before mentioned, with many such others as might be insisted on; weigh all the privileges which we are made partakers of; remember that he distributes them as he will, that he hath the sovereign disposal of them; and they will be prepared for this duty.

How and in what sense it is to be performed hath been already declared: what is the formal reason of this worship, and ultimate object of it, I have also manifested. In the duty itself is put forth no small part of the life, efficacy, and vigour of faith; and we come short of that enlargedness of spirit in dealing with God, and are straitened from walking in the breadth of his ways, which we are called unto, if we learn not ourselves to meet him with his worship in every way he is pleased to communicate himself unto us. In these things he does so in the person of the Holy Ghost. In that person do we meet him, his love, grace, and authority, by our prayers and supplications.

Again consider him as he condescends to this delegation of the Father and the Son to be our comforter, and ask him daily of the Father in the name of Jesus Christ. This is the daily work of believers. They look upon, and by faith consider, the Holy Ghost as promised to be sent. In this promise, they know, lies all their grace, peace, mercy, joy, and hope. For by him so promised, and him alone, are these things communicated to them. If, therefore, our life to God, or the joy of that life, be considerable, in this we are to abound,to ask him of the Father, as children do of their parents daily bread. And as, in this asking and receiving of the Holy Ghost, we have communion with the Father in his love, whence he is sent; and with the Son in his grace, whereby he is obtained for us; so with himself, on the account of his voluntary condescension to this dispensation. Every request for the Holy Ghost implies our closing with all these. O the riches of the grace of God!

Humbling ourselves for our miscarriages in reference to him is another part of our communion with him. That we have grieved him as to his person, quenched him as to the motion of his grace, or resisted him in his ordinances, is to be mourned for; as hath been declared. Let our souls be humbled before him on this account. This one considerable ingredient of godly sorrow, and the thoughts of it, are as suitable to the affecting of our hearts with humiliation, and indignation against sin, as any other whatever. I might proceed in the like considerations; as also make application of them to the particular effects of the Holy Ghost enumerated; but my design is only to point out the heads of things, and to leave them to the improvement of others.

I shall shut up this whole discourse with some considerations of the sad estate and condition of men not interested in this promise of the Spirit, nor made partakers of his consolation :

1. They have no true consolation or comfort, be their estate and condition what it will. Are they under affliction or in trouble?— they must bear their own burden; and how much too weak they are for it, if God be pleased to lay on his hand with more weight than ordinary, is easily known. Men may have stoutness of spirit, and put on great resolutions to wrestle with their troubles; but when this is merely from the natural spirit of a man,

(1.) For the most part it is but an outside. It is done with respect to others, that they may not appear low-spirited or dejected. Their hearts are eaten up and devoured with troubles and anxiety of mind. Their thoughts are perplexed, and they are still striving, but never come to a conquest. Every new trouble, every little alteration in their trials, puts them to new vexation. It is an ungrounded resolution that bears them up, and they are easily shaken.

(2.) What is the best of their resolves and enduring? It is but a contending with God, who hath entangled them, the struggling of a flea under a mountain. Yea, though, on outward considerations and principles, they endeavour after patience and tolerance, yet all is but a contending with God,—a striving to be quiet under that which God hath sent on purpose to disturb them. God doth not afflict men without the Spirit, to exercise their patience; but to disturb their peace and security. All their arming themselves with patience and resolution, is but to keep the hold that God will cast them out of, or else make them the nearer to ruin. This is the best of their consolation in the time of their trouble.

(3.) If they do promise themselves any thing of the care of God towards them, and relieve themselves thereby,—as they often do, on one account or another, especially when they are driven from other holds, all their relief is but like the dreaming of an hungry man, who supposeth that he eateth and drinketh, and is refreshed; but when he awaketh, he is empty and disappointed. So are they as to all their relief that they promise to receive from God, and the support which they seem to have from him. When they are awaked at the latter day, and see all things clearly, they will find that God was their enemy, laughing at their calamity, and mocking when their fear was on them.

So is it with them in trouble. Is it any better with them in their prosperity? This, indeed, is often great, and is marvellously described in Scripture, as to their lives, and oftentimes quiet, peaceable ends. But have they any true consolation all their days? They eat, drink, sleep, and make merry, and perhaps heap up to themselves; but how little do these things make them to differ from the beasts that perish! Solomon's advantage, to have the use and know the utmost of these things, much beyond any of the sons of men of our generation, is commonly taken notice of. The account also that he gives of them

VOL. II.

18

is known: "They are all vanity and vexation of spirit." This is their consolation: a crackling of thorns under the pot, a sudden flash and blaze, that begins but to perish. So that both adversity and prosperity slayeth them; and whether they are laughing or crying, they are still dying.

