1 / 
 
 < 
 
 i 
 
 '»:«.. 
 
/3 
 
 "i- 
 
 OF THE 
 
 Theological Seminary, 
 
 PRINCETON, N. J. 
 
 Case, O ^-"^ ... ..P.iy.is.10'1 
 
 Slielf, ^*^C? O Sec: ion 
 
 Book, 1.;.;^:..:.: 
 
^y, . ^ - :^J^ >y*^^ 
 
 yz 
 
 ,- />^' 
 
"»■ v^^ 
 
THE 
 
 cA ^ " <s^ 
 
 h 
 
 DOCTRINE 
 
 DIVINE EFFICIENCY, 
 
 DEFENDED AGAINST CERTAIN 
 
 MODERN SPECULATIONS. 
 
 I- 
 
 BY EDWARD D. GRIFFIN, D. D. • 
 
 PRESIDENT OF WILLIABIS COLLEGE. 
 
 'Love the Truth and Peace." Zech. 8. 19. 
 
 NEW-YORK : 
 
 JONATHAN LEAVITT, 182 BROADWAY, 
 
 BOSTON : 
 CROCKER & BREW.sTKR, 17 VVashiugton-street. 
 
 1833. 
 
Entered according to the Act of Confess, in the year 1833, by Jonathan Leavitl, in the 
 Clerk's Office of the District Court of the Southern District of New-York. 
 
 WEST & TROW, Printers 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 Page 
 
 Introduction 5 
 
 Chapter I. Dr Fitch's Theory 13 
 
 Chapter II. Dr Taylor's Theory 43 
 
 Chapter III. Notice of Two Other Writers 55 
 
 Chapter IV. Meaning and Origin of Corrupt Nature ... 63 
 
 Chapter V. Divine Efficiency 73 
 
 Chapter VI. Importance and Instrumentality of Truth . . 105 
 
 Chapter VII. Scripture Testimony to Divine Efficiency . . 117 
 
 Chapter VIII. Sinless Creatures Dependent for Holiness . . 165 
 
 Chapter IX. God's Power to Prevent Sin 179 
 
 Chapter X. Alleged Dominion of Motives. — ^ Distinct 
 
 Theory 203 
 
INTRODUCTION 
 
 There is something in controversy which is calculated 
 to awaken unhallowed passions, even when the object is 
 professedly most remote from personal interest. Religious 
 controversy is therefore in itself an evil, though it is often 
 necessary. This discussion I hope to conduct with good 
 will to my brethren, all of whom I respect, and some of 
 whom are my personal friends. I consider it lawful to 
 examine with freedom the soundness and even the fairness 
 of their arguments, but not to extend my censure beyond 
 the reasoning. I regard our dependence on divine 
 efficiency as one of the sweetest doctrines of the Bible, and 
 know it to be most deeply felt under the special effusions 
 of the Spirit. Take from me my dependence on God, 
 and I must despair. I consider too the honour of raising 
 to spiritual life a world dead in trespasses and sins, as 
 one of the brightest glories of the Godhead ; and I have 
 been grieved at my very heart to see this honour taken 
 away. This has been the severest cut of all. These 
 reasons for entering into this discussion will, I hope, 
 
 1* 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 plead my cause wifh those who may think me in errour. 
 Not that I am afraid to speak for God; but I know it to 
 be my duty to speak in a way least offensive to my 
 brethren, and least calculated to grieve the Spirit from our 
 churches by parly strife. But I may be permitted to call 
 things by their right names, and intend to be so explicit 
 as to make the theories I am opposing clear to ordinary 
 capacities. 
 
 By divine efficiency I mean the effectual power of God 
 immediately applied to the heait to make it holy. This 
 is the meaning which the CalvinistJc world have always 
 given to i lie phrase ; and no man has a right to use it in 
 another sense, lo set off a contrary doctrine or otherwise. 
 Nor may I be accused of wrongfully cluirging a denial of 
 divine efficiency, because some may choose to wrap up 
 another doctrine under tljis name. 
 
 There are two theories of modern origin abroad in 
 our country which deny this doctrine, and more or less 
 place the cause of holiness in motives clearly presented 
 by the illuminating Spirit. One of these is understood to 
 have proceeded from New-Haven, and to owe its origin to 
 the Bev. Doctors Taylor and Fitch, Professors of Theology 
 in Yale College. This system plainly denies the power 
 of God fully to control the mind by motives. The other, 
 which is adopted by here and there an individual, as- 
 cribes to God an absolute dominion by motives. Both 
 disclaim the self-determining power, on account of the 
 influence allowed to motives : but the New-Haven sys- 
 tem as plainly involves the self-determining power as did 
 that of Arminius himself. I shall e.\amine both theories. 
 
INTRODUCTION. 7 
 
 but shall direct my chief attention to the former, as occu- 
 pying more of the public attention and involving errours 
 of a larger size. 
 
 Dr Taylor, in treating of consideration and the com- 
 parison of dilferent objects of choice, says, " We have 
 already had occasion to say, that to deny the tendency 
 of the acts specified to produce a change of heart, is to 
 maintain the doctrine of the self-determining power of the 
 will."* As though this was a pretended power to act 
 without motives. And a writer on the same side, in a 
 late Periodical, rejects the imputation under a notion that 
 the theory of the self-determining power is, that the will 
 determines the will. Now Pres. Edwards did, hij way of 
 inference, push his antagonists into this inconsistency, that 
 the will is determined by a previous act of the will, and 
 that therefore there is a volition before the first volition; 
 but no Armininn, I believe, wa,s ever willing to admit into 
 his theory this inconsistency. And Pres. Edwards him- 
 self, in his book on the Freedom of the Will,f says, " I 
 shall suppose that the Arminians, when they speak of the 
 will's determining itself, do, by the will, mean the soul 
 willing. I sliall take it for granted that when they 
 speak of the will as the determiner, they mean the soul 
 in the exercise of a power of willing. — I shall suppose 
 this to be their meaning because nothing else can be meant 
 without the grossest and plainest absurdity." They meant 
 to say that the man himself chooses, unconstrained by a 
 higher power: but they did not mean to say, (though this 
 was an inference drawn from their arguments,) that he has 
 
 * Christian Spectator for 1829 : p. 486. t Lon. Ed. 1790 : p. 45. 
 
8 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 that choice because he first chooses to have that choice ; for 
 this would place a volition before the first volition. They 
 maintained that the will was not compelled by any thing 
 without ; that the soul was free to act or not act, notwith- 
 standing all inducements presented. But they still main- 
 tained, (as who will not?) that the mind, though not 
 forced, was uniformly induced by the stronger motive. The 
 great masters of Arminianism who are quoted by Pres. Ed- 
 wards in his work on the Will, do this.* Dr Turnbull 
 approvingly quotes another of them as saying, " The 
 will itself, how absolute and incontrollable soever it may 
 be thought, never fails in its obedience to the dictates 
 of the understanding." Mr. Chubb says, " No action can 
 take place without some motive to excite it." " Volition 
 cannot take place without some previous reason or motive 
 to induce it." Dr Whitby says, " To say that — the 
 greatest good proposed, the greatest evil threatened, wlien 
 equally believed and reflected on, is not sufficient to en- 
 gage the will to choose the good and refuse the evil, is in 
 effect to say, That which alone doth move the will to 
 choose or to refuse, is not sufficient to engage it so to do; 
 which, being contradictory to itself, must of necessity be 
 false. Be it then so that we naturally have an aversion to 
 the truths proposed in the Gospel ; that only can niake us 
 indisposed to attend to them, but cannot hinder our con- 
 viction when we do apprehend them and attend to them. — 
 Be it that there is in us also a renitency to the good we are 
 to ciioose ; that only can indispose us to believe it is, and 
 to approve it as, our chiefest good. Be it that we are 
 
 * Patre 107—118. 
 
INTRODUCTION. 9 
 
 prone to the evil that we should decline ; that only can 
 render it the more difficult for us to believe it is the worst 
 of evils. But yet what we do really believe to be our 
 chiefest good, will still be chosen ; and what we appre- 
 hend to be the worst of evils, will, whilst we do continue 
 under that conviction, be refused by us. It therefore can 
 be only requisite, in order to these ends, that the good 
 Spirit should so illumine our understandings, that we, 
 attending to and considering what lies before us, should 
 apprehend and be convinced of our duty ; and that the 
 blessings of the Gospel should be so propounded to us, as 
 that we may discern them to be our chiefest good ; and the 
 miseries it threateneth, so as we may be convinced that 
 they are the worst of evils ; that we may choose the one 
 and refuse the other." 
 
 Here is the New-Haven divinity entire. Here is Dr 
 Taylor's constitutional susceptibility to motives, founded 
 in self-love and wrought upon by the good contained in 
 truth. Here is that divine illumination which fastens the 
 wandering attention to truth and lets in upon the mind 
 the full power of motives ; which, with the mind's own 
 activity, is enough without divine efficiency. That power 
 of action which requires no other stimulus than motives 
 enforced by divine illumination, is the very self-determin- 
 ing power which Whitby, the prince of Arminians, main- 
 tained. And this is maintained in exact form by the 
 gentlemen of New-Haven, though Dr Taylor disclaims the 
 belief because he admits the necessity of motives. And 
 who does not ? As relates to divine efficiency and motives 
 and divine illumination, the gentlemen of New-Haven per- 
 
10 IN'TRODL'CTIOX. 
 
 fectly agree with Whilby and Cliubb and Tiirnbnll as above 
 quoted. Some of the Arminians of a darker age did indeed 
 suppose tliat the will could act willioiit molives. But this 
 appendasje was not essential to the scll-delcimining power. 
 If the mind moves itself to holiness in view of motives en- 
 ' forced by tiie illuminaLing Spiiil, without divine efliciency, 
 while it is competent lo reject the motives and is not abso- 
 lutely controlled by them, it possesses the self-detefmin- 
 ing power. And the New-Haven brethren will not deny 
 that this is their exact creed. In ex[)Iaining their system 
 therefore I shall unhesitatingly ascribe to them this belief. 
 But wheiher I am tliouglit to be riglit in this use of the 
 phrase or not, to prevent all dispute as to the exact impu- 
 tation I make, I hereby announce once for all, that I 
 mean by tlie self-determining power, a competency, (in 
 every sense of the word,) to move, in view of motives, with- 
 out divine efficiency, and a competency to reject the 
 motives. 
 
 Even the allegation of our brethren that a change by 
 divine efficiency would be only a i^hijskai operation, and 
 that no change is moral but that which is wrought by mo- 
 tives, is borrowed from the old Arminians. 
 
 There are three distinct theories respecting the cause 
 of the holy state or affections of the mind. One is, that 
 it is the power of the Spirit immediately applied to the 
 mind, to give it a holy temper, or, as others say, to make 
 it fall in with the motives presented in divine truth. 
 Another is, that the cause lies in the motives themselves, 
 set clearly before the understanding by the illuminating 
 Spirit. This is that theory which asserts the absolute do- 
 
INTKODUCTTON. 
 
 11 
 
 minion of mofivos. Tlie third is, that the mind turns it- 
 self, without any action of God but that which presents 
 motires ; witlioat any molives but those which the mind is 
 in all respects competent to resist, and which many do 
 finally resist. The cause then certainly lies in the self- 
 determining power. Here is nothing but the illuminating 
 Spirit, tiie light, and the mind deciding for itself whether 
 to fall in with the motives or not. This is exactly the 
 self-determining power maintained by Whitby, and this 
 is precisely the New-Haven theory. 
 
 I suppo.se Dr Taylor and Dr Fitch to agree in their 
 theory ; but as each has exhibited a different part, I shall 
 examine their writings separately. As Dr Fitch has 
 spread out the system more at large, I shall give him the 
 first place : and as his Review of Dr Fisk's Sermon has 
 been set up by some of the leading advocates of the new 
 doctrines, as a fair exposition of their opinions, I shall 
 attend chiefly to that. 
 
CHAPTER I. 
 
 Or Fitch's Theory, tis exhibited in his Rcvieto of Dr Fish's 
 Discourse on Predestination aiul Election. Christian Spectator, 
 Dec. 1831. 
 
 The theory exhibited in this^Review is, one half of 
 the way, pure Arminianism ; and the other half, it 
 assumes the high language of Calvinism, with an Armi- 
 nian meaning two thirds of the way, and for the other third, 
 i Calvinistic meaning wholly at variance with the rest of 
 the system. I Avill first spread out the theory so plainly 
 that every one can understand it, and secondly, show by 
 copious extracts that it is indeed w^hat I represent. 
 
 Dr Fitch says, (putting his thoughts into my own lan- 
 guage.) that if God should attempt to make men )ioly by 
 efficient power, they would not be holy after all, for they 
 would not be moral agents ; that all he can do is to throw- 
 truth upon their understanding and conscience by his illu- 
 minating Spirit, and leave the result to the self-determining 
 power, which is capable of yielding to the motives and 
 capable of resisting any influence which God can bring ; 
 that God does the best he can by his Spirit for every indi- 
 vidual, and therefore, (if I understand him,) as much for 
 •me as another ; that he has taken the best measures he 
 
 •2 
 
14 DR fitch's theory. 
 
 could to keep out sin, and could not succeed any further 
 without destroying the freedom of creatures and rendering 
 them incapable of sinning ; that he has taken the best 
 measures he could to recover men from the ruins of the 
 fall, and has done all he could for each individual consist- 
 ently with the general interest of holiness in our world, 
 and could not succeed with a greater number ; that God 
 ibresaw that if he gave being to creatures, and brought 
 forward such a system of government and grace, Peter 
 and John, by the self-determining power, would accept his 
 offers, and that Judas would reject them ; that this fore- 
 seen preponderance of good, (say, two to one,) was the 
 motive which induced God to create and to bruig forward 
 such a system of government and grace; that his deter- 
 mination to do all this when he foresaw the result, was it- 
 self the predestination of all things, even of sin, and par- 
 ticularly was the election of Peter and John and the rejec- 
 tion of Judas. Thus far the system, (except the language 
 of the last proposition,) is pure Arminianism. 
 
 At this point he turns short about, and employs the 
 highest Calvinistic language, but witli a meaning entirely 
 Armhiian. He says that, bj' the word and Spirit, God 
 rnsures the regeneration of Peter and John, and, according 
 to an eternal purpose, selects them from the ruins of the 
 apostacy. He presses the doctrine of election in the strong- 
 est possible terms. But how does God ensure regenera- 
 tion ? and what is the election contended for ? Why, he 
 ensures the regeneration of Peter and John by urging upon 
 them motives to which he foresaw that they, by the self- 
 
DR fitch's theory. |/> 
 
 determining power, would yield. In this way alone he 
 selects them from the ruins of the apostacy ; and his mere 
 determination to do this, was the eternal decree of election. 
 This is no other regeneration or election than any Armi- 
 nian would agree to if he would consent to use such lan- 
 guage. Indeed Dr Fitch plainly tells Dr Fisk, (a consist- 
 ent and highly respectable Arminian Methodist,) that he 
 ought to believe in the same election if he holds to fore- 
 knowledge : and Dr Fisk in his answer tells him that he 
 does, but reproves him for the illusory language in which 
 he has wrapt it up. 
 
 Thus two thirds of the last half of the way, viz. through 
 regeneration and election, he uses high Calvinistic lan- 
 guage with an Arminian meaning. The other third of 
 the last half of the way, viz. through perseverance, he 
 holds Calvinistic language and supports the Calvinistic 
 theory, but with entire inconsistence with the rest of the 
 system. If God does nothing for Peter but offer motives 
 which the self-determining power is to yield to or reject, 
 there are a million of chances to one that Peter will fall 
 away. Satan fell away from perfect holiness ; Adam fell 
 away from perfect holiness : a million to one that Peter 
 will fall away from imperfect holiness, in a world full of 
 temptations, with all his appetites and former habits set 
 against him, unless he is " kept by the power of God 
 through faith unto salvation." I beg to know what makes 
 it certain that a single Christian will persevere. God's 
 foreknowledge? That foresees a thing already certain, 
 but does not malce it certain. How comes it then to pass 
 that every regenerated man, from Adam to his youngest 
 
10 DR fitch's theory. 
 
 son, perseveres to the end? How came it to pass that 
 God, not as a mere prediction of what the self-determining 
 power would do, but as a promise of what he himself 
 would accomplish in reward of Christ, pledged himself to 
 him that they all should remain steadfast ? This doctrine 
 of perseverance can consist with nothing but God's abso- 
 lute dominion over the mind, either by efficiency or by 
 motives. If this doctrine is true the rest of Dr Fitch's 
 theory falls. 
 
 Now then for the proof of these assertions. Dr Fitch 
 says, "We earnestly object to that Antinomian scheme 
 which makes grace terminate solely on dispensing with 
 free agency ; by an act of mere omnipotence creating a 
 new heart, and thus leaving none of the elements which 
 constitute the moral certainty of a conversion in the agent 
 himself"* " If Dr Fisk wishes to show that God does 
 not create the volitions of moral agents, he has our hearty 
 consent."t " Dr Fisk maintains, and, we think, truly, 
 that any act of the creature brought into existence hy the 
 mere efficiency of God, cannot be an accountable act."| 
 In that passage, " No man can come to me except the 
 Father — draw him," for drmo he reads induce ;§ confining 
 the whole operation to the mere influence of motives. He 
 says approvingly, Dr Fisk " maintains that God is not 
 the sole agent in the universe ; that there is an entire and 
 complete cause of moral action lying out of him, in the ex- 
 istence of a free agent. Such an agent then, on Dr 
 Fisk's principles, has power to sin notwithstanding any 
 amount of influence which Jiis Maker can bring upon him 
 * 633. \ 599. t GOO. § G37. 
 
DR fitch's theory. 17 
 
 short of destroying his freedom. Does Dr Fisk know, 
 can he prove, that of beings who have thus the power to 
 sin, any moral system could have been formed in which 
 some of these beings would not use that power? Can he 
 prove that the alternative presented to God in creation teas 
 not this ; no moral system, or a system in which some of 
 his subjects woidd ccbuse the high prerogative of freedom 
 and i'ebel?'^* This is enough to show his opinion re- 
 specting the power of God to control by motives in rege- 
 neration. For if by motives God could infallibly bring 
 back the depraved Peter and all other selected sinners, 
 by motives he could in all cases have prevented the fall of 
 spotless spirits. 
 
 God's " purpose," continues Dr Fitch, " was to confer 
 on the beings composing his moral kingdom, the power of 
 volition and choice, and to use the best influence God coidd 
 use on the lohole to secure the holiness and prevent the sin 
 of such beings, loho themselves, and not he, were to have 
 immediate power over their volitions. — And it is still true 
 that he desires their obedience, — and, without hindering 
 the return of any, uses cdl the influence he can without sa- 
 crificing a greater good, to induce them to return."t Now 
 if there is any frankness in these expressions, their mean- 
 ing must be, that God does as much by his Spirit for one 
 as another ; for if he does the best he can for all, he can 
 do no more for a part. If there is any reservation made 
 by such expressions as "on the whole," and "without 
 sacrificing a greater good," nothing at all is said. If Dr 
 Fitch means only that God does the best he can for each 
 
 * C04. t 615. 
 
18 DR fitch's theory. 
 
 consistently with the highest good of the universe, he says 
 no more than the strongest advocate for efficiency would 
 allow. And such a limitation of a universal proposition, 
 designed to assert God's utmost efforts to recover indepen- 
 dent beings, would not be fair. But he goes on. " What- 
 ever degree or kind of influence is used with them, to fa- 
 vour their return to him, at any given time, — is as strongly 
 favourable to their conversion as it can he made amid the 
 obstacles lohich a world of guilty and rebellious moral agents 
 oppose to God's ivories of grace." In a note he says, " We 
 do not mean that these influences do not become more 
 powerful at future times, [as knowledge increases, I sup- 
 pose ;] but at each moment God is able to say. What more 
 could have been done to my vineyard that I have not 
 done?"* Then surely he does as much by his Spirit for 
 one as another according to the knowledge they possess ; 
 at all events he cannot absolutely control the mind by mo- 
 tives. The writer proceeds. " Human rebellion and wick- 
 edness — oppose obstacles to a work of grace in our world, 
 and hindrances to salvation, which the God of grace can- 
 not wholly overcome ; and — the measures of grace now pur- 
 sued—overcome those obstacles to a further extent than 
 any other system of measures would do."t He does 
 " every thing to encourage and persuade them to return, — 
 which he can do amidthe obstacles opposed by their sins."\ 
 " He couldnot effect more as a whole, to recover those who 
 had destroyed themselves. "§ God "desires from the 
 heart that all men — comply ; — brings all those kinds and 
 all that degree of influence — upon each individucd, which 
 *e32. i G33. iC34. § G21. 
 
DR fitch's theory. 19 
 
 a system of measures best arranged for the success of 
 grace in a world of rebellion allows."* " The purpose of 
 election" brings God into measures " to gain loJiom in the 
 methods of his wisdom he can."f And yet, (with what 
 consistency let others judge,) he asks, "Why do given 
 sinners repent ? — Does God use no influence and means 
 to induce sinners? — Are these influences and means 
 brought to bear alike on all nations and on all individ- 
 uals?"! If "lotj w^t^^ what propriety could it be so often 
 said, he does the best he can for all consistently with the 
 general interest of holiness in our world ? 
 
 According to Dr Fitch, God foresaw, not what he 
 would do, either by efficiency or the absolute control of 
 motives, but what the self-determining power would do if 
 he created such beings and placed them under such a 
 system of government and grace ; and that, antecedent, in 
 the order of nature, to any design on his part even to create ; 
 for this foresight of what the self-determining power would 
 do if created, was the very motive which induced him to 
 create and to bring forward such a system of government 
 and grace ; and this decision to create and to enter on 
 such measures when he foresaw the result, was itself the 
 decree of election, — was itself the predestination of all 
 things, not excepting sin itself Hear Dr Fitch. " God's 
 foreknowledge of what would be the results of his present 
 works of grace, [results proceeding neither from efficiency 
 nor the absolute control of motives,] preceded, in the order 
 of nature, the purpose to pursue those toorks and presented 
 the grounds of that purpose. [The grounds therefore of 
 
 *635. +638. t631. 
 
20 DR pitch's theory. 
 
 creation ; for the whole creation was comprehended in the 
 plan of redemption. " All things were created by him, 
 (Christ,) and for him."] Thus Peter, when writing to 
 the brethren, — states — that through the calls of the Gos- 
 pel — the Holy Spirit induced them to obey ; — and in this 
 very %vay, according to the foreknowledge of God, were 
 they chosen to this happy state. — Thus too Paul — refers to 
 the fact that such persons are ' the called according to his 
 purpose ;' and adds, as we should paraphrase the passage, 
 ' For whom he did forcknotc,' as the people who ivould he 
 gained to his holy kingdom by his present works of graee, 
 (in which result lay the whole objective motive for under- 
 taking these ivorks,) ' he did also,' by resolving on those 
 works, ' predestinate to be conformed to the image of his 
 Son;' and by performing those works he calls, justifies, 
 and glorifies. Foresight then of the good results in sinners 
 redeemed, ichich the present measures of grace if pursued 
 would secure, is asserted to precede the prospective election 
 of them in the ctcrncd purpose of God, and the accom- 
 plished election of them through the influence of the Spirit. 
 The passages therefore, while they fully maintain a per- 
 sonal election made by God, contradict alone that idea of 
 It which considers the selection of particular individuals as 
 the first thing in the order of nature, and not as the forcr 
 seen residt of God's using with a world of sinners the best 
 means, (including the influence of the Spirit,) for their 
 recovery."* Thus their prospective election was only a 
 determination to bring forward such a system of grace and 
 persuasion, when it was foreseen who would be persuaded ; 
 
 * 622, 3. 
 
DR fitch's theory. 21 
 
 and their accomplished election was only the bringing for- 
 ward of the system with such foreknowledge. Hear him 
 again. " God, foreseeing with certainty that Adam would 
 freely act in that manner if created and placed on trial, 
 did still determine to create him and place him on trial ; 
 and THUS determined that such an event [as the fall] should 
 take place and in just such a manner. This certainly is 
 predestination * according to the counsel and foreknowledge 
 of God.' "* " In what sense are we to understand the 
 position that" God "purposes the existence of sin? Not 
 necessarily in the sense of his preferring its existence — to its 
 non-existence. — In affirming the doctrine of predestination, 
 we affirm no more necessarily than that God, with the 
 knowledge that these beings' would sin in despite of the 
 best measures of providence and government he could take, 
 purposed to create them and pursue those measures, not 
 for the sake of their sin, but for the good which he never- 
 theless saw it was possible to secure in his moral kingdom. 
 This would be a purpose — to permit its existence rather 
 than to have no moral system. — Nothing more, touching 
 free agency, is implied in the purpose — than a certainty, 
 foreseen of God, that if he creates and upholds that being, 
 and pursues icise and good measures of providence, — the 
 being will at a given time freely choose in a given man- 
 ner "i " God then, for any thing that has been shown to 
 the contrary, may have predetermined the existence of the 
 sin which now takes place in his kingdom, not for the rea- 
 son that he prefers sin — to holiness, — but simply for this 
 reason, that he chooses to do the most he can for the good 
 " 603. t 612. 13. 
 
22 DR FITCH'S TIIEORV. 
 
 of a moral system ; to prevent sin and promote holiness to 
 the greatest extent possible in such a kind of system. • Sin, 
 where it now occurs, may be regarded by him as an evil, and 
 only an evil, and yet, [as an evil imavoidahle, as to his pre- 
 vention, in a moral system,) it may he reduced to the least 
 possible Vunits and overruled in the best jwssible manner."* 
 Dr Fisk " must acknowledge that God might choose to cre- 
 ate and place under moral government the present universe 
 of beings, — as one in which he could do the most possible to 
 check and restrain sin and redeem from its power. — Now 
 would the resolution to give such good to creatures — be in 
 fact a predetermination of all — events ?"t " Election is 
 resolved simply into a gracious purpose to pursue the best 
 possible measures for the salvdt Ion- of sinners ;—w-tchich mea- 
 sures are foreseen with certainty to result in the 'salvation 
 of a particular number only and not the whole. As to that 
 explanation of the doctrine which denies that God is deal- 
 ing with free agents who have the absolute power of choice, 
 andivho can resist cdl measures taken for their welfare, and 
 which resolves renewing grace into a simple act of creative 
 omnipotence, we frankly admit that it does load the doc- 
 trine with the charge brought against it."| " The purpose 
 of election rightly interpreted then, in our view brings the 
 God of justice and grace into immediate contact with our 
 rebellious world, staying the execution of justice and urg- 
 ing gracious terms of reconciliation on men, on purpose to 
 bring the matter to a speedy issue and to gain whom in 
 the methods of his wisdom he can"^ Thus election is only 
 the decision of" God to send the Gospel, with his gracious 
 * G07. t G04. 1 635. 6 G36. 
 
DR FITCIi's THEORY, -IS 
 
 providence and illuminating Spirit, to do the best they can 
 for the recovery of all men, foreseeing at the same time the 
 results. Again, " God purposed to introduce his mea- 
 sures of grace and to conduct them in the manner he does, 
 foreseeing the' exact results they would have in the reco- 
 very of fallen men. — What if by these measures of redemp- 
 tion some men, through their free compliance, are taken, 
 and others in their refusal are left ?"* " God, with this 
 knowledge of the results, is still willing to go forward with 
 the measures of his grace, and tlms elect to salvation and 
 harden in sin. — To this influence," [the drawing of God,] 
 the sinner " can yield, and be thus.drawn of the Father ; 
 this influence he can resist, and thus harden his heart 
 against God. Election involves nothing more as it respects 
 his individual case, except one fact, the certainty to the 
 divine mind ichcther the sinner will yield — or — continue to 
 harden his heart till the measures of grace are withdrawn, "t 
 Thus itseems that some sinners finally turn away from those 
 drawings of the Father mentioned in John C. 44. Again, 
 " The purpose of election — is a purpose on the part of God 
 to carry forward his works of grace such as they are, in the 
 ^P^ very manner he does, in foresight of the exact results they 
 will have in inducing men to comply. "| " God, by deci- 
 ding on his present measures of grace, chose from among 
 the lost the heirs of salvation."'^ " The end is secured hy 
 the means. The purpose of God to employ the means, tvith 
 a certain hiowledge that they would secure the end, is the 
 only proper account of his purposing and fixing the end."\\ 
 " We would only ask Dr Fisk whether in employing these 
 
 *634. 1637. 1634. §686. |1 624. 
 
•24 DR FITCU'S THEORY. 
 
 means in the manner he does, God did not foresee what 
 individuals would comply and be saved. We ask again, 
 whether in jjurposing to employ these means in the manner 
 he does, God did not purpose that those individuals should 
 comply and thus be saved. And what is this but a per- 
 sonal election to salvation?"* 
 
 After quoting a passage from Dr Fisk, asserting the 
 gracious restoration of the lapsed power of the will, he 
 .says, " Supposing this scheme to be true in all its parts, 
 and to contain the whole truth on the subject, we would 
 inquire whether in thus placing a world on the footing of 
 moral agency through a gracious restoration of lapsed 
 power, God does not foresee who will and who will not 
 abuse this gracious power. If he does not see that any 
 will use it aright, then why does he grant it ? If he does 
 this, then he knows who they are individually. And pur- 
 posing to dispense his grace to those individuals, he purposes 
 that they shall he saved. We see not therefore hut on his 
 (nvn principles Dr JF^isk must either acknowledge the actucd 
 salvation of all men, or a personal election in the purpose 
 if God to restore the — lapsed poioer of the children of 
 Adam."i This was a precious confession, dropt out in 
 an unguarded moment, that the election he had been 
 pleading for was fully consistent with Arminian principles ; 
 was what every Arminian ought to believe, and every one 
 else who admits the foreknowledge of God. 
 
 After all this, who would have expected to hear, m the 
 next breath, that God actually selects the heirs of salvation 
 from the rest of the world by rendering their, regeneration 
 
 ^G20. tG31. 
 
DR fitch's theory. 25 
 
 certain 1 And how does he render it certain ? Why, by 
 using the means which he foresaw the self-determining 
 power in some would snifer to prevail, in others would 
 defeat. If I invite ten men to my house, do I select five, 
 merely because I foresee that, without any discriminating 
 act on my part, only five will come ? But let him speak 
 for himsejf "The question is, how comes any man 
 to comply with this condition? — Does not God secure 
 that compliance? Does he not elect the individuals 
 who shall thus voluntarily obey?"* "His influences 
 — render certain the return to God of all who ever do 
 return."! " We have solely one question to try. Is it a 
 fact that God elects from the impenitent and unbelieving 
 the individuals who repent and believe ?— How come par- 
 ticular persons to be believers ? Does God actually in his 
 government induce persons to submit and believe ? Does 
 he do any thing which \\e foresees will actually secure the 
 submission and faith of those very persons who become 
 submissive believers ? In other words the question is, — 
 whether God by the dispensations of providence and grace 
 actually secures all existing faith. That he does we hold 
 to be a fact, and the great fact involved in what is said in 
 the Scriptures on the subject of election. "| " We con- 
 tend that" election " always involves in it another point, — 
 viz. the purpose of God which secures the repentance and 
 faith of those particular persons." || Now look here. 
 " Wliatever is the degree of influence lohich he uses with 
 them, it is not in its nature irresistible ; but — men as free 
 agents still Icecp to their guilty choice in resistance to it, or 
 through its operation freely give up their idols and place 
 
 ^619. 1623. 1622. |1631, 2. 
 
 3 
 
26 DR fitch's theory. 
 
 their hearts on God."* Now, in a fair use of language, 
 does such an influence exerted on Peter render Peter's 
 action certain, when he is the cause of his own action, 
 and has a sufficiency in himself to refuse to act let his 
 Maker do what he will? Can God's illuminating influ- 
 ence which many resist, but which he merely foresees that 
 Peter will allow to prevail, be said to ensure Peter's com- 
 pliance? Suppose Esther had been a prophetess, and 
 had foreseen that her intercession with Ahasuerus would 
 convert him to the cause of the Jews ; would it be proper 
 to adopt the high Calvinistic language in the case, and 
 say that she decreed the conversion of Ahasuerus, and 
 ensured it, and elected him to be the saviour of the Jews ? 
 Aiid yet such language might be applied to that case as 
 correctly as to this. God's determination to urge motives 
 which he foresees will owe their success to a power in the 
 creature independent of. his control, is God decreeing the 
 event! Now with this understanding of the interposition, 
 is it fair to apply to it the highest language that the ad- 
 vocates of efficiency have ever employed ? It may serve 
 to hide the alien form of the theory and cover it with an 
 orthodox guise ; but I appeal to the universe if it is fair. 
 
 It is not necessary to make quotations to prove that 
 Dr Fitch holds strongly to the doctrine of perseverance. 
 This will not be denied. 
 
 Dr Fisk, in his Reply to this Review,t holds the fol- 
 lowing language. " If I understand the reviewer — he is 
 — in principle an Arminian. — The reviewer's whole ground 
 of defence — is solely this Arminian explanation of the 
 
 ' 632. t Christian Advocate, May 11, 1832. 
 
DR fitch's theory. 27 
 
 doctrine of predestination. He acknowledges, nay boldly 
 asserts, in a strain of rugged controversy with his brethren 
 who may differ from this view of the subject, that there is 
 no other explanation by which the arguments of the ser- 
 mon can be avoided ; that is, as I understand it, the only 
 way to avoid the arguments against the doctrine of Calvi- 
 nian predestination, is to give it up and assume the Armi- 
 nian sentiment. — I cannot approve of 'the reviewer's use of 
 terms. Though to my understanding he has evidently 
 given the doctrine of predestination, not merely a new 
 dress, but a new character, yet he more than intimates 
 that it is the old doctrine with only a new method of ex- 
 planation. — And so confident is the reviewer that he still 
 believes in the fact of predestination in the old Calvinistic 
 sense, that in stating his sentiments on this subject, he 
 uses the same forms of expression which Calvinists have 
 used, when their meaning was as distant from his as the 
 two poles from each other. — I feel safer in understanding 
 the reviewer in an Arminian sense, because he and some 
 others take it very ill of me that I have represented them 
 as Calvinists. — By God's foreordaining whatever comes to 
 pass, he only means that God foresaw that sin would cer- 
 tainly take place, and predetermined that he would not 
 hinder it, either by refraining from creating moral agents, 
 or by throwing a restraint upon them that would destroy 
 their free agency ; in short, that he would submit to it as 
 an evil unavoidably ' incident to the best possible system, 
 after doing all that he wisely could to prevent it. This is 
 foreordaining sin ! This is predetermining that it should 
 be I I cannot but express my deepest regret that a gentle- 
 
28 DR fitch's theory. 
 
 man of the reviewer's standing and learning, should lend 
 his aid and give his sanction to such a perversion of lan- 
 guage, — to such a confusion of tongues. — Do the words 
 predestinate, — foreordain, — decree, mean in common lan- 
 guage, or even in their radical and critical definition, 
 nothing more than to permit, — not ahsoluiely to hinder, — 
 to submit to as an tinavoidable but offensive evil? The 
 reviewer certainly will not pretend to this, — The use of 
 these terms by those who believe as I understand the re- 
 viewer to believe, is the more unjustifiable, because they 
 are used by most Calvinistic authors in a different sense. 
 Why thei^ should the reviewer, believing as he does, con- 
 tinue to use them in the symbols of his faith ? Different 
 persons might give different answers to such a question. 
 For one I would prefer he should answer it himself — His 
 mode of explanation — turns the doctrine into Arminianism. ' 
 — ^But the sermon was never written to oppose those who 
 hold to the decrees of God in an Arminian sense: Why 
 then does the reviewer complain of the sermon 1 — It seems 
 that Calvinism, in its proper character, is as obnoxious to 
 the reviewer as to the author of the sermon. — If it is safer 
 to attack Calvinism in this indirect way, I will not object. 
 — But I cannot see that it would be safer. An open bold 
 front always ends best. — As I understand the reviewer, 
 from the days of John Calvin down to the present hour, 
 there is on this point, between the great body of Calvinists 
 and himself, almost no likeness except in the use of words. 
 Theirs is one doctrine, his another. Why then — does he 
 hail from that party and hoist their signals; and then, 
 after seeming to get the victory by espousing the very 
 
DR fitch's theory. 29 
 
 cause of the assailed, encourage the Calvinists to triumph 
 as if their cause had been successful ?" 
 
