faith; for in whatever moment, a man believes, (in the Christian sense of the word,) he is justified, his sins are blotted out, his faith is counted to him for righteousness.' But it is not so, at whatever moment he repents, or brings forth any or all the fruits of repentance. Faith alone therefore justifies ; which repentance alone does not ; much less any outward work. And, consequently, none of these are necessary to justification, in the same degree with faith.

Nor in the same sense. For none of these has so direct immediate a relation to justification as faith. This is proximately necessary thereto; repentance, remotely, as it is necessary to the increase or continuance of faith. And even in this sense, these are only necessary on supposition, if there be time and opportunity for them: for in many instances there is not; but God cuts short his work, and faith prevents the fruits of repentance. So that the general proposition is not overthrown, but clearly established by these concessions; and we conclude still, That faith alone is the proximate condition of justification."

4. This is what I hold concerning justification. I am next briefly to observe what you object. "If faith, say you, is the sole condition of justification, then it is our sole duty." I deny the consequence. Faith may be (in the sense above described) the sole condition of justification, and yet not only repentance be our duty before, but all obedience after we believe.

You go on. "If good works are not conditions of our justification, they are not conditions of our (final) salvation." I deny the consequence again. Good works, (properly so called,) cannot be the conditions of justification: because it is impossible to do any good work before we are justified. And yet, notwithstanding, good works may be (and are) conditions of final salvation. For

who will say it is impossible to do any good work, before we are finally saved?

You proceed. "Can we be saved, in the contemptuous neglect of repentance, prayer, &c. ?" No: nor justified neither; but while they are previous to faith, these are not allowed to be good works.

You afterwards argue from my own concessions thus:"+ Your notion of true stillness is, 'A patient waiting upon God, by lowliness, meekness, resignation, in all the ways of his holy law, and the works of his commandments.' -But how is it possible to reconcile to this the position, that these duties are not conditions of our justification? If we are justified without them, we may be saved without them. This consequence cannot be too often repeated."

Let it be repeated ever so often, it is good for nothing. For, far other qualifications are required, in order to our standing before God in glory, than were required in order to his giving us faith and pardon. In order to this, nothing is indispensably required, but repentance, or conviction of sin. But in order to the other it is indispensably required, that we be fully cleansed from all sin: that the very God of peace sancify us wholly, even to oxoxλnpov nμav, our entire body, soul, and spirit. It is not necessary therefore (nor indeed possible, that we should before justification, patiently wait upon God, by lowliness, meekness, and resignation, in all the ways of his holy law. And yet it is necessary in the highest degree, that we should thus wait upon him after justification. Otherwise, how shall we be meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light?'"

6

5. Soon after you add, ‡“In the passages last cited, you plead for the necessity of a good life. But in others, the force of your principles shews itself.-An answer approved by you is, My heart is desperately wicked. But. I have no doubt or fear. I know my Saviour loves me and. I love him.'-Both these particulars are impossible, if the Scripture be true."

*Remarks, p. 26. + p. 26. + p. 29.

You amaze me! Is it possible you should be ignorant, that your own heart is desperately wicked! Yet I dare not say, either that God does not love you; or that you do not love him.

* "Again, you say, 'you described the state of those who have forgiveness of sins, but not a clean heart;"" (not in the full, proper sense,), Very true: but even then, they had power over both inward and outward corruptions: far from being, as you suppose, "still wedded to their vices, and resolved to continue in them."

+"In another place, after having observed, that 'Sin does remain in one that is justified, though it has not dominion over him,' you go on, 'But fear not, though you have an evil heart; yet a little while and you shall be endued with power from on high, whereby ye may purify yourselves, even as he is pure.'-Sinners, if they believe this, may be quite secure, and imagine they have nothing to fear, though they continue in their iniquities.-For God's sake, Sir, speak out.-If they that have an evil heart have not, who has reason to fear?"—All who have not dominion over sin all who continue in their iniquities. You, for one, if any sin has dominion over you. If so, I testify against you this day, (and you will not be quite secure, if you believe me) The wrath of God abideth on you!'