2. They have no peace,-no peace with God, nor in their own souls. I know that many of them, upon false bottoms, grounds, and expectations, do make a shift to keep things in some quietness, neither is it my business at present to discover the falseness and unsoundness of it; but this is their state. True and solid peace being an effect of the Holy Ghost in the hearts of believers (as hath been declared), they who are not made partakers of him have no such peace. They may cry, "Peace, peace," indeed, when sudden destruction is at hand. The principles of their peace (as may be easily evinced) are, darkness or ignorance, treachery of conscience, self-righteousness, and vain hope. To these heads may all the principles of their peace be reduced; and what will these avail them in the day when the Lord shall deal with them? 3. I might say the same concerning their joy and hope;--they are false and perishing. Let them, then, consider this, who have satisfied themselves with a persuasion of their interest in the good things of the gospel, and yet have despised the Spirit of Christ. I know there are many that may pretend to him, and yet are strangers from his grace; but if they perish who in profession use him kindly, and honour him, if he dwell not in them with power, where shall they appear who oppose and affront him? The Scripture tells us, that unless the Spirit of Christ be in us, we are dead, we are reprobates,

we are none of Christ's. Without him you can have none of those glorious effects of his towards believers before mentioned; and you are so far from inquiring whether he be in you or no, as that you are ready to deride them in whom he is. Are there none who profess the gospel, who have never once seriously inquired whether they are made partakers of the Holy Ghost or no? You that almost account it a ridiculous thing to be put upon any such question, who look on all men as vain pretenders that talk of the Spirit, the Lord awake such men to a sight of their condition before it be too late! If the Spirit dwell not in you, if he be not your Comforter, neither is God your Father, nor the Son your Advocate, nor have you any portion in the gospel. O that God would awake some poor soul to the con sideration of this thing, before the neglect and contempt of the Holy Ghost come to that despising of him from which there is no recovery! -that the Lord would spread before them all the folly of their hearts, that they may be ashamed and confounded, and do no more presumptuously!

A

VINDICATION

OF

SOME PASSAGES IN A DISCOURSE CONCERNING

COMMUNION WITH GOD,

FROM

THE EXCEPTIONS OF WILLIAM SHERLOCK,

RECTOR OF ST GEORGE, BOTOLPH LANE.

WILLIAM SHERLOCK, father of Dr Thomas Sherlock, an eminent bishop of London, was himself distinguished as an author, and mingled deeply in the controversies of his day. His strictures on Owen's work on Communion with God appeared in 1674, after that work had been seventeen years before the public. It seems to have been Sherlock's first appearance in authorship; and some of his subsequent treatises, such as those on Providence and on Death, afford a better specimen of his abilities. They are destitute of evangelical principle and feeling, and imbued throughout with a freezing rationalism of tone; but, nevertheless, contain some views of the Divine administration, acutely conceived and ably stated. He became rector of St George, Botolph Lane, received a prebend in St Paul's, and was appointed Master of the Temple about 1684. His conduct at the Revolution was not straightforward, and laid him open to the reproaches of the Jacobites, who blamed him for deserting their party. There was a controversy of some importance between him and Dr South. The latter, on the ground of some expressions in the work by the former on the Trinity (1690), accused him of Tritheism. Sherlock retorted by accusing his critic of Sabellianism. He died in 1707, at the age of sixty-six.

Sherlock's work against Owen was entitled, " A Discourse concerning the Knowledge of Jesus Christ, and on Union and Communion with Him," etc. Owen confines himself, in his reply, to an exposure of the misrepresentations in which Sherlock had indulged. The latter, for example, sought to fix on the Puritan divine the doctrine, that the knowledge of divine things was to be obtained from the person of Christ, apart from the truth as revealed in the Scriptures. Our author successfully vindicates himself from this charge, and repudiates other sentiments equally mystical, and ascribed to him with equal injustice. The views of Sherlock, on the points at issue, have been termed, "a confused mass of Socinianized Arminianism." Owen evinces a strength of feeling, in some parts of his "Vindication," which may be accounted for on the ground that he resented the attack as part of a systematic effort made at this time to destroy his standing and reputation as an author. In the main, there is a dignity in his statements which contrasts well with the wayward petulance of his antagonist; and occasionally the reader will find a vein of quiet and skilful irony, in the way in which he disposes of the crude views of Sherlock.

Such was the beginning of the Communion Controversy, which soon embraced a wider range of topics, and points of more importance, than the merits of Owen's book. Besides the original disputants, others entered the field. Robert Ferguson, in 1675, wrote against Sherlock a volume entitled, "The Interest of Reason in Religion," etc. Edward Polhill followed, in "An Answer to the Discourse of Mr William Sherlock," etc. Vincent Alsop first displayed in this controversy his powers of wit and acumen as an author, in his "Antisozzo, or Sherlocismus Enervatus." Henry Hickman, a man of considerable gifts, and pastor of an English congregation at Leyden, wrote the " Speculum Sherlockianum," etc. Samuel Rollè, a nonconformist, wrote the "Prodromus, or the Character of Mr Sherlock's Book;" and also, in the same controversy, "Justification Justified." Thomas Danson, who had been ejected from Sibton, and author of several works against the Quakers, wrote "The Friendly Debate between Satan and Sherlock," and afterwards he published again in defence of it. Sherlock, in 1675, replied to Owen and Ferguson in his "Defence and Continuation of the Discourse concerning the Knowledge of Jesus Christ." He was supported by Thomas Hotchkis, Rector of Staunton, in a " Discourse concerning the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness," etc. The singular diligence of Mr Orme has compiled this full list of the works published in this controversy; but he is not quite correct in affirming that it was closed by the replies of Sherlock and Hotchkis in 1675. A second part of the work by Hotchkis appeared in 1678; and Sherlock was the author of two other works, "An Answer to Thomas Danson's scandalous pamphlet, entitled 'A Friendly Conference," " etc., which appeared in 1677, and was followed by a "Vindication of Mr Sherlock against the Cavils of Mr Danson.”—ED.