Our Author fets out, like a true Cafuift, with formal definitions of the terms and things belonging to his fubject; explaining the nature and determination of the Will; as allo the meaning of the terms Neceffity, Impoffibility, Inability, Contingence, &c. In this first part of his treat fe, he fettles alfo, the diftinction between phyfical and moral neceffity; and examines into the notions of liberty and moral agency. Having thus adjufted the terms of his argument, he proceeds, in the fecond part, to confider, whether there is, or can be, any fuch fort of Freedom of Will, as that wherein Arminians place the effence of the liberty of all moral agents. To this end, he endeavours to fhew the inconfiftency of the notion of Liberty confifting in the Will's felf-determining power; obviating feveral objections that he conceives may be made to his arguments; and concluding, that no event whatever, and no acts of volition in particular, can come to pafs without an antecedent caufe. He next proceeds to explode the notion of the abfolute indifference of the Will, and to prove that every act of volition, or determination of the Will, is neceffarily connected with the influence of motives; and therefore not contingent, of free in the Arminian fenfe of that term. In part the third, he enquires whether any fuch liberty of Will as Arminians hold, be neceffary to moral agency, virtue and vice, praife or blame; labouring to prove, that a liberty of indifference is not only not neceffary to virtue, but utterly inconfiftent with it; and that all virtuous or vicious habits and inclinations, are incompatible with Arminian notions of liberty and moral agency. If, fays he, indifference belongs to liberty of will, and it be effential to a virtuous action that it be performed in a state of liberty; it will follow, that it is effential to a virtuous action, that it be performed in a ftate of indifference; and alfo, that the more indifferent and cold the heart is with relation to the act which is performed, fo much the better; because the act is performed with fo much the greater liberty. But this, he obferves, is plainly contrary to the univerfal fenfe of mankind, and to the notion they entertain of virtuous actions; which is, that those actions proceed from a heart well-difpofed and inclined to virtue; and that such acts as spring immediately from a perfect indifference, cannot arife from any good principle or difpofition, and confequently lay no claim to the nature of virtue. Befides, the actions that are done in a state of indifference, or that arife immediately out of fuch a ftate, cannot be virtuous, becaufe, by the fuppofition, they are not determined by any preceding choice. And yet thofe acts which are not deter Ee 3 mined mined by preceding choice, cannot be either virtuous or vicious on Arminian principles, because they are not determined by the will: fo that, neither one way nor the other, can any actions be virtuous or vicious on fuch principles. In the fourth and laft part of the work, our metaphyfical Theologue confiders more particularly the feveral arguments which the Arminians make ufe of in fupport and defence of their notions of liberty, moral agency, &c. with those also which they bring in oppofition to the contrary doctrines. Under this head, he ftrives to fhew the falfhood and inconfiftency of the metaphyfical notion of action and agency, which is generally entertained by the defenders of the Arminian notions of liberty. He next examines into the reafons why fome people think it contrary to common sense, to fuppofe things which are neceffary, to be worthy of either praife or blame. He makes, however, a very juft diftinction between phyfical and moral neceffity, and maintains the latter to be perfectly confiftent with praife and blame, reward and punishment, according to common fenfe, and the natural notions of mankind. He combats next the objections that have been made to this fcheme of neceffity, as that it renders men mere machines in affairs of morality and religion; and that it agrees with the Stoical doctrine of fate, and the opinion of Mr. Hobbes: to all which, as well as to many other objections, he replies, in a fhrewd and masterly manner. We shall only take notice of his remarks on the fuppofed tendency of his principles to the propagation of Atheism and Licentioufnefs. "If any object (fays he) against what has been maintained, that it tends to Atheifm; I know not on what grounds fuch an objection can be raised, unless it be that fome Atheists have held a doctrine of neceffity, which they fuppofe to be like this. But if it be fo, I am perfuaded the Arminians would not look upon it as juft, that their notion of freedom and contingence should be charged with a tendency to all the errors that ever any embraced, who have held fuch opinions. The Stoic Philofophers, with whom the Calvinifts are charged with agreeing, were no Atheists, but the greatest Theists, and nearest akin to Chriflians, in their opinions concerning the unity and the perfections of the Godhead, of all the heathen Philofophers. And Epicurus, that chief father of Atheifm, maintained no fuch doctrine of neceffity, but was the greatest maintainer of contingence," He obferves, that the doctrine doctrine of Neceffity, which fuppofes a neceffary connection of all events on fome antecedent ground and reafon of their exiftence, is the only medium we have to prove the being of God while the contrary doctrine of contingence, which certainly implies or infers, that events may come to pass without dependence on any antecedent caufe, takes away all proof of the being of God, and has a tendency to Atheifm, fays he, with a witnefs! Again, it hath often been faid, continues our Author, that the calvinistic doctrine of Neceffity, faps the foundations of all religion and virtue, while it tends to the greateft licentioufnefs in morals. This objection, however, he conccives, fufficently anfwered by the arguments he brings again the pretence on which it is founded, viz. that his doctrine rendered all means and endeavours to be virtuous and religious fruitless and vain. But this he denies; and, on the contrary, affers, that fuch a tendency is truly to be charged on the oppofite doctrine, inasmuch as the notion of contingence, which that doctrine implies, overthrows