accurately explains the nature of that connexion which subsists between Christ and his people, in virtue of which they enjoy the benefits of his redemption. In some of these paragraphs he states the doctrine of imputation in such a way as must commend itself to every enlightened mind, and so as completely exposes the absurdity of imputed sanctification. With no less propriety he states the moral or analogical sense, in which the Scriptures speak of Christ's righteousness as the property of his people. Had he and others always spoken in the intelligible and scriptural manner, on this important subject, which is done in some parts of this volume, how much good might have been effected, and what a quantity of useless debate and altercation would have been prevented! The unnatural strain and construction which have been put on the language of Scripture, on several points in this controversy, have created great confusion, and have been attended with many injurious consequences. The ignorance and weakness of some occasion misconceptions of Scripture phraseology, which the technical language and wire-drawn distinctions of men of superior minds often tend to increase rather than to remove.

Almost at the very close of his life, and after he judged Antinomianism in a great measure to have been destroyed, Baxter was roused to the re-consideration of the subject, in consequence of the re-publication of Dr. Crisp's works, by his son, Samuel Crisp. To this edition was prefixed a document, subscribed with twelve names of London dissenting ministers, among whom were Messrs. Howe, Griffiths, Cockain, Chauncy, Alsop, and Mather. Considering the nature of Crisp's sentiments, and the outrageous language which he employs in his sermons, it is deeply to be regretted that such men had any thing to do with the publication. They do not, however, recommend or approve the sentiments, but declare their belief that the discourses as published, with additions, by his son, really were Dr. Crisp's.

This publication very nearly occasioned a controversy between Baxter and Howe, who was one of the subscribers of the attestation. Baxter was exceedingly displeased that the doctrines of Crisp should appear, even in the slightest degree, to be countenanced by such persons. He drew up a paper, therefore, with some warmth, against a practice which he thought had a very

pernicious tendency. Mr. Howe, waiting on him, prevailed with him to stop it before it was published and dispersed, upon his promising to prefix a declaration, with reference to the names before Dr. Crisp's sermons, (which declaration, also, should have several names to it,) to a book of Mr. Flavel's, then going to press, entitled, 'A Blow at the Root; or, the Causes and Cure of Mental Errors.' This was accordingly done; yet many remained dissatisfied. e

Though this prevented a personal discussion with Howe, it did not keep Baxter from engaging in the general controversy. In the preface by Samuel Crisp, the editor, Baxter considered himself attacked, though he was not named, and therefore felt that he was called once more to contend for the faith delivered to the saints. He was thus led to publish The Scripture Gospel Defended, and Christ, Grace, and Free Justification Vindicated, against the Libertines.' 1690. 8vo. This work is divided into two books. The first is, 'A Breviate of Fifty Controversies about Justification.' The second is, 'A Dialogue between an Orthodox Zealot and Reconciling Monitor, written on the Reviving of the Errors, and the Reprinting and Reception, of Dr. Crisp's Writings,' &c. In this second book, he describes a hundred of their errors. He then endeavours to moderate men's censure of their persons: and, thirdly, assigns reasons for not replying to them more at large.

Baxter saw only the commencement of the controversy respecting Crisp's sentiments, which agitated and consumed the dissenters for more than seven years after he had gone to his rest. He was succeeded by his friend Dr. Williams, who took the lead in the discussion in support of the doctrines of what may be called moderate Calvinism; and who, after incredible exertion, and no small portion of suffering, finally succeeded in clearing the ground of the Antinomians: scarcely any of them being left among the reputed dissenting ministers of the metropolis at the beginning of the last century. The best account of this controversy, both as carried on in the church and among the dissenters, for it was not confined to one party, is given by Nelson, in his 'Life of Bishop Bull,' to which I beg to

e Calamy's Own Life, vol. i. pp. 322, 323. The paper prefixed to Flavel's Treatise is subscribed by seven out of the twelve who had prefixed their names to the former attestation. In this paper they entirely disclaim any intention to approve of Crisp's doctrine, and declare they were merely called to attest the sou's integrity as the publisher of his father's manuscripts.

refer the reader who feels interested in its further details. I confine myself to a few additional observations on Baxter's connexion with it.

I do not regard his controversial writings, as having rendered any very essential service in this discussion. He has, indeed, stated himself to be of a different opinion; and it was natural he should think so, considering how much he wrote on the subject. But two things which he did in this controversy greatly impaired his influence. He placed individuals and opinions under the charge of Antinomianism that ought not to have been thus treated. By this means he divided the true friends of that very cause which he espoused, and created additional labour to himself; besides exciting those feelings of personal irritation of which he so frequently complains.