 These remarks of the President of the Wesleyan 
 University of Connecticut, appear to me candid and judi- 
 cious, and go far. towards exposing the unhappy incon- 
 gruity between the language and the sentiments of this 
 Review. 
 
 Since writing the above I have seen, in the Christian 
 Spectator for December 1832, an article from the same 
 pen on the Divine Permission of Sin ; referring to several 
 publications by which the Review and the system had 
 been assailed. I shall make a few extracts in confirma- 
 tion of some of the foregoing remarks and in illustration of 
 others. In the supralapsarian scheme, which Dr F con- 
 demns, " it is— assumed," he says, that God's " direct effi- 
 ciency — is such that he can rely on that alone to secure 
 any conceivable result tvhatcver. — Now to affirm that God, 
 in this manner, selects a part for holiness and blessedness, 
 and leaves the rest to sin and misery, is placing the sub- 
 ject on the ground of mere arbitrary will."* " We have 
 begun with very obvious facts, that moral agents have the 
 power of choice, and that their voluntary conduct is not the 
 result of immediate propidsion or direct creation."f God 
 "purposes to conduct his own works, [of creation as well 
 as grace,] in the particular manner he does, in view of the 
 results which will certainly ensue, — and for the sake alone 
 of the good which lies in these results, as being the highest 
 good he can secure."| The infralapsarian scheme, which 
 he approves, is this. " God, foreseeing the conduct which 
 
 * 617. t 619, Note. t 618. 
 
 3* 
 
30 DR fitch's theory. 
 
 will certainly ensue on the different measures it is possible 
 for him to take with a moral kingdom, purposes to pursue 
 those measures which will secure the best possible result. — 
 It supposes that there may he obstacles in the nature of a 
 moral kingdom which render it impossible for him to give 
 universal efficacy to any original scheme of moral govern- 
 ment or subsequent scheme of redemption. It supposes 
 therefore that, as the first thing, he decides upon that 
 course of means and measures which he foresees will on 
 the whole most overcome hindrances and carry holiness to 
 the farthest extent possible, considering a whole universe 
 in all ages. Such a purpose is, by consequence, the pur- 
 pose of all that conduct in his creatures tvhich is certainly 
 to ensue. That is, the general purpose to use the power 
 of moral government and redemption in the manner first 
 seen to be the best possible, is, by consequence, the speci- 
 fic election of Gabriel rather than Lucifer, and of Paul 
 rather than Judas."* Now take from the universe divine 
 efficiency and the absolute dominion of motives, and what 
 did God foresee, but merely how creatures, by the self- 
 determining power, would treat the motives presented in 
 his government, providence, and grace ? He foresaw that 
 Peter would yield to them and that Judas would reject 
 them. And seeing this, his very decision to create these 
 beings and to bring forward this system of motives, was 
 itself the election of Peter and the rejection of Judas. As 
 the submission of Peter and the obstinacy of Judas were 
 acts equally independent of him, one was decreed as much 
 as the other, except that no measures were taken to induce 
 
 * 617, 18. 
 
DR fitch's theory,, 31 
 
 Judas to sin. So says the writer. " He foreordains the 
 existence of sin as really as the existence of holiness, and 
 he predestinates to wrath as really as to mercy."* 
 
 Dr F denies, not only divine efficiency, but the abso- 
 lute dominion of motives. " We affirm that the causes in 
 kind which originate sin, beinff inseparably inherent in a 
 moral universe, may so accumulate in degree, wider every 
 system of providence and government which can be pursued, 
 as to render sure the occurrence of sin.' ^f "His purpose 
 is, not only to use the law, but so to carry on his works of 
 creation and providence with a universe, as to secure the 
 highest possible amount of obedience. — And if he prefers 
 obedience — to — sin, he will do cdl that is possible to secure 
 obedience in his creatures : and if it is not possible to SC' 
 cure from them all that he prefers, he ivill secure all that is 
 possible."'^ 
 
 Dr F takes up above fifty pages in proving that God 
 could not have prevented sin. And the bare supposition 
 that he rejected a sinless universe which was possible, for 
 the sake of displaying his glory, seems to fill the writer 
 with horrour. And he imagines the angels, on hearing 
 the story, to unite in saying, " Show us a God who, able 
 to advance the holiness of the universe forever and to pro- 
 tect it from all the inroads of sin, does nevertheless, in the 
 choice of his heart respecting a whole universe, actually 
 reject such protection, and prefer to gratify his subjects 
 with a mere exhibition at the expense of the sin and misery 
 of one or many of his subjects ; and we shall always see 
 him purposely leading off the holy into sin and preferring 
 
 *618. 1622. tC53. 
 
32 DR fitch's theory. 
 
 their rebellion to obedience : — and in all his conduct to- 
 wards sinners, from first to last, we shall never see any 
 wisdom, any goodness, any holiness, any justice, any mercy, 
 but the mere caprice that starts aside from all, simply 
 to make an exhibition which throws eternal horrour into all 
 our hearts. God on the throne stepping aside from the 
 office of ruler and protector, to assume the mere pageant, 
 and sacrificing to his caprice multitudes of his creation."* 
 This, I am aware, is said in opposition to the theory that 
 God chose the existelice of sin merely to honour himself 
 But it is bold language. In my lips it would be blasphemy; 
 for I believe that God could have prevented sin, and 
 would, had he not seen it a means of blessing the universe 
 by filling it with his glory. Now who would have thought, 
 after this daring- attack upon one of the conceivable mo- 
 tives for permitting sin, that the writer was willing to have 
 it understood that he wc.s not certain whether sin was vo- 
 luntarily permitted, (that is, could have been prevented,) 
 or not ? " We have ventured to assert that a demonstra- 
 tion cannot be obtained from the hands of man either on 
 the side of the affirmative — or — the negative."! Amidst 
 all these bold and confident arguments against the power 
 of God to prevent sin, he repeatedly stops to tell us that he 
 means no more than that the thing is possible or probable 
 or highly probable : and he actually charges Dr Woods 
 with " injustice" for alleging that Dr Taylor had maintain- 
 ed this point as true, when, (as it is said,) he had only 
 spoken of it as possible. t I hope we shall have no more 
 
 * 644. I C48. i 621, Second Note. 
 
DR fitch's theory. 33 
 
 books written to bring the world to believe as cardinal 
 truths what the writers themselves deem only possible. 
 
 And why on this subject should there be a doubt 1 
 God cannot control the mind by efficiency nor yet by mo- 
 tives ; for it is confidently alleged that sinners are compe- 
 tent to resist any influence which he can bring to regene- 
 rate them. Can he then keep every creature in the uni- 
 verse in all ages right by any providential influence? If 
 I understand Dr F, this last is the influence to which he 
 often refers. He says " that God, not only entertains the 
 purpose to treat his subjects according to their character, 
 but also to regulate, in tlie best manner possible, all that 
 injluence in his kingdom which determines character. God 
 can vary his own acts in the creation of moral agents and 
 in his providence and government over them, in ways that 
 are endless ,■ and as it is through these acts that he controls 
 and regulates the influence which determines character, 
 he can vary that influence in ways as endless."* " Man — 
 cannot tell what a single change in the present providence 
 of God will certainly effect in the volitions of a single be- 
 ing."t One had spoken of the " series of conditions" in 
 which God places his creatures, and Dr F says, " By 
 conditions we are to understand here precisely that kind 
 and degree of influence which meets each individual at 
 each time he acts."| Now will any one pretend that by 
 this providential influence God could have prevented sin, 
 when he could not prevent it by efficiency or by motives ? 
 But Dr F's whole system is built upon the assumption that 
 God has employed all sorts of influence to the utmost limit 
 
 * 616. t 649. -t 645, Note. 
 
34 
 
 DR FITCH S THEORY. 
 
 of his power, to promote the holiness of the universe, 
 and particularly of this world, in all its generations I sup- 
 pose. Whether he would admit that God can send the 
 Gospel to the heathen, or light to the ignorant in Christen- 
 dom, faster than he does, I doubt. He may think that all 
 the influence God could have employed could not have 
 sent more than one Noah to the antediluvian world, or 
 more missionaries to the heathen in the early ages or now. 
 Ill the infinite complication of God's affairs, what particu- 
 lar difficulties may be contemplated as lying in the way, 
 I know not. Dr F introduces another hinderance, — the 
 want of the prayer of faith. " He could with propriety do 
 more for the salvation of men — if more acceptable prayer 
 were offered for the object. — God prefers that men would 
 at all times and in all places offer up acceptable prayer ; 
 and — he does all that he can wisely to excite them to the 
 performance of this duty."* If God cannot make his 
 people pray, it is wonderful that he should bind himself 
 not to do the best he can for the salvation of others, for 
 which he is so anxious, until his backward people have 
 permitted him. If he cannot control them, it would seem 
 wise for him to act without their prayers, and not suspend 
 the salvation of his creatures, and even his own benevo- 
 lent agency, on the will of his unmanageable children, — 
 whom he can manage to keep Christians, but whom he 
 cannot cause to pray aright. 
 
 But whether it is allowed or not that by all sorts of 
 influence God does the best he can for each individual ; 
 it is easy to see that, so far as providence is concerned, less is 
 
 * 658. 
 
DR fitch's theory. 35 
 
 actually done for one than for another. Some are heathen : 
 some are brought up in ignorance in a Christian land ; 
 some cannot read ; some are blind ; some are deaf and 
 dumb ; some die young. But it ought not to be overlooked 
 that these providential diversities, especially as they relate 
 to a Gospel land, do not distinguish the elect froin the non- 
 elect. Among those most favoured with light, many appear 
 to perish in their sins ; and from among the ignorant and 
 neglected, many rise up to the Christian character. These 
 then are not the decisive influences to be taken into 
 account in determining vi^hether God does more for the 
 elect than for the non-elect. The question is, does he do 
 more by his Spirit ? 
 
 This question Dr. F studiously^ avoids answering, 
 though pressed by Dr Tyler. " That writer, [Dr Tyler,] 
 inquires, Who made Peter and Judas to differ ? We sup- 
 pose that question, in the mouth of Paul, was applied to a 
 totally different subject from salvation. — Who distinguish- 
 eth thee with gifts 1 But v»ere we to apply it to the sub- 
 ject of salvation, the question as used by Paul would 
 mean, Who saved Peter ? not. Who kept Judas in his im- 
 penitence ? Who saved Peter 1 God, who interposed and 
 induced him to repent : [not, controlled him by motives, 
 but, applied motives which he foresaw Peter would allow 
 to prevail.] But did he not interpose for Judas without 
 success ? We know not how far he may have gone in that 
 particular instance ; but we know that he goes far in favour- 
 ing salvation in the case of many who perish, and charges 
 on them the very guilt of refusing his grace and hardening 
 their hearts. But says that writer, [Dr Tyler,] If God did 
 
36 DR riTCH's THEORY. 
 
 as much to effect the salvation of the one as the other, how 
 can it be said that Peter was elected in distinction from 
 Judas? [Now he will speak out.] Did as much for Judas 
 as for Peter in the whole work of his salvation ? Is that 
 the meaning ? But we have never said that, or any thing 
 which implies it. Did as much for Judas as he did for 
 Peter at the time he repented ? Is that the meaning ? 
 [Now surely he will speak out.] We have not asserted 
 even that. We have said that what God did for the repent- 
 ance of Peter was effectual and converting grace ; [because 
 Peter made it effectual and converting ;] and what he did 
 for Judas was ineffectual and resisted grace ; [because 
 Judas made it ineffectual by resistance ;] and that what 
 he did for both, was all that he in wisdom could do toward 
 the object of securing their repentance and interest in sal- 
 vation. In purposing to do this, we say in intelligible lan- 
 guage, that he elected Peter ; and that the election was 
 founded, not in mere will and volition, but in a wise regard 
 to the highest good he could effect in his kingdom. — 
 Whether he did as much for both or not, he resolved to do 
 the best he could, and as a consequence elected Peter. 
 But how, [Dr Tyler asks,] was Peter elected in distinction 
 from Judas ? Why, Peter was elected and Judas was not. 
 What other distinction would you have ? Perhaps how- 
 ever Dr Tyler refers to the will of God. [And pray, to 
 what else could he refer?] The question would then read 
 thus : Can God will to save Peter in any sense in which he 
 does not will to save Judas, if he prefers that both should 
 repent rather than perish, and does all that he can for the 
 object ? Very well : if that is the meaning we are glad to 
 
DR fitch's theory. 37 
 
 come up to the question."* Well, what does he do ? In- 
 stead of answering the question directly in a single sentence, 
 he proceeds to erect a guide board, and to write on it the 
 words in 2 Pet. 3. 9, and Rom. 9. 18 ; and then, for a full 
 page and a half, is calling upon all passengers to examine 
 the guide board. All that I can gather from his explana- 
 tion is, that the distinction between Peter and Judas was 
 not grounded " on simple will and wont in God ;" " that 
 God really preferred, — with his whole heart, that Judas 
 should" "repent rather than neglect repentance and 
 perish ;" that " he will go forward with the measures of 
 his own choice among his creatures, rescuing with his 
 mercy, [how, he does not say,] and leaving to hardness 
 whom he will ;" and that " he will take this course because 
 he cannot possibly take a better. "f And this is the ex- 
 plicit answer to Dr Tyler's question, " Hoio was Peter 
 elected in distinction from Judas ?" The simple answer 
 should have been, that God foresaw that if he created 
 Peter and Judas and placed them under such circumstan- 
 ces, Peter, by the self-determining power, would accept the 
 invitation and Judas would reject it; and the decision to 
 place them in such circumstances, with such a foresight of 
 the event, was itself the election of the one and the rejec- 
 tion of the other. And whether the Spirit did more for one 
 than the other, he ought not to have been pressed to say; 
 for really he did not know : he could not know and should 
 have said so. If any thing less than an effectual control of 
 the will was done for Peter, who can prove from the mere 
 continuance of Judas in sin, that less was done for him ? 
 
 ' 655. 1 656, 7. 
 4 
 
^ DR fitch's theory. 
 
 And surely the Scriptures could not be expected to make 
 a minute distinction between two invitations both of which 
 were susceptible of rejection. But if the Scriptures do make 
 a distinction between this part of the treatment of Peter 
 and of Judas, it only proves that the work upon Peter was 
 efficient, and that Dr F's explanation of regeneration and 
 election is wrong. And yet in this very passage he him- 
 self makes the supposition of different degrees of influence. 
 " If" God " places his creatures in those conditions and 
 under that influence which, while they favour the salvation 
 of all in different degrees, will on the whole secure the 
 greatest number possible for him, &c."* I conclude how- 
 ever that the supposition is, of different degrees of provi- 
 dential influence. It is to this influence, I suppose, that 
 Dr F must refer when he talks of its limitation by a 
 regard to the public good. " If to secure the obedience 
 of Satan and the repentance of Judas, would involve a 
 departure from that use of influence which on the whole is 
 best, iS>6C."t " There is full ground for the distinction 
 between the preference of God as to what" creatures " do, 
 and his choice as to what he shall do himself in order to 
 secure their obedience. "J " Nor can we infer at all from 
 this choice of his heart" respecting the salvation of Judas, 
 " that God could go any further on his part than he did 
 to favour the repentance of Judas, with any gain to the 
 cause of redemption on the whole, or at least with any 
 gain to obedience in his whole kingdom." || Allowing it 
 supposable that the influence of providence, to be the best 
 for the whole, cannot be the best for every individual ; yet 
 
 *65G. tG52, Note. t G54. ||G56. 
 
DR fitch's theory. 39 
 
 if sin and its punishment and the redemption it has 
 occasioned, have not led to as much good as lioliness in 
 its stead would have done, then the good of the universe 
 cannot be impaired by the highest action of the Spirit 
 upon a Judas that is consistent with his moral agency. 
 If there is no advantage to be gained by his remaining a 
 sinner rather than becoming a saint, what possible injury 
 can be done to any or to all by the strongest efforts of the 
 Spirit upon him that are consistent with his freedom ? If 
 the Spirit were not omnipresent, his attention to Judas 
 might draw his attention from others, and so diminish 
 their chance. But that is not to be thought of. If the 
 Spirit foresaw that he could not succeed with Judas, and 
 that stronger attempts would only make him worse, tlicn hi 
 did the best he could for Judas. To say that the Spirit 
 did the best for Judas that he could consistently with the 
 interests of holiness at large, and yet not the best he could 
 absolutely, is certainly to say nothing, so long as you as- 
 sume that it is better for the universe for each individual 
 to be holy than sinful, and so long as no conceivable injury 
 to others could result from the highest efforts of the 
 Spirit upon Judas. If God really desired the holiness of 
 Judas, all things considered, what public interest then 
 could possibly restrain him from using with him the utmost 
 energies of the Spirit that the laws of moral agency would 
 allow? Who could possibly be injured by the strongest 
 effort, (I may say unlimitedly,) that God could make? for 
 any destruction of his moral agency, as it would have pre- 
 vented the possibility of his holiness, could not have been 
 an effort to make him holy. Look at the thing on every 
 
40 DR fitch's theory. 
 
 :side. If the holiness of Judas was better for the universe 
 than his sin, and God, all things considered, did most 
 heartily desire it, then, whatever hindrances might lie in 
 the way of his providential influences over him, no injury 
 could arise from the Spirit's doing all he could to make 
 him holy ; and he would be sure to do all that. 
 
 Shall I now tell you why Dr F is so reluctant to say 
 whether the Spirit did as much for Judas as for Peter? 
 Upon his principles it may be fairly doubted whether he 
 did. I have already said that if the Spirit foresaw that 
 he could not succeed with Judas, and that stronger at- 
 tempts would only make him worse, then he did the best 
 he could for Judas. This will unriddle the whole mys- 
 tery. If God foresaw that a greater effort upon Peter 
 would, tlxrough the self-determining power, prevail, and 
 that a greater effort upon Judas would only make him 
 worse ; then, though by his Spirit he did all he could to 
 any purpose for both, yet it may be presumed that he was 
 encouraged to do, and -actually did, more for Peter than 
 for Judas : though upon this principle it must be con- 
 fessed that he should not have shed upon Judas a ray of 
 light. But this goes upon the supposition that by no ex- 
 ertion of power could he regenerate Judas. And this is 
 denymg, not only efficiency, but the absolute control of 
 motives. And then no one will pretend that any thing 
 turned the heart of Peter but the self-determining power. 
 
 And if there is no divine efficiency and no control by 
 motives, how comes Dr F to say of our first parents, 
 " They had ability to obey, and the opportunity of con- 
 firming their o\vn holiness through the trial, and of bless- 
 
DR fitch's theory. 41 
 
 mg their posterity ;" that is, of confirming their posterity ?* 
 If God has no absolute power to keep his creatures from 
 sin, our first parents and their posterity could not have 
 been confirmed by his power. By whose then ? Angels 
 were confirmed, says Dr F, by the destruction of their 
 brethren and by the wonders of redemption.! By what 
 new means would Adam, after a few years, have been con- 
 firmed to eternity ? The apostacy of his posterity is ac- 
 counted for, by a writer in the Christian Spectator, by the 
 feebleness of their intellect and the cravings of their appe- 
 tites in infancy. The creation of male and female in 
 Eden shows that it was the purpose of God to bring them 
 into existence in the present manner had Adam stood. 
 And what but divine efficiency could have kept a race of 
 ignorant infants from being led away by their appetites as 
 at present ? In short, what could have confirmed Adam, 
 and all his race ushered in this manner into existence, 
 without either efl!icient power or the absolute dominion of 
 motives? 
 
 Dr Fitch says of Dr Fisk, " He asserts that we found 
 our explanations of foreordination on principles which — he 
 claims to be Arminian. In regard to the proper name to 
 be given to these principles, we shall inquire afterwards. "| 
 And yet I do not perceive that he fulfilled this promise. 
 And at the close of the Article he takes leave of us in 
 these words : " Ascribe it to whatever name you please : 
 no matter; it is intelligible and everlasting truth:" evi- 
 dently betraying a consciousness that it was the Arminiau- 
 ism charged upon him. 
 
 * 635. t C38. X 619, Note. 
 
 4* 
 
CHAPTER 11. 
 
 Or Taylor's Theory as exhibited in the Christian Spectator for 1829. 
 
 Dr T every where denies divine efficiency, and limits 
 the agency of the Spirit to the mere presentation of motives. 
 Of course he must have the same views of predesti- 
 nation and election, (both of which he strenuously main- 
 tains,) that Dr Fitch has expressed. Dr T holds that 
 God can create a being constitutionally qualified to act 
 without being acted upon ; that the angels are indepen- 
 dent for holiness ; that man would need no divine interposi- 
 tion but for his obstinate depravity ; that this renders neces- 
 sary a more urgent pressure of motives by the Spirit, to draw 
 his attention from the world and fix it upon divine truth ;* 
 
 * Dr T has exactly revived the old Arminian doctrine, that 
 the chief obstruction caused by bad affections lies in their drawing 
 away the attention from divine truth ; and that nothing is neces- 
 sary on the part of God but to illumine the understanding by his 
 Spirit. Dr Whitby says, (see Introduction,) " Be it then so that 
 we naturally have an aversion to the truths proposed in the Gos- 
 pel ; that only can make us indisposed to attend to them. — It there- 
 fore can be only requisite — that tlie good Spirit should so illumine 
 our understandings, that we, attending to and considering what lies 
 before us, should apprehend and be convinced of our duty." 
 Nothing could more exactly express the views of Dr T. 
 
44 '^ DR Taylor's theory. 
 
 that the Spirit can effectually arrest the attention of sin- 
 ners at first, but it depends on them whether that attention 
 shall continue or return to the world ; that there is in man 
 a constitutional susceptibility to the good exhibited in 
 divine truth, founded in self-love or the desire of happiness ; 
 that consequently there is in the close consideration of 
 truth a tendency to excite the love of truth ; that as the 
 Spirit does nothing but fix the attention upon truths most 
 calculated to persuade, consideration only acts in a line 
 with the Spirit, and has the same tendency in the moment 
 of conversion as before ; that consideration produces feel- 
 ing and feeling consideration, while the Spirit, by the 
 clear presentation of truth, promotes both ; that without 
 this consideration God cannot regenerate, for rival objects 
 must be compared before God can be preferred to the 
 world ; that by these means are excited supreme desires 
 after God, not viewed in the glories of his character, but as 
 the mere deliverer from punishment ; that these desires 
 are not selfish, because the supreme affection is detached 
 from the world and fixed on deliverance from future pu- 
 nishment ; that selfishness is thus suspended, and becomes 
 weaker in every renewal of its power, until, just at the 
 moment of conversion, it ceases altogether ; that the 
 means of regeneration are this consideration and the ac- 
 companying efforts to love ; that the sinner cannot be said 
 to use the means of regeneration while he is selfish, and 
 never therefore till that last moment when he makes the 
 full and final effort to give his heart to God ; that when 
 he has got so far as to desire deliverance from punishment 
 more than the world, (here is an infinite chasm in the 
 
DR Taylor's theory. 45 
 
 chain,) he is exactly prepared to give his supreme affection 
 to God as soon as the vail which conceals the divine glory 
 is taken away ; that he himself penetrates this vail by con- 
 centrated attention, and then, by summoning all his pow- 
 ers to love, by one successful effort he rises up to divine 
 affection. 
 
 In consistency with these views, Dr T's grand object 
 is to put sinners upon exertion, not merely by urging their 
 obligations, but by telling them that they may succeed 
 and can succeed, and that God may be ready to regene- 
 rate them at once. This is all consistent with the plan. 
 For as the exertions which the Spirit merely prompts, and 
 which are actually successful, are made by themselves, 
 and will succeed the sooner the sooner made ; and as 
 moral agents may reasonably be exhorted to these efforts, 
 and are put upon them by such excitements ; it comports 
 with the system to hold out these encouragements. And 
 if there is no divine efficiency, there is nothing false or 
 dangerous in all this. But if there is divine efficiency, 
 all language which contradicts it encourages a fatal self- 
 dependence, which may feed a false religion but cannot 
 promote the true. 
 
 Dr T strongly holds to the doctrine of perseve- 
 rance. 
 
 Now for the proof of all this. Dr T mentions ap- 
 provingly " the reason commonly assigned for the neces- 
 sity of a divine influence in regeneration. — This reason is 
 not that truth and motives, viewed in relation to the moral 
 agency of man, are insufficient to produce a change of 
 heart, but that when presented to the mind of the sinner, 
 their influence is counteracted by the perverseness of the 
 
46 DR Taylor's theory. 
 
 heart."* In the published correspondence between Dr 
 Hawes and Dr T, Dr H says, " The sinner's dependence, 
 — if I rightly understand your statement of it, is a depen- 
 dence of Ids own creating, growing out of voluntary per- 
 verscness of heart." Dr T replies : " The necessity of 
 the influence of the holy Spirit in regeneration, results 
 solely from the voluntary perverseness of the sinner's 
 heart." The necessity that God should conquer the rebel, 
 doubtless is of the sinner's own creating; but here his very 
 dependence for holiness is made his own fault. It follows 
 that the angels are not dependent for holiness : and there 
 is the self-deiermining power. In this same letter to Dr 
 H, Dr T impliedly asserts what Dr Fitch so openly 
 mamtains, that God could not have prevented sin ; a point 
 never admitted by any who believe either in divine efficien- 
 cy or in the absolute dominion of motives. For if God 
 can control one mind he can control all, and then he could 
 have prevented sin. The passage is this. "I do not 
 believe that sin can be proved to be the necessary means 
 of the greatest good, and that as such God prefers it on the 
 whole to holiness in its stead. — But I do believe that holi- 
 ness as the means of good may be better than sin ; that it 
 may be true that God, all things considered, prefers holi- 
 ness to sin in all instances in which the latter takes place, 
 and therefore sincerely desires that all men should come to 
 repentance, [but cannot make them repent;] though for 
 wise reasons he permits, or does not prevent, the existence 
 of sin." Permits sin ! And how could he prevent it ? 
 In no way but by refusing to create moral agents. As well 
 
 *224. 
 
DR Taylor's theory. 47 
 
 might you talk of my permitting the cholera, because I do 
 not kill off every body that could have it. Why dress up 
 palpable Arminianism in such Calvinistic drapery? Why 
 say in this very letter, " That the eternal purposes of God 
 extend to all actual events, sin not excepted, or that God 
 foreordains whatsoever comes to pass ;" vi^hen the mean- 
 ing, as Dr Fitch fully explains it is, that God decreed all 
 the foreseen actions of men in the very resolution to give 
 them being under such circumstances and means ? Why 
 should one who has publicly renounced divine efficiency, 
 the very ground work of Calvinism, stand in the midst of 
 Calvinists and say, as in this same letter, " I could wish 
 that" " my views and opinions" " might be satisfactory to all 
 our orthodox brethren. I have no doubt that they will be to 
 very many, and to some who have been alarmed hy ground- 
 less rumours concerning my unsoundness in the faith" ? 
 How can he say, " With respect — to what is properly con- 
 sidered the orthodox or Calvinistic system, — as opposed 
 to — the Pelagian and Arminian systems, I suppose there 
 is between the orthodox ministry and myself an entire 
 agreement" ? It is impossible for Dr T to mean more 
 by election thaa Dr Fitch does, (for both equally deny 
 God's absolute dominion over the mind ;) and yet he ex- 
 presses it in this letter in the following high Calvinistic 
 language : "I believe — that all who are renewed by the 
 holy Spirit, are elected or chosen of God from eternity 
 that they should be holy ; not on account of foreseen faith 
 or good works, but according to the good pleasure of his 
 will." " I do believe — that when" " the grace of God" 
 " becomes effectual to conversion, as it infallibly does in 
 
48 DR Taylor's theory. 
 
 the case of all the elect, it is unresisted." How " infalli- 
 hly does" 1 Because all who yield to the motives present- 
 ed do yield, and God foresaw they would. When this is 
 all he can mean after denying both divine efficiency and 
 the dominion of motives, why should he say, " I believe 
 — that the renewing grace of God is special, in distinction 
 from that which is common and is resisted by the sinful 
 mind, inasmuch as it is that which is designed to secure, 
 and does infallilily secure, the conversion of the sinner" ? 
 That is, in these foreseen instances in which the self-de- 
 termining power yields to motives, God ensures conver- 
 sion by merely presenting the motives. The doctrine of 
 perseverance he fully sustains in this same letter. " I be- 
 lieve — that all who are renewed by the holy Spirit, will, 
 through his continued influence, persevere in holiness to 
 the end." 
 
 Dr T says, " How does the Spirit secure this change? 
 I answer, not by acting on the truth. — But how positively 1 — 
 The question — sets philosophy at defiance." " That the 
 change is through the truth and implies attention to the 
 truth, — the sober, solemn consideration of the objects 
 which truth discloses, prior to the requisite act of the will 
 or heart, will not be doubted by the reader of the sacred 
 volume."* " God, in what he does to restore the sinner to 
 holiness, obliges him to be conscious of the requisite pro- 
 cess of thought and feeling, whether he will or not. Tlie 
 sinner can indeed resist and arrest this progress of thoitght 
 and feeling, but cannot prevent its commencement. "f 
 " What is the tendency of divine truth to turn the sinner 
 
 * Christian Spectator for 1820, p. 17. t 232. 
 
DR Taylor's theory. 49 
 
 to holiness, if there be nothing in the nature of his mind 
 which renders him susceptible to the influence of truth ? 
 The question then still recurs, how has truth this ten- 
 dency? We answer, by its solemn appeals of life and 
 death to the principle of selWove, or the natural desire of 
 men for happiness. — Man can never become insensible to 
 happiness, nor to the truth that he sacrifices his own well 
 being as a self-destroyer. This truth, as it is presented to 
 the mind hy the testimony of God, — embodies the swn total 
 of all the moral influence tvhich God uses in his revela- 
 tion."* Nothing but self-interest to be considered ! no 
 disinterested regard to God or man-! " Every act — of 
 sober consideration employed on the great truth that our su- 
 preme good is to be found only in the service of God, when 
 dictated exclusively by self-love, implies, for the time be- 
 ing, the suspended influence of the selfish principle. 
 [How, unless selfishness consists exclusively in the love of 
 the world ?] Such suspension however does not neces- 
 sarily prevent the thoughts and desires of the mind from 
 recurring, as it were instantly, to the objects of selfish 
 affection, nor the affection itself from resuming instantly 
 its accustomed activity and power. Indeed the tendency 
 to this, from the previous habitudes of the mind, is direct 
 and powerful. It is however to be remembered that — 
 there are tendencies opposite to that specified ; the ten- 
 dency of excited self-love to sober consideration, and of 
 this to deepen such excitement. When these tendencies 
 are not successfully counteracted by opposing tendencies ; 
 when by the strivings of the Spirit they are perpetuated 
 
 * 226. 
 5 
 
50 DR Taylor's theory. 
 
 and increased ; then it is that the selfish principle, not 
 only suffers temporary suspension, [selfishness suspended 
 before God is loved !] but grows weaker and weaker in 
 each instance of its returning activity and dominion, until, 
 at some point before the heart fixes on God, the power 
 and influence of this principle wholly cease from the mind. 
 [Selfishness is dead and God not yet loved!] — Connected 
 with this suspension of the selfish principle, there is yet 
 another state of mind involved in the process we are con- 
 sidering, which demands attention ; viz. the truly sincere 
 desires of the sinner for acceptance with God. — We do 
 not suppose that the state of mind of which we now speak 
 respects the inherent excellence of the objects of holy affec- 
 tion.— What we intend is, that" the sinner "desires accep- 
 tance with God, — contemplated simply under pne relation, 
 viz. as the only means of deliverance from punishment. 
 Nor is this a selfish state of mind, [though self-love is su- 
 preme !] but rather a state of mind which is necessarily 
 involved in the mental process of turning from sin to holi- 
 ness. The supreme affections of his heart being detached 
 from the world, the grand obstacle to his preferring a de- 
 liverance from punishment to the only object that can 
 come into competition with it, is removed. — And now, 
 according to the laws of voluntary action, nothing is want- 
 ing to lead forth the heart in holy affection to God, but — 
 clear, just, and vivid views of his glories." Those "glories 
 — are yet veiled. — Still however — he is willing to fix, and 
 does in fact fix, the eye of contemplation on the object of 
 holy affection, and does, with such glimpses of his glories 
 as he may obtain, feel their attractions and summon his 
 
DR Taylor's theorv. 51 
 
 Iieart to" the love of God. " We now ask, is there no 
 tendency in these acts and states of the sinner's mind to 
 carry the soul forth to God in holy love ? — a tendency 
 which, if wholly uncounteracted, would flow out in holy 
 love to God."* "We do not say that the contemplation 
 will result in holy love ; but we say that in proportion to its 
 intensity and the vividness of its perceptions, it will make 
 known to human consciousness a tendency to produce love, 
 direct and powerful, and not easily resisted."! " These 
 .acts have the same tendency when the sinner is regene- 
 rated by the holy Spirit."| " When self-love prompts the 
 first act of sober consideration, there is in this act a ten- 
 dency to augmented feeling, and — this feeling tends to fix 
 contemplation, and this again to deepen feeling; and — 
 thus by mutual action and reaction of thought and feeling, 
 the process, were there no effectual counteracting influ- 
 ence, would go on until it terminated in a change of heart. 
 — Such acts and states therefore have a tendency to such 
 a result. But if they have this tendency according to the 
 constitution of man as amoral agent, and would, if uncoun- 
 teracted, be followed by a change of heart without grace, 
 then they must have the same tendency when man gives 
 his heart to God through grace. "§ " Of all specific vo- 
 luntary action, the happiness of the agent in some form is 
 the ultimate cnd."\\ 
 
 " We now ask what acts of the sinner must be denoted 
 by the phrase using the means of regeneration ?'' They 
 are " acts of sober consideration and thoughtfulness which 
 were dictated by a regard to his own well being."^ 
 
 "227—231. t 203. t 234. §222,3. || 24. 11217. 
 
52 DR Taylor's theory. 
 
 " While the selfish principle continues its active influence 
 in the heart, — no meditation on divine truth can properly 
 be considered as a using of these means."* " Divine 
 truth is never in fact thus used by the sinner until the 
 identical moment when he submits to God."t There is 
 then, after all, no using of the means of regeneration till 
 the very act which is regeneration itself 
 
 This is on the whole just such a journey as I should 
 expect a supremely selfish man and totally depraved sinner 
 would make in his own strength from sin to holiness. 
 Treading selfishness under his feet with a heart caring 
 for nothing but himself; panting with " truly sincere desires 
 — for acceptance with God" while blind to his "excel- 
 lence" and caring for nothing but to shield himself from 
 punishment; completely detached from the world, and 
 just prepared to give his heart to God as soon as he can 
 obtain "clear, just, and vivid views of his glories," the 
 precise things that never were seen but by holy eyes ; put 
 upon using the means of regeneration when the act can- 
 not possibly precede regeneration itself If this is the road 
 travelled by the self-determining power, surely " the way 
 of transgressors is hard." I should hope that this single 
 attempt might discourage the nations from essaying to go 
 in this new path. Surely it is better to " go in the strength 
 of the Lord God ;" to " make mention of his " righteous- 
 ness, even of" his "only." 
 
 One grand object which Dr T is aiming at is to im- 
 prove the manner of addressing sinners. " We think the 
 Gospel is not now, as it was by the apostles, brought be- 
 
 * 210. t Christian Spectator for 1830,. p. 148. 
 
on, Taylor's theory. 53 
 
 fore the human mind in the character and relations of 
 a cause icJdch is to produce an immediate effect. — Every 
 sinner may become, and is authorized to believe that he 
 may become, a Christian on the spot. — No one performs 
 his duty the more for being told it ougJtt to be done, while 
 the conviction is also forced on the mind that it will not be 
 done. The conviction of the present practicability of duty 
 is indispensable to the present performance of duty."* 
 This is undoubtedly true of muscular efforts ; but whether 
 the sinner is more likely to love God for being told that he 
 can, in a form to encourage his native self-dependence, is 
 another question. He ought to be called upon to repent 
 immediately. His obligations cannot be too forcibly press- 
 ed. Every excuse should be wrested from him, and espe- 
 cially the plea of inability. He may be told that he de- 
 serves eternal fire for delaying a moment. And after he 
 is thus brought under a crushing sense of his obligations 
 and guilt, instead of casting him upon his own resources, 
 I have always found it most expedient to cast him helpless 
 upon the strength and mercy of God. I have told him. 
 But after all these obligations you never will repent unless 
 God breaks that stubborn heart. You will get into the 
 fire if you can : you certainly will if God is not stronger 
 than you. There is no hope for you unless God conquers 
 the rebel at his feet. Such an exhibition of his desperate 
 wickedness and obstinacy, is the best means to make him 
 die to all hope from himself, — to bring him to cast himself 
 dead at his Maker's feet, — to die that he may be made 
 alive. From what I have seen in past revivals, I am ready 
 
 * Christian Spectator for 1829, p. 2, 3. 
 
