fomewhat too strong; that the article might be made more acceptable by foftening fome expreffions feemingly tending to Antinomianifm; and by ftrengthening expreffions tending to encourage virtue, and the hopes of its rewards;" &c. &c.

We are in good company therefore, it appears, under our reproach. The charge however is a ferious one, and would deferve, could it be substantiated, the moft ferious attention. Were it indeed true that our doctrines, or thofe of the Church, either in their natural tendency, or ordinary effect, encourage men in fin, no reprobation could be too fevere for them. But "audi alteram partem;" let not a conclufion be formed too haftily. Our main bufinefs indeed is, not fo much to vindicate, as to inveftigate, the doctrines of the Church, and to fhow whofe opinions moft resemble them; but in this inftance, in attempting the one object, we fhall alfo achieve the other.

SECTION I.

Concerning the STANDARD of Morals.

WE will begin with the Standard or Rule of morality which the Church of England prefcribes. This is the "No Chriftian man whatever,"

whole moral law of God.

(c) Bamp. Lect. p. 110.

(d) Above, p. 208, 209.
P

« PreviousContinue »