،

* or future interest. Had we not experience, it might perhaps, be speciously urged, that it is improbable any kind of hazard and danger should be put upon us by an infinite Being; when every thing which is hazard and danger in our manner of conception, and will end in error, confusion, and misery, is now already certain in his foreknowledge.' Does it involve the subject in deeper gloom, to know that the All merciful, in his Sovereignty, who is not willing that any should perish, has resolved that all shall not, but has predestined an indefinite portion of the human race to holiness as essential to happiness, who are "to be con"formed to the image of his Son," and who are designated as the called, whom he justifies, and whom he will glorify* !

6

Our Author has hazarded' some remarks upon the subject of the human will, the extreme futility of which appears to us less surprising, as proceeding from such a writer, from his seeming to think that plain good sense, aided by some ex-, 'perience of human nature,' would be competent, without, as we should suspect, either extensive reading upon the subject, or deep investigation, to seize upon the homely truths' which comprise the very core and nucleus of the metaphysical controversy. His positions that the will must, in order to exist, be free-that it consists in the power of making elections, as, otherwise, it becomes a non-entity--few persons, would, we should suppose, be found to deny. The fact,' also, that we do really possess such a faculty,' is, on the ground assumed by our Author, undeniable. But the point which Dr. Whitaker overlocks, or by a petitio principii eludes, is this. Is the Will a self moving power-an efect taking place without a cause, and subjected in its operations to no laws? or is it dependent on the determining faculty in man, on the understanding; being in itself, not the cause of our actions, but the essence of action? and are not its determinations in every case conformable to the moral nature, or disposition from which, or in which it acts? Will our opponent assert, that the will of a depraved being is uncontrolled by the nature of that being? That a wicked man may just as easily will a virtuous action, as the man whose motives are those of purity and justice? Why do we will? By chance, or because we do will? If not, the will itself must be an effect, and we know of no rational cause of that effect, but the nature of the agent.

We think Dr. Whitaker has mistaken the meaning of those who assert the passiveness of the human will, in the work

*Rom. viii, 29, 30.

of regeneration. No persuasion can be firmer than that which we feel, that he would not designedly misrepresent their doctrines. But he cannot understand Calvinists to mean, that through the whole progress of the work of Divine grace upon the human heart, the will is entirely passive, and that it 'does in no degree co-operate in the work.' We apprehend, that it can only be in reference to the bestowment of regenerating grace, that this representation has been maintained: and modern Calvinism, at least, allows of this interpretation alone. On this subject then, we must again put to our Author a plain question. It is the doctrine of some of the most distinguished members of his Church, and, according to some, of the Church of England herself, that this efficacious grace is communicated in the ordinance of baptism :-in this case, we would wish to know, what part the will of the infant takes in the work. How does it co-operate? What moral activity is exerted by the recipient? But perhaps Dr. Whitaker, in common with the most consistent Protestants, rejects this notion as unscriptural. In this, we think, he will be countenanced by the common sense and feeling of mankind.' Let us, then, change the form of our question, and we must demand in what way the act of regeneration, which all who receive the doctrines of the New Testament must believe to be both real and necessary to the production of a vital principle of holiness, takes place, in combination with the human will. 'Whatever disabilities,' says our Author, and he is careful not to define too precisely those disabilities, have been incurred by the will in consequence of original or actual transgression, it is the first office of grace to remove-to restore that disordered faculty to its intermitted functions, that is, to restore it to its existence in the heart.' Does Dr. Whitaker mean to assert that those who are not the subjects of this grace, are destitute of will, and therefore, according to his own position, destitute of that freedom which is the basis of accountability? Or does he unwittingly symbolize with the Calvinist in meaning to assert the simple truth, that the unregenerate man is incapable of the right exercise of his will, because his nature is depraved? In either case, we may recur to our plain question-How can a nature change itself? How can the will which proceeds from the nature, become a cause effective in working a change upon that nature, by any mysterious co-operation with Divine agency? As well might our objectors deny, that an infant was not wholly passive, in the first communication of the vital spark, or that it was itself the author of that birth, to which the production of moral life in the soul, is, by our Saviour himself, represented as analogous.

There is one more passage in Dr. Whitaker's sermon, which we deem so exceptionable, that we cannot forbear trespassing a little longer upon the indulgence of our readers. After a candid admission that those who differ from each other on these abstruser points of theology, are, nevertheless, "brethren," even in doctrine, he adds,

The gospel of Christ happily depends neither on the one nor the other; it stands aloof from all artificial systems independent and alone; for without entering upon these controverted points it is possible to preach the great doctrine of salvation through Jesus Christ, and by faith in his blood, to warn the sinner to flee from the wrath to come, and to build up God's people in their holy faith, without one word of election, or reprobation, or irresistible grace. And, let me add, that if such forbearance he possible, it is also prudent, for though we may ourselves be able (though it be not very probable) to state these doctrines with all the clearness of Calvin, or to confute them with all the calmness and temper of Limborch, we shall assuredly be able to infuse a very small portion of those qualities into our hearers: whereas we shall indubitably raise in our congregations a spirit which it will be very difficult to exorcise; a spirit of strife and confusion, of unskilful disputation and pharisaical pride; in the rear of which we may perchance descry as ascending from the lowest abyss of hell," the demon of assurance," the fruits of which upon earth are most surely to be fouud in the records of our courts of justice, in the cells of the condemned, and at our places of execution. This dreadful persuasion has become but too frequent under such circumstances, though accompanied by total insensibility and hardness of heart. Even under the most promising appearance of faith and repentance in condemned persons a prudent guide, while he encourages hope, will always rep ess 'ance. He who knew what was in man, and he alone, had a right to assure the thief upon the cross that "this day shalt thou be with me in paradise," '

