rison of truth. And in those happy moments, when he is favoured with a glimpse of the exalted Lamb, whose transcendent glory fills heaven and earth, he looks coolly upon human authority, human wisdom, and human worthiness. Such a one will not be offended when the authority of celebrated names is set at nought, that truth may be maintained; but rather he has learned, in some degree, to cease from man, whose breath is in his nostrils; for wherein is he to be accounted of?"

The only persons to whom I would offer any thing like the shadow of an apology, for the polemical style of the following Letters, are the afflicted, broken-hearted children of Zion. I know that disputings gall and distress a tender mind. But how can we contend earnestly for the faith, without disputation? Were not our Lord and his apostles often engaged in reasoning with the opponents of truth? I hope, therefore, that the lambs of the flock will not be offended, especially when they reflect that the things contended for in the following pages are of the highest importance-things with which the honour of God, and the glory of a dear Redeemer, are concerned; and which are absolutely necessary to the strengthening of their own weak hands, and the confirming of

their feeble knees. It is now high time for the friends of truth to speak boldly. Error no longer hides its hateful head, but struts abroad before the sun, and scornfully defies the advocates of sovereign grace.

Although I have, in the following Letters, boldly and unequivocally asserted what I believe to be the truth, and although I have endeavoured to expose the deceitfulness of the opposite error, I hope the reader will find nothing inconsistent with the meekness and gentleness of Christ. That I have expressed indignation at iniquity I acknowledge, but I have not yet learned that this is inconsistent with the spirit of the gospel, or contrary to the example of our Lord. Throughout the whole I have studied brevity and perspicuity; and I have not been unmindful of the well-known advice of the poet, which all controversial writers should regard :

"Quidquid præcipies esto brevis, ut citò dicta
Percipiant animi dociles, teneantque fideles."

Into the hands of Him whose servant I profess to be, I confidently commit my work, notwithstanding the sinfulness and imperfection which adhere to it. I shall think myself more

than remunerated for my labour, if he make it useful to any of his ransomed ones. But should it please him that it die as soon as it is born, and remain in silence for ever, I trust I shall be content. For I am well persuaded that the Lord will defend his own immortal truths in his own way, and in his own time, though error may rejoice in a temporary triumph, and though truth may be "fallen in the street."

Liverpool, 1831.

WILLIAM RUSHTON, JUN.

A

DEFENCE

OF

PARTICULAR REDEMPTION.

LETTER I.

DEAR SIR,

AGREEABLY to your earnest request, I have carefully read Mr. Fuller's publication, entitled "Dialogues, Letters, and Essays." Although I have long been acquainted with his sentiments generally, and have attentively perused some of his writings, yet I know not how long I should have postponed reading the "Dialogues," had it not been for your earnest solicitations.

I consider myself, therefore, indebted in no small degree to you for the pleasure and advantage I have derived from some parts of that work. In the first and second parts, particularly, Mr. Fuller discovers that strength of mind, and that depth and originality of thought, which characterize him as a polemical writer : he has also defended many glorious truths, and triumphanty refuted some dangerous errors. Here and there, indeed, even in the first two parts, he touches upon certain points, on which you will not expect me to agree with him; but it is in the third part wherein he explains himself more particularly on that all-important subject

which engaged our attention when I had the pleasure of a personal interview with you, and on which, more espe cially, I find reason to differ from him.

It is well known that a particular truth is often more effectually opposed by the introduction of principles inconsistent with it, than by an open attack upon that truth. Now, if I mistake not, Arminian principles have been more effectually introduced into the churches, in this manner, by Mr. Fuller's writings, than if he had openly impugned the doctrines of grace, and employed the whole force of his able pen against election, effica cious grace, and final perseverance. These he professed to maintain inviolably ;* yet, by insisting on faith in Christ as a moral duty, comprehended radically in the law,--by his view of moral inability, but especially by the sentiments he has advanced relative to the Atonement of the Son of God, he has furnished a system for those who are predisposed towards Arminianism; and this system has so far prevailed in the churches, that now we hear almost as little of finished salvation as if we were Arminians; as little of the earnest and the witness of the Spirit, as if we were Sandemanians.

In all religious error, there is some false doctrine in particular which constitutes its basis, and against which some one branch of divine truth, more than another, stands as a bulwark. In Mr. Fuller's controversy with his Baptist brethren, the Atonement of Christ is the cardinal point. I am not therefore surprised to find him labour so earnestly to explain away the doctrine of Par ticular Redemption, and by all means to establish his

* Preface to "Gospel Worthy of all Acceptation," page 7.