all connection, in every degree, between endeavour and event, means and end. "I will not deny, fays Mr. Edwards, that fome men do unreasonably abufe this doctrine [of neceffity] as they do many other things which are true and excellent in their own nature but I deny that this proves, the do&rine itself has any tendency to licentioufnefs. I think the tendency of doetrines, by what now appears in the world, and in our nation in particular, may much more juftly be argued from the general effect which has been feen to attend the prevailing principles of Arminians, and the contrary principles; both having had their turn of general prevalence in our own nation. If it be, indeed, as is pretended, that calviniftic doctrines undermine the very foundation of all religion and morality; and enervate and difannul all rational motives to holy and virtuous practice; and that the contrary doctrines give the inducements to virtue and goodnefs their proper force, and exhibit religion in a rational light, tending to recommend it to the reafon of mankind, and enforce it in a manner agreeable to their natural notions of things: I fay, if it be thus, it is remarkable, that virtue or religious practice fhould prevail moft, when the former doctrines, fo inconfiftent with it, prevailed almost univerfally; and that ever fince the latter doctrines, fo happily agreeing with it, and of fo proper and excellent a tendency to promote it, have been gradually prevailing, vice, prophanenefs, luxury, and wickedness of all for's, É e 4 fhould fhould proportionably prevail; and that thefe things should thus accompany one another, and rife and prevail one with another now for a whole age together. If these things are truly fo, they are very remarkable, and matter of very curious fpeculation." Indeed, fuppofing with our Author, fuch to be the fact, it is remarkable enough. Even in this cafe, however, it is, in our opinion, far from proving that the feverity, or licentioufnefs, of manners, here hinted at, is either directly or indirectly owing to the influence of Arminian or Calvinistic principles. Facts, we own, when well afcertained, are stubborn things; but there is nothing in which we are fo liable to be deceived, as in the motives, or moral caufes, of them. may add to this, that manners are much less influenced by fpeculative opinions, than is generally imagined. There are other caufes at this time of day fo much more prevalent, that whatever use political institutions may have heretofore derived from the tenets and principles of true or falfe religion, the morals of a people are not altogether fo dependent on them at prefent. Having thus given a flight sketch of this truly cafuistical performance, we cannot difmifs the Author without obferving, how much the ideas we had formed of his genius and abilities, from his acutenefs and dexterity in managing the weapons of metaphyfical argument, were difappointed, in feeing him fo readily give into the theological chimeras of calvinistical orthodoxy. We could not help reflecting, on this occafion, upon the circumftance of a certain Gentleman's infanity; who used to reafon upon every fubject with great fubtlety and precifion, except the Lancashire Witches, and the Whore of Babylon. The new Theory of Generation, according to the beft and latest Dif coveries in Anatomy, further improved and fully displayed. By J. C. M. D. 8vo. 5s. Buckland, &c. TH HE Compiler, or rather Botcher, of this ftrange Farrago, informs his Gentlemen Subfcribers and Encouragers," to whom, and whom only, he addreffes his particular Preface," that he has prepared two volumes more for them to subscribe to, hoping for the continuance of their kind favours. favours." This, we may venture to predict, is not the best news they have heard fince the perufal of the first volume; efpecially as they muft infer the next to be no fmall one, for he literally aflures them, "It will confift of exact extracts of all that has been wrote both pro and con, on this very deep but curious fubject, as far as he can purchase or procure, and that from their refpective learned Authors themselves, both chapter and verse, as the faying is, with feveral pretty improvements on the fame." He certainly intends this as a confiderable encouragement to his Encouragers, to proceed as they have begun to convince them also that he cannot afford to give his productions for nothing, and that he has been practising confiderably upon his own theory, he fays exprefsly, "For though my labour and time are ever at the public's fervice, I cannot fay fo of my money, as having many natural heirs, [which fome may interpret into fo many bastards] who claim a much nearer right thereto." The confeffion, however, is very honeft, whatever the practice may have been. The first page of this extraordinary book, affures us very feriously," A man can do nothing more profitable for health, and pleasant to his nature, than to learn to know himself, in a mere natural, as well as in a moral fenfe and capacity, viz. What he is; what was; whence came; how old; when made; from what proceeded; how long exifted; where and how fubfifted before either born or begot, or even his parents before him; how many revolutions he has undergone, and how many different stages he has paffed through, before he arrived hither into this lower world; and to whom at last beholden for his prefent appearance: with many more fuch uncommon but curious difquifitions, both lawful and agreeable to learn, and pleafant and inftructive to ftudy," &c. &c.Now after a man's utmost poffible investigation, or Approfendiffement, as the French term it, of all thefe queries, we apprehend he must content himself with the information of his Mother, the Midwife, or parish Regifter, on a few of the most obvious particulars; and for a folution of the reft, we are at a lofs whether to refer him to the ftars themselves, or to this uncommon and curious Compiler of a new theory, just as old as Lieuwenhoek's microfcopical fpeculations; fince we do not pretend to fathom many of them ourselves. This brief fpecimen will probably fuffice for most of our Readers, and qualify them to form no unjuft eftimate of Dr. J. C's abilities, and of the manner and generation of the two other volumes which he has hatched; tho' the term of their visible |