In the next place, his own system of doctrine, in which he spoke so much of terms and conditions, and of the interest of repentance and good works in justification, was not well calculated to soften down the prejudices of the libertines whom he opposed. Many of them had good views of the freeness of grace, so far as that one position goes, and were not to be. satisfied with a mode of treating the subject more objectionable than even the stricter Calvinism, to which they objected as not sufficiently high for them. If they mystified justification and imputation in one way, Baxter did it in another; so that the scriptural scholar will probably object to the explanations of both parties; though he will feel convinced that Baxter's views, when stripped of the verbiage with which they are clothed, were much nearer the truth than those of his opponents, and much less calculated to injure the souls of men.

But though his controversial writings effected little, his practical works and preaching effected a great deal in this controversy. In these, without directly entering the lists with Antinomians, and probably without thinking of them, he assailed the strong holds of their system, and demolished them to the ground. A better remedy for any one attached to their mistaken views could not, perhaps, be prescribed than a course of Baxterian reading. If the influence of Baxter's spirit should be imbibed, the cure would be certain.

One of the great evils of the system consists in grossly incorrect notions of the nature of the law of God. From these arise imperfect ideas of human responsibility, with which are

necessarily connected inadequate impressions of guilt, and of the evil nature of sin. On all these subjects Baxter's views were most enlightened; and they were expressed with a power of eloquence scarcely equalled in human writings. He always speaks of the law of God like a man who well understood its spiritual character and its unquestionable claims. He pronounces on its authority, not as a matter sub judice, or which admitted of dispute; but which had its evidence in itself, and its answer in every man's conscience. Sin was, in his view, not a thing of speculation, which men required to be convinced of by argument, but matter of fact, not to be denied or explained away by the sinner. He arraigns him before the bar of God; he drags him to Sinai; he pours upon his ear the denunciation of offended Heaven: leaving him no plea to urge, no ground to stand on, without repairing to Calvary and the cross.

If the forte of some preachers and writers be the comforting of the broken-hearted, and that of others the building up of believers, the strength of Baxter lay in convincing men of sin. Man's responsibility for the powers and privileges which he enjoys, is urged by no writer with such fulness and force as it is by him. He had the deepest sense of this responsibility himself, and was thus, as well as by other considerations, induced to place it in the most powerful manner before others. High Calvinism, or Antinomianism, absolutely withers and destroys the consciousness of responsibility. It confounds moral with natural impotency, forgetting that the former is a crime, the latter but a misfortune; and thus treats the man dead in trespasses and sins, as if he were already in his grave. It prophesies smooth things to the sinner going on in his transgressions, and soothes to slumber and the repose of death the souls of such as are at ease in Zion. It assumes that, because men can neither believe, repent, nor pray acceptably, unless aided by the grace of God, it is useless to call upon them to do so. It maintains that the Gospel is only intended for elect sinners, and therefore it ought to be preached to none but such. In defiance, therefore, of the command of God, it refuses to preach the glad tidings of mercy to every sinner. In opposition to Scripture and to every rational consideration, it contends that it is not man's duty to believe the truth of God; justifying the obvious inference, that it is not a sin to reject it. In short, its whole tendency is to produce an impression on the sinner's

mind, that if he is not saved, it is not his fault, but God's; that if he is condemned, it is more for the glory of the divine sovereignty, than as the punishment of his guilt.

I am not acquainted with any direct process of argument by which such persons are likely to be cured. Their judgments are commonly as weak, as their understandings are perverted and obstinate. They reason in a circle, which it is a vain endeavour to break. They dwell on the figurative language of Scripture, which they apply in the most literal sense; refusing to be subject to any laws or canons of interpretation. In such cases, the best mode of proceeding is, perhaps, that which Baxter pursued in his general preaching-to treat such men as sinners labouring under the influence of that deceitful depravity, which assumes this with a thousand other forms, for the destruction of its subject. Baxter contributed greatly to introduce this awakening and powerful style of preaching; and thus did more to prevent and counteract Antinomianism, than by all his controversial writings. Another fatal error of this system, respects the great design of the Gospel itself. That this should be mistaken, considering the clearness of the discovery to us, and the importance of our understanding that discovery, may appear surprising; but the fact is undoubted. The grand object of the Gospel is the redemption of sinners. That redemption necessarily includes all that belongs to the condition of the lost and ruined party. It finds man guilty, and provides for him pardon: it finds him depraved, or morally diseased, and it provides a cure. It is designed to comprehend his body, soul, and spirit, and to secure their interests for ever. The blood of Christ, the great sacrifice for sin, is made the basis of the proclamation of Heaven's forgiveness to all that believe; and the application of the same blood by which the pardon is secured, by the power of the divine Spirit, is made to cleanse the soul from all its impurity. The grand loss which man has sustained by sin, is the moral image of the Creator. His nature has thus been robbed of its highest glory, and deprived of its chief enjoyment. Mere forgiveness might save from punishment, but could not render the sinner like God, or capable of beholding his resplendent face in righteousness. In order to this, the divine nature must be again restored; God must once more breathe into his nostrils the breath of life, and form him again according to his own likeness in knowledge and in true holiness.

It may be said, therefore, with the greatest propriety, that