 5* 
 
54 DR Taylor's theory. 
 
 to say of this method, as David said of Gohath's sword, 
 " There is none hke that; give it me." 
 
 In a pamphlet under the signature of an Edwardean, 
 lately published in Connecticut, it is stated of Dr T ; " He 
 says in substance that all sin consists in self-preference. — 
 Consequently sin must be the transgression of a known 
 law. — Consequently — infants, as they are incapable of this 
 self-preference or transgression of a known law, have no 
 moral depravity, and as they are ' born destitute of holi- 
 ness,' have no moral character."* 
 
CHAPTER III. 
 
 JVotice of Two other Writers. 
 
 Our brethren of this general school insist on putting 
 into natural ability a power which works without divine 
 efficiency. One of them says, " Surely the Dr would not 
 suppose that men have natural ability to love God unless 
 they are naturally able to change their temper. Neither 
 would he contend that the mind can change this temper 
 without any action or choice of its own. [A volition before 
 every volition, and so one before the first.] — It may be said 
 without impiety that almighty poiocr can no more affect the 
 actions or decisions of the mind, than — motives can influence 
 matter. — There is no way to. change the character of the 
 mind — but by motives." 
 
 The other writer is the reviewer of Dr Sprague's Lec- 
 tures on Revivals, and of the Letters in the Appendix, in 
 the Christian Spectator for March 1833. In one of those 
 Letters I had attempted to explain, not, as the reviewer 
 says, " the nature of man's inability," (not a word of that,) 
 but the manner in which men who had acted with me had 
 stated the full natural ability and obligations of sinners. 
 I will quote the passage. " We have shown them that 
 their obligations rest on their faculties, and are as reason- 
 able and as complete as though the thing required was 
 
56 NOTICE OF TWO OTHER WRITERS. 
 
 merely to tvalk across the jioor ; that their faculties consti- 
 tute a natural ability, that is, a full power to love and 
 serve God if their hearts were well disposed ; [according to 
 the common expression, Yoii canif i/ouwill;J leaving noth- 
 ing in the way but a bad heart, for which they are wholly 
 to blame if there is any blame in the universe ; that sin 
 can rest no where but in the heart, and that if you drive 
 it beyond the heart you drive it out of existence ; that 
 tliey alone create the necessity for God to conquer them, 
 and to decide whether he will conquer them or not ; that 
 it is an everlasting blot on creation that God has to speak 
 a second time to induce creatures to love him, much more 
 that he has to constrain them by his conquering power, 
 »Soc." That if was intended to express just what it does 
 in the common phrase. You can if you will ; namely, to 
 throw all the blame upon the heart : and it was so ex- 
 plained. It was intended to wrest from the sinner the 
 plea of inability, by telling him that he would find power 
 enough on hand as soon as he should attempt the ^vork 
 with a right temper. And if you say, this right temper is 
 the very tiling to be accomplished ; no matter: this form 
 of presenting the subject is calculated to bring it home to 
 the sinner that nothing is in the way but that for which 
 he is wholly to blame. And if any thing, in the form of 
 motives, can tend to his conviction and humiliation, it 
 must be this. Lay the question of efficiency aside : we 
 both hold to the use and necessity of motives. And when 
 motives of such a tendency are brought forward, let it 
 never again be said, in proof of their . inutility and non- 
 sense, that the good temper is the very thing to be accom- 
 
NOTICE OF TWO OTHER WRITERS. 57 
 
 plished, and, what is the power where the temper is wholly 
 dependent on God ? This is constantly said, in different 
 forms, by our brethren of this school. The reviewer 
 makes my definition of ability to amount to this, " You 
 have full power to make yourselves new hearts — if they 
 were already new."* No definition of power will satisfy 
 them but that which excludes divine efficiency. My if, 
 I allow, belonged rather to familiar than to philosophical 
 language : but the whole paragraph expressed the highest 
 natural ability that ever was or could be held by a believer 
 hi divine efficiency, — the highest that ever was dreampt 
 of by the mass of New-England divines. And yet the 
 reviewer, full indeed of courtesy and grace of style and 
 proofs of mind, makes his appeal — but hear him. "We 
 cannot in this connexion pass over a very remarkable pas- 
 sage in Dr Griffin's Letter, App. p. 159, in which the nature 
 of man's inability and dependence on the influences of the 
 Spirit, is stated in a manner which we had never expected 
 from the author of the Park-street Lectures. ' Their, 
 [sinners'] faculties constitute a natural ability, that is, a 
 full power to love and serve God if tJieir hearts were well 
 disposed.' [Why did his quotation stop there ?] Now we 
 ask, is this the ' natural ability' of New-England divines ? 
 Is it on the ground of possessing such power merely, that 
 sinners have been exhorted to give God their hearts at 
 once, have been told that they were able to do it and were 
 utterly inexcusable for a moment's delay ? — This statement 
 of Dr Griffin is followed by another, which brings him, as 
 far as we can see, directly on the ground of Evangelical 
 
 *38. 
 
58 NOTICE OF TWO OTHER WRITERS. 
 
 Arminians. ' They, [sinners,] are bound to go forth to 
 their work at once, hut they are not hound to go alone : 
 it is their privilege and duty to cast tliemselves instantly 
 on the Holy Ghost, and not to take a single step in their 
 own strength.' App. p. 161. Now it is not possible, we 
 apprehend, to invent any statement more directly contra- 
 dictory than this to the fundamental principle of New- 
 England Calvinism. That principle is, that man is in 
 himself a free agent, [and who said he was not ?] and not 
 made such by the influence of the Spirit; that he is bound 
 as a free-agent to go forth at once to the work of obeying 
 God, in the exercise of power conferred in creation and 
 not superinduced by grace, that is, to go alone ; that, as 
 a complete moral agent in himself considered, he is bound 
 to obey God in his oion strength, this being made in the 
 law the very measure of his obedience. — Upon all these 
 points Dr Griffin has explicitly contradicted his brethren 
 and taken sides with their opposers." In a note he intro- 
 duces the younger Edwards as saying that a man can re- 
 move his moral inability, and has " power to the contrary 
 act in every instance of choice," and can choose in oppo- 
 sition to what at present is the greatest apparent good.* 
 This is only saying that a sinner, while he hates and while 
 sin appears the most attractive, has power to love. Now 
 if you mean by power a full and proper basis of obligation, 
 I shall be the last to deny that ; for otherwise the sinner 
 could not be bound or blamed or punished. But if you 
 mean by power an ability that works without divine effici- 
 ency, I hope I shall be the last to believe that. And I 
 
 * 37—40. 
 
NOTICE OF TWO OTHER WRITERS. 59 
 
 know that the younger Edwards held to no such thing. 
 He was my preceptor in theology, and he taught a very 
 different system. And every body knows that the mass of 
 New-England divines from the beginning have acknow- 
 ledged no such doctrine. 
 
 There is no difference between me and the reviewer 
 about natural ability, except that I place it in the 
 faculties of a mind dependent on God for holiness, 
 and he places it in faculties that move themselves to 
 holy action without divine efficiency. And with this 
 essential departure from the track of New-England divines, 
 lie makes this daring appeal to them against their own 
 known doctrines and dialect. I should not have noticed 
 this in a writer with a manner in all other respects worthy 
 of imitation, had I not observed the same thing in many 
 instances of late. It is a common practice with writers of 
 this school to make confident appeals to Edwards and 
 Smalley and Dwight and the New-England divines at 
 large as their coadjutors, when they are as far from these 
 divines as Arminianism is from Calvinism. Is this fair? 
 is this honest ? It may serve a purpose, but is it right I 
 It is far from my heart to wish to cast any reflections, but 
 as an humble individual I do entreat that this practice 
 may be discontinued. Let there be no wrapping up of 
 errour under orthodox terms. Let none be afraid or 
 ashamed to speak out on either side. There is a radical 
 division in our churches, and let it appear. Concealment, 
 for the sake of holding together, will only corrupt the 
 whole mass. Whatever it costs, let every man speak the 
 truth, the whole truth, and leave the event with God. 
 
60 NOTICE OF TWO OTHER WRITERS. 
 
 In regard to going alone, my opinion is, that every un- 
 regenerate man, without the least delay, ought to cast 
 himself upon the strength of God, like an infant falling 
 into its mother's arms, and to go on in holiness from that 
 moment, saying as he goes, " My soul, wait thou only 
 upon God, for my expectation is from him." Is this lan- 
 guage new to the land of the Pilgrims ? It has been in it 
 as long as the voice of prayer. Is it a late thing in New- 
 England to caution men against depending on their own 
 strength ? It has been the common dialect from the days 
 of Cotton and Hooker. It must be the dialect of all who 
 believe in divine efficiency. But this language is no 
 denial of natural ability, as consisting in faculties which 
 are the proper basis of obligation. When we speak of 
 casting ourselves on the strength of God, we do not mean 
 in order to help out our natural ability, but to obtain 
 moral power. Have not good men in all ages cast them- 
 selves on God for moral strength ? How was it in the 
 days of David and Isaiah ? " It is God that girdeth me 
 with strength and maketh my way perfect." " Wait on 
 the Lord, be of good courage, and he shall strengthen thy 
 heart : wait, I say, on the Lord." " My strength and my 
 heart faileth ; but God is the strength of my heart and my 
 portion forever." "Blessed is the man whose strength is 
 in thee." " Surely, (shall one say,) in the Lord have I 
 righteousness and strength." " The Lord is my strength 
 and song, and is become my salvation." " Trust ye in 
 the Lord forever, for in the Lord Jehovah is everlasting 
 strength." And do not Christians cast themselves on God 
 for moral strength every time they pray for sanctification ? 
 
Notice of tavo other writers. 61 
 
 And if it is the duty of Christians thus to cast them- 
 selves on the strength of God, it is the duty of sinners ; 
 and to this they ought to be exhorted. No believer in 
 divine efficiency will hesitate to utter this injunction. And 
 if you suppress it, you send them forth crippled with self- 
 dependence, and with a religion very different from the 
 true. And then you may talk about preaching up depen- 
 dence occasionally but not too often ; you may talk about 
 differing from your brethren only on " the philosophy of 
 religion ;" (all this may serve a purpose ;) but in fact you 
 and they stand at the two poles on one of the two or three 
 most important points that can be disowned without infi- 
 delity itself 
 
 We admit that men have a capacity or power to love 
 God without the application of divine efficiency ; other- 
 wise none could be punished. But they never will : and 
 it is not owing to their depravity; for the same is 
 true of the holy angels. Now if you ask me, what 
 is that power which is never exerted without divine 
 efficiency ? I can only say, that, in the account of the 
 divine mind, it is the proper basis of obligation, and there- 
 fore, by the decision of common sense, must be called a 
 power. Your difficulty is to see that a creature may be 
 reasonably bound while dependent for his affections. We 
 think that God has pronounced the compatibility of the 
 two by pronouncing the truth of both. And while we thus 
 believe, we cannot admit your competency to decide against 
 the power on account of the dependence. 
 
 6 
 
CHAPTER IV. 
 
 Meaning and Origin of Corrupt Nature. 
 
 As I am reasoning with brethren who believe in the ex- 
 ercise system, I do not intend to embarrass my argument 
 by connecting it with the taste scheme. And to remove 
 prejudices on account of any leaning I may be supposed to 
 have to that plan, as well as to explain my meaning when 
 I refer, as I shall have occasion to do, to the necessity of a 
 new temper or new affections, (without determining which,) 
 before the sinner will be persuaded by divine truth ; I will, 
 in the outset, state what I mean by a moral nature or tem- 
 per ; what I mean also by the corrupt nature common to 
 the race, and in what sense it has been derived from Adam. 
 What I shall say on these subjects, and on the origin of 
 sin, will not, I think, be denied by any who believe that 
 God efficiently produces holiness but not sin. 
 
 Self-love consists in the desire of happiness and aversion 
 to misery, or in loving to gratify our personal tastes and feel- 
 ings. This is essential to a rational and even to a sensi- 
 tive nature. This had Adam before the fall ; but divine 
 efficiency wrought in him supreme love to God, which kept 
 self-love in due subjection. As soon as God withdrew his 
 sanctifying influence, (and that he did sovereignly and not 
 as a punishment,) Adam's self-love became supreme, (there 
 can be no rivals for supreme affection but God and self,) 
 and of course turned to selfishness, and, as soon as God 
 
64 MEANING AND ORIGIN 
 
 was presented in his law, to " enmity against God." For 
 all this no positive act was necessary on the part of God 
 but to uphold Adam's rational existence. If Adam does 
 not love his Maker supremely, he must with supreme desire 
 seek the means of his own personal gratification, or cease to 
 have a rational soul. Now that proncness to gratify him- 
 self, growing out of the absence of love to God and the 
 presence of self-love turned to selfishness ; or perhaps I 
 may more properly say, that combination of inward ciraim- 
 stauces out of which will infallibly arise the exercises of 
 selfishness and enmity against God, constitutes the corrupt 
 nature or temper of which I speak. While his rational 
 existence is continued, and while he does not love God, it 
 must be his nature to be selfish, and to hate God when God 
 sets himself against him in his law, as much as it is the 
 nature of the serpent to bite and of the lion to be carnivo- 
 rous. The difference between the two cases is this. The 
 nature of the serpent and lion depends on their physical 
 formation ; the nature of Adam, on the absence of love to 
 God which he ought to exercise. He is to blame for that 
 state of things, — for that nature or aptitude, — and there- 
 fore it is a moral nature.* If one must love his own hap- 
 piness in case he is even sentient, then a man who does 
 not love God, must, anterior in the order of nature to his 
 selfishness, have an infallible aptitude to selfishness. If 
 
 " I know that the word nature, etymologically considered, be- 
 longs exclusively to physics ; but for want of another term, and 
 prompted by a strong analogy, men have applied it to our moral 
 constitution. And while it means this, to say that a change of 
 nature must he a. physical change, is only a play upon words which 
 involves a serious errour. 
 
" OP CORRUPT NATURE. 65 
 
 the soul 7mist have desires after something or cease to be, 
 and must be influenced by the greatest apparent good, 
 then a man who loves himself supremely and God not 
 at all, must have a preparation within him, (consisting 
 perhaps in the mere relation of things,) to hate God when 
 God comes to be seen arrayed against him in his law. 
 
 When God re-produced supreme and habitual love to 
 himself in Adam's heart, that nature or aptitude was 
 changed. It was not the new nature of Adam to seek his 
 own interest supremely and to hate God. Whether God 
 re-produced any thing but exercises, I will not say. If not, 
 the new nature was not a new existence, but a new relation 
 between the feelings towards self and towards God. That 
 is, self-love no longer ruled, and the feelings towards God 
 were no longer hatred but supreme love. It is the com- 
 mon feeling of mankind, until philosophy calls the thing in 
 question, that there is a temper which is the foundation 
 of exercises. I see a man, in a revival of religion, dissol- 
 ved in tears and tenderness. I tell you. Go to that man 
 six months hence and contradict him, and he will affront 
 you. Why ? you ask ; he has no such feelings in exercise 
 now. No, I say, but such is his nature. We account for 
 the feelings and passions of men by charging them to a mild 
 or an irascible temper. No one attempts to tell what it is, 
 any more than he attempts to account for the mental diver- 
 sities of different animals, (mere organized matter cannot 
 think or desire,) or for the preparation in the sleeping child 
 to love its parent rather than a stranger. I know not that 
 a man actually loves himself all the time ; and yet, sleeping 
 or waking, it may constantly be said of him, that self-love 
 6* 
 
66 MEANING AND ORIGIN 
 
 is inseparable from his nature. The thing, whatever it is, 
 presents itself to us in different aspects ; sometimes as a 
 proneness or propensity, sometimes as that facility of ac- 
 tion, founded on association of ideas, which we call habit, 
 sometimes as a mental appetite to which motives are to be 
 addressed, as an invitation to a feast is addressed to a 
 bodily taste. In the last case I know not but the motives 
 are presented to the mind predisposed by habitual affec- 
 tions. One feeling certainly hurries a man into another. 
 Anger or envy will cause him to hate. Offer one who 
 loves gold, a bag of guineas to cross the street, and if no 
 stronger motive urges the other way he will certainly 
 come. A man who loves honour, will be induced to de- 
 sire, to be grateful, to love, to resent, to be angry, to be 
 sorry, to be glad, according to the relation of events to his 
 ruling passion. A man who loves the world supremely, 
 will flee from a religious meeting to wordly business. Ex- 
 perience shows that the affections and volitions do mo\'e in 
 such an order, and hold on in an unbroken course, and 
 we are not conscious of any thing behind them. Pres. 
 Edwards* calls the thing in question a principle. " If 
 grace be — an entirely new kind of principle, then the ex- 
 ercises of it are also entirely a new kind of exercises. — 
 This new spiritual sense, and the new dispositions that at- 
 tend it, are no new faculties, but are new principles of 
 nature. I use the word principles for want of a word of a 
 more determinate signification. By a principle of nature 
 in this place I mean \\\Vii foundation which is laid in nature, 
 
 *Quoted in a Tract entitled, The Renewal of Sinners the Work 
 of Divine Power ; p. 9. 
 
OF CORRUPT NATURE. 67 
 
 either old or new, for any particular manner or kind of ex- 
 ercise of the faculties of the soul, or a natural habit or 
 foundation for action ; — so that to exert the faculties in that 
 kind of exercises may be said to be his nature.^' This 
 definition exactly accords with the one which I have given 
 unless it makes nature more decidedly an existence, and 
 as such the foundation of exercises. But when he calls it 
 a habit, and makes it consist in statedly exerting the facul- 
 ties in a particular way, no one can object. He seems at 
 a loss for a definition, but on the whole accords very well 
 with the one which I have given. That definition is, that 
 nature, in the unregenerate, is an aptitude to every selfish 
 exercise, growing out of the fact that self-love, which is 
 inseparable from their existence, has, from the absence of 
 love to God, become supreme ; and in the Christian, that 
 it is an aptitude to every holy feeling, arising from the do- 
 minant love of God. 
 
 The constitution made with Adam was, that if he con- 
 tinued obedient his posterity should be jjrcserved holy ; that 
 if he transgressed they should be abandoned to sin. In 
 consequence of the fall they come into the world without 
 the sanctifying influence of God upon their hearts. The 
 consequence is, that they are left under the dominion of 
 selfishness. How soon they have selfish exercises, I can- 
 not tell. That from the first they prefer pleasure to pain, 
 and therefore have self-love and only self-love, is certain ; 
 but whether it is selfishness in exercise, when they have 
 no knowledge to direct their affection to another object, or 
 to institute any comparison, I will not determine. But 
 with that self-love which will develope itself in time, 
 
68 MEANING AND ORIGIN 
 
 and without any influence which can ever awaken the love 
 of God in their hearts, they have a preparation within them 
 for every thing wicked. That preparation is what I mean 
 by their corrupt nature. And it stands in the same relation 
 to the moral properties which will mark their lives, that the 
 carnivorous nature of the young lion does to his future 
 habit of eating flesh. 
 
 This depravity, in whatever it consists, subjects infants 
 to condemnation. Of this, natural death is declared to be 
 a standing proof "As by one man sin entered into the 
 world, and death hy sin, even so death passed upon all 
 men, for thai all have sinned."* In the same chapter 
 the whole race are, over and over again, said to be con- 
 demned for Adam's sin, even as believers are justified 
 for Christ's righteousness. By this I understand that the 
 public act of Adam, which indicated what their hearts 
 would be as fully as it showed his own, was made the 
 ground of their public condemnation. But this public 
 condemnation would not have been pronounced upon them 
 had they not deserved eternal death for their own wicked 
 hearts. One thing is certain. If they are saved by grace, 
 they might have gone to hell by justice. They cannot go 
 to heaven by both. If I lay a purse of gold on your table, 
 it cannot be both a present and the payment of a debt. 
 One idea excludes the other. But all who are saved are 
 saved by grace and by Christ. To this we must adhere or 
 renounce the Bible. Had no Saviour been provided, (and 
 surely God was not bound by justice to provide a Saviour,) 
 the whole race would have been lost. Nor is it the provi- 
 
 *Rom. 5. 12. 
 
OP CORRUPT NATURE. 69 
 
 sion of a Saviour that has brought the race into being in 
 an infant state. The creation of nialo and female in Eden, 
 shows that it was the purpose of God, at the time the cove- 
 nant was made with Adam, to bring them into the world 
 just as he now does, whether Adam stood or fell, and 
 whether a Saviour was provided or not. Justice therefore 
 approved of the actual destruction of a whole race that 
 were to be born infants. They meet a condemnation at 
 the threshold of their existence. Their just doom in the 
 cradle is, that first or last they shall sink to perdition. And 
 this doom would have been just had no Saviour been pro- 
 vided. Had no Saviour been provided then, what privilege 
 would it have been for them to live to years of discretion 
 rather than sink to hell from the cradle ? It would only 
 have been the privilege of growing up under judicial 
 blindness, to treasure up wrath against the day of wrath. 
 If you deny the justice of bringing them into the world in 
 such a state, why, I ask, is it more unjust in God to with- 
 hold his influence the first moment of one's existence, than 
 after one has loved him with all the heart up to the mo- 
 ment of the withdrawment ? From the angels who fell and 
 fi-om Adam, he withdrew his influence for no previous 
 fault, but after they had loved him with all the heart up to 
 that moment. That influence he owes to no creature, ex- 
 cept where he has promised it, as in the case of the Church 
 and the elect angels; and rational creatures are complete 
 moral agents without it, or sinners could not be punished. 
 And if God can justly leave infants unsanctified and sinful, 
 why may he not justly treat them as sinners. Why do you 
 bring them to Christ in baptism, if they have no need of 
 
70 MEANING AND ORIGIN 
 
 cleansing and of a Saviour, and therefore of mercy? It is 
 not infant angels that are to be brought to the baptismal 
 font. A large part of the race die in infancy and go to 
 heaven or hell. If to the latter, (which for certain reasons 
 I hope is not the case,) then they justly perish; if to the 
 former, then they are saved by grace and by Christ, and 
 therefore might justly have been consigned to death. 
 
 Now whether they are condemned for a corrupt nature 
 or for sinful exercises, I will not decide. Nor will I attempt 
 to weigh the difference between condemning them for a 
 nature sure to rebel, and condemning them for bad exer- 
 cises when they have no knowledge of God or of duty. 
 But sure I am that they are not without a moral character 
 till they are old enough to understand God's law. Sure I 
 am that they do not pass in one moment, (for one sin de- 
 serves eternal death,) from the neutral state of the lower 
 animals to a desert of everlasting burnings. 
 
 If infants cannot be sinners, neither can they be sancti- 
 fied. What then have become of the unnumbered millions 
 who have died in infancy? Who can believe that the in- 
 fant Jesus differed in nothing from the infant Judas ? But 
 the thing is settled beyond dispute. To Jeremiah it was 
 said, " Before thou camest forth out of the womb I sancti- 
 fied thee."* And lest this should be accounted a mere 
 consecration to the prophetic office, I will bring another. 
 To the father of John the Baptist it was said, " He shall 
 be filled with the Holy Ghost even from his mother's 
 womb."t And if you say, this was miraculous, still it 
 shows that the thing was possible. And if it is possible for 
 
 *Jer. 1.5. t Luke 1.15. 
 
OF CORRUPT NATURE. 71 
 
 the sanctifying Spirit to act on the infant mind, it is possi- 
 ble for the effects of his absence to be there. And what 
 can these be but some form or other of depravity 1 And 
 if it is possible for infants to be depraved and to be sancti- 
 fied, who, on account of any difficulties attending the sub- 
 ject, will deny their actual depravity and sanctification, in 
 direct opposition to the plain language of the Bible ? 
 
C H A P T E R V . 
 
 Divine Efficiency. 
 
 As I am dealing with the adherents of the exercise sys- 
 tem, I shall stand on that ground through my whole argu- 
 ment : or if I have occasion to speak of the previous state 
 of mind which gives effect to motives, I shall call it temper 
 or affections. For the same reason I shall adopt their lan- 
 guage in respect to the divisions of the mind. These I be- 
 lieve to be understanding, will, and affections ; but to ac- 
 commodate myself to their dialect, I shall include the last 
 two under the common name of will. At present I shall 
 consider the controversy as existing with those only who 
 hold that the Spirit does as much for one as another, unless 
 he stops short with some on account of the foreseen impos- 
 sibility of success. For reasons already stated I think I 
 am authorized to consider the writers in the Christian 
 Spectator as of this class. Indeed between this theory and 
 that of an absolute control by motives, there can be no 
 middle ground, at least none which any text of Scripture 
 can be pretended to support. And an absolute control by 
 motives is no part of their creed who deny, or even doubt, 
 that God could have prevented sin. But the grand point of 
 difference is on the question of divine efficiency. This they 
 
 7 
 
74 DIVINE EFFICIENCY. 
 
 firmly deny, and this we as decidedly maintain. And we 
 feel that where the most spiritual part of the Church since 
 the Reformation have gone, — the Wattses, the Doddridges, 
 the Edwardses, and the Brainerds, there it is safe for us to 
 go ; and that a new track, struck out in opposition to all 
 these, is marked with suspicion and danger. Pres. Ed- 
 wards says, " Let" the sinner " apply his rational powers 
 to the contemplation of divine things, and let his belief be 
 speculatively correct; still he is in such a state — that those 
 objects of contemplation will excite no holy affections.^'* 
 David Brainerd, in his account of his conversion, says, 
 " I at once saw that all my contrivances and projects to 
 procure deliverance and salvation for myself, were utterly 
 in vain. I was brought quite to a stand, as finding my- 
 self utterly lost. I saw that it was forever impossible for 
 me to do any thing towards helping or delivering myself I 
 saw that, let me have done what I would, it would no more 
 have tended to my helping myself than what I had done. 
 I had the greatest certainty that my state was forever mise- 
 rable for all that I could do, and wondered that I had never 
 been sensible of it before." " It was," adds the author of 
 the Tract, " when he had thus given up all expectation of 
 relief from his own efforts ; when he was brought to see 
 himself lost and helpless; when his former feelings were 
 gone and he had left off all his selfish and resolute endea- 
 vours to bring himself into a better state ; it was then — 
 that unspeakable divine glory seemed to open to the view 
 of his soul. "t This was unlike the present plan of throw- 
 ing sinners upon their own resources. 
 
 * Tract before mentioned; p. 10. t id. p. 90. 
 
DIVINE EFFICIENCY. 75 
 
 The real question lies between the Calvinistic doctrine 
 of divine efficiency and the Arminian self-determining 
 power. If the will turns without the immediate agency of 
 God, it is turned none the less by a self-determining power 
 for the contemplation of motives which do not absolutely 
 control. The old Arminians, though they denied, as the 
 writers in the Christian Spectator do, that motives exert- 
 ed an absolute dominion, and some of them talked, incon- 
 sistently enough, about the necessity of indifference, did 
 not deny the indispensableness of motives. In that they 
 would have bid defiance to the most familiar consciousness 
 of the human race. But they meant to insist, as these mo- 
 dern writers do, that the will is not a slave to motives. 
 If without divine efficiency the will turns in view of 
 motives which it is competent to resist, it is turned by a 
 self-determining power. If all that God does is to lay truth 
 in before the mind in its most affecting aspects and rela- 
 tions, then it is not God, in distinction from discovered 
 truth, that changes the heart. It is either truth, in its own 
 affecting aspects and relations, which does the work, or 
 the mind changes itself in view of motives. There is no 
 escaping from this dilemma. Dr Taylor says, the mind is 
 never changed "without an influence of the holy Spirit 
 distinct from the natural or simple injluencc of truth.^^ 
 But that influence of the Spirit does no more than lay in 
 truth before the mind, not in false glosses, but in its own 
 affecting aspects and relations. If the influence of truth 
 thus made conspicuous, is in any sense "distinct from" its 
 " natural or simple influence," yet it is its own unborrowed 
 influence when clearly seen. After the truth is thus made 
 
76 DIVINE EFFICIENCY. 
 
 manifest, God does no more. Either then it is the truth 
 clearly seen which changes the mind by effectual control, 
 or the mind changes itself in view of motives, and that is 
 the self-determining power. The former the gentlemen 
 deny ; the latter of course they must maintain. No, they 
 say, it is God that produces the change by an instrument. 
 He sends in the truth as a man thrusts in a sword ; and no 
 one would ascribe the execution to the sword, but to the 
 man who wields it. Then the action is on the truth, and 
 not on the mind othenvise than as the truth affects it. But 
 Dr Taylor denies that the action is on the truth ; and I 
 hope to show in another place that there is no sense or 
 meaning in such a supposition. Further, if the truth, in 
 one instance, is the instrument in the same sense that the 
 sword is in the other, then the mind has no more of the 
 freedom pleaded for than the body when pierced with a 
 sword. The freedom set up consists in a power to be slain 
 by the truth or to repel the truth at pleasure ; which would 
 exclude every external agent and every instrument wielded 
 by him. Were a man to present a sword which the body 
 could receive or reject at pleasure, and it chose to receive 
 it and die, and gave it this effect after the agency of the 
 man had ceased, (after, in the order of nature,) the man 
 could not be said to have produced that death even by an 
 instrument. But to avoid all dispute about the meaning of 
 the self-determining power, I once more announce, that 
 when I use the phrase, I mean no more than a power that 
 actually turns from sin to God without divine efficiency, in 
 view of motives illumined by the Spirit but not absolutely 
 controllino-. 
 
DIVINE EFFICIENCY. 77 
 
 Our brethren start with this assumption, that they can 
 look far enough into the mysteries of nature to see deci- 
 sively that if God makes me " willing" in the day of his 
 " power," I am not free though I am willing. Now I 
 protest against this assumption, and affirm that no mortal 
 man can look far enough into the secrets of nature to see 
 this to be a fact. I doubt whether Gabriel could, even if 
 it were a fact. I protest also against this bold scrutiniz- 
 ing into the mode of divine operation. This fault is not 
 chargeable upon us. " God said, Let there be light, and 
 there was light." We ask no questions about the mode, 
 and are satisfied to know that he ivilled it to be and it was. 
 *' You hath he quickened who were dead in trespasses and 
 sins." We ask no questions about the mode, and are sa- 
 tisfied to know that he willed their resurrection and it took 
 place. We are not of those who, after such a report, com- 
 plain of a "physical change" which destroys freedom. 
 From our own consciousness we know that we are free ; 
 and the man who has been regenerated is the last to com- 
 plain that his liberty is abridged. Our freedom consists 
 in a faculty to will under the dictates of the understand- 
 ing, and in actual willingness. If we are willing we are 
 free. No higher idea of freedom can be conceived. If 
 it is possible for God to make us willing by a direct act 
 upon the mind, his efficiency must be consistent with our 
 liberty. This dream of the incompatibility of efficiency 
 with freedom, is one of those errours of judgment which 
 grow out of the casual association of ideas. In other cases 
 where power enforces a thing, we say, the subject is not 
 free. And you transfer that idea to a case where power 
 
78 DIVINE EFFICIENCY. 
 
 only makes us willing. If I am willing, I know you can- 
 not look far enough into the secrets of nature to see that 
 I am not free, even though made willing. What more do 
 I want ? I have complete faculties and a willing soul. 
 But you say, what are faculties that cannot move unless 
 moved by another ? This word cannot is constantly used 
 delusively in these discussions. A faculty to move that, 
 physically speaking, cannot move, is a contradiction in 
 terms. It is a faculty which is not a faculty. But there 
 may be faculties to move which, in point of fact, will not 
 move in such a manner but in him in whom they have 
 their being.* By power, as applied to the human mind, 
 we mean nothing more than the proper basis of obligation ; 
 and it consists in the faculties of a rational soul ; faculties 
 not necessarily independent in their exercises. Rational 
 creatures are bound to love God even though he does not 
 efficiently make them willing ; else the wicked could not 
 be punished. We ascribe to them therefore a power irre- 
 spectively of the action of God upon them ; because it is 
 the dictate of common sense that no one can be bound to 
 to do a thing for which he has not natural ability, for in- 
 stance, to carry that mountain. If you can prove from this 
 obligation that there is no divine efficiency, prove it. But 
 I know that you cannot penetrate far enough into the mys- 
 teries of nature to see that it must be so. You must refer 
 the decision to divine revelation, the plain tenour of which 
 we must believe whether it crosses what we call our reason 
 or not. And all revelation is against you, as I hope to show 
 in its proper place. Assuming this at present, we say that 
 
 * Acts 17, 28. 
 
DIVINE EFFICIENCY. 79 
 
 rational creatures have a capacity to love God without his 
 efficiency, but that, as a matter of fact, they never will. 
 Nor does this arise from their perverseness ; for we apply 
 the same assertion to the holy angels. And if we are 
 charged with inconsistency in asserting a power, (meaning 
 only a basis of obligation,) where there is no independence, 
 we take shelter in the utter incapacity of man to decide 
 this question by his own unassisted reason, and appeal 
 confidently to the word of God, which plainly and very 
 often asserts what we affirm. And if that word supports 
 divine efficiency in respect to man, none will doubt that 
 it is true in respect to angels : for those who make our de- 
 pravity the only occasion for the interposition of the Spirit, 
 and thus limit his operations to men, deny efficiency alto- 
 gether, and make that interposition a mere matter of moral 
 suasion. If the Bible asserts this dependence in reference 
 to a part, it does in reference to all. On that word we 
 cast ourselves. To the plain and uncontradicted meaning 
 of several hundred texts we submit, whether we can see 
 the consistency of what they assert or not. This we must 
 do in all cases. If the Bible tells us that there are Three 
 in One, we must believe though we cannot comprehend. 
 If it tells us that men and angels are bound to love God, 
 and so have power, without divine efficiency applied, and 
 at the same time informs us that they are not independent, 
 we must believe it all though unable to reconcile the parts. 
 If God is not to be believed when he tells us of those facts, 
 relative to matter or mind, which lie too deep for creature 
 comprehension, he cannot make a credible revelation of 
 necessary truths ; for there are many such truths whose 
 
80 DIVINE EFFICIENCY. 
 
 modes and relations we cannot comprehend. We cannot 
 tell how our will moves the body, how the grass grows, 
 nor even, according to Locke and Stewart, how motion is 
 communicated by impulse. If we are to believe nothing 
 whose modes we cannot comprehend, we must stand uni- 
 versal skeptics in the midst of a world full of wonders, and 
 must constantly reject the testimony of our senses. If it 
 can be proved from the Scriptures that God did hold Judas 
 bound to love him, to whom he never applied his efficient 
 power, and that he did apply that power to Peter, we must 
 believe, whatever difficulties lie in the way, that Judas had 
 natural power, (meaning by power the basis of obligation,) 
 and that Peter was made to differ from him by the imme- 
 mediate operation of the Spirit upon his heart. I believe 
 this because I find it in my Bible : and while it is there, I 
 will lie down upon it and hold it as with the grasp of death, 
 even though as unable to understand it as to understand 
 how God could exist without a beginning or a cause. 
 
