we, could obtain the leave of the Company to send them, and that they might enjoy their protection when there. More than this I dare not ask, or even accept at their hands.

"I know your object is to do something on an enlarged scale. I revere your motives, but would entreat you to consider the words of an apostle, 2 Cor. vi. 11-18. Christian enlargement, according to this passage, and according to fact, does not consist in uniting with, or drawing into our religious measures, great numbers of worldly men; but rather in the reverse. The forming of such connections, is the same thing as being unequally yoked.' To unite the sprightly horse with a tardy ass would be to straiten rather than to enlarge him; and must impede the object, instead of promoting it. Half a score Christians, cordially united, will accomplish more than thousands of heterogeneous characters, possessed of mere discordant principles.

"But if your scheme were not thwarted by such a connection, it would certainly be corrupted, and so in great measure be defeated. Every body of men, like every species, if they propagate any thing, it will be their own likeness. True religion may be accidentally propagated by those who are destitute of it; but that is all. God often makes use of instruments in this way; but it is a work above our hands. If we attempt it, there is infinite danger of the work being marred. They may indeed be used in furnishing some of the materials, as Tyrian workmen furnished materials, and aided in the building of the temple but they must not be invested with the power of direction. In this case the answer of Zerubbabel to those who offered to unite in rebuilding the temple, is worthy of example. You have nothing to do with us, to build a house unto our God; but we ourselves together will build unto the Lord God of Israel, as Cyrus, the king of Persia, hath commanded us.'

"You suppose the number of pious ministers that could be collected, and supported by voluntary subscription merely, would be small. Be it so a small number, if they could co-operate with several pious schoolmasters, might do great things. I may also add, the number of characters suitable for such an undertaking, is small. You hope for thirty; I wish you may find so many. It is more than we can find amongst us. If you can muster ten, without hold

X

ing up very handsome pecuniary prospects to allure them, it will be a good specimen of the prevalence of true religion in your connections.

"Finally Notwithstanding all I have said, I had much rather see the doctrine of Christianity introduced among the Hindoos, even though it were under the form of an Established Episcopacy, than that they should continue as they are; and if you should persevere in your scheme, I shall pray that it may prosper in all that is good about it, and which I am persuaded is not a little."

CHAPTER XI.

Controversy with Mr. Booth-Letter to Dr. Hopkins-Remarks on some American Writers-Mr. Booth's notion of Regeneration by the Word examined-Particular Redemption-Conversation with a friend at Edinburgh, on the same subject-Atonement and Substitution of Christ-Letter to Dr. Erskine on the Merits of Christ— Letter to Mr. Maclean on Faith and Justification-Validity of Lay Ordination-Propriety of administering the Lord's Supper without a Minister-and Strict Communion.

It was grief of heart to Mr. Fuller, to have any disagreement with a man whom he so highly esteemed, as the venerable Abraham Booth. But on some minor points there was a difference between them, though not such as would justify the slightest alienation, or require any painful exercise of mutual forbearance. During the controversy on Faith, in which Mr. Fuller was several years engaged with various opponents, who marched forward from the ranks both of Arminians and Calvinists, to meet this redoubtable champion, Mr. Booth watched its progress with considerable anxiety; and finally concluded that he could find a middle path between those Calvinists who admit and those who deny the obligation of sinners to believe the gospel. He at the same time suspected that Mr. Fuller and his friends were too much attached to the sentiments of President Edwards, and other American divines of later date; and that by importing their metaphysical refinements, there would be some danger of relaxing that muscular system of theology to which he himself was so ardently devoted.

Mr. Booth, therefore, published, in 1796, his first edition of "GLAD TIDINGS to perishing Sinners;" the object of

which is to prove that "the genuine gospel contains a complete warrant for the ungodly to believe in Jesus." This is a proposition which Mr. Fuller never denied, and which needed but little proof; and it is rather extraordinary that so acute a writer as Mr. Booth should seem to confound the "warrant" to believe, with a disposition to believe, or that state of mind which induces faith. Had the question been, what is it that warrants a sinner to believe in Christ; the obvious answer is, the gospel and that only. But if it were asked, what is it that inclines a sinner to believe; the only answer is, that sacred influence by which he is renewed in the spirit of his mind. Yet both in the title and tenor of the work, this necessary and important distinction is too much overlooked.

In the progress of his inquiry, Mr. Booth did not fail to animadvert pretty severely on some of the American writers whom he mentioned rather in terms of contempt; and the sentiments of Dr. Hopkins in particular, on the subject of regeneration and justification, he considered as "pernicious," and tending to "corrupt the gospel." His pamphlet soon crossed the Atlantic, where it was attentively examined by Dr. Hopkins, who transmitted to a friend on this side the water, a complete refutation of several of Mr. Booth's positions, accompanied with some pointed strictures on the temper of his performance, and the inconclusive nature of his reasonings. The respect entertained for Mr. Booth, did not permit the printing of this valuable manuscript, and it obtained only a private circulation; for, whatever difference of opinion might exist on some speculative points, all parties were agreed in paying homage to his character. Mr. Fuller apologized to Dr. Hopkins, for Mr. Booth's manner of writing, and his seeming contempt for cotemporary authors, in a letter dated March 17, 1798; while he at the same time expressed his own opinion of the manuscript in question.

