their favour Job xxiii. 13, 14. Job xxxiv. 29. Prov. xvi. 4. Isa. xlv. 7. St. Matth. x. 29, 30. St. Luke xxiv. 26. St. John vi. 37. Acts xiii. 48. &c.

The principal writers on the side of Necessity are, Hobbes, Collins, Leibnitz, Hume, Hutcheson, Kaimes, Hartley, Edwards, Priestley, Crombie, Toplady, T. and W. Belsham, and perhaps Locke.* Of these, Hartley, Hume, and Priestley, are perhaps the most profound reasoners, and Lord Kaimes, the most perspicuous writer, on the subject.

On the other side are, Clarke, King, Law, Reid, Butler, Price, Bryant, Wollaston, Beattie, Horseley, Gregory, Butterworth, &c.

This doctrine of Necessity is nearly connected with that of Predestination, which, of late years, has assumed a form very different from that which it formerly possessed; for, instead of being consi

* Several others have taken part with the advocates for Necessity, as Mr. Forsyth, in his Principles of Moral Science, Judge Cooper, &c. "The time seems to have arrived," says the latter of these gentlemen, "when the separate existence of the human soul, the freedom of the will, and the eternal duration of future punishment, like the doctrines of the Trinity, and Transubstantiation, may be regarded as no longer entitled to public discussion.”—Appendix, No. 2. to Memoirs of Dr. Priestley, vol. i. p. 335.

Interest reipublicæ ut denique sit finis litium, is a maxim of technical law; the same will equally apply to philosophy and religion; and what shorter way than this can be devised of settling some of the most knotty and perplexing controversies?

dered as a point to be determined almost entirely by the sacred writings, in the hands of a number of able writers, it has in a great measure resolved itself into a question of natural religion, under the head of the Philosophical liberty or necessity of the will: or, whether all human actions are, or are not, necessarily determined by motives arising from the character which God has impressed on our minds, and the train of circumstances amidst which his providence has placed us? The Calvinistic doctrine of predestination is, that "God, for his own glory, hath fore-ordained whatsoever comes to pass." The scheme of Philosophical Necessity, as stated by an intimate friend and warm admirer of Dr. Priestley, the most celebrated Necessitarian of the age, is, "That every thing is predetermined by the Divine Being; that whatever has been, must have been; and that whatever will be, must be;-that all events are pre-ordained by infinite wisdom and unlimited goodness;-that the will, in all its determinations, is governed by the state of mind;—that the state of mind is, in every instance, determined by the Deity; and that there is a continued chain of causes and effects, of motives and actions, inseparably connected, and originating from the condition in which we are brought into existence by the Author of our being."*

Essay on Philos. Necessity, by Alexander Crombie, A. M. See Dr. Priestley's two Disquisitions on Matter and Spirit, and on Philosophical Necessity; in the former of which, the mechanism of the mind is asserted, and in the latter the doctrine of necessity. The works on both sides may be seen in Dr. DODDRIDGE's Lectures, Vol. I. Edit. 1799.

On the other hand, Dr. Doddridge very justly remarks, that "those who believe the being and perfections of God, and a state of retribution, in which he will reward and punish mankind according to the diversity of their actions, will find it dif ficult to reconcile the justice of punishment with the necessity of crimes punished. And they that believe all that the scripture says on the one hand, of the eternity of future punishments, and, on the other, of God's compassion to sinners, and his solemn assurance that he desires not their death, will find the difficulty greatly increased."

It is doubtless an article of the Christian faith, that God will reward or punish every man hereafter according to his actions in this life. But we cannot maintain his justice in this particular, if men's actions be necessary either in their own nature, or by the divine decrees. Activity, and self-determining powers, are the foundation of all morality; and to prove that such powers belong to man, it is urged that we ourselves are conscious of possessing them. We blame and condemn ourselves when we do amiss; but an inward sense of shame, guilt, and remorse of conscience, are feelings which are inconsistent with the scheme of necessity. It is also agreed, that some actions deserve praise, and afford an inward satisfaction; but for this, there would be no foundation, if we were invincibly determined in every volition: so that approbation and blame are consequent upon free actions only.

CALVINISM,

AND

CALVINISTS.

NAMES.-The terms Calvinism and Calvinists are derived from John Calvin,* a zealous and eminent reformer, and contemporary with Luther. They occur so early as 1564; and it was the controversy on the Eucharist which first rendered them characteristical appellations.

It appears from Bishop Jewel's Defence of his Apology for the Church of England, † that the title of Calvinist was also affixed to our Reformers, and the English Protestants in general, by the adherents of the Church of Rome, as a term of reproach. As such, it was afterwards revived by one class of Protestants against another; and,

* His real name was Cauvin, but having put Calvini to his Commentary on the two books of Seneca, published at Paris in 1532, he was thence called Calvin.

t Pp. 64, 152, 154, 198, &c. Edit. 1611.

at length, from long accustomed appropriation, and for distinction's sake, those who held doctrines and principles more nearly agreeing with the writings of Calvin than with those of Arminius, were called Calvinists, a name which they still retain in this country; while those on the Continent of Europe have long been more generally known by the title of the Reformed. Wherever Calvinism has been the established religion, the Presbyterian form of church government has been adopted; and hence the term Presbyterians most frequently includes Calvinists, but not vice versa; for many who have adopted those doctrines which are known as Calvinistic, have been Independents, and not a few of them warm friends of Episcopacy. "If we would look for warm advocates of church authority in general, and for able writers in defence of our own form of church government in particular, such," says Bishop Horsley, "we shall find among those

*The title of Reformed, which with us is generally used as standing in opposition to Popery alone, was given to those Protestant Churches which did not embrace the doctrine and discipline of Luther. It was first assumed by the French Protestants, and afterwards became the common denomination of all the Calvinistical Churches on the Continent, which it still continues to be. But as there does not appear to be any good reason for the denomination, as applied to those churches in particular, it should doubtless be laid aside.

↑ I am aware that this is likely to be objected to by most readers of this denomination; for Calvinists in general conceive that Calvinism, doctrinally viewed, is as much the established creed in England as in Scotland.