 Why should liberty be impaired by divine efficiency 1 
 It is agreed on all hands that the Christian's new exercises 
 are his own, as much as they possibly can be his own. 
 They are acts, not of God, but of his own mind, as fully as 
 they can be acts of that mind, — as fully as God's acts are 
 acts of his mind. God never created his own mind, nor, 
 as far as we can conceive, his own exercises. All are self- 
 existent, without succession, in one eternal now, insepara- 
 ble from his self-existent nature. But in the highest pos- 
 sible sense he exercises the feelings he has. And in a 
 sense equally perfect the Christian exercises his feelings. 
 They are the real exercises of his own mind. Mind is 
 
DIVINE EFFICIENCY. 81 
 
 such a peculiar substance that its action can be in the 
 highest possible sense its own while caused by the Author 
 of its being. If we are willing, we as completely exercise 
 that willingness as though we had caused it by an inde- 
 pendent power. In regard to its being our own, we go as 
 far as our brethren possibly can. The only point of dif- 
 ference is about the cause : not whether it is entirely our 
 own, but what caused it to be exercised. Our brethren, 
 if they differ from us in any thing but words, must mean 
 that the mind of man not only exercises its own affections 
 in the fullest degree, but causes itself to exercise them. If 
 they meant only that the faculties cause the exercises, there 
 is a sense in which this is true ; for the essential attributes 
 of mind are necessary to the action of mind. But they 
 seem to have a confused notion that the will, not only exer- 
 cises such volitions, but chooses to exercise them ; placing 
 a volition before every volition, and one before the first ; 
 the very absurdity charged upon the old Arminians by 
 Pres. Edwards. The question is not whether Peter does 
 himself exercise the affections, and exercise them in the 
 highest possible sense in which any being can ; whether 
 it is his own faculties that put them forth. The ques- 
 tion is not whether he is willing in the highest sense in 
 which any being can be willing ; whether it is his own 
 hearty willingness. In these points all are agreed. But 
 the sole question is, what causes him to exercise such a 
 willingness ? One says it is God, another says it is Peter. 
 And those who adopt the latter opinion, talk about his 
 doing it spontaneously, — his doing it because he chooses to 
 do it, as if there needed any other consent than the wil- 
 
82 DIVINE EFFICIENCY. 
 
 lingness itself. But they seem to dream of the necessity 
 of a willingness to be willing ; which again carries us back 
 to that confusion which Pres. Edwards encountered and 
 exposed ; namely, the necessity of a volition before every 
 free volition, and therefore one before the first ; else the 
 first is not free ; and then, as slaves cannot beget a line of 
 freemen, no part of the series is free. If you say, the 
 mind must cause the volition, there is a sense in which 
 this is true. If there was no mind there could be no voli- 
 tion. It is the mind itself that wills. But the question 
 still returns, what causes the mind to will thus and thus 
 rather than in a contrary way? If you say, the mind 
 chooses to do it, there again is a volition before every free 
 volition, and one before the first. If you say, the mind 
 has power to act in view of motives, I know it well ; and 
 so has Judas power to love, but he does not exert that 
 power. Why does Peter exert it? If you say, because 
 he chooses to do it, there again is a volition before every 
 free volition. If you say, the cause lies in the self-deter- 
 minmg power, the question still returns, why does Peter 
 exert that power and Judas not ? If you trace it to a pre- 
 vious volition in Peter, you have need to find the cause of 
 that, and to run back interminably through a chain which 
 at last leaves an effect without a cause. If the cause of 
 that exertion of the self-determining power is not a previ- 
 ous volition, what is it? A capacity to choose? But 
 Judas has this capacity and does not use it : why does 
 Peter use it if the reason is not a previous choice ? His 
 capacity cannot be the cause of his using his capacity in 
 this way ; for Judas has the same capacity and does not 
 
DIVINE EFFICIENCY. 83 
 
 SO use it. What self-determining power can be controlled 
 by capacity, or can exist in capacity, without a previous 
 choice ? The very word self-determination implies a de- 
 cision from fixed purpose ; and this cannot be made by 
 mere power or capacity without an act of the will. No 
 man, I think, can conceive of a self-determining power 
 which proceeds without purpose or choice. A self-deterr 
 mining mind is a mind that purposely determines its own 
 acts : and there is a purpose before every purpose, and one 
 before the first. It is in vain to ransack the mind for a 
 self-determining power that does not consist in a capacity 
 to control the volitions hy previous volitions. If you mean 
 by the self-determining process, that we choose to choose, 
 say it : but if you mean any other thing, you must mean 
 only that the mind itself wills ; and this is as true on our 
 plan as on yours. The willingness could not be more its 
 own if it carried back an agency beyond its own action to 
 cause its own activity. This language exposes the confu- 
 sion of the whole system. The theory of self-determina- 
 tion assumes that the mind sends back an agency to cause 
 its own activity, — that it acts to cause its own action, — 
 that it acts before it acts, — that its action causes its first 
 action. If the mind originates its own holy action, it 
 either acts before it acts, or, without acting, it originates 
 its action by a mere potoer to act. Certainly the action 
 grows out of a power to act ; but a power to originate, 
 without acting, is quite a different thing. It is not the 
 mind's power to act, but a power, without acting, to cause 
 itself to act. 
 
 I will not have such a self-determining power in my 
 
84 DIVINE EFFICIENCY. 
 
 system, you say. I always have denied it, and it shall not 
 be fastened upon me. Well then, who does determine 
 the will on your plan ? God does not except by motives. 
 Motives have no absolute control. After they have ex- 
 erted all their force, the will is to decide whether to fall in 
 with them or reject them. In that decision it is not influ- 
 enced by motives. For after the whole body of motives 
 have done their best, the decision is to be made whether 
 to allow their influence to have any effect. Call that influ- 
 ence ten degrees. It must be no more nor less. The 
 whole body of motives are wrapt up in ten degrees, and 
 the question is, shall ten degrees be rejected or be allowed 
 to prevail ? That precise question the mind must decide 
 without the influence of motives. The ten degrees are not 
 the pleading attorney, but the prisoner at the bar. He 
 stands to be judged. If he is allowed to speak, the ten 
 degrees are changed to eleven. The influence of motives 
 is not working on the judge ; that influence is the very 
 thing to be judged. It Jias spent itself, and now the ques- 
 tion is, shall that identical influence, without increase or 
 change, be lifted up or cast down 1 In that decision the 
 will is influenced by nothing out of itself It is its own 
 determiner. Even the temper and aflfections are not al- 
 lovved to interfere. The very thing which the will has to 
 do is to crush and destroy the temper and affections. Self- 
 interest is not allowed to speak. The whole plea which 
 self-interest has put in is mute in the prisoner at the bar. 
 Not a straggling motive from any corner of the universe 
 is left out of the ten degrees. Not one can exert an influ- 
 ence on the decision. The very point at issue is, whether 
 
DIVINE EFFICIENCY. 85 
 
 one of them all shall have the least influence or not. In 
 the decision of that question the mind can be determined 
 by nothing but its own despotic will. And if this is not 
 self-determination, tell me what is. Besides, here is a 
 mind claiming to be rational, and highly jealous of its li- 
 berty, that constantly acts, in the highest concerns, without 
 motives, and therefore with no more reason than a block, 
 
 Every attempt to find in a previous act of the mind 
 the cause of holiness, leads to inconsistency. Some have 
 placed it in a consent to fall in with the motives contained 
 in divine truth; others, (with nearly the same meaning,) 
 in a resolution to submit to God. Let us consider both. 
 
 The mind consents to fall in with the motives presented 
 in divine truth, before it does fall in with them and put 
 forth holy affections. That consent cannot be holy, for it 
 it is the cause of holiness. And being unholy, it cannot 
 be put in motion by holy motives. Such motives may hv 
 addressed to reason and conscience ; but none except mo- 
 tives adapted to a selfish temper can induce that unholy 
 consent which produces all the holiness in the soul. Mo- 
 tives of a better character must indeed be in readiness to 
 be fallen in with when the mind consents ; but that con- 
 sent, which has the most important bearing of all the ope- 
 rations of the mind, sets aside as useless, (in respect. to 
 itself,) all the holy motives of the universe, and yields only 
 to those which are unholy. It will not itself submit to any 
 but bad motives, and yet it compels the mind to yield to 
 all those which are contained in the truths of God. 
 
 Take the other view. The advocates of the new doc- 
 trine, in their division of the mental powers, comprehend 
 8 
 
80 DIVINE EFFICIENCY. 
 
 die heart and will under the common name of will : and, 
 overlooking the immense difficulty of subduing a wicked 
 Iteart, they speak of the operation as being as easy as it is 
 to will. They go upon the principle that the will, (in the 
 vulgar sense of the word, viz. the faculty which forms re- 
 solutions,) can control the affections; and they constantly 
 beset awakened sinners to resolve to submit. That reso- 
 lution they consider the cause of all the holy affections ; of 
 course it is not itself holy : consequently it cannot be mov- 
 ed by motives adapted to a holy temper. Here then again 
 there is no chance for the operation of any but selfish mo- 
 tives, to awaken that lordly resolution which commands in- 
 to existence all the holy affections. None but bad motives 
 can act on that wicked emperor who orders the mind into 
 submission to the pure motives of God. He is moved 
 huuself by the worst influence, but sends out the best 
 He is not known by his works ; for his works are good and 
 he is evil. 
 
 I ask the advocates of the exercise system, what there 
 li; before the holy affection that can be called an indepen- 
 dent power; I mean, that originates holy exercises with- 
 out the immediate action of God. How does it work ? I 
 ain not asking what power exercises the affections ; that is 
 the mind : but I am inquiring after a power which ex- 
 hausts its influence before the exercise appears. Is this 
 jjower exerted through a voluntary act or is it not ? If it is, 
 then there is a volition before every volition, and one be- 
 fore the first. If it is not, then I ask, what is that mighty 
 power which produces these wonderful effects without any 
 decision or action? Look at this thing on every side. 
 
DIVINE EFFICIENCY. 87 
 
 Look at it long. Pass not by the question without a dis- 
 tinct answer. The main point turns on this. How does 
 the mind cause its own exercises without any act or deci^ 
 sion ? What independent cause can act there without an 
 act of the mind ? Look at it. What can it be ? When 
 you go back beyond volition, you find, nothing but mind 
 in an involuntary state : but how can mind in such a state 
 act to cause volition in distinction from exercising it ? The 
 believers in a disposition might think they saw a cause, 
 though not an independent cause. But will you who are 
 so strenuous to exclude every thing from the mind but ex- 
 ercise, say that you have found in it an independent cause 
 of exercise which involves no decision or action ? In a 
 thing which has nothing but exercise, what is that mighty 
 cause which produces every thing without exercise ? Ex- 
 isting affections, by entertaining motives which call forth 
 similar affections, may in a sense be the cause of the lat- 
 ter ; but this is not the case contended for by the advocates 
 of the self-determining power. Besides, there are here no 
 such affections as you wish to produce. 
 
 You say, the cause lies in the faculty of the will. Bui 
 are you sure that this is not using words without a meaning ? 
 What is the faculty which, without any decision or act, 
 causes itself to will 1 Can you look so far as clearly to see 
 that there is any thing in all this but words ? Put it 
 in plain and intelligible language and tell me what it is. 
 Get not over this task by covering it up in the tapestry of 
 general terras. I cannot be satisfied till this question is 
 answered. I well know that there is a faculty, and that 
 that faculty is exercised in willing ; but when the faculty 
 
S8 DIVINE EFFICIENCY. 
 
 has willed, it has done all that we can trace : we cannot 
 find in it an independent cause of that exercise. We can 
 find in it a sort of cause, (as without the faculty the exer- 
 cise could not exist,) but by no means an independent 
 cause. By the faculty of the will we understand no more 
 tlian that the mind is so formed that, with or without di- 
 vine efficiency, it will put forth volitions, as matter cannot. 
 But whether there is or is not divine efficiency, is not de- 
 cided by the allowed existence of a faculty. 
 
 But cannot God, you say, lodge in mind an efficient 
 cause as well as in matter ? If you mean by an efficient 
 cause that without which the effect could not be, (the com- 
 mon definition given it,) then mind is an efficient cause ; 
 for without mind there could be no perception or thought 
 01' affection or volition, or any operation of imagination or 
 memory. But if you mean by an efficient cause, a cause 
 independent for its present power and action, there is not 
 an efficient cause in all the works of God. I am willing 
 to admit also that the attributes of matter, which consti- 
 tute the laws of nature, are efficient causes. Stewart con- 
 siders the laws of nature as only the stated modes of divine 
 operation, and denies that any thing intervenes between 
 the divine will and the effect. But if the attributes of 
 matte}' do not exist separately from God, matter does not 
 exist ; and then we must all go hack to Berkleianism. 
 Stewart denies that efficient causes can exist in matter : 
 but if extension exists separately from God, the extension 
 of a marble rock is the efficient cause of its filling the 
 space to the exclusion of other bodies. Brown, on the 
 other hand, maintains that the laws of nature are efficient 
 
DIVINE EFFICIENCV. 89 
 
 causes, but denies that God constantly produces their ex- 
 istence ; and says that at the creation he permanently 
 lodged in matter its existence and powers, which continue 
 without his further interposition. But to me this appears 
 as impossible as for God to create a being which for the 
 future shall be self-existent. It seems to suppose that he 
 lodged self-existence in matter and its laws, which appears 
 to be a contradiction even in terms. In the middle space 
 between these two philosophers I would take my humble 
 stand, and say, that the attributes or laws of matter are 
 efficient causes, actually intervening between the divine 
 will and the effect, but that they are momentarily sup- 
 ported and made what they are by the power of God. 
 
 Now the operations of these laws of matter are uniform 
 and mechanical, without any variations or diversities to be 
 accounted for. In this they essentially differ from tbe 
 operations of mind. In the latter the diversities are the 
 very things and the only things to be accounted for. That 
 the mind is the efficient cause, in general, of affections 
 and volitions, does not account for the fact that one mind 
 has holy exercises and another sinful. We may account 
 for the sinful by the existence of self-love, (essential to 
 every nature above a block,) turned into selfishness by the 
 absence of love to God, and moved by motives of which 
 the universe is full ; but we cannot account for the holy 
 exercises without going back beyond the motives in view 
 of which they were called forth, to that power which 
 caused the mind to fall in with the motives : for before 
 holiness is implanted in the heart, there is nothing an- 
 swering to self-love in the other case, to which the motives 
 
9U DIVINE EFFICIENCY. 
 
 are adapted. The fact is, that the heart governs the head 
 more than the head the heart. The heart, influencing the 
 judgment respecting the greatest good, controls, in moral 
 matters, the opinions of the understanding ; but the under- 
 standing cannot reform a selfish heart. 
 
 The mind, though an efficient cause, is not indepen- 
 dent. And what do you mean by that? you say. Sup- 
 pose God does constantly uphold the causal powers of the 
 mind, as he does the causal power of the loadstone, they 
 are still causes existing separately from him, as much as 
 the attributes of matter, (the true physical causes,) exist 
 separately from him. All this is true ; but those mental 
 powers are only what we mean hy faculties. And in the 
 e.xercise of the faculties there is a latitude altogether dif- 
 ferent from the mechanism of the material world. No 
 powers or faculties are causes of such a nature as to ac- 
 count for the difference of moral feeling between Peter and 
 Judas. Those powers act uniformly so far as to attend to 
 and choose the greatest apparent good ; but what that ap- 
 parent good is, depends less on the faculties than on the 
 state of the heart. In the unregenerate, where supreme 
 self-love predominates, the greatest apparent good is sure 
 to be wrapt up in self-interest, and the powers which God 
 .supports are as sure to act under the general control of 
 selfishness : and as no light spread upon other objects can 
 make them dearer to the selfish man than self, no radiations 
 of trutli can alter this direction of the powers, until, by an 
 energy wholly distinct from the faculties and from truth, 
 the stubborn heart, in view of truth, is all at once made to 
 transfer its supreme affection to God. 
 
DIVINE EFFICIENCY. 91 
 
 It has been asked on our side, How can our faculties 
 be constantly dependent and their operations forever inde- 
 pendent ? There is nothing gained by anything delusive 
 or by concealing any part of the truth. I admit therefore 
 that the argument for divine efficiency involved in this 
 question is not logical. The power of the loadstone, 
 though constantly supported by God, is its own power ; 
 else the attributes of matter have no existence separate 
 from God, and then matter has no existence. And if that 
 attraction is its own power separately from God, it is, 
 though not an independent, yet an efficient cause, inter- 
 vening between the divine will and the effect. Can that 
 cause be dependent and its action independent ? Its ac- 
 tion, though not the immediate action of God, is certainly 
 caused by God. The action of that power mechanically 
 follows from the support of that power ; and if the power 
 is not independent, the action is not independent, although 
 the action is its own and not God's. Thus it is with the 
 attributes or laws of matter : is it so with mind ? The 
 faculties of the mind are as constantly supported as the 
 attributes of matter ; and the exercise of a faculty is not 
 the act of God but the act of the creature. Its support 
 and its exercise are so distinct as to be the acts of entirely 
 different agents. Thus far the two cases are alike. But 
 here arises the mighty difference : there is no such me- 
 chanism in the operations of the mental faculty. If there 
 was, its operation must be the same at all times and in all 
 minds. Its support makes it merely a faculty, but does 
 not decide its operations. These are decided by the 
 state of the heart and outward circumstances, — outward 
 
92 DIVINE EFFICIENCY. 
 
 circumstances throwing in motives adapted to the existing 
 temper or affections. We cannot therefore argue from the 
 dependence of the faculties, that the particular form of 
 their exercise is determined by God. The faculties them- 
 selves are not the full cause of the diversities of their ope- 
 rations : and therefore to support them is not to support 
 the entire cause, much less to be the cause. There is not 
 a single faculty that has the full cause in itself. The 
 judgments of the intellect and the decisions of the will are 
 botli controlled by the heart. And the heart itself is so 
 far dependent on the intellect, that it is always influenced 
 by motives contemplated by that faculty, provided they 
 accord with its own taste. The faculty of the heart can 
 never account for all the diversities of its operations. The 
 attraction of the magnet is a competent and efficient cause 
 of the motion of the steel towards it : but if it had such a 
 latitude of action as sometimes to attract and sometimes to 
 repel the same object, no single power lodged within it 
 could be the cause of this diversity of action. The faculty 
 of the heart cannot account for a man's hating rather than 
 loving or loving rather than hating, and therefore is not 
 the full cause of any specific mode of action. If the 
 movements of this faculty involved the mechanism of ma- 
 terial laws, the power would be the full cause of the ope- 
 ration : but as it works in opposite ways, in loving and 
 hating, the cause of this diversity must be sought for be- 
 yond the faculty. When therefore you say that God 
 supports the faculty, you do not say that he supports the 
 entire cause of these diversities, much less that he is him- 
 self the cause. That he supports the life and faculties of 
 
DIVINE EFFICIENCY. 93 
 
 the wicked, is no proof that he produces all their wicked 
 feelings. 
 
 To prove our spontaneity in originating our own holy 
 exercises, an appeal is often made to our consciousness- 
 Never was an appeal less supported. What are we con- 
 scious of? Entire willingness in the operations of our 
 own minds. But the question is not about exercising, 
 but about spontaneously causing our own volitions. Now 
 we know that we are willing, but are we conscious of 
 willing to be icilling ? The very question answers itself, 
 and refutes this confident appeal. Whatever are the diffi- 
 culties of comprehending this subject, I think we can 
 clearly see that the nature of our exercises is the same 
 whether they are divinely caused or not. My thoughts of 
 you and my love to you are what they are, whether origi- 
 nated by God or by myself. We know from conscious- 
 ness that we have all the workings of a rational soul, 
 and that they are perfectly free by whomsoever caused ; 
 we cannot be certain from their nature or freeness, 
 whether they are caused by the simple powers of the mind 
 or by the addition of a foreign impulse. If we were plainly 
 told that God had " wrought all our works in us," we 
 should not feel them to be less our own or less free. If 
 we were told that he had made us " willing in the day of 
 his " power," we should be no less conscious of being 
 willing and free. A thought is a thought and love is love 
 however caused. We cannot therefore draw from our 
 conscious freedom any argument against the efficiency of 
 God. 
 
 But will not these reasonings prove either that God is 
 
94 DIVINE EFFICIENCY. 
 
 the efficient cause of all the volitions of the unregenerate, 
 or that they possess the self-determining power ? I think 
 oot. Self-love and a submission to the greatest apparent 
 good, are essential to all beings that have life. A worm 
 prefers pleasure to pain, and will turn aside if a coal of fire 
 is laid before it. Otherwise it could not have both the 
 power of perception and of muscular motion. If God sus- 
 tains the rational existence of natural men, he sustains a 
 nature sure to be influenced by the strongest motive ad- 
 dressed to self-love. Nothing more is necessary on his 
 part than to withhold his sanctifying grace, to convert 
 that self-love into selfishness. It remains in subjection 
 while the love of God rules the heart ; but as soon as that 
 superior is withdrawn, the servant, by a mere change of 
 relations, becomes the master ; and from its very nature it 
 cannot be a master without being a tyrant and a traitor. 
 No divine power is necessary in all this process but to sup- 
 port the rational existence. And if nature itself, thus 
 supported, works in this way, by the mere preponderance 
 of motives addressed to selfishness, there needs no self-de- 
 termining power. In supporting nature God supports rea- 
 son and self-love and the empire of the greatest apparent 
 good; and the sin comes from men's not keeping 
 self-love in subjection by the dominant love of God. This 
 is their own fault. They are bound, even without the 
 application of divine efiiciency, to love God supremely, 
 because they have rational souls and are capable of under- 
 standing his will. But does no self-determining power 
 act in all the multiform ragings of their selfishness ? No : 
 their supreme regard for the gratification of their own pro- 
 
DIVINE EFFICIENCY, 95 
 
 pensities, into which their self-love, (their essential nature,) 
 turns when they neglect the love of God, must be roused 
 to all these ragings by the pressure of adapted and suffi- 
 ciently powerful motives : for to be influenced by motives 
 and to be controlled by the greatest apparent good, are 
 essential to their nature. Let their nature, in all its attri- 
 butes, be supported by its Author, and they change its 
 operations, not by a self-determining power, but by with- 
 holding their love from God. By that single neglect, and 
 not by a self-determining power, they cause the laws of 
 nature, which the God of nature must support, to work re>- 
 bellion. But though the wicked rage without any appli- 
 cation of divine efficiency but to support the harmless laws 
 of nature, not without that efficiency do they turn from 
 supreme enmity to the supreme love of God. 
 
 Still God has the absolute control of mind in all its 
 common operations : else how could he govern the world ? 
 Whether he does this by the mere force of motives adapted 
 to the existing temper, or sometimes by a lower sort of 
 efficiency, not however productive of sin, I will not deter- 
 mine. But the fact is incontrovertible. " The king's 
 heart is in the hand of the Lord as the rivers of water : 
 he turneth it whithersoever he will." " The preparations 
 of the heart in man and the answer of the tongue is from 
 the Lord." " There are many devices in a man's heart ; 
 nevertheless the counsel of the Lord, that shall stand." 
 " A man's heart deviseth his way, but the Lord directeth 
 his steps." " O Lord, I know that the way of man is not 
 m himself: it is not in man that walketh to direct his 
 steps." " Man's goings are of the Lord ; how can a man 
 
96 DIVINE EFFICIENCY. 
 
 then understand his own way V " He fashioneth their 
 hearts alike." " In him we live and move and have our 
 being." Are not some of these motions voluntary ? Then, 
 besides living in him, we voluntarily move in him. Then 
 somehow he causes our willingness as he does our life. 
 " Who is he that saith and it cometh to pass when the 
 Lord commandeth it not ?" " There is no wisdom nor un- 
 derstanding nor counsel against the Lord." " Arise and 
 go down to the potter's house, and there I will cause thee 
 to hear my words. Then I went down to the potter's 
 house, and behold he wrought a work on the wheels. And 
 the vessel that he made of clay was marred in the hand 
 of the potter. So he made it again another vessel, as 
 seemed good to the potter to make it. Then the word of 
 the Lord came to me saying, O house of Israel, cannot I 
 do with you as this potter, saith the Lord 1 Behold as 
 the clay is in the potter's hand, so are ye in my hand, O 
 house of Israel. At what instant I shall speak concerning 
 a nation and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up and to 
 pull down and to destroy it; if that nation against whom I 
 have pronounced, turn from their evil, I will repent of the 
 evil that I thought to do unto them. And at what instant 
 I shall speak concerning a nation and concerning a king- 
 dom, to build and to plant it ; if it do evil in my sight, that it 
 obey not my voice, then I will repent of the good wherewith 
 I said I would benefit them." How many volitions he 
 must control to accomplish all this. " Shall the axe boast 
 itself against him that heweth therewith? or shall the saw 
 magnify itself against him that shaketh it ? as if the rod 
 should shake itself against them that lift it up, or as if the 
 
DIVINE EFFICIENCY. 97 
 
 Staff should lift up itself as if it were no wood. ' " Thou 
 art my battle axe and weapon of war : for with thee will 1 
 break in pieces the nations, and with thee will I destroy 
 kingdoms."* 
 
 A number of cases in the sacred history are referred to 
 in the margin,! in which God controlled the hearts of men 
 in common matters. I will only ask, how Could Christians 
 pray for relief in a thousand cases, if they could not confide 
 in his absolute power to control the heart ? How otherwise 
 could Jacob have prayed for deliverance from the rage of 
 Esau, or have said about the unknown lord of Egypt, " God 
 Almighty give you mercy before the man, that he may send 
 away your other brother and Benjamin" ? How otherwise 
 could Jehoshaphat have prayed for his assailants to depart 
 from him ? or Esther and the Jews for the success of her 
 intercession with Ahasuerus ?| In some instances where 
 the operation could not perhaps be called sanctification, 
 there seemed to be a direct influence upon the heart, '•' He 
 made them also to be pitied of all those that carried them 
 captives." " In Judah the hand of God was to give them 
 one heart to do the commandment of the king and of the 
 princes by the word of the Lord." When " the fathers of 
 
 *Ps. 33. 15. Prov.16. 1,9. andl9. 21.and20.-24. and 21. l,3(i. 
 Isai. 10. 15. Jer. 10. 23. and 18. 2—10. and 51. 20. Lam. 3. 37. AcLs 
 17. 28. 
 
 t Gen. 32. 6, 11. with ch. 33. 4. Exod. 3. 21. and 11. 3. and 12. 
 36. and 34. 24. Josh. 2. 24. with Exod. 15. 15. with Ps. 48. 4—0 
 Judg. 7. 21 , 22. and 14. 4. 2 Kin. 24. 2, 3. 2 Chron. 20. 22, 23. and 
 21. 10. Ez. 1. 1. and G. 22. and 7. 27. Isai. 10. 5—7. Jer. 51. TT, 
 12. Hag. 1. 14. John 7. 30. and 8. 20. 
 
 t Gen. 32. 11. and 43. 14. 2 Chron. 18. 31 Esth. 4. iC>. 
 9 
 
98 DIVINE EFFICIENCY. 
 
 Judah and Benjamin" went up to Jerusalem, in the days 
 of Cyrus, " to build the house of the Lord," it was " God" 
 who ''had raised" their "spirit" to that high emprise. 
 And it was he who, in the days of Darius, " stirred up the 
 spirit of Zerubbabel — and the spirit of all the remnant of 
 the people" to the same work.* Even in the motions of sin, 
 (though only permissively, I suppose,) his government is 
 effectual. "He turned their heart to hate his people, to 
 deal subtilly with his servants." God " moved David" to 
 number the people ; and in all cases, " whom he will he 
 hardeneth."t 
 
 But all these operations are distinguishable from that 
 which produces holiness. These fall within the range of 
 nature, but sanctifying grace is supernatural. The former is 
 ascribed to God ; the latter to the holy Spirit, and consti- 
 tutes his distinctive work as one of the Persons of the Tri- 
 nity. Take away that supernatural operation which sancti- 
 fies, and what is there left of the office work of the Spirit ? 
 or how is he made known as one of the Sacred Persons ? 
 
 The great thing which our brethren oppose is a direct 
 operation on the mind, as working, in their view, a " physi- 
 cal change" inconsistent with freedom. But the causing 
 of a moral effect is not a physical change. Were a new 
 faculty created, it would indeed be a physical change. If 
 that moral effect is wrought by truth, the power which brings 
 truth into view must be applied directly to the truth or di- 
 rectly to the mind. It cannot be applied to the truth. That 
 would produce a change in truth itself But truth cannot 
 
 * Ps. lOG. 46. 2 Chron. 30. 12. Ez. 1. 5. Hag. 1. 14. 
 \ 2 Sam. 24. 1. Ps. 105. 25. Rom. 9. 18. 
 
DIVINE EFFICIENCY. 
 
 99 
 
 change. Two and two make four. What change can 
 that truth undergo? The sinner has rebelled against 
 God. What change can take place in that truth 1 And 
 what is that power which produces no change in the 
 thing to which it is applied? And if the power is 
 applied directly to the mind, to make truth seen, attended 
 to, felt, and loved, it is all we ask. And are you sure 
 that the application of power to the understanding and 
 conscience, to make truth seen, attended to, and felt, is 
 any more consistent with freedom, than the application of 
 power to the heart to make truth loved ? 
 
 God can doubtless say, Let the mind see truth, — in 
 any degree of clearness, — and it is done ; just as Christ 
 willed to appear among his disciples, the doors being shut, 
 and he appeared. If you say, in this case no one can tell 
 on what the power operated, and no one can tell on what 
 the power operates in the other case ; yet we can tell on 
 what the change takes place. As there are but two sub- 
 jects concerned, — mind and truth, — the change must be 
 in one or the other or both : but as no change can possibly 
 take place in truth, it must be in the mind alone. And 
 the change by which truth is first seen, cannot be wrought 
 through the truth, otherwise than as truth is the object 
 seen. That the mind first sees it, must be owing to a 
 clearer discernment in the mind itself, not produced by 
 the object. This probably will not be denied. Here 
 then is one direct act upon the mind that does not destroy 
 freedom. In the next two acts, by which truth is attended 
 to and felt, they will say that the influence is carried on 
 
HX> DIVINE EFFICIENCY. 
 
 through the instrumentality of truth ; and that I am not 
 disposed to deny. But all this influence produces nothing 
 but awakening and conviction. This is not therefore the 
 act about which we are inquiring. Come then right to 
 the point. Does God, by an influence on the heart, cause 
 it to love the truth ? 
 
 You say, he changes the heart through the truth ; and 
 you mean that he does not act immediately on the heart, 
 bin only presents truth to the clear view of the understand- 
 ing, and there leaves it. Then it is not God, but illu- 
 mined truth, seen in its own affecting aspects and relations, 
 that works the change, so far as it is wrought by any 
 thmg but the mind itself But as truth does not control 
 the mind, (as is every where asserted,) it is the mind that 
 turns itself under the inducements which truth offers. 
 And that is exactly the self-determining power. 
 
 If this is so, God cannot be said to convert men. If 
 he only sends in illumined truth, which Peter, by the self- 
 determining power, loves, he also sends in illumined truth, 
 which Judas, by the self-determining power, hates, and 
 hates in proportion as it is illumined : and except his aim- 
 ing at the effect in the former case and not in the latter, 
 he may be said as truly to cause Judas to hate as to cause 
 Peter to love. He merely presents the object, which in 
 one instance is hated and in the other is loved. 
 
 In this theory of the self-determining power, I find 
 nothing but effects without a cause. Here are Peter and 
 Judas, twin minds we will suppose, of exactly the same 
 faculties, tempers, and habits, and urged on by the same 
 
DIVINE EFFICIENCY. 101 
 
 motives : for that is certainly a supposable case.* At ten 
 o'clock they both oppose. At eleven Peter yields and Judas 
 still resists. What has produced this difference ? What 
 caused Peter, with his powers and habits and temper, to 
 love, while Judas, with the same powers and habits and 
 temper, continues to hate? The same causes should pro- 
 duce the same effects. You must either say that Peter 
 chose to love, (placing a volition before every volition, and 
 one before the first,) and Judas did not, or you must look 
 for a cause out of Peter. You cannot find it in the mo- 
 tives; for the same pressure of truth, by the supposition, 
 IS made upon Judas as upon Peter. In short there is an 
 effect without a cause, unless that cause is found in God. 
 Mind is doubtless the cause of mental exercises in a 
 certain sense, as without mind there could be no exercises, 
 and it is the mind itself that exercises. But when you see 
 two minds of the same stamp, and under the pressure of 
 the same motives, put forth opposite exercises, that differ- 
 ence must have a cause distinct from mind or motives. 
 Or to fix the eye on one, the mighty change from hatred 
 to love in Peter, while Judas remains the same, must have 
 a cause other than the faculties, habits, and temper, which 
 
 * In the first chapter it was allowed to be doubtful, on their 
 principles, whether the Spirit pressed motives so far upon Judas as 
 upon Peter, on account of foreseeing that they would not prevail, 
 but would only make him worse. Now, as the present argument 
 is concerned, it matters not whether the Spirit actually applies an 
 equality of motives without success, or sees that they would be 
 without success if applied. The failure of the motives as contem- 
 plated by the Spirit, is the same to the argument as an actual 
 failure. 
 
 9* 
 
102 DIVINE EFFICIENCY. 
 
 are common ; other than the motives which are common. 
 The only question is about that cause : not whether Peter 
 is capable of exercising love without the Spirit ; for Judas 
 is equally capable and does not do it : not whether Peter 
 really puts forth the exercise himself, with all the spon- 
 taneity and freedom that mind can possibly have ; for no 
 one doubts of that : but what causes Peter's hatred to 
 change to love when that of Judas remains the same ? If 
 you say, it is the self-determining power, I meet no answer 
 there. Why does the self-determining power act so diffe- 
 rently in different men under exactly the same circum- 
 stances ? If you say again, Peter chose to love and 
 Judas did not, the question still returns, icliy did Peter 
 choose so differently from Judas under precisely the same 
 circumstances? To say, he chose to choose differently, 
 is only running back through an endless chain, and leav- 
 hig at last an effect without a cause. If to escape from 
 this difficulty you change the ground and say, the pressure 
 of truth was not the same in both cases ; then you give up 
 your favourite tenet, that God does the best he can for all 
 and eacli. Or if you say, he foresaw that no further pres- 
 sure of motives would avail with Judas, then this contem- 
 plated failure of equal motives is the same to my argument 
 as an actual failure of equal motives. What ground was 
 there for God to foresee that the same motives would fail 
 with one and prevail with the other ? What was the cause 
 of that foreseen certainty 1 But I deny that the mind, in 
 the clearest view of truth, will love without the action of 
 divine efficiency. No where below the heavens is truth 
 more clearly seen than in hell, but no love is there. To 
 
DIVINE EFFICIENCY. 103 
 
 say, it is because the Spirit does not place it before them, 
 is to say, it is because they do not see it with sufficient 
 clearness. But that they see it less clearly than do the 
 saints on earth, (bating their blindness to its glory,) is more 
 than you can prove or I believe. And certainly they see 
 it clearly enough to hate it with eternal rancour. To say, 
 it is because there is no hope, is to say that no man can 
 love God without a bribe. Dr Taylor reckons all love to 
 God to be prompted by self-interest; but the very reason 
 why the mere view of truth will not prevail, is that the 
 love which the truth requires, and which alone can relish 
 the truth, is altogether different from the promptings of 
 self-love and of nature. And while the heart remains 
 supremely selfish, the service of God to which the truth 
 invites, will not appear the greatest good. There must be 
 a direct action of the Spirit upon the heart, conforming it 
 to the holy and benevolent nature of truth, before it will 
 be persuaded by truth to love God. 
 
CHAPTER VI 
 
 Importance and Instrumentality of Truth. 
 
 The intellect, the memory, the heart, the will, cannot 
 act without a subject or object or reason of action. With- 
 out truth there is no object, (except errour,) for the under- 
 standing to consider, the memory to recall, the heart to 
 love, hate, desire, dread, rejoice in or regret, or by which 
 the will can be moved. Except so far as errour thrusts 
 itself into the place of truth, truth is the only thing seen 
 or felt, loved, hated, desired, dreaded, rejoiced in, or sor- 
 rowed for, and offers the only considerations in view of 
 which the mind acts. It presents all those considerations 
 and objects from which the intellect forms its reasonings, 
 its judgments, its expectations ; which the heart regards 
 with delight or aversion, with joy or sorrow, with gratitude, 
 hope, or fear ; and from which the will forms all its de- 
 cisions. In short, truth is the necessary means of all the 
 operations of mind which are not guided by errour. With- 
 out it there can be no right exercises at all. It is that 
 which the heart enjoys, and without which there can be 
 no holy happiness. It is that which forms all the enno- 
 bling furniture which we call knowledge. If knowledge 
 serves any purpose in the exaltation and happiness of 
 
106 IMPORTANCE AND INSTRUMENTALITV 
 
 mind, the same purpose is served by truth, for nothing but 
 truth can be known. Without truth there would be no 
 knowledge, no holy happiness, no holy exercises, no truly 
 rational action. Even God glorified is nothing but truth 
 displayed. If it is important that all worlds should be 
 filled with the glory of God, it is important that truth 
 should flood the universe. All the infinitely grand and 
 expensive measures which God has taken to make himself 
 known, are only measures to pour truth upon the eyes of 
 the creation. The only good resulting fi-om the mission, 
 death, and reign of Christ, is involved in truth displayed. 
 What is the law of God, with all its penalties and rewards, 
 but truth presented in the form of knowledge, imposing 
 obligations, and offering motives to obedience? The 
 eternal empire of Jehovah over a universe of moral agents, 
 is sustained by nothing but truth, — is nothing but truth 
 illustrated and applied as motives to obedience, adoration, 
 and praise. Infinite is the value of truth as an instrument 
 of divine government, as a medium of revealing the divine 
 glory ; two things which act and react upon each other. 
 The government of God and all the sanctions of his law, 
 and all the discoveries of him in creation, providence, and 
 grace, are no other than glorious truths to feed the under- 
 standings and sway the hearts and lives of creatures. If 
 truth is not important in this office, the moral empire of 
 God and all the discoveries of his glory have been in vain. 
 The word of God is nothing but a body of truth : and it 
 may be expected of that revelation that it will not discredit 
 truth by pronouncing it useless in governing and blessins 
 the universe. 
 