"I sincerely thank you," says he, "for your remarks on Mr. Booth's performance; which every person of judgment who has seen them, within my knowledge, considers as a decisive refutation. When his piece first came out, I was in London. I looked into it, and soon after called upon him. I told him, as to his first part, I had no objection to it, except this; that it seemed to imply that sinners were very willing to come to Christ, if the door was but open; and all that appeared to be wanting was a right or 'warrant' to come. But as to his second part, I was fully persuaded

that he was wrong, and that I could prove him so. To which he made scarcely any other reply than saying he supposed I should not approve of it.

I have remarked the effects of his pamphlet on the pub. lic mind. Some of our monthly editors have bestowed indiscriminate praise, without at all understanding the ground of the controversy. People in general do not seem to comprehend his design. They can see no object he has in view, or who, or what he means to oppose, except one. They think his first part savours of an agreement with me; and reckon, therefore, that the whole book was written in order to favour my sentiments on the duty of sinners to believe in Christ. I have been asked for a copy of my first piece on that subject; and when I have answered, it is out of print: Well, it has been said, 'I will get Mr. Booth's book; 1 reckon they are pretty much alike.' In short, I do not think it will do any harm, owing chiefly to its obscurity.

You are mistaken, however, in Mr. Booth's character; and as for his manner of writing, it may admit of some apology. He is an upright, godly, learned man. But(1.) He is a generation older than Sutcliffe, Pearce, or myself; and perhaps it may be owing to this that he is less attentive to any thing we write.-(2.) He is a great admirer of Owen, Vitringa, Venema, &c. and seems to suppose that they have gone to the ne plus ultra of discovery. (3.) Having written a pretty large and valuable work, entitled, "Pedobaptism Examined on the Principles, Concessions, and Reasonings of the most learned Pedobaptists," he there got into such a habit of quotation, that he seems unable to write half a dozen pages without it. And though I believe him to be as honest a man as any in the world, I will not say that he is destitute of what on both sides of the water, for aught I know, may be called 'British pride.'* I attribute his misrepresentations of your sentiments to this spirit, by which he was prevented from a patient and candid examination of the whole of what you say, rather than to any unworthy design; for of this he is utterly incapable."

Mr. Fuller and his connections certainly had a very high esteem for the writings of President Edwards, and others of the New-England school, which they read with consid

* This alludes to Mr. Booth's frequently calling his opponent the "American Doctor."

siderable advantage; and to that bulwark of the Calvinistic system, Edwards's treatise on the Freedom of the Will, Mr. Fuller acknowledged himself indebted for his first right views on the subject of moral obligation. But that he indiscriminately adopted the sentiments of these writers, or admitted all their reasonings, is far from being true. In the same letter to Dr. Hopkins, from which the above extracts are taken, are the following paragraphs:

"I am not sure that your idea of God being the author of sin,' is essentially different from the notion of those Calvinists who consider sin as the object of divine decree : but I am satisfied of this, that to say 'God is the author of sin,' does so naturally convey to almost every mind the ideas that God is the friend and approver of sin; that we are mere passive instruments, and that he himself being the grand agent, ought only to be accountable for it,—that I should think, by using it, I conveyed ideas directly contrary to James i. 13. And I must say, that the whole of that passage, taken together, appears to me to represent an important truth, which your manner of writing seems to overlook; and which is thus expressed by M'Laurin, in his sermon on the passage,- Whatever dishonourable thoughts sinful men may have of God to the contrary, yet it is a truth clearly evident, that God is infinitely free from the blame of their sins."* Your observations on the passage, in vol. i. p. 213, of your system, go only to prove that your views do not represent God as tempting men to sin, or as being tempted himself to sin: but you do not observe the opposition in the context, that evil is not to be ascribed to God, ver. 13-15; that every good and perfect gift, especially regeneration, is to be ascribed to God, ver. 16 -18.

I have enjoyed great pleasure in reading many of your metaphysical pieces, and hope those who can throw light on evangelical subjects in that way, will continue to write. But I have observed that wherever an extraordinary man has been raised up, like President Edwards, who has excelled in some particular doctrines, or manner of reasoning, it is usual for his followers and admirers too much to confine their attention to his doctrines or manner of reasoning, as though all excellence was there concentrated. I allow that your present writers do not implicitly follow Edwards, as to his sentiments, but that you preserve a spirit of free

* Sermons and Essays, p. 31.