[Sidenote:  Liberties of doctrine]

There had been, since the unhappy Covenant was brought and so generally taken in England, a liberty given or taken by many Preachers—­those those of London especially—­to preach and be too positive in the points of Universal Redemption, Predestination, and those other depending upon these.  Some of which preached, “That all men were, before they came into this world, so predestinated to salvation or damnation, that it was not in their power to sin so, as to lose the first, nor by their most diligent endeavour to avoid the latter.  Others, that it was not so:  because then God could not be said to grieve for the death of a sinner, when he himself had made him so by an inevitable decree, before he had so much as a being in this world;” affirming therefore, “that man had some power left him to do the will of God, because he was advised to work out his salvation with fear and trembling;” maintaining, “that it is most certain every man can do what he can to be saved;” and that “he that does what he can to be saved, shall never be damned.”  And yet many that affirmed this would confess, “That that grace, which is but a persuasive offer, and left to us to receive, or refuse, is not that grace which shall bring men to Heaven.”  Which truths, or untruths, or both, be they which they will, did upon these, or the like occasions, come to be searched into, and charitably debated betwixt Dr. Sanderson, Dr. Hammond, and Dr. Pierce,—­the now Reverend Dean of Salisbury,—­of which I shall proceed to give some account, but briefly.

[Sidenote:  A charitable disquisition]

In the year 1648, the fifty-two London Ministers—­then a fraternity of Sion College in that City—­had in a printed Declaration aspersed Dr. Hammond most heinously, for that he had in his Practical Catechism affirmed, that our Saviour died for the sins of all mankind.  To justify which truth, he presently makes a charitable reply—­as ’tis now printed in his works.—­After which there were many letters passed betwixt the said Dr. Hammond, Dr. Sanderson and Dr. Pierce, concerning God’s grace and decrees.  Dr. Sanderson was with much unwillingness drawn into this debate; for he declared it would prove uneasy to him, who in his judgment of God’s decrees differed with Dr. Hammond,—­whom he reverenced and loved dearly,—­and would not therefore engage him into a controversy, of which he could never hope to see an end:  but they did all enter into a charitable disquisition of these said points in several letters, to the full satisfaction of the learned; those betwixt Dr. Sanderson and Dr. Hammond being printed in his works; and for what passed betwixt him and the learned Dr. Pierce, I refer my Reader to a Letter annexed to the end of this relation.

[Sidenote:  Changes of judgment]