OF TRUTH. 107 
 
 Thai expectation is realized. It seems even to be 
 suggested that there is no salvation where the Gospel does 
 not come. "Whosoever shall call upon the name of the 
 Lord shall be saved. How then shall they call on him in 
 whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe 
 in him of whom they have not heard ? — So then faith 
 Cometh by hearing and hearing by the word of God."* 
 And as it is by faith that God purifies the heart,t Christ- 
 ians are said to be " clean through the word."| Because 
 the Ephesians believed and trusted in God " after that" 
 they had " heard the word of truth," that word is called 
 " the Gospel of" their " salvation. "§ "It pleased God by 
 the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe." |1 
 If the "ingrafted word" is received with the "meekness" 
 of faith, it "is able to save" the soul.^ God "called" 
 the Thessalonians " to salvation through sanctification of 
 the Spirit and belief of the truth," "by" the "Gospel" 
 which Paul had preached.** To denote that a divine 
 energy attended the word, it is said, " His word was with 
 power." And yet the mere word did no more than when 
 it was said, Be thou made whole. " Our Gospel came not 
 unto you in word only, but also in power and in the Holy 
 Ghost." " My speech and my preaching was — in demon- 
 stration of the Spirit and of power ; that your faith should 
 not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of 
 God. "ft " The preaching of the cross — unto us which 
 are saved, — is the power of God."|| The Agent and the 
 
 * Rom. 10. 13—17. John 17. 20 t Acts 15. 9. j John 15. 3. 
 § Eph. 1. 13. il 1 Cor. 1. 21. IT James 1. 21. ** 2 Thes. 2. 13, 
 14. tt Luke 4. 32. 1 Cor. 2. 4, 5. 1 Thes. 1. 5. It 1 Cor. 1. 18. 
 
108 IMPORTANCE AND INSTRUMENTALITY 
 
 means are sometimes thrown together in a sort of mystical 
 confusion. " I commend you to God and to the word of 
 his grace, which is able to build you up and to give you 
 an inheritance among all them which are sanctified."* 
 By a figure of speech intended to denote the comparative 
 hardness of different people, it is said that if the Gospel 
 had been carried to others they would have believed ;t 
 which cannot mean, even upon the opposite plan, that 
 they would have believed without the Spirit. " For the 
 kingdom of God is not in word but in power. "| Minis- 
 ters, as they plant and water the field, are fellow labourers 
 with him who gives the increase. " Who then is Paul 
 and who is Apollos but ministers by whom ye believed, 
 even as the Lord gave to every man ? I have planted, 
 Apollos watered, but God gave the increase. So then 
 neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that water- 
 eth, but God that giveth the increase. — We are labourers 
 together with God."§ In conviction, and especially in 
 repentance, truth penetrates the heart like sharp arrows 
 or a drawn sword, or, like fire and a hammer upon a rock, 
 it breaks it in pieces. " Thine arrows are sharp in the 
 heart of the king's enemies, whereby the people fall under 
 thee." " The sword of the Spirit, which is the word of 
 God." " For the word of God is quick and powerful, 
 and sharper than any two edged sword, piercing even to the 
 dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and 
 marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents 
 
 * Acts 20. 32. t Ezek. 3. G. Matt. 11. 21. t 1 Cor. 4. 20. 
 § 1 Cor. 3. 5—9. 
 
OF TRUTH. 
 
 109 
 
 of the heart." " Is not my word like as a fire — and like a 
 hammer that breaketh the rock in pieces ?"* 
 
 Thus far there is nothing which has the least sem- 
 blance of opposition to divine efficiency. We come now 
 to a new class of texts. By an easy figure the speaker 
 is so identified with the word spoken, that to him is as- 
 cribed the instrumentality of the latter. The word is 
 dropt from view and he is put for the whole. By exactly 
 the same figure the word is so identified with the divine 
 Agent who wields it, that the energy of the Spirit is as- 
 cribed to the word. The Spirh is dropt from the account 
 and the word is put for the whole. In both cases the 
 nearest and most visible cause is selected as that on which 
 the imagination most naturally dwells. The perfect same- 
 ness of the figure in the two cases however, ought effectu- 
 ally to guard against misconstruction. And even our 
 brethren cannot insist on a literal meaning : for that would 
 entirely exclude the word in one case and the illuminating 
 Spirit in the other. 
 
 " Go ye — and disciple all nations.'.' " Delivering thee 
 from — the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee, to open 
 their eyes and to turn them from darkness to light and from 
 the power of Satan unto God." " And he shall iui-h the 
 heart of the fathers to the children and the heart of the 
 children to their fathers."! Here the eye is filled with 
 the nearest object, and the more remote object is put out 
 of view. Now turn to the other texts which fill the eye 
 with the next nearest object and put out of view the Agent 
 
 * Pa. 45. 5. Jer. 23. 29. Heb. 4. 12. Rev. 1. IG. and 2. 12. 
 
 t Mai. 4. 6. Mat. 28. 19. Luke 1. 17. Acts 2G. 17, 18. 
 10 
 
110 IMPORTANCE AND INSTRUMENTALITY 
 
 behind the scene. " So shall my word be that goeth forth 
 out of my mouth : it shall not return unto me void, but it 
 shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper 
 in the thing whereto I sent it." " The word of God is 
 not bound." " So mightily grew the word of God and 
 prevailed ;" the Holy Ghost, though enforcing it with mi- 
 raculous power, being not named. " For this cause also 
 thank we God without ceasing, because when ye received 
 the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it, not 
 as the word of men, but, as it is in truth, the Avord of God, 
 which effectually worketh also in you that believe." Com- 
 pare that however with this : " He that wrought effectually 
 in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same 
 was mighty in me towards the Gentiles." Again : " Ye 
 shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free ;" 
 meaning, from sin. "It is written in the prophets. And 
 they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore 
 that hath heard and hath learnt of the Father, cometh 
 unto me." Every man is in darkness until he is enlight- 
 ened from above. .For "the natural man receiveth not 
 the things of the Spirit of God ; for they are foolishness 
 unto him ; neither caii he know them because they are 
 spuliuuUy discerned." " It is the Spirit that quickeneth, 
 the flesh profiteth nothing : the words that I speak unto 
 you, they are spirit and they are life." This strong figure 
 by which the Gospel is called spirit and life, cannot ex- 
 clude the holy Spirit, for he is named in this very sentence 
 as the real quickener. " Not of the letter, [the law,] but 
 of the spirit; [the Gospel, called in the context "the 
 ministration of the Spirit," because accompanied with 
 
OP TRUTH. Ill 
 
 larger measures of the Spirit than the law of Moses ;] for 
 the letter killeth, but the spirit givetli life." " Thy word 
 hath quickened me ;" explained by this other clause in the 
 context, " I will never forget thy precepts, for with them 
 tliou hast quickened me."* 
 
 Take another set of texts in which the same thing 
 occurs in relation to both objects. " If any of you do err 
 from the truth and one convert him, let him know that he 
 which converteth the sinner — shall save a soul from death." 
 Here no account is made of the word, but only of the man 
 who utters it. In the next that I shall cite, all account is 
 made of the word and none of the Spirit. " The law of 
 the Lord is perfect, converting the soul." These forms of 
 expression are analagous to others of every day's occur- 
 rence. We say for instance, that Peter and John healed 
 the lame man at the Beautiful gate of the temple, and it is 
 so expressed in the Contents of the chapter ; but Peter 
 said to the wondering multitude, " Why look ye so earn- 
 estly on us, as though by our own power or holiness we 
 had made this man to walk ?"t 
 
 Thus far, I think, there is nothing that either sets 
 aside the effxient action of the Spirit or explains the mode 
 of his operation. Indeed where the Spirit is not mentioned 
 it behooves our brethren to supply the defect as well as us ; 
 for they, no less than we, hold to the necessity of the 
 Spirit's operation. 
 
 * Ps. 119. 50, 03. Isai. 5.5. 11. John C. 45, G3. and 8. 32,34. 
 Acts 19. 20. ICor. 2. 14. 2 Cor. 3. 6, 8. Gal. 2. 8. 1 Thes.2. 
 13. 2 Tim. 2. 9. 
 
 t Ps. 19. 7. Acts 3. 12. James 5. 19, 20. 
 
112 IMPORTANCE AND INSTRUMENTALITY 
 
 We now come to two texts whicli, taken in any thing 
 like a literal sense, would seem to favour our brethren ; 
 but upon that construction they would contradict several 
 hundred texts which hold a different language, as we shall 
 have occasion to see. They speak of the word as the 
 seed by which the children are formed in the second birth, 
 and the act of the father as merely introducing that seed. 
 The two passages are these : " Born again, not of corrupt- 
 ible seed but of incorruptible, by the word of God." " Of 
 his own will begat he us with the word of truth." There 
 is a third text wliicli speaks of the seed without explaining 
 the reference, but from the other two we must conclude 
 that the reference is to the word. " Whosoever is born of 
 God doth not commit sin ; for his seed remaineth in him, 
 and he cannot sin because he is born of God."* I do not 
 say that these are all the texts which thus speak, but I say, 
 they are all that I could find; and I have taken great 
 pains to collect the whole. At present I must believe that 
 these are the only texts Avhich have given countenance to 
 the doctrine which is so triumphantly sounded in every 
 street, that we are begotten and horn again through the 
 word. 
 
 Now for the meaning of these texts. As truth is that 
 in view of which the intellect and heart act, and without 
 which there could be no active life ; in other words, as all 
 the exercises of the new man grow, as it were, out of truth ; 
 this is spoken of as the seed which is wrought up into the 
 living man. But this is strongly figurative upon every 
 
 * James J . IS. 1 Tct. 1. 23. 1 John 3. 9. 
 
OF TRUTH. 113 
 
 construction. Truth docs not groio up into a Christian. 
 Every body sees that. And when the language is ascer- 
 tained to be figurative, we are at full liberty to inquire of 
 other texts how far the figure swells or varies the literal 
 meaning. That it does vary it in some degree is certain ; 
 but how far, cannot be settled by the texts themselves, but 
 must be learnt from the general tenour of Scripture and fi-om 
 common sense. We have already seen that truth is in- 
 troduced to the view of the mind by an action, not on truth, 
 hut on the mind itself. This is one important variation 
 from the literal import of the figure. Let another similar 
 one be supposed, namely, that by an action on the heart 
 God causes it to love as well as see the truth, and it is all 
 we ask. 
 
 There are three other texts which have been brought 
 to support the literal meaning of this figure, which do not 
 apply. Men are said to beget by establishing the figura- 
 tive relation of father and son. Thus Paul begat his son 
 Onesimus, and he begat the Corinthians " through the 
 Gospel." But this was not God begetting ; nor does it 
 express God's power in regeneration. Not God but Paul 
 is the father in this figure. But even Paul claims to have 
 begotten them "through the Gospel;" which fully 
 shows that this memorable phrase, in the other cases, can 
 denote only a general instrumentality ; for Paul could 
 not introduce truth into the mind, as the sticklers for 
 the literal meaning of this figure represent God as 
 doing. If this great moral change is called a new birth, 
 the Gospel, regarded as the means of making the living, 
 active man, may well enough be called the seed ; but the 
 10* 
 
114 IMPORTANCE AND INSTRUMENTALITY 
 
 resemblance must not be pressed too far. By another 
 modification of this general figure Paul becomes the mother. 
 " My little children, of whom I travail in birth again until 
 Christ be formed in you ;" referring to the agony of prayer 
 for the descent of the Spirit upon them ; which looks like 
 any thing but a generation by the word without the life 
 giving Spirit. 
 
 How regeneration is effected by light, and what the 
 meaning is of all those passages which speak of this, may 
 be gathered from a single text. " God, who commanded 
 the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, 
 to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in 
 the face of Jesus Christ."* After all then it is a new crea- 
 tion. 
 
 In the days of the apostles there was an unction of the 
 Spirit which communicated a knowledge of the truth ; but 
 it was the Spirit of inspiration.! 
 
 We have now passed regeneration. When we come 
 to the process of sanctification, we find it to be a law of the 
 new creation that, while the Christian is gazing intently 
 upon God in the glass of his word, the Spirit takes that 
 occasion to transform him progressively into the divine 
 likeness. And by the same figure by which efl^ciency is 
 ascribed to light, we say that views of God are transform- 
 ing. " We all with open face beholding as in a glass the 
 glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from 
 glory to glory, even as bi/ the Spirit of the Lord." " Sanc- 
 tify them through thy truth ; thy word is truth. — For their 
 sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified 
 
 * 2 Cor. 4. G. t 1 John 2. 20, 27. 
 
OF TRUTH. 116 
 
 through the truth." But this very prayer for sanctifying 
 influence was made to God. " Christ — loved the Church 
 and gave himself for it, that he might sanctify and cleanse 
 it with the washing of water by the word ;" the word being 
 the water in which it is cleansed by the divine Purifier ; 
 or literally, the word furnishing the considerations by which 
 the holy affections are called forth by the causal influence 
 of the Spirit of Christ.* 
 
 There are several texts which have been thought 
 against us, which have no such bearing. The enjoined 
 action of the creature is so exactly in a line with the action 
 of the Spirit, that the two coincide in bringing forth the 
 exercises of a new heart ; one causally, the other actually. 
 On this account both are called by the sartie name. Thus 
 men are commanded to make to themselves new hearts and 
 to circumcise their hearts ; which means only that they 
 must cease to hate and begin to love. If Christians 
 " quench not the Spirit," but co-operate with the Spirit, 
 as they ought to do, they will be " transformed by the 
 renewing of " their " mind ; " they will "be renewed in 
 the spirit of" their " mind ; " they will " stir up the gift of 
 God which is in " them ; they will be partakers " of the 
 afflictions of the Gospel according to the power of God ; " 
 they will "be strong in the Lord and in the power of his 
 might;" they will pray "in the Spirit;" they will "be 
 filled with the Spirit ; " they will "put off" the old man with 
 his deeds, and — put on the new man, which is renewed in 
 knowledge after the image of him that created Mm" — 
 " which after God is created in righteousness and true 
 
 * John 17. 17, 19. 2 Cor. 3. 18. Eph. 5. 25, 26. 
 
116 IMPORTANCE AND INSTRUMENTALITY, &C. 
 
 holiness." And therefore all these things are command- 
 ed.* 
 
 In some of these instances men seem commanded to 
 do what God does for them, — to be renewed in the spirit 
 of their mind, to be strengthened by his power, to be filled 
 with the Spirit. But upon every plan the action of God 
 and the action of believers are distinct. Except that both 
 actions, as coincident, are sometimes called by the same 
 name, the whole meaning is, that they must avail them- 
 selves of the offered aids of the Spirit, and go forward in 
 the line to which he excites them. That is all : and in 
 this there is nothing opposed to the common Calvinistic 
 theory. 
 
 I have now gone over all the texts that I could find 
 which speak of the instrumentality of the word in rege- 
 neration and sanctification. And allowing for figures of 
 speech, (for the most part slight and natural,) they cast 
 no decisive light on the mode of divine operation, and in 
 their most obvious meaning are easily reconcilable with 
 divine efficiency, Thus far then there is nothing disco- 
 vered in opposition to this doctrine. We are next to inquire 
 what there is in the Bible which positively supports it. 
 
 * Deut. 10. 16. Jer. 4. 4. Ezek. 18. 31, 32. Rom. 12. 2. Eph. 
 4. 23, 24. and 5. 18. and G. 10, 18. Col. 3.9, 10. 1 Thes. 5. 19. 
 1 Tim. 4. 14. 2 Tim. 1. G, 8. 
 
CHAPTER VII. 
 
 Scripture Testimony to Divine Efficiency. 
 
 After all our reasonings on the subject of divine 
 efficiency, our chief dependence must be on the plain tes- 
 timony of the Bible. We can argue conclusively against 
 the assumption that divine efficiency is inconsistent with 
 freedom ; but for positive proof of the doctrine we dare not 
 rely on our own independent reasonings. We cannot 
 look so deep into the secrets of nature. We must " hear 
 what God the Lord will speak : " and if he, in language 
 the most plain and positive, declares the fact, we must 
 cast no doubts upon it from any confidence we may have 
 in our own powers of discernment, or from any apprehen- 
 sion of its inconsistency with moral agency. Now then 
 for the divine testimony. 
 
 I. The general language of Scripture represents God to 
 be the Author of holiness, without limiting or qualifying 
 the declaration by a reference to any instrument. The 
 general current of Scripture therefore gives the same evi- 
 dence of efficiency in the second creation, that the first 
 chapter of Genesis does of efficiency in the first. "God 
 said. Let there be light, and there was light." We ask 
 
118 SCRIPTURE TESTIMONY 
 
 no questions about the mode, but simply believe that he 
 willed the existence of light and light was. Exactly the 
 same evidence we have, not from a single chapter, but 
 from the general tenour of Scripture, that God efficiently 
 wills the existence of holiness in the hearts of his people. 
 And the few texts which speak of truth as the object 
 towards which the mind acts, or as the consideration by 
 which it is consciously influenced, do not touch the ques- 
 tion. Who causes the mind to fall in with truth 7 This 
 question, which is settled by 'the general voice of Scrip- 
 ture, receives no opposing answer from a single text. 
 
 (1.) I sliall begin with a class of texts which, in the 
 simplest form, speak of God as the Author of holiness. 
 " I am the Lord which sanctify you." " God is ray 
 strength and power, and he maketh my way perfect." 
 " The Lord our God be with us as he was with our 
 fathers. Let him not leave us nor forsake us; that he 
 may incline our hearts unto him, to walk in all his ways, 
 and to keep his commandments and his statutes and his 
 judgments, as he commanded our fathers." " Thou hast 
 heard the desire of the humble ; thou wilt prepare their 
 heart." " The Lord will give grace and glory." "The 
 Lord will perfect that which concerneth me." " Thou 
 wilt ordain peace for us, for thou also hast wrought all our 
 works in us." " I hid me and was wroth, and he went 
 on frowardly in the way of his heart. I have seen his 
 ways and v ill heal him. I will lead him also and restore 
 comforts unto him and to his mourners. I create the fruit 
 of the lips : peace, peace to him that is far off and to him 
 that is near, saith the Lord, and I will heal him." " That 
 
TO DIVINE EFFICIENCY. 119 
 
 they might know that I am the Lord that sanctify them." 
 " The heathen shall know that I the Lord do sanctify 
 Israel." " He is like a refiner's fire and like fidler's soap. 
 And he shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver ; and 
 he shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold 
 and silver, that they may offer unto the Lord an offering 
 in righteousness." " Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona, for 
 flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my 
 Father which is in heaven." "Without me ye can do 
 nothing." " A man can receive nothing except it be giv- 
 en him from lieaven." " Him hath God exalted with his 
 right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give re- 
 pentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins." " Simeon 
 hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, 
 to take out of them a people for his name." " A certain 
 woman named Lydia, — whose heart the Lord opened." 
 " Who maketh thee to differ from another ? and what hast 
 thou that thou didst not receive ? Now if thou didst 
 receive it, why dost thou glory as if thou hadst not receiv- 
 ed it 1 " " By the grace of God I am what I am." " Not 
 that we are sufficient of ourselves to think any thing as of 
 ourselves, but our sufficiency is of God." " Thanks be to 
 God which put the same earnest care into the heart of 
 Titus for you." " When it pleased God, who separated 
 me from my mother's womb, — to reveal his Son in me." 
 " Now the God of peace that brought again from the dead 
 our Lord Jesus Christ, — make you perfect in every good 
 work to do his will, working in you that which is well 
 pleasing in his sight." " Every good gifl and every per- 
 
120 SCRIPTURE TESTIMONY 
 
 feet gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father 
 of lights." " Who — was manifest in these last times for 
 you who hy him do believe in God."* 
 
 (2.) The great account made of the Spirit in the 
 Gospel dispensation, and the work every where ascribed 
 to him. 
 
 The office work of the third Person in the Trinity is to 
 sanctify. Take from the Spirit that work, and you wrest 
 from him all employment, and cover him from creatures 
 with an eternal cloud. From the more abundant influ- 
 ences of the Spirit which attend the Gospel, compared 
 with the law of Moses, that is called " the ministration of 
 the Spirit," and even " the spirit." This w as a chief 
 good promised to Christ in the covenant of redemption, 
 and through him to the Church in the covenant of grace. 
 " Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being 
 made a curse for us ; — that the blessing of Abraham might 
 come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ ; that we might 
 receive the promise of the Spirit through faith. — Now to 
 Abraham and his Seed w^ere the promises made. He 
 saith not. And to seeds, as of many, but as of One, And 
 to thy Seed, which is Christ." '" The Redeemer shall 
 come to Zion. — This is my covenant with them, saith the 
 Lord : My Spirit that is upon thee and my words which I 
 
 • Lev. 20. 8. 2 Sam. 22. 33. 1 Kin. 8. 57, 53. Ps. 10. 17. and 
 84. 11. and 138. 8. Isai. 26. 12. and 57. 17—19. Ezck. 20. 12. and 
 37. 28. Mai. 3. 2, 3. Mat. 16. 17. John 3. 27 and 15. 5. Acts 
 3. 31. and 15. 14. and 16. 14. 1 Cor. 4. 7. and 15. 10. 2 Cor. 3. 
 5. and 8. 16. Gal. 1. 1.5, IG. Heb. 13. 20, 21. James 1. 17. 
 I Pet. 1.20,21. 
 
ro DIVINE EFiFICIENCY. \'2.l 
 
 have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, 
 nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of 
 thy seed's seed, saith the Lord, from henceforth^ and for- 
 ever." "And it shall come to pass afterward that I will 
 pour out my Spirit upon all flesh." "And I w^ill pour upon 
 the house of David and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem 
 a spirit of grace and of supplications; and they shall look 
 upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn 
 for him as one mourneth for his only son." " I will pray 
 the Father and he shall give you another Comforter, that 
 he may abide with you forever. — The Comforter, which is 
 the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name." 
 "When the Comforter is come — he shall testify of me." 
 •' When he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you 
 into all truth." " If I go not avv^ay the Comforter will not 
 come unto you, but if I depart I will send him unto you." 
 " This spoke he of the Spirit which they that believe on 
 him should receive ; for the Holy Ghost was not yet given, 
 because that Jesus was not yet glorified." In his first 
 . interview with the disciples after liis resurrection, " he 
 breathed on them and saith unto them, Tleceive ye the 
 Holy Ghost." " He showed himself alive after his passion : 
 — and being assembled together with them, commanded 
 them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait 
 for the promise of the- Father, which, saith he, ye have heard 
 of me. For John truly baptised with water, but ye shall be 
 baptised with the Holy Ghost not many days hence."* 
 
 ^ Isai. 59. 20, 21. .Joel 2. 28, 29. Zech. 12. 10. John 7. 38, 39. 
 and 14. 16, 17, 2G. and 15. 26. and 16. 7, 13. and 20. 22. Acts 1. 
 3—5. 2Cor. 3. 6, 8. Gal. 3. 13, 14, 16. 
 
 11 
 
V22 SCRIPTURE TESTI.MONV 
 
 When Christ " ascended on high " he " received gifts 
 for men, — that the Lord God might dwell among them." 
 The chief of these was the holy Spirit, which he poured 
 out upon his disciples on the day of Pentecost. To show 
 once for all that he had sent down this Agent to dwell 
 with men and statedly to attend the Gospel, he imparted 
 to the first disciples the miraculous powers of the Spirit, 
 and thus made a public and convincing display of the con- 
 nexion of the Spirit with the Gospel and with the Church. 
 For where he bestowed miraculous powers he generally 
 exerted sanctifying grace ; and the former operation was 
 such an evidence of the latter, that the apostles considered 
 it a sufficient ground for baptism. Thus Peter at the 
 house of Cornelius : " Can any man forbid water that 
 these should not be baptised, which have received the Holy 
 Ghost as well as we ? " And when he told the story to 
 the synod of Jerusalem, he said, "And God, which know- 
 eth the hearts, bore them witness, giving them the Holy 
 Ghost even as he did unto us ; and put no difference be- 
 tween us and them, purifying their hearts by faith." This 
 same Peter, standing up on the day of Pentecost, said, 
 " Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and 
 having received of the Father the promise of the Holy 
 Ghost, he hath shed forth this which ye now see and hear." 
 At another time, " when they had prayed the place was 
 shaken where they were all assembled together, and they 
 were all filled with the Holy Ghost." On the converts at 
 Samaria the apostles " laid — their hands, — and they re- 
 ceived the Holy Ghost." At Damascus, "Ananias — said. 
 Brother Saul, the Lord — hath sent me that thou mightest 
 
TO DIVINE EFFICIENCV. 123 
 
 receive thy sight and be filled with the Holy Ghost." At 
 a later period still, " the churches [had] rest throughout 
 all Judea and Galilee and Samaria, and were edified, and, 
 walking in the fear of the Lord and in the comfort of the 
 Holy Ghost, were multiplied." At Antioch in Pisidia, 
 " the disciples were filled with joy and with the Holy 
 Ghost." "The Holy Ghost came on" the disciples of 
 Ephesus "when Paul laid his hands upon them."* 
 
 It is remarkable that the sanctifying Spirit is not pre- 
 sented as one standing and offering truth to persuade, 
 but as an effusion, sometimes dissolving, sometimes re- 
 freshing or fructifying, sometimes cleansing, sometimes 
 baptising and consecrating. " 1 have poured out my 
 Spirit upon the house of Israel." " I will pour water 
 upon him that is thirsty and floods upon the dry ground ; 
 I will pour my Spirit upon thy seed and my blessing upon 
 thine offspring." " The palaces shall be forsaken — until 
 the Spirit be poured upon us from on high and the wilder- 
 ness be a fruitful field." " According to his mercy he 
 saved us by the washing of regeneration and renewing of 
 the Holy Ghost, which he shed on us abundantly through 
 Jesus Christ our Saviour." " I indeed have baptised you 
 with water, but he shall baptise you with the Holy Ghost." 
 " For by one Spirit are we all baptised into one body, — 
 and have been all made to drink into one Spirit." vSome- 
 times the Spirit is the oil that feeds the perpetual lamps. 
 " And he said unto me, What seest thou? And I said, 
 
 * Ps. C8. 18. Acts 2. 1—4, 33. and 4. 31. and 8. 15—17. and 9 17. 
 31. and 13. 52. and 15. 8. 9. and 19. 2^6 
 
124 SCRIPTURE TESTIMONY 
 
 1 have looked and behold a candlestick all of gold, with 
 a bowl upon the top of it, and his seven lamps thereon, 
 and seven pipes to the seven lamps which were upon the 
 top thereof; and two olive trees by it, one upon the right 
 side of the bowl and the other upon the left side thereof. — 
 Then he answered and spoke unto me, saying, This is 
 the word of the Lord unto Zerubbabel, saying. Not hy 
 might nor by poioer, hut by my Spirit, saith the Lord of 
 hosts."* 
 
 This is the general account. Come now to something 
 a little more particular. " Cast me not away from thy 
 presence, and take not thy holy Spirit from me. Restore 
 unto me the joy of thy salvation and uphold me with thy 
 free Spirit." " When the enemy shall come in like a 
 flood, the Spirit of the Lord shall lift up a standard against 
 him." " Where is he that brought them up out of the sea 
 with the shepherd of his flock 1 Where is he that put his 
 holy Spirit within him ?" " According to the word that I 
 covenanted with you when ye came out of Egypt, so my 
 Spirit remaineth among you." " If ye then, being evil, 
 know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much 
 more shall your heavenly Father give the holy Spirit to 
 them that ask him." " It is the Spirit that quickeneth, 
 the flesh profiteth nothing." " Hope maketh not ashamed, 
 because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by 
 the Holy Ghost which is given unto us." "For they that 
 are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh, but they 
 
 * Isai. 32. 14, 15. and 44. 3. Ezek. 39. 2P. Zech. 4. 2— G. 
 Mar. 1.8. 1 Cor. 12. 13. Tit. 3. 5. 6. 
 
TO DIVINE EFFICIENCY l''^" 
 
 -that are after the Spirit, the things of the Spirit. For to 
 be carnally minded is death, but to be spiritually minded 
 is life and peace.— For if ye live after the flesh ye shall 
 die ; but if ye, through the Spirit, do mortify the deeds of 
 the body, ye shall live. For as many as are led by the 
 Spirit of God, they are the sons of God. For ye have not 
 received the spirit of bondage again to fear, but ye have 
 received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, 
 Father. The Spirit itself beareth witness with our- spirit 
 that we are the children of God.— Ourselves also which 
 have the first fruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan 
 within ourselves.— The Spirit also helpeth our infirmities : 
 for we know not what we should pray for as we ought ; 
 but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groan- 
 ings which cannot be uttered. And he that searcheth 
 the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit, because 
 he maketh intercession for the saints according to the will 
 of God." Is'this the Spirit merely suggesting truth, and 
 not eifectually awakening desires 1 "My conscience also 
 bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost." " The kingdom 
 of God is not meat and drink, but righteousness and peace 
 and joy in the Holy Ghost." " The natural man recen- j 
 eth not the things of the Spirit of God, for they are fool- ' 
 ishness unto him ; neither can he know them because 
 they are spiritually discerned. But he that is spiritual 
 judgeth all things." " Now the God of hope fill you with 
 all joy and peace in believing, that ye may abound in hope 
 through the power of the Holy Ghost." " And such were 
 some of you ; but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, 
 but ye are justified in the name of tlie Lord Jesus and by 
 11* 
 
126 SCRIPTURE TESTIMONY 
 
 the Spirit of our God." " Now he which stabUsheth U8 
 with you in Christ, and hath anointed us, is God, who 
 hath also sealed us and given the earnest of the Spirit in 
 our hearts." " Forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared 
 to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written, not 
 with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God, not in 
 tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart." Does 
 this look like mere persuasion 1 " Now the Lord is that 
 Spirit : and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is li- 
 berty." " He that hath wrought us for the self-same thing 
 is God, who also hath given unto us the earnest of the 
 Spirit." " The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the 
 love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be 
 with you all." " Because ye are sons, God hath sent 
 forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, 
 Father." " We, through the Spirit, wait for the hope of 
 righteousness by faith." "Walk in the Spirit, and ye 
 shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh. For the flesh lusteth 
 against the Spirit and the Spirit against the flesh ; and 
 these are contrary the one to the other. — But if yc be led 
 by the Spirit ye are not under law. — The fruit of the Spi- 
 rit is love, joy, peace, long sutTerini, gentleness, goodness, 
 faith, meekness, temperance. — If we live in the Spirit let 
 us also walk in the Spirit." " In whom also after that ye 
 believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise 
 which is the earnest of our inlieritance." "Through him 
 we both have an access, by one Spirit, unto the Father." 
 " Grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed 
 unto the day of redemption." " The fruit of the Spirit is 
 in all goodness and righteousness and truth." " Praying 
 
TO DIVINE EFFICIENCV. 127 
 
 always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit." 
 " He therefore that despiseth, despiseth not man but God, 
 who hath also given unto us his holy Spirit." " Quench 
 not the Spirit." " That good thing which was committed 
 unto thee, keep by the Holy Ghost that dwelleth in us." 
 " Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth 
 through the Spirit." " If ye be reproached for the name 
 of Christ happy are ye, for the Spirit of glory and of God 
 resteth upon you." " These be they who separate thenv 
 .•3elves, sensual, having not the Spirit. But ye, beloved, 
 — praying in the Holy Ghost, keep yourselves in the love 
 of God."* 
 
 (3.) Faith, (the condition of salvation,) and holiness 
 generally, instead of being independent acts of the crea- 
 ture under the persuasions of the Spirit, are the gift of 
 God. " For I say, through the grace given unto me, to 
 every man that is among you, not to think of himself more 
 highly than he ought to tliink, but to think soberly, accord- 
 ing as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith." 
 " According to the grace of God which is given unto me, 
 as a wise master builder I have laid the foundation." 
 " Every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this 
 manner and another after that." " When James, Cephas, 
 
 •i^'Ps. 51. 11, 12. Isai. o9. ID. and G3. 11. Hag. 2. 5. Luke 
 11. 13. John 6. 63. Rom. 5. 5. and 8. 5, 6, 13— IC, 23, 26, 27 
 and9. Land 14. 17. and- 15. 13. 1 Cor. 2. 14, 15. and 6. 11. 2Cor 
 1. 21, 22. and 3. 3, 17. and 5. 5. and 13. 14., Gal. 4. 6. and 5. 5 
 16—18, 22, 23, 2."j. Eph. 1. 13, 14. and 2. 18. and 4. 30. and 5. 9 
 and 6. 18. 1 Thes. 4. 8. and 5. 19. 2 Tim. 1 . 14. I Pet. 1. 22 
 and 4. 14. Jude 19,20. 
 
128 SCRIPTURE TESTIMONV 
 
 ;ind Jolin — perceived the grace that was given unto me." 
 " By grace are ye saved, through faith ; and that not of 
 yourselves, it is the gift of God." " Unto you it is given 
 in behalf of Christ, not only to believe on him, but also to 
 suffer for his sake." "Looking unto Jesus, the author 
 and finisher of our faith." " By the grace of God I am 
 what I am : and his grace which was bestowed upon me 
 was not in vain, but I laboured more abundantly than they 
 all ; yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me." 
 " There are diversities of operations, but it is the same 
 God Avhich worketh all in all. — For to one is given by the 
 Spirit the word of wisdom, — to another faith by the same 
 Spirit. — But all these worketh that one and the self same 
 Spirit." " Unto every one is given grace according to the 
 measure of the gift of Christ."* 
 
 (4.) God is every where represented, not as our per- 
 suader, but as our essential moral strength. " The Lord 
 is my strength and song, and he is become my salva- 
 tion." " I will love thee, O Lord my strength. The Lord 
 is my rock and my fortress and my deliverer ; my God, my 
 strength, in whom I will trust. — It is God that girdeth me 
 with strength and maketh my way perfect." "Let the 
 words of my mouth and the meditation of my heart be 
 acceptable in thy sight, O Lord, my strength and my Re- 
 deemer." "Wait on the Lord, be of good courage, and 
 he shall strengthen thy heart: w'ait, I say, on the Lord." 
 " The Lord is my strength and my shield : my heart trusted 
 in him and I am helped." . " Be of good courage and he 
 
 ' Rom. 12. 3. 1 Cor. 3. 10. and 7. 7. and 12. G, 8, 9, 11. and 15. 
 10. Gal. 2. 9. Eph.2. 8. and4.7. Phil. 1.29. Hcb. 12. 2. 
 
