FARTHER REMARKS ON THE BASIS.

It might be some improvement if the 3d Count under Chap. XIX were made to read: That any man can secure eternal life by his own obedience to the law of God,

Count 5 should be so amended as to read: That the gospel is a new law, which in accommodation to the infirmity of our fallen nature promises salvation on condition of faith and repentance, as the proper title to its blessings.

The first Count condemns that kind of antinomianism, which may be denominated ultra-Calvinistic: another Count might be added condemning more pointedly the fundamental tenet of Arminian Antinomianism, to this effect:--

That christians are not under the moral law as it was given to man in a state of innocence, but under some modification of it, so mitigated in its demands, that it is fulfilled by that sincere, though imperfect, obedience, which is practicable to man since his moral and intellectual powers have been damaged by the fall of our first parents.

The 9th count under chap. XXI might be spared. Perhaps it has always been admitted that such persons as cannot pray without it, may lawfully use a form of praise. When the Liturgy was admitted into the English Church, it was perhaps expedient and for edification. Her great error, which was the cause of much misery to the British nation for several generations, lay in contending for its use as of Divine authority, after the necessity for it had passed away---a kind of error, however, into which many other churches have fallen. Besides, the Liturgical error is never again likely to give much disturbance to the church. We would not condemn the use of a form of prayer absolutely and under all circumstances. It is sufficient to say that we have no such custom binding as a law, neither yet the VOL. IV.-SIG. 1