A careful and strict enquiry into the modern prevailing notions of that freedom of…

Here, if it should be replied, that altho' it be true, that according to the Doctor, the final Determination of the Will always depends upon, and is infallibly connected with the Understanding's Conviction, and Notice of the greatest Good; yet the Acts of the Will are not necessary; because that Conviction and Notice of the Understanding is first dependent on a preceding Act of the Will, in determining to attend to, and take Notice of the Evidence exhibited; by which Means the Mind obtains that Degree of Conviction which is sufficient and effectual to determine the consequent and ultimate Choice of the Will; and that the Will with Regard to that preceding Act, whereby it determines whether to attend or no, is not necessary; and that in this, the Liberty of the Will consists, that when God holds forth sufficient objective Light, the Will is at Liberty whether to command the Attention of the Mind to it.

Here, if it should be replied, that altho' it be true, that according to the Doctor, the final Determination of the Will always depends upon, and is infallibly connected with the Understanding's Conviction, and Notice of the greatest Good; yet the Acts of the Will are not necessary; because that Conviction and Notice of the Understanding is first dependent on a preceeding Act of the Will, in determining to attend to, and take Notice of the Evidence exhibited; by which Means the Mind obtains that Degree of Conviction which is sufficient and effectual to determine the consequent and ultimate Choice of the Will; and that the Will with Regard to that preceeding Act, whereby it determines whether to attend or no, is not necessary; and that in this, the Liberty of the Will consists, that when God holds forth sufficient objective Light, the Will is at Liberty whether to command the Attention of the Mind to it.

Nothing can be more weak and inconsiderate than such a Reply as this. For that preceding Act of the Will, in determining to attend and consider, still is an Act of the Will (it is so to be sure, if the Liberty of the Will consists in it, as is supposed) and if it be an Act of the Will, it is an Act of Choice or Refusal. And therefore, if what the Doctor asserts be true, it is determined by some antecedent Light in the Understanding concerning the greatest apparent Good or Evil. For he asserts, it is that Light which alone doth move the Will to choose or refuse. And therefore the Will must be moved by that in choosing to attend to the objective Light offered, in order to another consequent Act of Choice: so that this Act is no less necessary than the other. And if we suppose another Act of the Will, still preceding both these mentioned, to determine both, still that also must be an Act of the Will, & an Act of Choice; and so must, by the same Principles, be infallibly determined by some certain Degree of Light in the Understanding concerning the greatest Good. And let us suppose as many Acts of the Will, one preceding another, as we please, yet they are every one of them necessarily determined by a certain Degree of Light in the Understanding, concerning the greatest and most eligible Good in that Case; and so, not one of them free according to Dr. Whitby's Notion of Freedom. And if it be said, the Reason why Men don't attend to Light held forth, is because of ill Habits contracted by evil Acts committed before, whereby their Minds are indisposed to attend to, and consider of the Truth held forth