TO DIVINE EFFICIENCY. 129 
 
 shall strengthen your heart, all ye that hope in the Lord." 
 " I will go in the strength of the Lord God." " My flesh 
 and my heart faileth, but God is the strength of my heart 
 and ray portion forever." " Sing aloud unto God our 
 strength." " Blessed is the man whose strength is in 
 thee." " The Lord is my strength and song, and is be- 
 come my salvation." " My soul melteth for heaviness ; 
 strengthen thou me according unto thy word." " In the 
 day when I cried thou answeredest me and strengthenedst 
 me with strength in my soul." " My soul, wait thou only 
 upon God ; for my expectation is from him." " God is my 
 salvation, I will trust and not be afraid ; for the Lord Jeho- 
 vah is my strength and my song; he also is become 
 my salvation." " Trust ye in the Lord forever, for in the 
 Lord Jehovah is everlasting strength." " Let him take 
 hold of my strength that he may make peace with me, and 
 he shall make peace with me." " He giveth power to the 
 faint, and to them that have no might he increaseth 
 strength. Even the youths shall faint and be weary, and 
 the young men shall utterly fall ; but they that wait upon 
 the Lord shall renew their strength : they shall mount up 
 with wings as eagles ; they shall run and not be weary, 
 and they shall walk and not faint." " Fear thou not, for 
 I am with thee ; be not dismayed, for I am thy God. I 
 will strengthen thee ; yea I will help thee ; yea I will up- 
 hold thee with the right hand of my righteousness." 
 " Surely, (shall one say,) in the Lord have I righteousness 
 and strength." " The Lord God is my strength, and he 
 will make my feet like hinds' feet, and he will make me to 
 
130 SCRIPTURE TESTIMONY 
 
 walk upon my high places." " I will strengthen them in 
 the Lord, and they shall walk up and down in his name, 
 saith the Lord." "I can do all things through Christ 
 which strengtheneth me."* 
 
 More indeed is sometimes meant by God's being our 
 strength, than that he imparts moral power. Protection is 
 sometimes implied, and sometimes liis general agency in 
 delivering us from eternal death. But the other is the 
 principal idea. 
 
 (5.) God foretells holiness, not as the foreseen result of 
 the self-determining power under circumstances arranged 
 by him, but as a thing which he himself would produce. 
 " And they that escape of you shall remember me among 
 the nations whither they shall be carried captives ; — and 
 tliey shall loathe themselves for the evils which they have 
 committed in all their abominations ; and they shall know 
 tliat I am the Lord." " I will remember my covenant with 
 thee in the days of thy youth. — Then thou shalt remember 
 thy ways and be ashamed. — And I will establish my cove- 
 nant with thee, and thou shalt know that I am the Lord ; 
 that thou mayst remember and be confounded, and never 
 open thy mouth any more because of thy shame when I 
 am pacified towards thee for all that thou hast done, saith 
 the Lord God." " And there shall ye remember your 
 
 " Exod. 15. 2. Ps. 18. 1, 2, 32. and 19. 14. and 27. 14. and 28. 
 7. and 31. 24. and G2. 5. and 71. 16. and 73. 26. and 81. 1. and 84. 
 5. and 118. 14. and 119. 28. and 138. 3. Isai. 12. 2. and 26. 4. and 
 27. 5. and 40. 29—31. and 41. 10. and 45. 24. Hab. 3. 19. Zech, 
 10.12. Phil. 4. 13. 
 
TO DIVINE EFFICIENCY. 131 
 
 ways and all your doings wherein ye have been defiled ; 
 and ye shall loathe yourselves in your own sight for all 
 your evils that ye have committed. And ye shall know 
 that I am the Lord when I have wrought with you for my 
 name's sake, not according to your Avicked ways nor ac- 
 cording to your corrupt doings, O house of Israel, saith 
 the Lord God."* 
 
 (6.) The people of God, by his directions, have always 
 prayed to him, not to persuade them, but to make them 
 holy. " O Lord God of Abraham, Isaac, and of Israel, 
 our fathers, keep this forever in the imagination of the 
 thoughts of the heart of thy people, and prepare their 
 heart unto thee. And give unto Solomon my son a per- 
 fect heart to keep thy commandments, thy testimonies, 
 and thy statutes." "Q,uicken us and we will call upon 
 thy name. Turn us again, O Lord God of hosts, — and 
 we shall be saved." " Wilt thou not revive us again, that 
 thy people may rejoice in thee V " Unite my heart to 
 fear thy name." " Let the beauty of the Lord our God 
 be upon us." What this means, God himself has told us. 
 " Thy renown went forth among the heathen for thy 
 beauty ; for it was perfect through my comeliness which I 
 had put upon thee, saith the Lord God." " O that my 
 ways were directed to keep thy statutes. — My soul cleav- 
 eth unto the dust ; quicken thou me according to thy 
 word. — I will run in the way of thy commandments when 
 thou shalt enlarge my heart. — Incline ray heart unto thy 
 testimonies, and not to covetousness. Turn away my eyes 
 
 * Ezek. 6. 0, 10. and 16. CO— G3. and 20. 43. 44. 
 
1 3*2 SCRIPTURE TESTIMONY 
 
 from beholding vanity and quicken thou me in thy way. — 
 I have longed after thy precepts, quicken me in thy right- 
 eousness. — Let my heart be found in thy statutes, that I 
 be not ashamed. — Q.uicken me after thy loving kindness, 
 so shall I keep the testimony of thy mouth. — I am afflicted 
 very much ; quicken me, O Lord, according unto thy 
 word. — Plead my cause and deliver me : quicken me 
 according to thy word. — Consider how I love thy precepts ; 
 quicken me, O Lord, according to thy loving kindness. — 
 Cluicken me accorcing to thy judgments. — Hear my voice 
 according unto thy loving kindness : O Lord, quicken me 
 according to thy judgment." ^' Quicken me, O Lord, tor 
 thy name's sake." " Incline not my heart to any evil 
 thing." " Turn thou me and I shall be turned." " O 
 Lord, revive thy work in the midst of the years ; in the 
 midst of the years make known : in wrath remember 
 mercy." " Peace be to the brethren, and love with faith 
 from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ." "' And 
 this I pray, that your love may abound yet more and more 
 in knowledge and in all judgment ; that ye may approve 
 tiiiugs that are excellent ; that ye may be sincere, and 
 without offence till the day of Christ ; being filled with the 
 fruits of righteousness which are by Jesus Christ." ' The 
 Lord make you to increase and abound in love one toward 
 another and towards all men ; — to the end he may stablish 
 your hearts unblamable in holiness." " Now our Lord 
 Jesus Christ himself, and God even our Father, — stablish 
 you in every good word and work." " The Lord direct 
 your hearts into tlie love of God and into the patient wait- 
 
TO DIVINE EFFICIENCY. 133 
 
 ing for Christ." " The God of all grace — make you per- 
 fect, stablish, strengthen, settle you."* 
 
 Thus, under these six divisions, you see how the gene- 
 ral tenour of Scripture, in its most simple form, supports 
 the doctrine that God is the Author of holiness, and that, 
 without the slightest allusion to any instrumentality of the 
 word, and with no more reference to the mode of opera- 
 tion than we find in the first chapter of Genesis. . Such a 
 flood of testimony cannot be set aside or explained away 
 by a few texts which speak of an instrumentality no wise 
 inconsistent with divine efficiency. But this is only the 
 first head. I proceed to more special testimony. 
 
 II. The Spirit, so far from standing without and send- 
 ing in truth like another pleader, is represented as dwell- 
 ing in the heart as a habitation or as the seat of empire. 
 " Ye are not in the flesh but in the spirit, if so be that the 
 Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not 
 the Spirit of Christ he is none of his. And if Christ be 
 in you, the body is dead because of sin, but the spirit is 
 life because of righteousness. But if the Spirit of him that 
 raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you ; he that raised 
 up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal 
 bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you." " Know ye 
 not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of 
 (jod dwelleth in you ? If any man defile the temple of 
 
 ' I Chron. 29. IS, 19. Ps. 60. 18, 19. and 85. G. and 8G. 11 . and 
 90. 17. and 119. 5, 2.5, 32, 30, 37, 40, SO, 88, 107, 149, 154, 15G, 1.59. 
 and 141. 4. and 143. 12, 13. Jer. 31. 18. Ezek. IG. 14. Hab. 3. 2. 
 Eph. 6. 23, Phil. 1. 9—11. 1 Thes. 3. 12, 13. 2 Thes. 2. IC, 
 17 . and 3. 5. 1 Pet. 5. 10. 
 
 12 
 
134 SCRIPTURE TESTIMONY 
 
 God, him shall God destroy : for the temple of God is holy, 
 which temple ye are." " Know ye not that your body is 
 the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you 1" " What 
 agreement hath the temple of God with idols ? for ye are 
 the temple of the living God ; as God hath said, I will 
 dwell in them and walk in them." " In whom all the 
 building, fitly framed together, groweth unto a holy tem- 
 ple in the Lord ; in whom you also are builded together 
 for a habitation of God through the Spirit." " Christ as 
 a Son over his own house ; whose house are we." "Ye 
 also as living stones are built up a spiritual house." " He 
 that keepeth his commandments dwelleth in him and he 
 in him : and hereby we know that he abideth in us, b\ 
 the Spirit which he hath given us." " Greater is he that 
 is in you than he that is in the world. — Hereby know we 
 that we dwell in him and he in us, because he hath given 
 us of his Spirit. — Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is 
 the Son of God, God dwelleth in him and he in God.' * 
 
 III. Instead of merely persuading men to be good. 
 God positively declares that he will take away the bad 
 heart and put a good one in its stead. " Then will 1 
 sprinkle clean water upon you and ye shall be clean : 
 from all your filthiness and from all your idols will I 
 cleanse you. A new heart also will I give you, and a 
 new spirit will I put within you : and I will take away 
 the stony heart out of your flesh and I will give you a 
 heart of flesh. And I will put my Spirit within you and 
 
 * Rom. 8. 9—11. 1 Cor. 3. 16, 17. and G. 19. 2 Cor. 6. Hi. 
 Eph. 2. 21, 22. • Heb. 3. 6. 1 Pet. 2. 5. 1 John 3. 24. and 4. 4, 
 13, 15. 
 
TO DIVINE EFFICIENCY. 135 
 
 cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my 
 judgments and do them. — I will also save you from all 
 your uncleannesses." " And I will give them a heart to 
 know me, that I am the Lord ; and they shall be my peo- 
 ple and I toill be their God ; for they shall return unto me 
 ivith their whole heart."* 
 
 And in the most express manner we are told that God's 
 efficiency in giving a good heart does not prevent blame 
 for exercising a bad heart. " I will give them one heart, 
 and I will put a new spirit within you ; and I will take 
 the stony heart out of their flesh and will give them a 
 heart of flesh ; that they may walk in my statutes and keep 
 my ordinances and do them : and they shall be my people 
 and I will be their God. Btit as for them whose heart 
 walJceth after the heart of their detestable things and their 
 abominations, I tvill recompense their way upon their own 
 heads, saith the Lord God."f 
 
 On the supposition of merely inducing, without an ab- 
 solute control by motives, the work of God differs from 
 that of Satan only as the motives are different and his skill 
 is greater. Both persuade and do no more. But it is no 
 where said that Satan takes away a good heart and gives 
 a bad one ; but merely that he puts evil thoughts " into 
 the heart," as in the case of Judas.| 
 
 IV. God not only claims to make the heart new, but 
 by absolute covenant engages to do it, and even inserts 
 that promise among the essential stipulations of the cove- 
 nant of grace. " Behold the days come, saith the Lord, 
 
 " Jer. 24, 7. Ezek. 36.25—29. t Ezek. 11. 19—21. I John 13. 2. 
 
I'i6 SCRIPTURE TESTIMONY 
 
 that J will make a jicw covenant with the house of Israel 
 and with the house of Judah : not according to the cove- 
 nant that 1 made with their fathers in the day that 1 took 
 them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt : 
 (which my covenant tliey brake, although I was a husband 
 unto them, saith the Lord :) but this shall be the covenant 
 that I will make with the house of Israel : After those 
 days, saith the Lord, I will put my Jaw in their inward 
 parts and write it in their hearts, and will be their God 
 and they shall be my people. And they shall teach no 
 more every man his neighboiu' and every man his brother, 
 saying. Know ye the Lord : for they shall all know me 
 from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the 
 Lord."* 
 
 After these covenant stipulations of what God himself 
 would do, shall it be said that every thing is left to the 
 casual decisions of the self-determining power, certain 
 only as they are foreseen by God ? 
 
 V. This independent potency of the will is flatly con- 
 tradicted. " Which were born, not of blood, nor of the 
 will of the flesh, /?o?' of the will of man, but of God."" " So 
 then it i^ not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, 
 but of God that showeth mercy. "f 
 
 VI. Nor is this dependence on divine efficiency any 
 discouragement, but the only encouragement we have to 
 hope for success. " Work out your own salvation with 
 fear and trembling ; for it is God which worketh in you 
 both to will and to do of his good pleasure. "J 
 
 -Jer. 31. 31-34 tJohnl. 13. Rom. 9. 16 t Phil. 2. 12, 13 
 
TO DIVINE EFFICIENCY. 137 
 
 VII. It ill comports with the theory of persuasion that 
 moral inability is ascribed to the sinner. To say to a 
 man, You have so strong an inclination to go, that you 
 cannot stop unless I persuade you, would certainly be a 
 very unusual mode of address. But moral inability is as- 
 cribed to the sinner. " A deceived heart hath turned 
 him aside, that he cannot deliver his soul nor say, Is there 
 not a lie in my right hand ?" " Can the Ethiopian change 
 his skin or the leopard his spots ? then may ye also do 
 good that are accustomed to do evil." "No man can 
 come to me except the Father which hath sent me draw 
 him. — Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come 
 unto me except it were given unto him of my Father."* 
 Dr Fitch says that to draw means here to induce : but as 
 though this parrying interpretation was foreseen, it is 
 added as a parallel expression, " except it were given unto 
 him of my Father." 
 
 VIII. The opposite theory is, that God merely presents 
 inducements which some yield to and others reject. Now 
 in such an attempt at persuasion how can there be any 
 great exhibition of power ? This theory then is flatly 
 contradicted by all those texts which speak of regenera- 
 tion and sanctification as displays of mighty power. 
 " Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power." 
 " That the offering up of the Gentiles might be accepta- 
 ble, being sanctified by the Holy Ghost,— through mighty 
 signs and wonders, by the power of the Spirit of God." 
 *' My preaching was not with enticing words of man's 
 wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power ; 
 
 * Isai. 44. 20. Jer. 13. 23. John 6. 44, 65. 
 
 12* 
 
138 SCRIPTURE TESTIMONY 
 
 that your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men but 
 in the power of God." " We have this treasure in earth- 
 ern vessels, that the excellency of the power may be of 
 God and not of us." " For he that wrought effectually in 
 Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was 
 mighty in me towards the Gentiles." " Whereof I was 
 made a minister, according to the gift of the grace of God 
 given unto me by the effectual working of his power. — 
 Wherefore I desire — that he would grant you, according 
 to the riches of his glory, to be strengthened with might 
 by his Spirit in the inner man ; that Christ may dwell in 
 your hearts by faith. — Now unto him that is able to do 
 exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think, ac- 
 cording to the power that worketh in us ; unto him be 
 glory in the Church by Jesus Christ — world without end.'" 
 '* That I may know him and the power of his resurrec- 
 tion." "Strengthened with all might according to his 
 glorious power. — Giving thanks unto the Father which 
 hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of 
 the saints in light ; who hath delivered us from the power 
 of darkness and hath translated us into the kingdom of 
 his dear ^on. — Whereunto I also labour, striving accord- 
 ing to his working which worketh in me mightily." " For 
 our Gospel came not unto you in word only, but also in 
 power and in the Holy Ghost. — And ye became followers 
 of us, — having received the word — with joy of the Holy 
 Ghost." " The eyes of your understanding being enlight- 
 ened, that ye may know — what is the exceeding greatness 
 of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the 
 working of his mighty power which he wrought in Christ 
 
TO DIVINE EFFICIENCY. 139 
 
 when he raised him from the dead and set him at his own 
 right hand in the heavenly places."* If there was no 
 other text in the Bible against the theory of powerless 
 persuasion, this would be enough. How could a bare 
 suggestion of motives be " the exceeding greatness of his 
 power," and " according to the working of his mighty 
 power" in the resurrection and exaltation of Christ ? 
 
 IX. The different names by which this great moral 
 change is called, denote the efficient act of God, and some 
 of them his mighty power. 
 
 (1.) It is called the circumcision of the heart ; which 
 implies far move than the bare suggestion of motives. It 
 imports the actual excision " of the filth of the flesh." 
 "The Lord thy God will circumcise thy heart and the 
 heart of thy seed, to love the Lord thy God with all thy 
 heart and with all thy soul." " In whom also ye are cir- 
 cumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in 
 putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circum- 
 cision of Christ. "t 
 
 (2.) It is called the opening of the eyes of the blind 
 and the unstopping of the ears of the deaf " The Lord 
 openeth the eyes of the blind." " In that day shall the 
 deaf hear the words of the book, and the eyes of the blind 
 shall see out of obscurity and out of darkness." " The 
 eyes of the blind shall be opened and the ears of the deaf 
 shall be unstopped." " I the Lord have called thee — to 
 
 * Ps. 110. 3. Rom. 15. IG— 19. 1 Cor. 2. 4, 5. 2 Cor. 4. 7. 
 Gal. 2. 8. Eph. 1. 18—20. and 3. 7, 13, IG. 17, 20. Phil. 3. 10. 
 Col. 1. 11— 13,29. IThes. 1.5, 6 
 
 t Deut. 30. 6. Col. 2. 11. 
 
140 SCRIPTURE TESTIMONY 
 
 open the blind eyes. — And I will bring the blind by a way 
 that they knew not. — I will make darkness light before 
 them. — Hear ye deaf and look ye blind that ye may see." 
 " The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath 
 anointed me to preach — recovering of sight to the blind."* 
 
 To show that he had come to execute this office, our 
 Saviour opened the bodily eyes and ears : and to make 
 the cases more parallel, he opened them by a word : and 
 when he said to the deaf ear, " Ephphatha, that is, Be 
 opened," who ever dreamt that the word itself produced 
 the effect, or had any more potency than the rod of Moses 
 or the trumpets of Jericho ? 
 
 (3.) It is called a new birth. If then the first birth is 
 altogether an effect of divine power, so should be the 
 second. And though in the life which commences at the 
 first birth, man is active, yet in that reception of life he is 
 passive. The impartation of the living principle is wholly 
 the operation of God. And if the second birth is limited 
 to the causal influence of God in producing the activity of 
 the new life, man is passive here also. If the name is e.\- 
 tended to the new exercises, (as it certainly is in those 
 two instances in which the word is called the seed,t) then 
 man is both passive and active in regeneration ; passive 
 as he is acted upon, and active as he puts forth the new 
 exercises : and he must be acknowledged to be thus far 
 passive by all Avho hold to divine efficiency.. " Which 
 were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of 
 the will of man, but of God." " Verily, verily I say unto 
 
 * Ps. 146. 8. IsaL. 29. 18. and 35. 5. and 42. 6, 7, IG, 18. Luke 
 4.18. t James 1.18. 1 Pet. 1. 23, 
 
TO DIVINE EFFICIENCY. 141 
 
 thee, Except a man be born again he cannot see the 
 kingdom of God. — Except a man be born of water and 
 of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. 
 That which is born of flesh is flesh ; and that which is 
 born of the Spirit is spirit. Marvel not that I said unto 
 thee, Ye must be born again. The wind bloweth where 
 it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst 
 not tell whence it cometh and whither it goeth : so is 
 every one that is born of the Spirit :" a marked reproof 
 of ever)^ attempt to explain the mode of operation. " As 
 then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that 
 was born after the Spirit, even so it is now." " Whoso- 
 ever is born of God overcometh the world." "If ye 
 know that he is righteous, ye know that every one that 
 doth righteousness is born of him ;" alluding to the son's 
 inheriting the father's nature. But if he who is called 
 the father only persuades, as well might you expect that 
 every hearer would partake of the nature of the preacher. 
 " Love is of God, and every one that loveth is born of 
 God." The same allusion. " We know that whosoever 
 is born of God sinneth not ; but he that is begotten of God 
 keepeth himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not." 
 Still the same allusion. " Whosoever believeth that Jesus 
 is the Christ is born of God ; and every one that loveth 
 him that begat, loveth him also that is begotten of him." 
 The same allusion the fourth time. Surely there must be 
 a nearer relation between God and believers than between 
 a teacher and his pupil : a hlood relation, if I mav so say ; 
 
142 SCRIPTURE TESTIMONY 
 
 a relation by which the children of God become " parta- 
 kers of the divine nature."* 
 
 (4.) It is called a resurrection. And if the dead do 
 not rise from their- graves by a self-determining power, 
 at the voice of mere persuasion, neither do sinners from 
 spiritual death. The dead may rise at a summons, as 
 Lazarus did, and as the dead will do at the last day ; but 
 the power is not in the sound, it is in the arm of God. 
 And in a moral change of supreme difficulty, set forth 
 under the figure of a resurrection and ascribed to the 
 mighty power of Ggd, has. he no agency but that of mere 
 persuasion ? Look at the vision of Ezekiel. " The hand 
 of the Lord was upon me and carried me out in the Spirit 
 — and set me down in the midst of the valley which was 
 full of bones : — and lo they w"ere very dry. And he said 
 unto me, Son of man, can these bones live 1 And I an- 
 swered, O Lord God, thou knowest. Again he said unto 
 me. Prophesy upon these bones and say unto them, O ye 
 dry bones, hear the word of the Lord. Thus saith the 
 Lord God unto these bones. Behold I will cause breath to 
 enter into you and ye shall live. — So I prophesied as I 
 was commanded : and as I prophesied, behold a shaking, 
 and the bones came together, bone to his bone. — Then 
 said he, — Prophesy unto the wind : prophesy, son of man, 
 and say to the wind, Thus saith the Lord God, Come from 
 the four winds, O breath, and breathe upon these slain 
 
 * John 1. 13. and 3. 3—8. Gal. 4. 29 2 Pet. 1. 4. 1 John 3. 
 29. and 4. 7. and 5. 1,4, 18 
 
TO DIVINE EFFICIENCY. 143 
 
 that they may live. So I prophesied as he commanded 
 me ; and the breath came into them, and they lived, and 
 stood up upon their feet an exceeding great army. Then 
 he said unto me, Son of man, these bones are the whole 
 house of Israel. — Therefore prophesy and say unto them, 
 Thus saith the Lord God, — Ye shall know that I am the 
 Lord when I — shall put my Spirit in you and ye shall 
 live." Did the word of Ezekiel in this case at all limit or 
 conceal the power of God ? Turn now to other passages. 
 " As the Father raiseth up the dead and quickeneth them, 
 even so the Son quickeneth whom he will. — The hour is 
 coming and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of 
 the Son of God, and they that hear shall live." " Yield 
 yourselves unto God as tliose that are alive from the dead." 
 " You are risen with him through the faith of the opera- 
 tion of God who hath raised him from the dead. And 
 you, being dead in your sins, — hath he quickened together 
 with him." " I saw the souls of them that were beheaded 
 for the witness of Jesus ; — and they lived and reigned 
 with Christ a thousand years. — This is the first resurrec- 
 tion. Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first 
 resurrection : on such the second death hath no power." 
 " You hath he quickened who were dead in trespasses 
 and sins. — God who is rich in mercy, for his great love 
 \vherewith he loved us even when we were dead in sins, 
 hath quickened us together with Christ, — and hath raised 
 us up together and made us sit together in heavenly 
 places in Christ Jesus."* 
 
 * Ezek. 37. 1— 14. John 5. 21,25. Rom. 6. 13. Eph. 2. 1— C 
 Col. 2. 12, 13. Rev.20. 4— 6. 
 
144 SCRIPTUUE TESTIMONY 
 
 (5.) It is called a new creation : and it would seem a 
 most extravagant strain of a figure to apply such a name 
 to an act of mere persuasion. Nothing less than the pro- 
 rluction of a new life, by the sajue power that produced 
 the first, would seem to warrant such an appellation. 
 
 I " We are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto 
 good works, which God hath before ordained that we 
 should walk in them." •' When he seeth his children, 
 the work of my hands, in the midst of him, they shall 
 sanctify my name." " That they may see and know and 
 consider and understand together that the hand of the 
 Lord hath done this, and the holy Que of Israel hath cre- 
 ated it." " Behold I create new heavens and a new- 
 earth, and the former shall not be remembered nor come 
 into mind. But be you glad and rejoice forever in that 
 which I create : for behold I create Jerusalem a rejoicing 
 
 I and her people a joy." " Create in riie a clean heart, O 
 God, and renew a right spirit within me." " For God 
 I who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath 
 shined in our liearts, to give the light of the knowledge of 
 tiie glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ." " If any 
 man be in Christ he is a new creature : old things are 
 past away, behold all things are become new. And all 
 things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by 
 Jesus Christ." " In Christ Jesus neither circumcision 
 availeth any thing nor uncircumcision, but a new crea- 
 ture." " Having abolished in his fiesh the enmity, — to 
 make in himself of twain one new man." " That ye put 
 on the new man, which after God is created in righteous- 
 
TO DIVINE EFFICIENCY. 145 
 
 ness and true holiness." " And he that sat upon the 
 throne said, Behold I make all things new."* 
 
 X. The choice of the elect was made, not in view of 
 the foreseen operations of the self-determining power, but 
 by the sovereign will of God decreeing to make them holy ; 
 and they are made holy in consequence of that decree. 
 Not as foreseen penitents, but as sinners to be renewed, 
 they were given to Christ in the eternal covenant of re- 
 demption, and their salvation was secured to him as his 
 reward : and in consequence of that conveyance and 
 promise of the Father, and as Christ's reward, they are 
 regenerated. That covenant with Christ was, through 
 him as the Head, extended to the Church : and in conse- 
 quence of those stipulations with Christ and the Church. 
 — as his reward and in virtue of his intercession, — believ- 
 ers are kept by the power of God through faith unto sal- 
 vation. This vital connexion of election, regeneration, 
 and perseverance, with each other and with Christ's re- 
 ward, and with the covenants of redemption and grace, 
 makes them very difl'erent things from what they are in 
 the opposite theory. In that theory election is only a de- 
 cision to bring forward means to which it is foreseen that 
 the self-determining power will yield and will continue to 
 yield. That incipient and continued yielding of the selt- 
 determining power, under motives urged by the Spirit, is 
 the whole of regeneration and perseverance. But I shall 
 be able to show that election, regeneration, and perseve- 
 
 ^ Ps. .51. 10. Isai. 29. 23. and 41. 20. and 65. 17, 18. 2 Cor. 
 4. 6. and 5. 17, 18. Gal. 6. 15. Eph. 2. 10, 15. and 4. 24. Rev 
 21. 5. 
 
 13 
 
146 SCRIPTURE TESTIMONY 
 
 ranee have, on the contrary, the exact forms and relations 
 which I have assigned them. 
 
 (I.) The choice of the elect was made, not in view of 
 the foreseen operations of the self-determining power, but 
 by the sovereign will of God decreeing to make them 
 holy ; and they are made holy in consequence of that 
 decree. 
 
 [1.] By the sovereign will of God. " I will be gra- 
 cious to whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy on 
 whom I will show mercy." Dr Fitch calls this a "simple 
 will and wont in God ;" a language which certainly has 
 sufficient freedom ; though I suppose he means to exclude, 
 what we equally would exclude, a will founded on no good 
 reason. But this wise and absolute sovereignty, whomso- 
 ever it may offend, gave joy to the heart of Christ. " In 
 that hour Jesus rejoiced in spirit and said, I thank thee, 
 O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou hast hid 
 these things from the wise and prudent and hast revealed 
 them unto babes. Even so, Father, for so it seemed good 
 in thy sight. All things are delivered to me of my Father : 
 and no man knoweth who the Son is but the Father, and 
 who the Father is but the Son, and he to whom the Son 
 will reveal him." "The children being not yet born, 
 neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of 
 God according to election might stand, not of works but of 
 him that calleth, it was said unto her. The elder shall 
 serve the younger : as it is \vritten, Jacob have I loved but 
 Esau have I hated. What shall we say then ? Is there 
 unrighteousness with God ? God forbid. For he saith 
 to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, 
 
TO DIVINE EFFICIENCY. 147 
 
 and I will have compassion on whom I will have com- 
 passion. So then it is not of him that willeth nor of him 
 that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy. For the 
 Scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose 
 have I raised thee up, that I might show my power in thee, 
 and that my name might be declared throughout all the 
 earth. Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have 
 mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth. Thou wilt say 
 then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault ? for who hath 
 resisted his will ? [His decretive will in distinction from 
 his preceptive : a distinction which the apostle here brings 
 into view and does not deny, but in the context clearly 
 affirms.] Nay but O man, who art thou that repliest 
 against God ? Shall the thing formed say to him that 
 formed it, Why hast thou made me thus ? Hath not 
 the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make 
 one vessel unto honour and another unto dishonour ?" 
 " What saith the answer of God unto him? I have re- 
 served to myself seven thousand men who have not bowed 
 the knee to Baal. Even so then at this present time also, 
 there is a remnant according to the election of grace. — 
 What then % Israel hath not obtained that which he seek- 
 eth for, but the election hath obtained it and the rest were 
 blinded." " Ye see your calling, brethren, how that not 
 many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not 
 many noble are called : but God hath chosen the foolish 
 things of the world to confound the wise ; and God hath 
 chosen the weak things of the world to confound the 
 things which are mighty; and base things of the world 
 and things which are despised hath God chosen, yea and 
 
148 SCRIPTURE TESTIMONY 
 
 things which are not, to bring to naught things tliat are, 
 that no flesh should glory in his presence ; — that, accord- 
 ing as it is written, He that glorieth let him glory in the 
 Lord."* 
 
 But if God only foresaw who would repent if placed in 
 such circumstances, and who would not, his mere decision 
 to place them in such circumstances could not be that 
 .sovereign election which is expressed in these passages. 
 
 Other texts support election without so distinctly 
 marking its sovereignty. " God hath not appointed us to 
 wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ. ' 
 ''Many are called but few are chosen." "Ye are a cho- 
 sen generation, — that ye should show forth the praises of 
 him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvel- 
 lous light, "t 
 
 [2.] Decreeing to make them holy. " We are bound 
 to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren, beloved of 
 the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen 
 you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and 
 belief of the truth." " Ye have not chosen me but I have 
 chosen you, and ordained you that you should go and 
 bring forth fruit and that your fruit should remain." 
 ''That he might make known the riches of his glory on 
 the vessels of mercy which he had afore prepared unto 
 glory ; even us whom he hath called, not of the Jews only 
 but also of the Gentiles. As he saith also in Osee, I will 
 call them my people which were not my people. — And — 
 
 " Exod. 33. 19. Luke 10. 2J , 22. Rom. 9. 11—21. and 11.4. 
 5,7. 1 Cor. 1.2G— 29,31. 
 
 * Mat. 20. 16. and 22. 14 1 Thes. 5. 9. 1 Pet 2. 9. 
 
TO DIVINE EFFICIENCY. 149 
 
 in the place where it was said, — Ye are not my people, 
 there shall they be called the children of the living God. 
 Esaias also crieth concerning Israel, — A remnant shall be 
 saved. — Except the Lord of sabaoth had left us a seed, 
 we had been as Sodoma and had been made like unto 
 Gomorrha." "According as he hath chosen us in him 
 before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy 
 and without blame before him in love ; having predesti- 
 nated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to 
 himself according to the good pleasure of his will, to the 
 praise of the glory of his grace. — In whom also we have 
 obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to 
 the purpose of him who worketh all things after the coun- 
 sel . of his own will." " We know that all things work 
 together for good to them that love God, to them which 
 are the called according to his purpose. For whom he 
 did foreknow he also did predestinate to be conformed to 
 the image of his Son, that he might be the first born 
 among many brethren. Moreover whom he predestinated 
 them he also called, and whom he called them he also 
 justified, and whom he justified them he also glorified." 
 "Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, 
 through sanctification of the Spirit unto obedience."* 
 
 The last two passages speak of foreknowledge : but as 
 the elect were predestined "to be conformed to the 
 image " of Christ, and as that purpose is unfailingly fol- 
 lowed by effectual calling and " sanctification of the 
 Spirit," it is impossible it should be a mere foreknowledge 
 
 » John 15. 16, Rom. 8. 23—30. and 9. 23—99 Epli. 1. A— 11. 
 2Thes. 2. 13. 1 Pet. 1.2. 
 
 13* 
 
150 SCRIPTURE TESTIMONY 
 
 of what the self-determining power would do. Knowledge^ 
 whether past or present, is frequently in Scripture put for 
 that favourable regard which exists among acquaintance. 
 " Thou hast said, I know thee by name and thou hast also 
 found grace in my sight. — And the Lord said unto Moses, 
 I will do this thing also ; — for thou hast found grace in my 
 sight and I know thee by name." " Then will I profess 
 unto them, I never knew you." " I am the good Shep- 
 herd, and know my sheep and am known of mine." " God 
 hath not cast away his people which he foreknew." 
 " The foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal. 
 The Lord knoweth them that are his."* According to 
 this meaning of knowledge, the foreknowledge in question 
 was nothing but a special love exercised from eternity. 
 
 [3.] And they are made holy in consequence of that 
 decree. "As many as were ordained to eternal life be- 
 lieved " " The hidden wisdom, [the way of salvation, t] 
 which God ordained before the world unto our glory ;" 
 but is since revealed, " to the intent that now unto the 
 principalities and powers in heavenly places might be 
 known by the Church, [the body of sanctified individuals,] 
 the manifold wisdom of God, according to the eternal pur- 
 pose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord."| 
 
 (2.) Not as foreseen penitents, but as sinners to be 
 renewed, the elect were given to Christ in the eternal 
 covenant of redemption, and their salvation was secured 
 to him as his reward. 
 
 ** Exod. 33.12,17. Mat. 7. 23. John 10. 14. Rom. 11. 2. 
 2 Tim. 2. 19. 
 
 t Col. 1. 27. I Acts 13. 48. 1 Cor. 2. 7. Eph. 3. 10, 11. 
 
TO DIVINE EFFICIENCY. 151 
 
 The tenour of tliis covenant can be gathered only from 
 the references made to it in the revelation to men, and 
 particularly from the prophetic and historic notices of 
 Christ's reward. " When thou shalt make his soul an 
 offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his 
 days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his 
 hand. He shall see of the travail of his soul and shall be 
 satisfied. — I will divide him a portion with the great, and 
 he shall divide the spoil with the strong, because he hath 
 poured out his soul unto death." " Why do the heathen 
 rage and the people imagine a vain thing ? The kings 
 of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel 
 together against the Lord and against his anointed. 
 [Applied to Herod and Pilate and the Roman soldiers and 
 the Jews.*] — Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of 
 Zion. I will declare the decree. The Lord hath said 
 unto me, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee. 
 Ask of me and I shall give thee the heathen for thine 
 inheritance and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy 
 possession." " They shall fear thee as long as the sun 
 and moon endure. — He shall come down like rain upon 
 the mown grass, as showers that water the earth. In his 
 days shall the righteous flourish, and abundance of peace 
 so long as the moon endureth. He shall have dominion 
 also from sea to sea and from the river to the ends of the 
 earth. — All nations shall serve him. — His name shall en- 
 dure forever, — and men shall be blessed in him : all na- 
 tions shall call him blessed." " I have made a covenant 
 with my Chosen. — My faithfulness and my mercy shall be 
 with him. — He shall cry unto me. Thou art my Father.-— 
 
 * Acts 4. 25—27. 
 
15*2 SCRIPTURE TESTIMONY 
 
 I will make him my First born. — His seed also will I 
 make to endure forever, and his throne as the days of 
 heaven." " I the Lord — will — give thee for a covenant 
 of the people, for a light of the Gentiles, to open the blind 
 eyes, to bring out the prisoners from the prison, and them 
 that sit in darkness out of the prison-house." " I will 
 also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayst 
 be my salvation unto the end of the earth. — I will — give 
 thee for a covenant of the people, to establish the earth, 
 to cause to inherit the desolate heritages ; that thou mayst 
 say to the prisoners. Go forth." " Therefore doth my 
 Father love me, because I lay down my life. — This com- 
 mandment have I received of my Father." " Who for 
 the joy that'was set before him endured the cross, despi- 
 sing the shame, and is set down at" the right hand of the 
 throne of God." " Being found in fashion as a man, he 
 humbled himself and became obedient unto death, even 
 the death of the cross : wherefore God also hath highly 
 exalted him and given him a name which is above every 
 name." " Whom he hath appointed heir of all things : 
 who, — when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down 
 on the right hand of the Majesty on high, being made so 
 much better than the angels as he hath by inheritance 
 obtained a more excellent name than they. — Thou hast 
 loved righteousness and hated iniquity : therefore God, 
 even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness 
 above thy fellows."* 
 
 From these quotations it is evident that Christ by cove- 
 
 * Ps. 2. 1—8. and 72. 5—8, 11, 17. and 89. 3, 24—29. Isai. 42. 
 6, 7. and 49. G— 9. and 53. 10— 12. John 10. 17, 18. Phil. 2. 8,9. 
 Heb. 1.2— 4, 9. and 12. 2. 
 