:

"What do you mean by 'Sin remains in one that is justified?' That he is guilty of any known, wilful, habitual sin ?"-Judge by what has gone before:-I mean the same as our church means, by "Sin remains in the regenerate." 6. You proceed to another passage, which in the Journal stands thus: After we had wandered many years, in the new path of salvation by faith and works, about two years ago it pleased God, to shew us the old way of salvation by faith only. And many soon tasted of this salvation, being justified freely, having peace with God, rejoicing in hope of the glory of God, and having his love shed abroad in

* Remarks, p. 80. p. 31. p. 32. § Vol. II. p. 37.

their hearts.' Thus I define what I mean by this salvation, viz. righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost.

But you object, "Here you deny the necessity of good works in order to salvation." I deny the necessity, nay possibility, of good works as previous to this salvation; as previous to faith or those fruits of faith, righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost. This is my real sentiment, not a slip of my pen, neither any proof of my want of accuracy.

7. "I shall now," you say, "consider the account you give in this journal, of the doctrine of justification."

e

I will recite the whole, just as it stands, together with the occasion of it. In the afternoon I was informed, how many who cannot, in terms, deny it-explain justification by faith. They say 1. Justification is two-fold; the first, in this life, the second, at the last day. 2. Both these are by faith alone, that is, by objective faith, or by the merits of Christ which are the object of our faith. And this, they say, is all that St. Paul and the church mean by, We are justified by faith only.' But they add, 3. We are not justified by subjective faith alone, that is, by the faith which is in us. But good works also must be added to this faith, as a joint condition both of the first and second justification. In flat opposition to this, I cannot but maintain (at least till I have clearer light) 1. That the justification which is spoken of by St. Paul to the Romans, and in our articles, is not two-fold. It is one and no more. It is the present remission of our sins, or our first acceptance with God. 2. It is true, that the merits of Christ are the sole cause of this our justification. But it is not true, that this is all which St. Paul and our church mean, by our being justified by faith only: neither is it true, that either St. Paul or the church mean by faith, the merits of Christ. But, 3. By our being justified by faith only, both St. Paul and the church mean, that the condition of our justification, is faith alone, and not good works: inasmuch as all works done before

* Remarks, p. 33. + p. 30. Vol. II. p. 13, 14.

justification, have in them the nature of sin. Lastly, Thať faith which is the sole condition of justification, is the faith which is wrought in us, by the grace of God. It is a sure trust which a man hath, that Christ hath loved him and died for him.'

8. To the first of these propositions you object, “That * justification is not only two-fold, but manifold. For a man may possibly sin many times, and as many times be justified or forgiven."

I grant it. I grant also, that justification sometimes means, a state of acceptance with God. But all this does not in the least affect my assertion, that'that justification which is spoken of by St. Paul to the Romans, and by our church in the 11th, 12th, and 13th articles, is not our ac-. quittal at the last day, but the present remission of our sins."

You add, "You write in other places so variously about this matter, that I despair to find any consistency. Once you held a degree of justifying faith, short of the full assurance of faith, the abiding witness of the Spirit, or the clear perception that Christ abideth in him.' And yet you afterwards warned all, not to think they were justified, before they had a clear assurance, That God had forgiven their sins.'-What difference there is between this clear assurance, and the former full assurance and clear perception, I know not."

"Once

Let us go on step by step, and you will know. you held a Degree of justifying faith, short of the full assurance of faith, the abiding witness of the Spirit, or the clear perception that Christ abideth in him."" And so I hold still, and have done for some years. "And yet you afterwards, warned all, not to think they were justified, before they had a clear assurance that God had forgiven their sins.'' ""-I did so." What difference there is between this clear assurance, and that full assurance and clear perception, I know not,"-Sir, I will tell you: The one is, an assurance

Remarks, p. 37, 38, 39. † p. 40.