assur

We scarcely know on what part of this singularly heterogeneous par graph to begin our animadversions. From the latter sentence, it should seem that this assurance,' this dreadful 'persuasion,' this demoniacal possession, is a peculiarity nearly restricted to condemned criminals: it is a deduction which persons under such circumstances are led logically to draw from the doctrines of election, reprobation, and irresistible grace;' or it is the consequence of a spirit which has been raised in their minds by the preaching of these doctrines This, we think, is, without the slightest distortion, the sense of our Author's words. Having traced, to his own satisfaction at least, the crimes of malefactors, to a peculiar species of fanaticism, as one of the most fruitful sources both of their guilt, and of their hardened impenitence, on which he considers himself justified in bestowing the scriptural term of "assurance," he

would seem to argue this position-that because criminals frequently discover a total insensibility and hardness of heart, assurance of hope is, in all cases, fallacious and dangerous; and the doctrines of election, and of irresistible grace, are not to be preached, because of their tendency to generate this dreadful persuasion in criminals.

If Dr. Whitaker takes the trouble to inspect our pages, we may indulge the persuasion that this simple representation of what we conceive to be the naked sense of the sentiments he has advanced, will suggest to his mind their refutation, accompanied by sensations of poignant regret, not unmixed with shame, for having countenanced the illiberal and ignorant opinions on the subject of Calvinism, which his words seem to involve. It would be an insult to the understandings of our readers, to occupy our pages with exposing the stale and often refuted falsehood, that, either in point of fact or of tendency, the doctrines of Calvinism, (misrepresented and distorted, as they may have been by illiterate teachers) are to be ranked among the incentives to crime. The only thing which can be adduced as affording the smallest pretext for such a charge, is, the injudicious zeal with which some pious Calvinistic ministers have flattered the suspicious repentance, and proclaimed the unsatisfactory conversion of dying malefactors. In these cases, however, the knowledge and professed reception of religious doctrines, have been uniformly subsequent to the crimes for the commission of which those poor unhappy beings have become the subjects of pious commiseration. We are at a loss, then, to conceive, how any degree of" assurance" into which they may be deluded, or how the impenitence with which it has been supposed to be connected, can, either by logic or by common sense, be made to appear cause of their guilt. Has Dr. Whitaker, indeed, visited for himself the cel's of the condemned, and met there, on their errand of mercy to the hopeless, the unwearied propagators of these delusive notions? Or has he even obtained any authenticated accounts of malefactors, who have either attributed their crimes to any received system of religious belief, or exhibited antecedently an immoral reliance on antinomian doctrines? Till he have, he will do well to suspect the accounts he may have received of the effects of Calvinistic preaching, and to be cautious in inferring consequences so widely remote from truth and candour.

the

It will not be forgotten by our readers, and the consideration has, doubtless, afforded to Theologians of Dr. Whitaker's class the liveliest satisfaction, that by a very numerous order of popular teachers, whose indefatigable and successful labours have been employed chiefly in the instruction and reformation of the lower orders, no such pernicious doctrines as those which distinguish the Calvinistic system, are preached. Perhaps, it

will tend to rescue, in their estimation, the name of Methodist, from the vulgar opprobrium cast upon it, that the sect which it serves to designate, is distinguished by its rejection of the tenets which our Author represents to be so dangerous to society. It is evident, therefore, that the charge of encouraging crime, and sealing up impenitence in hardness of heart, must be borne entirely by the preachers of election, reprobation, and irresistible grace. Doubtless there is nothing in the formularies of the Established Church, to foster a delusive assurance of salvation; nothing in the absolution so gratuitously afforded by her officiating clergy, too often, we fear, with all the indifference of professional mechanism, to the ignorant and the immoral, to engender a false hope, and a self-righteous reliance. The discourses which issue from her pulpits, are, we are bound to believe, of that awakening character-the avoidance of the controverted topics alluded to, is accompanied, on the part of the preacher, with so earnest and faithful exhortations to selfexamination and holiness,-the tendency of anticalvinistic preaching is of so humbling a description,—that' the demon of Jassurance,' effectually exorcised, has no fruits-can boast of no victims there.

It would lead us into too wide a discussion to enter into the vindication of the doctrine itself, which Dr. Whitaker first misconceives, and then controverts; a doctrine which, in common with every other tenet deducible from the Scriptures, has certainly been perverted and abused. But if the faith through which we are saved, be of that general character, that it has no relation to personal experience; if the tests of character with which the Scriptures furnish us, be of no use in enabling us to decide upon our moral state; if the promises of God are indeed to be believed, but not appropriated; if the marks of election be alike equivocal in the novice and in the saint; and if assurance be indeed unattainable, and hope must be without confidence, and love without rejoicing: then, and then only, will we agree in stigmatizing as unscriptural and pernicious, that style of preaching, and that system of theology, which give prominence to the controverted points from which Dr. Whitaker exhorts his clergy to abstain. But then we must be equally careful, from like prudence, to avoid all reference to those passages in the sacred volume, which seem to breathe so presumptuous a spirit. The Spirit which "beareth witness" with the spirit of the Christian that he is " the child of God," must be shewn to have withdrawn his operation; so that he can no longer be allowed to say, "Hereby we know that we dwell ❝in him and he in us, because he hath given us of his Spirit.""We know that we are of God, and the whole world lieth in "wickedness; and we know that the Son of God is come, and