and as therefore affording us a sufficient ground to trust in him for the pardon or non-imputation of our sins.

It is necessary to add with regard to these invitations, that being proclaimed in the name of the Most High God, they carry in them all the authority of his command: which is formally expressed in many places of scripture, particularly in 1 John iii. 23. This is his commandment, that we believe in the name of his Son Jesus Christ: A command, which, as Mr. Hervey well observes, is "the most important that ever issued "from the throne of glory. If this be neglected no "other can be kept; if this be observed, all others will "be easy."

Objection. "The gospel is a feast freely provided, "and sinners of mankind are freely invited to partake "of it. There is no mention of any gift or grant dis "tinct from this; but this itself is a ground sufficient. "Those, who were persuaded to embrace the invita-. ❝tions, are not described as coming to make a claim of: ❝ it as their property; but as gratefully aecepting of it.":

Answer. This objection allows, that sinners of mankind are invited to partake of the gospel feast, which is Jesus Christ and all spiritual blessings in him. But it is plain, that every invitation of this kind implies a grant or promise, which gives the persons invited a right to use the provisions of the feast for all the purposes specified in the invitation; and to claim them as their property for these purposes. The grant or pro- : mise thus implied in the invitation is either free or suspended upon some condition. If it be suspended upon some condition then the persons invited cannot make their claim to the provisions, till that condition be ful

lled. But if it be free and unconditional, they have a sufficient warrant to make their claim immediately. Here then is the difference between those who contend, that an appropriation of Christ, grounded singly upon the gospel-offer, belongs to the nature of saving faith, and their opponents. The former hold, that the grant or promise implied in the invitations of the gospel, is free; or, in other words, that it is such as warrants any perishing sinner of mankind, immediately upon hearing it, to rest upon it for his own everlasting salvation. Whereas the latter deny, that he has any warrant to do so till he find that he has come up to the terms or conditions required. The ground of the sinner's trust in Christ for salvation, according to the former scheme, is the promise alone. But the ground of his trust, according to the latter scheme, is partly the promise, and partly something that he feels or does, considered as the condition of the promise. Faith, according to the one doctrine, proceeds only upon what is without us; but, according to the other, it necessarily proceeds in some measure, upon something within us.

The act of receiving Christ and his benefits cannot be separated from the persuasion, that they are ours by virtue of the grant in the gospel promise; because though there may be a giving, where there is no receiving, as we have seen; yet there can be no receiving of Christ without a previous giving of him, John iii. 27. A man can receive nothing except it be given him from heaven. Any pretended receiving of Christ, which proceeds not upon a view of the divine grant of him in the gospel, is nothing but hypocrisy and presumption. A person may take a commodity as a thief or a robber; but not as an honest man, till he can claim it as his

own by donation, by purchase, or upon some other lawful ground.

The assertion, "that there is no mention in the " scripture of any gift or grant of Christ distinct from "the gospel invitation," is true, if it mean, that the free grant which God makes of Christ to sinners, is implied in every gospel invitation. But it is a gross falsehood, if it mean, either that there is no such grant, or that it is not distinctly expressed in various places of scripture.

It is not so

Objection. "In what sense may a gospel-hearer "call salvation by Jesus Christ his own? He is free"ly invited to partake of it: that is all. "his own, but that he may ultimately be debarred from "possessing it. But in whatsoever sense it is his own, "that is the only sense in which he is warranted to be"lieve it to be so."

Answer. We have already observed, that a free invitation to a feast implies a free promise, which gives the persons invited a sufficient ground to call the feast their own, according to the import of that promise; as much their own, as if they had procured the intertainment with their own money. A persuasion that it is theirs in this sense is implied in their compliance with the invitation, in their coming to and partaking of the feast. Such is the sense in which the gospel promise affords every sinner of mankind, who hears it, a ground to believe that salvation by Jesus Christ is his. In both cases, it is not the right of persons, as only exhibited in the invitation, that makes them actual partakers of the provision; because to such as disbelieve and reject this right, it is as if it had no existence. But when their right is actually believed and improved, then they

F

cannot fail to be actual partakers, unless the inviter be deficient in faithfulness or ability. This deficiency is supposable in the case of men who invite their neighbours to an earthly feast; but not in the case of the great God who calls us to Christ in the gospel. Hence when this right is duly apprehended, under the influence of the spirit of faith, it secures the person so apprehending it from all danger of being debarred from the possession of the promised salvation. In the case

of an earthly feast, it is indeed one thing for persons to believe or trust in the promise of the inviter, and another thing to exert bodily strength in coming to such a place, in eating and drinking. But with regard to the spiritual feast to which we are invited in the gospel, our trust in the promise of God in Christ as directed to us, and our coming to partake of Christ as the food of our souls, are but different views of one and the same thing.

There are few religious controversies in which a greater want of candour appears, than in the opposition which has been made to the doctrine of Mr. Marshal, Mr. Boston and others, concerning the nature of that faith in Jesus Christ to which the hearers of the gospel are called. According to this doctrine, says one, "the unregenerate are called to conclude themselves "interested in the righteousness of Jesus, while ad"hering to their own righteousness as the ground of

"the

acceptance with God:" just as if calling sinners, as Mr. Marshal and Mr. Boston do, to believe the righteousness of Christ to be so presented to them in the grant and promise of the gospel, as to warrant each of them to trust in it assuredly for his own justification before God; were the same thing with calling them to conclude themselves savingly interested in the righteous

ness of Christ, or already in a justified state; and as if the believing claim which sinners are directed by these divines to make to the righteousness of Christ, as their only justifying righteousness, were not as inconsistent with any dependence on their own righteousness for their acceptance with God; as it would be for the same person to go towards the north and south poles at the same time.

"This faith," says Mr. Bellamy, meaning that which is taught by Mr. Marshal, Mr. Hervey and others, "is founded wholly in a heated imagination." To this we may reply in the words of Dr. Owen. “We "know," says he, " that if a man promise us any thing "seriously and solemnly, which is absolutly in his << power, we trust to his word or believe him, con"sidering his wisdom, honesty and ability. This we know is not a mere fixing of the imagination, but is a real and useful confidence or trust. And whereas "God hath given us great and precious promises, and that under several confirmations, especially that of "his oath and covenant, if we do really believe their << accomplishment; and that it shall be to us accord"ing to his word, upon the account of his veracity, "power, righteousness and holiness; why shall this "be accounted a fanatical fixing of the imagination. "If it be so, it was so in Abraham, our example, "Rom. iv. 19, 20, 21. But this blasphemous figment " is designed for the overthrow of the way of life and "salvation by Jesus Christ. God gives us great and "precious promises, that, by them, we might be made "partakers of a Divine nature. These promises he "requireth us to receive and to mix them with faith; "that is, trusting to and resting on his Divine power "and veracity, ascribing unto him thereby the glory of