TO DIVINE EFFICIENCY. 153 
 
 nam was entitled to the reward of a glorious kingdom of 
 holy and happy subjects, and to " see of the travail of his 
 soul" until he should be " satisfied." But light still more 
 decisive beams upon us. The salvation of the elect was 
 expressly promised to Christ in the eternal covenant. 
 " Paul, — an apostle of Jesus Christ, according to the faith 
 of God's elect; — in hope of eternal life which God, that 
 cannot lie, promised before the world began." Promised 
 to whom 1 No man was there to receive the promise : 
 none was there but the Mediator. And so distinct and 
 specific was the assignment, that all their names were 
 written in his book of life. " And they that dwell on the 
 earth shall wonder, (whose names were not written in the 
 book of life fro7u the foundation of the icorld,) when they 
 behold the beast." " And all that dwell upon the earth 
 shall worship him, whose names are not written in the 
 book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the 
 world."' " And there shall in no wise enter into it any 
 thing that defileth, — but they which are written in the 
 Lamb's book of life." " And I saw the dead, small and 
 great, stand before God, and the books were opened, and 
 another book was opened which is the book of life." 
 "Clement also, and — other my fellow labourers, whose 
 names are in the book of life." " At that time thy people 
 shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in 
 the book."* 
 
 (3.) In consequence of that conveyance and promise 
 
 ^ Dan. 12. 1. Phil. 4. 3. Tit. 1. 1, 2. Rev. 13. S. and 17. 8 
 and20. 12, and21.27 
 
154 SCRIPTURE TESTIMONY 
 
 of the Father, and as Christ's reward, the elect are regene- 
 rated. 
 
 In receiving the promises for his posterity, Abraham 
 was a type of Christ. The influence upon his posterity 
 therefore of the covenant made with him, set forth the in- 
 fluence upon the elect of the covenant made with Christ. 
 And what was the influence of the covenant made with 
 Abraham ? " The Lord thy God hath chosen thee to be 
 a special people unto himself above all the people that 
 are upon the face of the earth. The Lord did not set his 
 love upon you nor choose you because ye were more in 
 number than any people, (for ye were the fewest of all 
 people ;) but because the Lord loved you, and because he 
 would keep the oath which he had sworn unto your fa- 
 thers." So it is with those who were given to Christ for a 
 seed. They are regenerated, not for any thing in them, 
 but on account of the eternal covenant with him. " Who 
 hath saved us and called us with a holy calling, not accord- 
 ing to our works, but according to his own purpose and 
 grace which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world 
 began." And nothing can defeat that purpose. They may 
 be hid in the depths of heathenism ; fenced round by the 
 throne and the altar and the school of philosophy ; but no- 
 thing can obstruct the way of Christ when he comes to reco- 
 ver his own. When Paul had entered the proud and for- 
 bidding Corinth, the Lord Jesus said to him in a vision, 
 " Be not afraid, but speak and hold not thy peace ; for I 
 am with thee, and no man shall set on thee to hurt 
 thee : for T have much people in this city." But 
 
TO DIVINE EFFICIENCY. 155 
 
 Christ's own testimony is the most decisive. " All that 
 the Father giveth me shall come to me, and him that 
 Cometh to me I will in no wise cast out." " Other sheep 
 I have which are not of this fold : them also I must bring, 
 and they shall hear my voice. — But ye believe not because 
 ye are not of my sheep. — My sheep hear my voice, and 
 I know them, and they follow me. — My Father which 
 gave them me is greater than all." " I have manifested 
 thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the 
 world : thine they were, and thou gavest them me, and 
 they have kept thy word."* 
 
 (4.) That covenant with Christ was, through him as 
 the Head, extended to the Church : and in consequence 
 of those stipulations with Christ and the Church, — as his 
 reward and in virtue of his intercession, — believers are 
 kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation. 
 
 There was a promise to Christ respecting the elect : 
 but as moral agents they were to be treated with directly. 
 And when God came to address himself to them, he gave 
 them while impenitent, as he did the rest of the world, 
 his invitations and conditional promises. But when, in 
 consequence of the covenant with Christ, they are made 
 believers and sons of God, he extends to them, now com- 
 posing the Church, absolute promises of preserving grace 
 and eternal salvation. I will first show you that God 
 gives these absolute promises to the Church or body of 
 believers ; and secondly, that he ensures their perseve- 
 
 ' Deut. 7. 6—8. John 6. 37. and 10. 10, 20—29. and 17. 0, Acts 
 18.9,10. 2Tiin. 1. 9. 
 
156 SCRIPTURE TESTIMONY 
 
 ranee as the reward of Christ and in virtue of his interces- 
 sion. 
 
 [I.] God has given to the Church or body of believers 
 absolute promises of preserving grace and eternal salva- 
 tion. " The steps of a good man are ordered by the 
 Lord, and he delighteth in his way. Though he fall he 
 shall not be utterly cast down, for the Lord upholdeth him 
 .with his hand. — The Lord — forsaketh not his saints ; 
 they are preserved forever." " They shall be my people 
 and I will be their God. And I will give them one heart 
 and one way, that they may fear me forever.— And I will 
 make an everlasting covenant with them that I will not 
 turn away from them to do them good, but I will put my 
 fear in their hearts that they shall not depart from me.'' 
 " When God made promise to Abraham, because he 
 could swear by no greater he swore by himself; saying, 
 surely, blessing, I will bless thee, and multiplying, I will 
 multiply thee. And so after he had patiently endured he 
 obtained the promise. For men verily swear by the great- 
 er, and an oath for confirmation is to them an end of all 
 strife. Wherein God, willing more abundantly to shoic 
 7into the heirs of promise the immutability of his coufjsel. 
 confirmed it by an oath ; that by two immutable things in 
 which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a 
 strong consolation who have fled for refuge to lay hold 
 upon the hope set before us ; which hope we have as an 
 anchor of the soul both sure and steadfast." "Now to 
 him that is of power to stablish you according to my Go.«- 
 pel, — be glory through Jesus Christ forever."' " To hif 
 
TO DIVINE EFFICIENCY. 157 
 
 own Master he standeth or falleth. Yea he shall be hold- 
 en up; for God is able to make him stand." " I know 
 whom I have believed ; and I am persuaded that he is 
 able to keep that which I have committed unto him 
 against that day." " Who are kept by the power of God 
 through faith unto salvation." " Now unto him that is 
 able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless 
 before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy, — be — 
 dominion and power." " The anointing which ye have 
 received of him abideth in you, and — ye shall abide in 
 him." "They went out from us, but they were not of 
 us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have 
 continued with us ; but they went out that they might be 
 made manifest that they were not all of us." " Hence- 
 forth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness 
 which the Lord the righteous Judge shall give me at that 
 day. — The Lord shall deliver me from every evil work, 
 and will preserve me unto his heavenly kingdom." " Be- 
 ing confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun 
 a good work in you will perform it until the day of Je- 
 sus Christ." " I am the Lord, I change not, therefore ye 
 sons of Jacob are not consumed." " There hath no tempta- 
 tion taken you but such as is common to man : but God is 
 faithful who will not suffer you to be tempted above that 
 ye are able, but will with the temptation also make a way 
 to escape, that ye may be able to bear it." " The very 
 God of peace sanctify you wholly : and I pray God your 
 whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless 
 unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. Faithful is he 
 that calleth you, who also will do it." " The Lord is faith- 
 
 14 
 
158 SCRIPTURE TESTIMONY 
 
 ful who shall stablish you and keep you from evil. And 
 we have confidence in the Lord touching you, that ye both 
 do and will do the things which we command you. And 
 the Lord direct your hearts into the love of God and into 
 the patient waiting for Christ."* 
 
 [2.] It is as the reward of Christ and in virtue of his 
 intercession that God ensures the perseverance of believers. 
 
 First, they are kept in consequence of their election : 
 and as they were elected in Christ, in other words, were giv- 
 en to him as a reward in the eternal covenant, they are kept 
 in consequence of being thus given to him. " As many as 
 were ordained to eternal life believed." Then none be- 
 lieve but those who are elected to eternal life : of course 
 no believer can fall away : and this security arises from 
 their election in Christ. " Ye have not chosen me, but I 
 have chosen you, and ordained you, that you should go and 
 bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain." 
 " Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom pre- 
 pared for you from the foundation of the world." That 
 antecedent purpose and preparation stood inseparably con- 
 nected with their perseverance to eternal life. " To sit on 
 my right hand and on my left is not mine to give, but it shall 
 be given to them for whom it is prepared of my Father."! 
 
 Secondly, Christ is the Mediator of that better cove- 
 nant which, in distinction from the covenant of Sinai, 
 
 * Ps. 37. 23, 24, 28. Jer. 32. 38—40. Mai. 3. 6. Rom. 14. 4. and 
 16. 25, 27. 1 Cor. 10. 13. Phil. 1.6. 1 Thes. 5. 23, 24. 2 Thes. 3. 
 3—5. 2 Tim. 1. 12. and 4. 8, 18. Heb. 6. 13—19. 1 Pet. 1.5. Jude 
 24, 25. 1 John 2. 19, 27. 
 
 t Mat. 20. 23. and 25. 34. John 15. 16. Acts 13. 48. 
 
TO DIVINE EFFICIENCY. 159 
 
 secures the persevering holiness of believers. " But now 
 hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much 
 also he is the Mediator of a better covenant which was 
 established upon better promises. — For finding fault with 
 them he saith, Behold the days come, saith the Lord, 
 when I will make a new covenant with the house of Is- 
 rael and with the house of Judah ; not according to the 
 covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I 
 took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of 
 Egypt ; because they continued not in my covenant, and 
 I regarded them not, saith the Lord. For this is the cove- 
 nant that I will make with the house of Israel after those 
 days, saith the Lord : I will put my laws into their mind 
 and write them in their hearts ; and I loill be to them a 
 God, and they shall be to me a people."* 
 
 Thirdly, Christ, having died to redeem his people from 
 all iniquity, did, by one offering, secure their salvation ; 
 and God, after calling them to the fellowship of his Son, 
 is bound, in faithfulness to him, to keep them to his ever- 
 lasting kingdom. " For by one offering he hath perfected 
 forever them that are sanctified : whereof the Holy Ghost 
 also is a witness to us. For after that he had said before, 
 This is the covenant that I will make with them after 
 those days, saith the Lord : I will put my laws into their 
 hearts and in their minds will I write them, and their sins 
 and iniquities will I remember no more : now where re- 
 mission of these is, there is no more offering for sin." 
 " Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from 
 all iniquity and purify unto himself a peculiar people zeal- 
 
 * Heb. 8. 6—10. 
 
160 SCRIPTURE TESTIMONY 
 
 ous of good works." " Who shall also confirm you unto 
 the end, that ye may be blameless in the day of our Lord 
 Jesus Christ. God is faithful by whom ye were called 
 unto the fellowship of his Son."* 
 
 Hence the whole work is every where said to be done 
 through Christ or in Christ, and believers are said to 
 have been raised icith Christ. " God, — when we were 
 dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, 
 — and hath raised us up together and made us sit toge- 
 ther in heavenly places in Christ Jesus ; that in the ages 
 to come he might show the exceeding riches of his grace 
 in his kindness towards us through Christ Jesus. — For we 
 are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good 
 works." t 
 
 Fourthly, hence the promise of preserving grace is 
 made to believers as the seed of Christ, or rather is made 
 to Christ for them. " I have made a covenant with my 
 Chosen. — His seed — will I make to endure forever. — If 
 his children forsake my law and walk not in my judg- 
 ments, — then will I visit their transgression with the rod 
 and their iniquity with stripes ; nevertheless my loving 
 kindness will I not utterly take from him nor suffer my 
 faithfulness to fail. My covenant will I not break nor 
 alter the thing that is gone out of my lips. — His seed shall 
 endure forever."| 
 
 Fifthly, Christ himself testifies that the perseverance 
 of the saints is owing to their having been given to him. 
 " This is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all 
 
 ' 1 Cor. 1. 3, 0. Tit. 2. 14. Heb. 10. 14—18. f Eph. 2. 4—10 
 t Ps. 89. 3. 4. 29—36 
 
TO DIVINE EFFICIENCY. 161 
 
 which he hath given mc I should lose nothing, but should 
 raise it up again at the last day. And this is the will of 
 him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son and 
 believeth on him, may have everlasting life, and I will 
 raise him up at the last day." " Ye believe not because 
 ye are not of my sheep. — My sheep hear my voice, and I 
 know them, and they follow me : and I give unto them 
 eternal life, and they shall never perish, neither shall any 
 pluck them out of my hand. My Father which gave them 
 me is greater than all, and none is able to pluck them out 
 of my Father's hand." " Thou hast given him power 
 over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many 
 as thou hast given him." " That the saying might be 
 fulfilled which he spoke, Of them which thou gavest me 
 have I lost none."* 
 
 Sixthly, Christians are kept and saved in consequence 
 of Christ's intercession. A specimen of that intercession 
 may be seen in that wonderful prayer which he offered 
 just before he entered Gethsemane. " I pray for them : 
 I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast 
 given me. — Holy Father, keep through thine own name 
 those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one as 
 we are. While I was with them in the world I kept them 
 in thy name. Those that thou gavest me I have kept, and 
 none of them is lost but the son of perdition. — I pray not 
 that thou shouldst take them out of the world, but that 
 thou shouldst keep them from the evil. — Sanctify them 
 through thy truth. — For their sakes I sanctify myself, that 
 they also might be sanctified through the truth. Neither 
 
 * John 6. 39, 40. and 10. 26—29. and 17. 2. and 18. 9. 
 14* 
 
162 SCRIPTURE TESTIMONY 
 
 pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall be- 
 lieve on me through their word : tliat they all may be one; 
 as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also 
 may be one in us. — And the glory which thou gavest me 
 I have given them, that they may be one even as we are 
 one : I in them and thou in me, that they may be made 
 perfect in one, and that the world may know that thou — 
 hast loved them as thou hast loved me. Father, I will 
 that they also whom thou hast given me be with me where 
 I am, that they may behold my glory which thou hast 
 given me. — I have declared unto them thy name, and will 
 declare it, that the love wherewith thou hast loved me may 
 be in them and I in them."* 
 
 Here then we see the elect given to Christ by solemn 
 covenant, as the reward of his stipulated obedience in the 
 work of redemption, with an absolute engagement that 
 they should be regenerated, kept, and saved. In fulfil- 
 ment of that covenant we see them actually regenerated 
 and perseveringly sanctified by the power of God, express- 
 ly as the reward of Christ and in virtue of his interces- 
 sion. Thus their incipient and continued sanctification 
 is wrought by the power of God, in fulfilment of a solemn 
 covenant with his Son, and in payment of a debt due to 
 him. Surely that sanctification must be secured either by 
 efficiency or the absolute control of motives. It cannot 
 be left to the casual operation of the self-determining pow- 
 er, under excitements which many resist. And yet the 
 opposite theory represents God as merely foreseeing that 
 the self-determining power would begin and finish the 
 
 * John 17. 9—26. 
 
TO DIVINE EFFICIENCY, 163 
 
 work if he brought forward such means : and his only de- 
 cision respecting the whole concern was, to bring forward 
 the means. He has nothing to do with decreeing or pro- 
 ducing or even occasioning these effects, only as he pre- 
 sents the means with a foreknowledge of the issue. After 
 the means are applied to both classes alike, they them- 
 selves produce the only difference which exists between 
 them. And now, when the Bible is filled with such re- 
 presentations as have been produced, does it all end in 
 this, that the Father's decree and covenant with his Son 
 were only to send to both classes alike the means of grace 
 and the illuminating Spirit ? Then they were not two 
 classes except in the mere foreknowledge of God. 
 
 I have now finished the Scripture testimony to divine 
 efficiency. I by no means suppose that I have found all 
 the texts. Many which I have found have been cast, or 
 will be cast, into other chapters to support related branch- 
 es of the subject. But in this single chapter near three 
 hundred texts are arrayed in direct support of the main 
 point. Such a current of proof runs not through the Bi- 
 ble in support of any other doctrine, except what relates to 
 the perfections and government of God, the depravity of 
 men, the mediation of Christ, and eternal retributions. 
 Nor could any language be more explicit. And lest one 
 form of expression should be explained away as figurative, 
 numerous forms are used, which go to explain and confirm 
 each other. Nor, when we have spoken of the number of 
 texts, have we said half The relations among the various 
 parts of this great system, which the texts explicitly sup- 
 port, and which cannot stand together if any of them are 
 
164 SCRIPTURE TESTIMONY, &C. 
 
 changed, are altogether more decisive than the number of 
 ^xts. In short, if the doctrine of divine efficiency is not 
 revealed in the Bible, I know not in what language it 
 could have been revealed. Nor is there a text in the 
 whole range of revelation which contradicts it. 
 
 And after all, will you come forward and say, I can 
 look far enough into the secrets of nature to see that di- 
 vine efficiency cannot comport with human freedom? 
 Dare you say this in the face of several hundred texts, as 
 explicit as any language can furnish, and supporting rela- 
 tions which are inseparably jointed together ? These are 
 the real parties to the question : several hundred texts ar- 
 rayed against your assumption, and your assumption 
 against several hundred texts. And which ought to pre- 
 vail, let God and the universe decide. 
 
CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 Sinless Creatures Dependent for Holiness. 
 
 To me it appears as impossible for God to make a 
 being who shall act independently of him, as to make a 
 being who for the future shall be self-existent. He can 
 make beings whose actions shall be completely their own, 
 so as to deserve praise or blame ; because moral good and 
 evil do not lie in originating but in performing. This 
 notion of communicated independence has been extended 
 even to matter. Boyle and Lord Kames thought it mors 
 creditable to the Author of nature to suppose that he made 
 the znaterial universe to go alone ; that he gave it powers 
 which remained after he withdrew his hand, — powers 
 which, in their continuance, were caused by him and not 
 caused by him, — caused by him in being given at first as 
 permanent powers, and not made permanent by his con- 
 tinued action. This supposes that God at twelve o'clock 
 could give power to a machine to go alone at one. But if 
 he could make a thing, whether a being or a power, that 
 would exist and act after he had withdrawn, he could make 
 a thing which for the time to come would be self-existent ; 
 and yet the self-existence would be communicated. A power 
 derived from God to exist without God ! 
 
166 SINLESS CREATURES 
 
 Brown is of the same school. He has laboured to prove 
 that the material universe, after deriving its existence 
 and laws from the Creator, performs its operations without 
 his further interposition ; that God wills its operations only 
 as he formed it with such powers and lets it go on when he 
 could suspend its laws ; that no power is necessary for its 
 preservation, power always bearing a relation to some 
 " change." But what can that existence or power be 
 which God does not support ? What causes it to be this 
 moment ? God causes a thing to exist the first moment, 
 but what caused it to exist the second ? Its existence one 
 moment was no cause of its existing another. What 
 causes it then to exist now? God, by a previous act whose 
 effect continues to the present time, but not by a present 
 act. But what makes the effect continue to the present 
 time if God's power is suspended ? Is there any thing 
 there to act in the place of God when he is withdrawn 1 
 any thing to cause the effect of a former act to continue 
 when the Actor is no longer there ? If you say, God im- 
 parted to the thing permanent existence, that is saying 
 that God icilled its permanent existence. Now as God's 
 existence is not in succession, but in one eternal now, we 
 must not think of him as willing a thing and afterwards 
 ceasing to will it while the thing itself remains. What he 
 wills he wills in one eternal now. And if at the creation 
 he willed the eternal existence and laws of matter, he 
 never ceases to will the same. And when we get upon 
 the scale of creatures, and measure over successive days 
 and hours and moments, we can say at every instant, God 
 now wills the existence and laws of matter. And that 
 
DEPENDENT FOR HOLINESS. 167 
 
 willing is all we know of his causal power. It was a ne- 
 glect to notice this mode of God's existence, which led these 
 eminent philosophers to distinguish between the power 
 which gave being to the universe and its laws at first, and 
 the power which continues their existence. 
 
 The same reasonings will prove that a created mind 
 could not be made to go alone. Without the application 
 of divine efficiency it may be reasonably bound, and there- 
 fore may have that power which is the basis of obligation ; 
 but nothing can make it independent in its operations : 
 for independent action implies independent attributes, and 
 independent attributes imply independent being, and inde- 
 pendent being would be communicated self-existence. 
 
 If sinless creatures are not dependent on God for holi- 
 ness, how will you account for the fall of any ? and since 
 some have fallen, what security is there that all will not 
 apostatize ? Let us consider this matter. 
 
 I have repeatedly said that the operations of the facul- 
 ties are controlled by the affections and outward circum- 
 stances, — outward circumstances throwing in motives 
 adapted to the existing temper. And motives adapted to 
 the temper and brought into the full view of the under- 
 standing, will infallibly draw forth affections agreeing with 
 the state of the heart. For, thus presented to the intel- 
 lect and thus adapted to the temper, they offer to the mind 
 the greatest apparent good. And that exhibition, even ac- 
 cording to Dr. Whitby, the pride of Arminianism, will 
 certainly control the heart or will. These are his words. 
 " To say that — the greatest good proposed, the greatest 
 evil threatened, when equally believed and reflected on, is 
 
168 SINLESS CREATURES 
 
 not sufficient to engage the will to choose the good and 
 refuse the evil, is in effect to say, that which alone doth 
 move the will to choose or refuse, is not sufficient to engage 
 it so to do ; which, being contradictory to itself, must of ne- 
 cessity be false."* Thus while the heart is right and the 
 mind free, proper motives, set clearly before the understand- 
 ing, will certainly awaken right affections. And temptations 
 to sin while the heart is right, will instantly be rejected. 
 All these operations are voluntary and free ; yet such is the 
 indissoluble connexion between understanding, motives, and 
 affections. How then can a holy being apostatize ? Not 
 until the heart ceases to be inclined to fall in with the mo- 
 tives which moved it before. That cessation cannot be 
 produced by good motives, and before it takes place bad 
 motives cannot operate. It cannot therefore be the effect 
 of motives. It must result from some influence, or some 
 withdrawment of influence, behind the scene. If it results 
 from a positive influence, God must be the efficient cause 
 of sin ; if it results from the withdrawment of an influence, 
 the influence withdrawn was that which before inclined the 
 heart to holy action : and that is the very efficiency for which 
 we plead. Without resorting to efficiency and its with- 
 drawment, how can we account for the fall of holy beings ? 
 How even on the principle of the self-determining power ? 
 The whole of that power, according to Whitby, consists 
 in an ability to decide whether or not to attend to and be- 
 lieve the truth presented :t but while the heart is right, the 
 mind will certainly give attention and credence to the truth 
 exhibited. A change of heart, or of the causal influence 
 
 ' See Introduction. + See Introduction 
 
DEPENDENT FOR HOLINESS. 169 
 
 which acts upon the heart, must therefore be the first thing in 
 the fall of a holy being. Without this change, no tempta- 
 tion, no delusive speech against the truth of God, thrown in 
 m a moment of inattention, could work this fall. While 
 the heart is overflowing with supreme love to God, no 
 temptation to transgress can gain the ear ; and no delusive 
 speech can gain a moment's credence till faith in God has 
 given way. You seek in vain for the origin of this change 
 in ?notwes bearing upon a heart warm with the love of God. 
 The heart must first degenerate before the motives can 
 touch it. The cause of all the causes must begin its 
 action here. Dominant love would prevent the evil from 
 beginning in the decay of attention or of faith, or in any 
 obliquity in the views or decisions of the intellect. The 
 habit of love itself, or the propensity to love, must fail, 
 before any thing in the mind or in outward temptations 
 can take hold of the heart to debase it. The first thing 
 to be done is to dry up the fountain of that love, which 
 no mere faculties or motives will ever accomplish. That 
 can be done only by the withdrawment of the influence 
 which produced it. Therefore if God has no eflicient 
 influence to withdraw, there is no accounting for the fall 
 of a holy being. 
 
 This is exactly the argument by which I attempted to 
 prove that no faculties or motives, without efficient power, 
 will convert supreme enmity into the supreme love of God. 
 The only difference in the two cases is, that inherent self- 
 love will rise up into sin upon the mere withdrawment of 
 divine influence, whereas there is nothing in the totally 
 
 15 
 
170 SINLESS CREATURES 
 
 depraved sinner to rise up into the love of God without his 
 positive efficiency. 
 
 The conclusion to which we come is, that the fall of 
 Adam and of the angels furnishes strong proof that a 
 divine influence was withdrawn which had supported their 
 love. But influence or no influence, they fell. And if 
 they had not been kept by divine efficiency, neither are 
 the inhabitants of heaven now kept. And if some fell, 
 thus unsupported, what can prevent them all from falling? 
 What makes it certain that Gabriel will not apostatize ? 
 If you say, God forekno\^•s that he will not, foreknowledge 
 finds a thing certain, but does not make it certain. How 
 comes it then to be certain that Gabriel will persevere ? Dr. 
 Fitch answers, " We who hold to the defectibility of Ga- 
 briel and his. need of the guards of God for protection and 
 strength, would say, that now the smoke of torment, con- 
 tinually ascending from the everlasting pit, — so fills his 
 heart with fear and reverence ; and the Lamb that is in the 
 midst of the throne, with the prints of crucifixion he bore, 
 and the acclamations of the ransomed for their deliverance, 
 so fills his heart with love to the e.xcellence of his Maker ; 
 that his holy purpose of serving God is exalted and con- 
 firmed beyond all approach of prevailing temptation."* 
 Then God exercises absolute dominion by motives ; and 
 then he could have exerted the same over all his creatures 
 and effectually prevented sin. But if he does not exercise 
 absolute dominion by motives, all these new motives arising 
 from the punishment of sin and the work of redemption 
 
 ' Christian Spectator for 1832. p. 638. 
 
DEPENDENT FOR HOLINESS. 171 
 
 cannot, absolutely secure the perseverance of Gabriel, and 
 all heaven may yet apostatize. At any rate we have here 
 offered to us the glorious effects which God has pressed 
 out of sin. According to this statement, the entire influ- 
 ence which supports his moral empire over all heaven, and 
 by a parity of reasoning over the whole universe, to eter- 
 nity, is educed from the consequences of sin. 
 
 But you turnupon me and say, Have you not asserted 
 such a dominion by motives, when you maintained that 
 holy beings, while continuing holy, must be governed by 
 holy motives ? While continuing lioly : that is the very 
 effect to be accounted for. The question is, do motives 
 cause tliem to continue inclined to fall in with motives? 
 This I deny, and ascribe the effect to the power of God. 
 If motives have an absolute dominion, they mould the 
 heart by their own power, whether adapted to its present 
 temper or not. This I have no wliere asserted but uni- 
 formly denied. 
 
 There are but three cases in which we have had an op- 
 portunity ta contemplate the perfectly holy among crea- 
 tures. One is that of the holy angels and " the spirits of 
 just men made perfect ;" the second is that of our first pa- 
 rents ; the third is that of the man Christ Jesus. All these 
 cases are in our favour. 
 
 It is certain that the angels and glorified saints are con- 
 firmed ; confirmed after a period of probation, and there- 
 fore as a reward; (in the former case as a legal, in the 
 latter as a gracious reward;) and of course confirmed by 
 God After the exaltation of Christ to be head over " all 
 
172 SINLESS CREATURES 
 
 principality and power," we read of " the elect angels."* 
 And if angels, as the reward of their obedience during 
 probation, are enrolled among the elect, they must be en- 
 rolled by God, who therefore stands pledged to keep them 
 from falling. And how can he effectually keep them from 
 falling, but either by efficient power or the absolute do- 
 mniion of motives? If these two ways of preservation are 
 given up, the certainty of their perseverance must be 
 abandoned. If our brethren deny the absolute dominion 
 of motives, and admit the confirmation of " the elect an- 
 gels," they must own that the angels are kept m holiness 
 by the efficient power of God. That glorified saints are 
 also confirmed, is evident from their ordhiation "to eternal 
 life," and from the winding up of the final scene : " These 
 shall go away into everlasting punishment, but the right- 
 eous into life eternal."! And if they are eternally con- 
 firmed as a covenanted recompense, awarded to them by a 
 public and most solemn judicial sentence, then God, in the 
 highest possible degree, is pledged to keep them forever 
 from falling. And if he does not exercise absolute do- 
 minion by motives, he must eternally keep them by effi- 
 cient power. 
 
 If you say, the dominion of motives may be absolute in 
 heaven, and nothing but human depravity prevents it on 
 earth ; you have no right to say this after denying, or even 
 doubting, the power of God to prevent sin. For if God 
 can by motives exercise such a dominion over spotless 
 beings, he could have prevented spotless beings from falling 
 
 " t Tim .5. 21. t Mat. 2:3. 46 Acts 13. 48. 
 
DEPENDENT FOR HOLINESS. 173 
 
 It is said by our brethren that Adam was not holy when 
 he was first created ; that he was made only with faculties, 
 and became holy at once by the right exercise of them. 
 As I am now standing on the exercise ground, I am will- 
 ing to allow that he was not holy till he exercised his fa- 
 culties. But was it under the influence of divine efficiency 
 that he exercised them aright ? If so, then God made him 
 holy at first. And what do we hear ? " Lo this only have 
 I found, that God hath made man upright, but they have 
 sought out many inventions." God made man upright. 
 God made Adam upright. Do we want any more ? But 
 let us go to the creation itself " And God said, Let us 
 make man in our own image, after our likeness. — So 
 God created man in his own image ; in the image of God 
 created he him : male and female created he them. And 
 God blessed them and said unto them, Be fruitful and mul- 
 tiply and replenish the earth." Now I assert that creating' 
 them in the image of God, though it included intellect 
 and knowledge, and dominion if you please, was making 
 them holy. Did God bless them before they were holy ? And 
 yet the historian passes from their creation in God's image 
 to the benediction without an intermediate word. This 
 close connexion implies that their creation in the image of 
 God was itself a preparation for the blessing. And if there 
 could be any doubt, the language of the apostle would re- 
 move it. "Ye have — put on the new man, which is renewed 
 in knowledge af\er the image of him that created him."* 
 If the new creation in the image of God makes men holy, 
 the first creation in the image of God made Adam holy. 
 
 ^ Gen. 1. 26, 27 Eccl. 7. 29. Col. 3. 9, 10. 
 15* 
 
174 SINLESS CREATURES 
 
 In regard to the man Christ Jesus, the Spirit was 
 poured upon him for various purposes ; to anoint him to 
 the several offices of Prophet, Priest, and King, and to 
 communicate wisdom and hohness. All tliese purposes 
 are expressed in a single passage. " The Spirit of the 
 Lord shall rest upon him ; the Spirit of wisdom and un- 
 derstanding, the Spirit of counsel and might, the Spirit of 
 knowledge and of the fear of the Lord; aiid shall make 
 him of quick understanding in the fear of the Lord ; and 
 he shall not judge after the sight of his eyes, neither re- 
 prove after the hearing of his ears; but with righteousness 
 shall he judge, and reprove with equity. — And righteous- 
 ness shall be the girdle of his loins, and faithfulness the 
 girdle of his reins." Here is the knowledge of the Pro- 
 phet, the holiness of the Priest, and the power and wisdom 
 of the righteous King and Judge, all communicated by 
 the unction of the Spirit. 
 
 1. The Prophet should have both knowledge and the 
 gift of utterance ; and both were communicated to Jesus 
 by the Spirit. Christians of that day had an unction 
 which taught them " all things ;" and it seems to have 
 been this inspiring Spirit of knowledge that was meant 
 when it was said, " He whom the Father hath sent speak- 
 eth the words of God ; for God givetli not the Spirit by 
 measure unto him." " The Lord God hath given me the 
 tongue of the learned, that I should know how to speak a 
 word in season to him that is weary." " The Spirit of 
 the Lord God is upon me, because the Lord hath anointed 
 me to preach good tidings unto the meek." 
 
 2. As the Jewish priests, at their consecration, were 
 
DEPENDENT FOR HOLINESS. 175 
 
 washed with water and anointed with oil ; so Christ, when 
 set apart to the priestly office, was baptised by John and 
 anointed by the Holy Ghost, expressly at the age at which 
 by law the priests had been consecrated. To make the 
 sacrifice of this Priest expressive of God's unchangeable 
 resolution to support his law by executing its penalty on 
 future offenders, he must be dear to the Father, and must 
 therefore be rendered dear by a course of filial obedience. 
 Hence that ordination to the priesthood, (which was in 
 fact his introduction to the public character of a Son,) 
 seems to be called his generation. " No man taketh this 
 honour unto himself, but he that is called of God, as was 
 Aaron. So also Christ glorified not himself to be made a 
 high priest, but he that said unto him, Thou art my Son, 
 to-day have I begotten thee. As he saith also in another 
 place, Thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchi- 
 sedec." On that occasion therefore the voice from heaven 
 pronounced him the " beloved Son." 
 
 3. By the same unction he received the power of a 
 King and the wisdom of a righteous Judge, an|d was visibly 
 appointed to dominion over a numerous seed, and to the 
 inheritance as " the First born among many brethren." 
 "With my holy oil have I anointed him.; — He shall cry 
 unto me, Thou art my Father. — I will make him my First 
 born. — His seed also will I make to endure forever and 
 his throne as the days of heaven." The very unction 
 which he received when he came up out of Jordan, gave 
 him power to redeem his subjects by baptising them with 
 the Holy Ghost, and power to cast out devils and to work 
 all his miracles. " He that sent me to baptise with water, 
 
176 SINLESS CREATURES 
 
 the same said unto me, Upon whom thou slialt see tlie 
 Spirit descending and remaining on him, the same is he 
 which baptiseth with the Holy Ghost." "God anointed 
 Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power ; 
 who went about doing good and healing all that were op- 
 pressed of the devil." He " cast out devils" " by the 
 Spirit of God." From God also he received the wisdom 
 and integrity of a righteous Judge. "Give — thy right- 
 eousness unto the King's Son. He shall judge thy people 
 with righteousness and thy poor with judgment." 
 
 4. Means and the Spirit were both necessary to make 
 that human being holy and to keep him holy. To begin 
 with means. "Behold a virgin shall conceive and bear a 
 son, and shall call his name Immanuel. Butter and 
 honey shall he eat, that he may know to refuse the evil 
 and choose the"*good." His habits of virtue were confirm- 
 ed like those of another man. '' Though he were a Son 
 yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered : 
 and being made perfect, [by these confirming trials of his 
 love and obedience,] he became the author of eternal salva- 
 tion unto all them that obey him." He needed the Spirit too. 
 •' The Lord God — wakeneth morning by morning, he 
 wakeneth my ear to hear as the learned. The Lord God 
 hath opened my ear and I teas not rebellious, neither turned 
 away back. [To open the ear was a well known figure, 
 denoting, to render obedient.] I gave my back to the 
 smiters and my cheeks to them that plucked off the hair : 
 I hid not my face from shame and spitting." " Be not 
 thou far from me, O Lord : O my strength, haste thee to 
 help me." " My God shall be my strength." Of that 
 
DEPENDENT FOR HOLINESS. 177 
 
 wondrous stranger of Nazareth it was said, " And the 
 child grew and waxed strong in spirit, [in the margin, " by 
 the Spirit,"] filled with wisdom, and the grace of God was 
 upon ?um." During the period of his youth, " Jesus in- 
 creased in wisdom and stature and in favour with God and 
 man." And when he came to make that offering about 
 which the Spirit of prophesy had said, " The Lord God 
 hath opened my ear and I was not rebellious," did he go 
 alone ? did the man achieve it all in his own independent 
 strength ? No, it was the Spirit that made his life so pure 
 that his offering was without a spot. " Who, through the 
 eternal Spirit, offered himself without spot to God."* 
 
 As the affections of that holy man were thus indubi- 
 tably influenced by the Spirit, the only question is, whether 
 the influence was efficient or merely by motives. Accord- 
 ing to our brethren, the only thing which renders the Spirit 
 necessary for men, is bad affections ; and the chief obstruct- 
 ion to the empire of truth arising from bad affections, lies 
 in their going after other objects and holding the attention 
 from the truth : to which they add the power of habit ; 
 which, from the associations existing, not only among our 
 ideas, but, according to Reid and Stewart, among all the 
 operations of the mind, and from the increasing facility 
 with which these associations are formed and all these ope- 
 rations are carried on, renders the exercise of holy or sin- 
 
 *Num. 4. 47. Ps. 22. 19. and 72. 1, 2. and 89. 20—29. Isai. 
 7. 14, 15. and 11. 1—4. and 49. 5. and 50. 4—6. and 61. 1. Mat. 3. 
 16, 17. and 12. 28. Luke 2. 40, 52. and 3. 23. John 1. 33. and 3. 
 34. Acts. 10, 38. Rom. 8. 29. Heb. 5. 4—9. and 9. 14. 1 John 
 2. 20, 27. 
 
