His own time and way, No doubt, in adults the existence by faith; that

what is to prevent Him, in from imparting it likewise? divine nature will indicate its is, by their bringing forth an effect corresponding to the principle of which they are possessed: but faith, as an effect, is merely an accident ;*-it is love which, as the cause, is the essence ;-and if love be conferred, is not the divine nature, and thereby the capacity for admission into Christ's kingdom, conferred likewise ?— Observe, I assert not the admission of every infant into Christ's kingdom; but only of those whom he may be pleased to beget again, in the exercise of his infinite sovereignty, by the communication to them of his nature. And I connect not this new birth with the sprinkling of water, or with any other external and superstitious practice; but solely with the divine purpose, and with the putting forth of that purpose in act by the implantation of the principle of love or the divine nature. As to the text commonly quoted in proof of infant salvation, viz. suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me, for of such is the kingdom of heaven,† it is not worth a rush as evidence of the doctrine: for, our blessed Lord in this passage does not state, that His kingdom consists of little children, but of such ; that is, of persons who, having been born again, are in a spiritual point of view what little children are in a natural point of view.§

* The best proof which I can afford of this is, the xiiith. chapter of the 1st Epistle to the Corinthians throughout, especially verse 13th.

§ This becomes very plain, when we compare the words of the text quoted with Christ's words in Matthew xviii. 3.

Secondly, it is in vain to object to the system just propounded, "that the exclusion of any infants from the kingdom of heaven is inconsistent with justice, seeing that it is impossible for any of them to be guilty of the sin of unbelief." The man who starts this objection generally contradicts other admitted principles of his own, and always errs, not knowing the scriptures nor the power of God. He who admits that, in the consequences of Adam's crime, even infants although personally guiltless of it are involved-and yet objects to my theory, that infants, as not being personally guilty of unbelief, cannot be excluded from Christ's kingdom-evidently contradicts himself.-But passing by the argumentum ad hominem to which, in reference to this point, our soi-disant orthodox clearly lie open, it is of more importance for me to observe, that every person who proposes the objection in question mistakes the ground of the natural condemnation of all Adam's posterity, as well as the ground upon which any of the human race are excluded from supernatural blessings. He mistakes the former for, it is not on account of my having personally committed, or my being supposed to have personally committed, Adam's transgression, that I am from the very period of my conception in the womb obnoxious to Adam's punishment; but my liability to death, from my very origin, is on account of my having the same nature as that which in Adam led to and was productive of his first transgression. I am liable to be punished in consequence of my having in me the cause of evil, not on account of that

cause having in my case been actually productive of a certain effect. The punishment, then, attaches to Adam's nature wherever that nature is found, whether in infants or in adults; the first transgression of Adam having been by divine appointment, properly speaking, merely the first indication of a nature which is essentially fleshly and earthly; and which as such, and as proved to be such by the inability of its first possessor even in a state of innocence to abstain from transgression, is fitted only to return to the dust from which it was originally taken.-And, if one transgression of our common parent was a sufficient indication of the perfect inability of mere human nature to comply with divine prohibitions, and consequently of its unworthiness to retain natural blessings;-surely the re-iterated proofs afforded by the Jewish nation of their inability under the most favourable circumstances, when left to themselves, to believe in the declarations of God concerning benefits freely bestowed on them, must be allowed to be likewise a sufficient indication of the total indisposition and inability of mere human nature to credit divine testimony, and, consequently, of the total unworthiness of those who are possessed merely of human nature to inherit supernatural blessings. Now, this is the very predicament in which every human being, whether infant or adult, stands. His nature as the same with that of Adam, it has been proved over and over again, has no capacity whatever to believe divine testimony. 1 Corinth: ii. 14. Belief of that testimony, it has by repeated experiments been satis

factorily shewn-it is by the conduct of the Jewish nation shewn at the present day-can only spring from love, or the divine nature: a principle which, as Adam's descendants, human beings when they come into the world certainly have not. The ground of the exclusion of the majority of infants and others from Christ's kingdom is not, therefore, properly speaking, the fact of their being naturally destitute of faith, but the fact of their being naturally destitute of the principle from which alone faith can proceed, The majority of infants are not excluded because personally they have rejected the divine testimony, or because personally they are supposed to have rejected it; but because they possess no more than a nature which, in every case in which an opportunity is afforded for displaying what it is, necessarily and inevitably rejects that testimony; thereby incontrovertibly proving, that it is fitted only for existence in this present world.Thus, then, is the ground of the exclusion of all infants from the natural advantages of the earthly paradise, and of the majority of them from the supernatural advantages of Christ's kingdom, exactly the same. Of the former they are deprived, because they have a nature which is the same with that which in Adam led to his first transgression; from the latter they are excluded, because they have merely a nature the same with that which in the Jews as a nation shewed itself unable to produce faith, or any other divine fruit and effect. Deprivation of the one, and exclusion from the other, thus attach, not to offences actually committed

by the infant, but to the nature which it has,—a nature from which, whenever the suitable opportunity is afforded, these offences naturally proceed.

One explanation more, and my system, in so far at least as regards the present subject, is complete..

"What" it may be asked, "is to become hereafter of the great majority of the human race, who, according to your sentiments, are eternally punished, by being eternally excluded from Christ's kingdom?"

The question is a fair one, and shall receive a fair, distinct, and scriptural answer.

The wicked or unbelieving portion of mankind, it is plain, cannot be annihilated. With the annihilation of any of the human race, however plausible and satisfactory to some the notion may have appeared, it is impossible to render the word of God consistent. Death is one of the works of the Devil: and, therefore, if a single human being were to be left for ever under the power of death-which if annihilated he would be— in his case one of the works of the Devil, instead of being destroyed, would be confirmed. Thus, the same text which overturns the doctrine of eternal torments, overturns likewise that of annihilation. But, to disprove the latter doctrine, it is unnecessary to have recourse to inferences, however correctly these may be drawn. Christ has expressly declared, that all that are in the graves shall hear his voice; John v. 28: and, as believers in his testimony, we require nothing farther to satisfy us of the fact.*

* See also 1 Corinth: xv. 22; a text which nothing but the most bare-faced impudence and sophistry can attempt to explain away.

U