178 SINLESS CREATURES DEPENDENT FOR HOLINESS. 
 
 ful affections more and more easy and certain. They liold 
 that truth throws so attractive a light upon reason and self- 
 love, that if the attention can be fastened to it, the mind 
 will be likely to yield to its influence ; at any rate, that the 
 Spirit can do no more than to present truth in so clear and 
 atfecting a light as to arrest" the roving attention and fasten 
 it to spiritual objects. Now certainly Jesus had no such 
 rambling attention which needed to be brought back to di- 
 vine things. That only operation which our brethren as- 
 cribe to the Spirit, and which depravity alone renders ne- 
 cessary, could not have been wrought in this instance. If 
 the sanctifying Spirit moved upon that mind, it must 
 have been in a way and for a purpose wholly out of the 
 scope of their plan, The single fact therefore that the 
 sanctifying Spirit moved upon Jesus, wholly breaks up 
 their theory, and forever settles the point that the office of 
 the Spirit is not merely to fix the attention of a fallen 
 creature upon truth, but to move even the holy by effectual 
 power, 
 
CHAPTER IX 
 
 God's Power to Prevent Sin. 
 
 If God can control the mind either by efficiency or by 
 motives, he can prevent sin : for if he can control one mind 
 he can control all minds. If then you deny that he could 
 have prevented sin, you deny both his efficiency and the 
 absolute dominion of motives. The writers in the Chris- 
 tian Spectator must therefore be ranked among the deniers 
 of both ways of control, because they deny God's power to' 
 prevent sin. For altliough now and then they qualify the 
 denial by saying that the inability is only possible or pro- 
 bable or highly probable; y6t men of their character would 
 not fill the world with arguments in support of a point, of 
 sach unequalled solemnity, about which they had a seriou? 
 doubt. Besides, all their theories respecting regeneration 
 and sanctification and election and predestination and mo- 
 ral agency, fall at once if God has such an absolute control 
 over the mind as is implied in a power to prevent sin. 
 They say the mind turns itself in view of motives, and 
 often resists ail the inducements which God can bring. 
 They make election and predestination to consist in a 
 mere determination to bring forward such creatures and 
 means, with a foresight of the decisions of the self-deter- 
 
180 god's power. 
 
 mining power. They deny that moral agency can con- 
 sist with any mode of absolute control. All these theories 
 flatly contradict God's power to prevent sin. If then I 
 prove that God could have prevented sin, it sweeps away 
 their whole system respecting predestination and election 
 and regeneration and sanctification and moral agency. 
 
 One thing must be distinctly noted in the outset. If 
 God could not have prevented sin in all worlds and ages, 
 he cannot prevent sin in any world or age, or in any crea- 
 ture at any time, except by preventing the particular occa- 
 sion and temptation. If God could not h9.ve prevented sin 
 in the universe, he cannot prevent believers from fatally 
 falling ; he cannot prevent Gabriel and Paul from sinking 
 at once into devils, and heaven from turning into a hell. 
 And were he to create new races to fill the vacant seats, 
 they might turn to devils as fast as he created them, in spite 
 of any thing that he could do short of destroying their mo- 
 ral agency. He is liable to be defeated in all his designs, 
 and to be as miserable as he is benevolent. This is infi- 
 nitely the gloomiest idea that was ever thrown upon the 
 world. It is gloomier then hell itself For this involves 
 only the destruction of a part, but that involves the wretch- 
 edness of God and his whole creation. And how awfully 
 gloomy as it respects the prospects of individual believers. 
 You have no security that you shall stand an hour. And even 
 if you get to heaven, you have no certainty of remaining 
 there a day. All is doubt and sepulchral gloom. And 
 where is the glory of God ? where the transcendent glory 
 of raising to spiritual life a world dead in trespasses and 
 
TO PREVENT SIN. 181 
 
 sins? where the glory of swaying an undivided sceptre, 
 and doing his whole pleasure "in the army of heaven and 
 among the inhabitants of the earth"? 
 
 I know of but two things which can be said to avoid 
 these fearful consequences. One is, that God foresaw 
 from the beginning that the saints on earth and the pre- 
 sent and future inhabitants of heaven would not apostatize ; 
 the other is, that they are unchangeably kept by a view of 
 the punishments of sin and the work of redemption. As 
 to the first, God's foreseeing a thing to be certain does not 
 make it certain, but implies that it is already certain. If 
 you say, God would not create any who he foresaw would, 
 after such an exhibition of justice and mercy, apostatize 
 in heaven, nor any who on earth would fall away after 
 being induced to turn from sin to God ; this is sup- 
 posing, without any authority whatever, that the perse- 
 verance of the inhabitants of heaven and earth depends 
 wholly on their being those identical creatures rather 
 than others of the same mould, or of the same race with a 
 somewhat different constitution. If you suppose that God 
 foresaw that those identical creatures would indepen- 
 dently persevere rather than other creatures of exactly the 
 same mould and in the same circumstances, you suppose 
 the foresight of an effect without a cause, and certainly 
 an effect not caused by him. And it is inconceivable how 
 God should foresee an event nowise dependent on his will. 
 It is said by our brethren that, antecedent in the order of 
 nature to his decree even to create, and as the ground of 
 that decree, God foresaw that if he brought forward such a 
 system of government and grace, such and such would be 
 16 
 
182 god's power 
 
 the decisions of the self-determining power in different ni' 
 dividuals. The certainty of those decisions thus condi- 
 tionally foreseen, I will call a conditional certainty, which 
 was afterwards made absolute by the decree to bring for- 
 ward the system. Now as that conditional certainty exist- 
 ed anterior to any decree of God even to create, and there- 
 fore was in no sense dependent on his will, how could he 
 foresee it ? He could indeed foresee the result of any sup- 
 posed laws by him impressed on matter or mind ; for it 
 would be contemplating the exact operations of causes ap- 
 pointed to work in a determinate manner : and to suppose 
 mind to operate by fixed laws, is not supposing the mecha- 
 nism of matter transferred to the soul, but only a rational ad- 
 herence to motives in accordance with the free desires of 
 the mind. If the movements of created minds do depend on 
 God's will, then certainly he cannot foresee them any fur- 
 ther than he determines them. Here is a world to be 
 created. None but God can create it. How can he cer- 
 tainly know that it will be created if he has not determined 
 to create it ? But the supposition is, that he foresees the 
 future operations of an efficient cause wholly independent 
 of him. I say future, for though God exists in one eter- 
 nal now, yet these operations of created minds Avere not 
 eternal. The theory is, that he foresaw what those minds 
 would independently do if he made them ; a foresight an- 
 terior, in the order of nature, to all his purposes, and the 
 very ground of the decree even to create ; and yet this 
 conditional certainty, thus wholly independent of his will, 
 he distinctly foresaw. If this is not venturing into the 
 unknown without chart or compass, I know not what is. 
 
TO PREVENT SIN. 183 
 
 All that we are authorized to believe concerning the divine 
 prescience is, that " known unto God are all iiis works 
 from the beginning of the world," and that there is a close 
 connexion between " the determinate counsel and fore- 
 knowledge of God."* All the rest is a dream. He is 
 omniscient within his own dominions : but if there could 
 be a world beyond the bounds of his empire, how does 
 reason or Scripture intimate that he could know that ? 
 How, more than you can know what people will do in 
 another world ? 
 
 If you suppose that the perseverance of saints and an- 
 gels depends on some peculiarity of constitution by which 
 they are distinguished from other beings of the same race, 
 how does this effectual influence of a constitution passively 
 received, any more than efficiency itself, comport with 
 freedom 1 God gave them a peculiar constitution which 
 ensured their eternal perseverance. And are you sure 
 that you mean less or more by that constitution than 
 others do by a disposition, which you reject as inconsist- 
 ent with moral agency ? 
 
 Take now the other supposition ; that the holy crea- 
 tures of both worlds are unfailingly kept by a view of 
 the punishments of sin and the wonders of redemption. 
 But this is the absolute dominion of motives. And if God 
 can exercise such a dominion, why could he not have pre- 
 vented sin ? You may say, without those consequences of 
 gin, — punishment and redemption, — there were not motives 
 enough to secure the perpetual holiness of the universe or of 
 
 * Acts 2. 23. and 15. 18. 
 
184 
 
 GOD S POWER 
 
 any of its parts. Then you have abandoned your favourite 
 theory, that hohness in every case is better for the universe 
 than sin in its stead. And when you have given up that no- 
 tion, you may perhaps discover a reason why God permitted 
 sin when he could have prevented it. If God can keep saints 
 and angels eternally holy by motives, why did he not keep 
 the universe eternally holy by motives ? If you say, the 
 motives were not furnished till punishment and redemption 
 brought them forth, then you say, that some good effects 
 have followed from sin which could not have existed with- 
 out it : and then sin in some cases is better for the universe 
 than holiness in its stead. While, to disprove God's volun- 
 tary permission of sin, you continue to say that holiness in 
 all cases is better for the universe than sin in its stead, 
 you may not say that the consequences of sin ha\e furnish- 
 ed stronger motives to holiness than could have existed 
 without it : and therefore you may not plead that God, by 
 motives, can eternally keep sin from heaven, and yet by 
 motives could not have kept sin from the universe. My 
 own opinion is, that by mere motives he could not have 
 done the one and cannot do the other. Certainly it is not by 
 mere motives that believers on earth are kept. The same 
 motives are urged upon other men without effect. Hell 
 thunders and Calvary weeps, and they march on to death. 
 You say, because they do not believe. Aye, and one rea- 
 son why they do not believe is, that faith " is the gift of 
 God." If he keeps the saints by motives, why by motives 
 could he not have prevented sin 1 And if he does not keep 
 them by motives, he must keep them by efficient power. 
 There is no other alternative. You must give up the doc- 
 
TO PREVENT SIN. 185 
 
 trine of perseverance or admit that God could have pre- 
 vented sin. You must give up the doctrine of perseverance 
 or resort either to that of efficiency or an absolute control 
 by motives. If neither of these is admitted, what chance 
 is there for any on earth or in heaven to stand ? Satan 
 fell from perfect holiness ; Adam fell from perfect holiness : 
 what should keep believers from falling from imperfect 
 holiness, in a world full of temptations, and with all the 
 influence of former habits bearing upon them ? How 
 comes it then to pass that every one of them, without a 
 single exception, perseveringly yields to motives which 
 cannot control others ? How comes it to pass that God is 
 so sure of this control over them, that he firmly covenants 
 with Christ and the Church to keep them all ? Is it be- 
 cause none but the less stubborn yield at first ? But what 
 is stubbornness on your plan but the strength of present 
 passions ? And have not the strong passions of a Manas- 
 seh and a Saul of Tarsus and a dying thief yielded, while 
 mildness has died in sin ? Have not the most unlikely sub- 
 mitted, while the children of the pious, brought up in the 
 midst of means, have died in profligacy ? Do you say, God 
 keeps bad motives from those he means to keep ? Then 
 he could have kept bad motives from all his creatures and 
 prevented sin. But Christians live every day in the midst 
 of temptations. It is indeed said, " There hath no temp- 
 tation taken you but such as is common to man : but God 
 is faithful who will not suffer you to be tempted above that 
 ye are able ; but will with the temptation also make a way 
 to escape, that ye may be able to bear it :" but the safety 
 lies in his making a way to escape, which I understand 
 16* 
 
186 fiOD'S POWER 
 
 to be by efficient power in connexion with his protecting 
 providence. 
 
 Upon your plan there are two facts wholly unaccounted 
 for : first, that all the individuals who were given to Christ, 
 and only those, are induced at first to submit ; and secondly, 
 that every one of them without exception perseveres. As- 
 sign any sufficient reason for these facts, and see if the same 
 might not have kept sin out of the universe. You must 
 relinquish your theory respecting the prevention of sin, or 
 give up the doctrine of perseverance ; and then there is 
 no certainty that a creature in any world will continue to 
 be holy. 
 
 You say, the conversion and perseverance of the elect 
 were certain because God foresaw them ; and they were 
 decreed in the very purpose to bring forward such a sys- 
 tem of government and grace with a foreknowledge that 
 the self-determining power would yield, and continue to 
 yield, to the motives ; and the promises to Christ and the 
 Church were only engagements to send the means, 
 added to predictions of what the self-determining power 
 would do. This is the explanation of Dr Fitch, put into 
 my own language. And this will explain the apparent 
 contradiction in Dr Taylor's account of the predestination 
 of sin when God was heartily unwilling that it should 
 take place. He believes " that the eternal purposes of 
 God extend to all actual events, sin not excepted." And 
 yet he says, " I do not believe that sin can be proved to be 
 the necessary means of the greatest good, and that as such 
 God prefers it on the whole to holiness in its stead. — But 
 1 do believe — that it mav be true that God, all things con- 
 
TO PREVENT SIN. 167 
 
 sidered, prefers holiness to sin in all instances in which 
 the latter takes place, — though for wise and good reasons 
 he permits, or does not prevent, the existence of sin."* 
 That is, by creating moral agents, he permitted what he 
 could not prevent but by refusing to create them. And 
 he decreed their sin by deciding to create them and to 
 place them under law. And so he decreed the regenera- 
 tion, perseverance, and salvation of the elect, by determin- 
 ing to create them and to place them under means, (in- 
 cluding the illuminating Spirit,) to which he foresaw that 
 the self-determining power would yield. And his covenant 
 with Christ and the Church was a promise to do just that 
 and no more. 
 
 On this statement I remark first, that God's foreseeinor 
 the certainty of their conversion and perseverance, did not 
 make these events certain. This theory therefore leaves 
 the facts as unaccounted for as before. Secondly, their 
 conversion and perseverance, being wrought by a power 
 independent of God, could not, in any conceivable way, 
 have been foreseen. Thirdly, for God, in his solemn cove- 
 nants with Christ and the Church, to promise to do what 
 really was to be done by another, and then to assume the 
 praise of doing it himself, would involve what no good man 
 would intentionally impute to God. 
 
 To sum up all in a word. If God keeps believers by 
 his efficiency, he could have prevented sin. If he keeps 
 them by the controlling power of motives, he could have 
 prevented sin. But if he does not keep them at all, but 
 
 " Letter to Dr Havves. 
 
188 god's poweu 
 
 only foresees that they will keep themselves, under the in- 
 fluence of motives common to all ; then the following facts 
 are wholly unaccounted for ; namely, that, as the reward 
 of Christ, God covenanted with him to keep them; that 
 he covenanted with the Church to keep them; that he 
 takes to himself the praise of keeping them by his "power 
 — through faith unto salvation ;" and finally, that they all 
 without exception do persevere in a world full of tempta- 
 tions, and while embarrassed by their old habits and re- 
 maining sins. 
 
 I now turn more directly to the great investigation. 
 And in the outset I wish to dispose of a few texts which 
 are thought by our brethren to lie against us. " What 
 could have been done more to my vineyard that I have 
 not done in it?" "The Lord — is long-suffering to us 
 ward, not willing that any should perish but that all should 
 come to repentance." " Who will have all men to be 
 saved and to come unto the knowledge of the truth."* 
 If the doctrine of divine efficiency is true, these texts 
 ought to be just what they are ; and therefore they do not 
 lie against the doctrine, nor of course against the power 
 of God to prevent sin. If we are dependent on God for 
 holiness, and none the less under obligations, then we 
 sustain two relations to God, in a great measure inde- 
 pendent of each other ; namely, that of recipients of his 
 sanctifying impressions and that of moral agents ; in 
 other words, that of beings acted upon and that of beings 
 acting. And if, on the one hand, we are none the less de- 
 
 * Isai. 5. 4. 1 Tira. 2. 4. 2 Pet. 3. 9. 
 
TO PREVENT SIN. 189 
 
 pendent for being bound, and, on the other, none the less 
 under obligations for being dependent, then each of these 
 relations is entire without reference to the other. And 
 then a being who acts according to truth, must act towards 
 us as moral agents without reference to our dependence, 
 and towards us as dependent without reference to our ob- 
 ligations ; that is, he must speak to us as moral agents as 
 though we were independent, and must speak about us as 
 dependent as though we were clay in the hands of the 
 potter, without powers or obligations. God, as he acts 
 towards the moral agent, is the moral Governour : as he 
 acts towards the dependent subject, is the Sovereign Effi- 
 cient Cause. In the character of Moral Governour, he has 
 no influence to employ but motives. In the character of 
 Sovereign Efficient Cause, he does, nothing but produce 
 sanctifying impressions ; in doing which he acts as a 
 Sovereign, except when he produces them as a gracious 
 reward or in answer to prayer, or when he withholds them 
 as a punishment, as in the case of judicial blindness. In 
 these instances alone the two departments run into each 
 other. In all other cases they are wholly separate and 
 independent. The Moral Governour fills immeasurably the 
 greater space, because God has inconceivably more to say 
 and do to creatures as bound to obey, than to creatures as 
 merely dependent. And as, in his direct treatment of 
 moral agents, he can express the benevolence of his nature, 
 the Moral Governour, who employs no influence biit 
 motives, can sincerely express the kindness of his heart in 
 measures and in language which have no reference to 
 men's dependence, and which any benevolent king or 
 
190 
 
 GOD S POWER 
 
 father might employ who could do nothing but make pro- 
 visions for others and wield motives. It is the Moral 
 Governour alone who says, " What could have been done 
 more to my vineyard that I have not done in it?" The 
 meaning is, what provisions could I have made, or what 
 motives could I have urged, more than I have done ? But 
 the Sovereign Efficient Cause says, " The king's heart is 
 in the hand of the Lord as the rivers of water : he turneth 
 it whithersoever he will." The Moral Governour says, 
 " The Lord — is long suffering, — not willing that any 
 should perish but that all should come to repentance." 
 The Sovereign Efficient Cause says, "Therefore hath he 
 mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he 
 hardeneth." Now upon the principle of divine efficiency, 
 and while men are allowed to be none the less bound on 
 that account, such, to comport with truth, must be the 
 language of God to moral agents, for whom he can do 
 nothing but provide privileges, and over whom he has no 
 control but by motives, and by his direct treatment of 
 whom he can express the benevolence of his heart. As 
 such language comports with truth upon the principle of 
 an efficiency which does not impair moral agency, it does 
 not lie against us, but leaves the question of efficiency or 
 no efficiency to be decided by other proofs. 
 
 We admit that whatever God does by efficiency or 
 permission is intended to })romote the highest happiness 
 of the universe, and that this happiness will probably be 
 connected with the highest holiness : and in this sense 
 God is striving, perhaps with all his might, to promote, in 
 his kingdom at large, the rational operations of h.oliness, 
 
TO PREVENT SIN. 191 
 
 under the guidance of the highest attainable knowledge. 
 He therefore is displaying himself as fast probably as the 
 nature of things will admit. For this highest exhibition 
 of himself, which involves the display of all truth, the 
 punishment of sin and the work of redemption I believe 
 to be necessary. Whether he is aiming to exalt the 
 universe, as a whole and in all its ages, to the highest 
 possible holiness, is not for me to say. It is likely to be 
 so. But if this is what our brethren mean, they do not 
 draw just conclusions from their premise ; for it does not 
 follow from God's aiming at the greatest general holiness, 
 that some instances of sin are not necessary to the greatest 
 good, nor that he is doing his utmost to make every in- 
 dividual holy. It only proves that he aims to make every 
 individual holy so far as comports with the general in- 
 terest of holiness ; and this no believer in revelation denies. 
 If when our brethren say, God does the best for each 
 that he can consistently with the highest prevalence of 
 holiness in the universe in all ages, they mean no more 
 than that the greatest display of his glory is necessary 
 to the highest general holiness, and that he does for 
 each the best he can consistently with his glory ; I do 
 not object ; and could say the same in perfect consistence 
 with divine efficiency. But if they mean, (as certainly 
 they do if they mean any thing contrary to the common 
 doctrine,) that God does all he can to make each indivi- 
 dual holy which comports with moral agency ; (the only 
 limit that can be fixed, since holiness in every case is bet- 
 ter for the universe than sin in its stead, and since no 
 conceivable harm could result from his trying in every 
 
i9'2 god's power 
 
 case to bring about that which, for that particular case. 
 would be the best for the universe;) then I deny. Could 
 not more have been done in our w'orld for six thousand 
 years consistently with moral agency ? Could not more 
 than one Noah have been -sent to the antediluvian world '? 
 Could not all nations have had a Moses and a Pentateuch ? 
 Could not the God of miracles have filled all lands with 
 Bibles and with Pauls? Could not the spirit of 1792 have 
 begun a tliousand years sooner ? That God has done the 
 best he could for the display of the character of man and 
 his own, — for the manifestation of his justice, mercy, and 
 patience, — for filling the universe with the knowledge of 
 truth, and thus providing the means of the highest general 
 holiness and happiness ; I am willing to believe. But that 
 he has done all he could consistently with moral agency, for 
 the conversion of each individual ; or, (which amounts 
 to the same thing,) that he has done all he could for the 
 conversion of each that consisted with the highest holiness 
 of the universe, upon the assumed principle that holiness 
 in every case is better for the holiness of the universe 
 than sin in its stead ; that is to say, all he could for each ; 
 I cannot believe. These several suppositions amount to 
 the same thing. For if the holiness of each individual 
 is better for the holiness of the universe than sin in its 
 stead, and if God has done all he could for the conversion 
 of each individual that consisted with the highest holiness 
 of the universe, then lie has done all he could for the con- 
 version of each that comported with moral agency : in other 
 words, all he could. What other limit can be set ? If the 
 holiness of each individual is better for the holiness of the 
 
TO PREVENT SIN. 193 
 
 universe than sin in its stead, how could it obstruct the 
 holiness of the universe for God to go to the utmost feasi- 
 ble limit with each? If he succeeded, the holiness of the 
 universe would be advanced and in no way marred ; un- 
 less it would furnish the universe with more constraining 
 motives to holiness for some to be sinners and punished, 
 which is contrary to the supposition. If he failed, it is 
 inconceivable how the effort could make worse any but 
 the rejecters themselves, who would soon confine the injury 
 to hell and take it from other worlds. At any rate he 
 could not have been kept back from doing his utmost for 
 each by foreseeing a failure : for as both the failure and 
 success must depend on the self-determining power, which 
 lies beyond his control, he could not, so far as we can 
 conceive, have foreseen the result. Indeed it is an over- 
 whelming argument against this self-determining power, 
 that it would shut out all the actions of creatures from his 
 foresight, and leave the whole moral universe for the 
 future to him a perfect blank. 
 
 It does not follow that God could not have prevented 
 sin, from tlie fact that he has not prevented it : for he has 
 important purposes to answer by means of sin. " The 
 Lord hath made all tilings for himself, yea even the wick- 
 ed for the day of evil." That is to say, for his own pur- 
 poses he made Judas, with a full knowledge of the traitor's 
 course, and with an eye distinctly fixed on " the day of 
 evil." Less than this, I think, cannot be made of the text. 
 But whatever else it implies, it certainly implies that God 
 has purposes to answer by sin. He had purposes to an- 
 swer by the sin of Joseph's brethren, and a providence in 
 17 
 
194 god's power 
 
 that affair. "God sent me before you to preserve you a 
 posterity in the earth and to save your lives by a great 
 deliverance. So now it was not you that sent me hither 
 but God." He had purposes to answer by the sin of 
 Pharaoh and a providence in that affair. "For the Scrip- 
 ture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have 
 I raised thee up, that I might show my power in thee, and 
 that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.'' 
 He had purposes to answer by the pride of the Assyrian 
 king and a providence in that matter. " O Assyrian, 
 the rod of my anger ; — I will send him against a hypo- 
 critical nation. — Howbeit he meaneth not so, neither doth 
 his heart think so ; but it is in his heart to destroy and to 
 cut off nations not a few. — Wherefore — I will punish the 
 fruit of the stout heart of the king of Assyria and the glory 
 of his high looks. — Shall the axe boast itself against him 
 that heweth therewith? or shall the saw magnify itself 
 against him that shaketh it?" God had purposes to answer 
 by the sins of the betrayer and murderers of Christ, and a 
 pre-determined providence in those matters. " Truly the 
 Son of man goeth as it was determined, but wo unto that 
 man by whom he is betrayed." " Herod and Pontius 
 Pilate, with the Gentiles and the people of Israel, were 
 gathered together for to do whatsoever thy hand and 
 thy counsel determined before to be done." " Him being 
 delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge 
 of God, .ye have taken and by wicked hands have cruci- 
 fied and slain." After God had created the universe " by" 
 Christ and "for'' Christ, that is, for a theatre on which 
 he might accomplish the wonders of redemption and un- 
 
TO PREVENT SIN. 195 
 
 cover the great designs of God ; after all his covenants 
 with him and the Church ; after all the preparations for 
 his advent and death in the types and predictions and 
 arrangements of the old dispensation ; after sending him to 
 die and commanding him to die ; can it be supposed that 
 he did all he could consistently with moral agency to 
 prevent the sin of Judas and of the Jews ?* If your mean- 
 ing is, that he did all he could consistently with the 
 highest display of his glory, and therefore with the great- 
 est ultimate holiness and happiness of the universe, this 
 is true, and leaves untouched his power to prevent sin. 
 
 Sin has certainly been the occasion of immeasurable 
 good. Had there been no sin the universe would have 
 lost all the glorious results of redemption, which, as we 
 have seen, was the great end for which God built the 
 universe. Christ was the " Word" by which the whole 
 mind of God was to be expressed : Christ is the " face" 
 from which all " the light of the knowledge of the glory 
 of God" shines: and "God— created all things by Jesus 
 Christ, to the intent that now unto the principalities and 
 powers in heavenly places might be known by the Church 
 the manifold wisdom of God, according to the eternal pur- 
 pose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord," " No 
 man hath seen God at any time ; the only begotten Son 
 which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared 
 him."t Without sin and the work of redemption, all the 
 
 * Gen. 45. 7, 8. Prov. 16. 4. Isai. 10. 5—19. Luke 22. 22. John 
 10. 18. Acts 2. 23 and 4. 27, 28. Rom. 9. 17. -Col. 1. 16. with 
 John 1. 3. 
 
 t John 1.1,18, 2Cor. 4. 6. Eph. 3. 9—11. ' 
 
196 god's power 
 
 displays of God which belong to the present universe 
 would have been lost ; and what could have come in their 
 stead no message from heaven has told us. The punish- 
 ment of sin will reveal God and the claims of his govern- 
 ment as nothing else probably could have done. " Tor- 
 mented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy 
 angels and in the presence of the Lamb ; and the smoke 
 of their torment" ascending "up forever and ever" ! This 
 will lay down into the heart of the universe the boundless 
 evil of sin and the infinite claims of God, as nothing else 
 could do. If " there is joy in the presence of the angels 
 of God over one sinner that repenteth," "more than over 
 ninety and nine" who never fell, then, on the strong 
 principle of contrast, there may be more joy in the universe 
 than though sin and redemption had never been. 
 
 If God has no power to sanctify nor effectually to re- 
 strain sin, prayer for the suppression of sin and the con- 
 version of the world would seem to be mockery. Or if in 
 such petitions a limited power is to be acknowledged, it 
 would be no more than the expression of the truth to add, 
 as far as thou art able. But an appendix so unlike the 
 Scriptures and so shocking to mankind, would soon open 
 the eyes of all to the claims of the new doctrine. 
 
 Upon the principle of our brethren, judicial blindness 
 results from the withdravvment of the illuminating Spirit 
 and of such restraints as God in his providence can im- 
 pose. But even this is abandoning men to sin which 
 might have been in a measure restrained. God therefore 
 does not do his utmost to restrain sin. You say, he aban- 
 dons some as a warning to others, and by this means 
 
TO PREVENT SIN. 197 
 
 promotes holiness in his kingdom at large. Then the 
 withdrawment of the Spirit and the relaxation of restraint, 
 which lead to increased sin, are, in some instances, better 
 for the holiness of the universe than more light and restraint 
 and less sin in their stead. And why, upon the same princi- 
 ple, may not sin and its punishment be better in some 
 cases for the holiness of the universe than perfect obedi- 
 ence in its stead ? It is impossible to reconcile a single 
 instance of abandonment in any world with the highest 
 efforts of God in every case to restrain sin. But he does 
 abandon sinners on earth and in hell. And if he can 
 promote the public good by letting sin loose to rage when 
 he could have restrained it, why may he not benefit the 
 the universe by suffering sin to come into existence when 
 he could have prevented it? I admit that judicial blind- 
 ness results from nothing on God's part but the withhold- 
 ing of influence and restraint when he might have applied 
 them ; but his manner of speaking of this seems to imply 
 more absolute dominion over mind than our brethren are 
 willing to allow. " God gave them over to a reprobate mind." 
 " Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same 
 lump to make one vessel unto honour and another unto 
 dishonour ?" " For this cause God shall send them strong 
 delusion that they should believe a lie, that they all might 
 be damned." " A stone of stumbling and a rock of of- 
 fence to them which stumble at the word, being disobe- 
 dient, whereunto also they were ajjjjointed."* I admit that 
 God's appointing them to disobedience was only decree- 
 
 » Rom. 1. 28. and 9. 21. 2 Thes. 2. 11, 12. 1 Pet. 2. 8. 
 17* 
 
198 god's power 
 
 ing not to do all he could to sanctify them. But if all that 
 God could do was to invite them by his Spirit, and the 
 issue depended on their self-determining power ; and if 
 for a time he did invite them and did all he could for their 
 salvation ; it would be strong language to call the with- 
 drawment of a rejected invitation to obedience an appoint- 
 ment to disobedience. How could he appoint to disobe- 
 dience if he had no power to prevent it ? The language 
 becomes still stronger. " Therefore hath he mercy on 
 whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he harden- 
 eth." " The election hath obtained it and the rest were 
 blinded ; according as it is written, God hath given them 
 the spirit of slumber ; eyes that they should not see and 
 ears that they should not hear." " Therefore they could 
 not believe, because that Esaias said again. He hath 
 blinded their eyes and hardened their heart, that they should 
 not see with their eyes nor understand with their heart." 
 " Why hast thou made us to err from thy ways and hard- 
 ened our heart from thy fear ?" God is said to have hard- 
 ened the heartof Pharaoh, of the Egyptians, of Sihon, and 
 of the Canaanites.* 
 
 All these texts, I suppose, prove no more, as to the 
 wicked, than that God withdrew his influence and re- 
 straint : but I think they imply a power to prevent sin. 
 At least they show the permission of sin in the excess 
 when that excess might have been prevented. And they 
 seem worded with too much authority for one who can 
 
 •Exod. 7. 3, 13. and 14. 17. Deut. 2.30. Josh. 11. 20. Isai. C3. 
 17. John 12. 40. Rom. 9. 18. and 11. 7, 8. 
 
TO PREVENT SIN. 199 
 
 only invite but cannot control. Can it be seriously 
 thought after all these representations, tliat God had 
 nothing more to do in those cases than to send his 
 word and illuminating Spirit and restraining providence 
 to do his best to keep them from sin and to make them 
 holy, and afterwards, in discouragement, to withdraw his 
 restraint and inviting Spirit ? You might as well say of a 
 faithful minister, who had followed his hearers with un- 
 remitting entreaties and tears, that he had sovereignly 
 hardened the obstinate, because he had withdrawn, dis- 
 couraged, to another people ; especially if he was the only 
 minister on earth. 
 
 It is the common doctrine of the Bible that God can 
 restrain from particular sins. God said to Abimelech, 
 I also withheld thee from sinning against me ; therefore 
 suffered I thee not to touch her." " This day," said 
 Phinehas, " we perceive that the Lord is among us, because 
 ye have not committed this traspass against the Lord." 
 Nay more, in language which cannot be misunderstood 
 or explained away, we are assured that God can unlimit- 
 edly restrain sin, and that he will restrain all that does not 
 contribute to his glory ; in other words, that every sin 
 which he allows to exist will promote his praise. " Surely 
 the wrath of man shall praise thee; the remainder of 
 wrath shalt thou restrain."* Were there no other text in 
 the Bible on the subject, this ought forever to settle the 
 question : and I cannot but wonder that, with this single 
 
 "0011.20.6. Josh. 22. 31. Ps. 76. 10. 
 
200 god's power 
 
 text on tlie sacred page, there should be, among believers 
 in divine revelation, a remaining doubt on earth. 
 
 In all the common affairs of life God is certainly able 
 to turn the hearts of men as he pleases. Many texts in 
 proof of this were cited in the fourth chapter. I add ano- 
 ther thought. Christ has received from the Father power 
 to conquer sin and all its pernicious effects. " Who shall 
 change our vile body that it may be fashioned like unto 
 his glorious body, according to tlie working whereby he is 
 able even to subdue all things unto himself"* When the 
 apostle uttered this he had his eye directly on the effects 
 of sin as exhibited at the bottom of the grave, and affirm- 
 ed that the mighty Conqueror would subdue death and all 
 things else. And shall sin itself, the greatest enemy and 
 cause of all, elude his power ? These two things, his 
 power to control the heart in common matters and his 
 power to subdue sin, place him on an undivided throne. 
 Such a throne, to the joy of the holy universe, he does 
 fill. " My counsel shall stand and I will do all my plea- 
 sure." " Whatsoever the Lord pleased, that did he in 
 heaven and in earth, in the seas and all deep places." 
 " The counsel of the Lord standeth forever ; the thoughts 
 of his heart to all generations." " He is of one mind and 
 who can turn him ? and what his soul desireth even that 
 he doth." "All the inhabitants of the earth are reputed 
 as nothing, and he doth according to his will in the army 
 of heaven and among the inhabitants of the earth : and 
 
 * Phil. 3.21. 
 
TO PREVENT SIN. 201 
 
 none can stay his hand or say unto him, What dost 
 thou ?"* This looks like any thing but weakness and 
 disappointment and frustrated desires ; any thing but ina- 
 bility to regulate the moral universe as he pleases ; any 
 thing but being defeated in his attempts to restrain his 
 creatures from sin or to bring them back to obedience. 
 Such a theory assigns to him a very limited empire : and 
 certainly it takes from the universe its highest consolation. 
 If the question could be put to every holy being in hea- 
 ven and earth, Shall all the counsels of infinite Avisdom 
 and love stand ? shall all the wishes of infinite benevolence 
 be gratified ? one universal shout, " as the voice of many 
 waters," would respond, " Amen : — alleluia ; for the Lord 
 God omnipotent reigneth." 
 
 * Job 23. 13. Ps. 33. 11, and 115. 3. and 135. C, Isai. 46, 10. 
 Dan. 4. 35. 
 
CHAPTER X 
 
 Alleged Dominion of Motives. Jl Distinct Theory. 
 
 I HAVE now finished what I had to say on the subject 
 of divine efficiency, and have come to anotlier theory en- 
 tirely distinct, but equally opposed to that fundamental 
 truth. It is, that God can mould the heart at pleasure 
 by the mere influence of motives, whether they are adapt- 
 ed to its present temper or not. This, so far as I know, 
 is a theory entirely new : but it accords much better than 
 the other with the true doctrines. It is reconcileable 
 with special grace in regeneration and with election and 
 perseverance. Still it is nothing but moral suasion, and 
 ill comports with that representation of divine power in 
 regeneration with which the Scriptures abound. And all 
 that has been said in proof of divine efficiency lies against 
 it. All that has been said to show that the Bible does 
 not ascribe regenerating power to the word, lies more 
 against this than against the other theory ; for if the mere 
 illuminating Spirit cannot give efficacy to the word at all, 
 surely it cannot always. 
 
 On some printed pages before me I find the following. 
 '' It is evident, if God is able to exert his agency on the 
 mind through the truth, that no limitation can be assigned 
 to that agency short of absolute omnipotence. — Through 
 
204 ALLEGED DOMINION 
 
 its instrumentality God can exert any influence however 
 great, and overcome every obstacle to be found in the un- 
 renewed soul." " I have no where said that regeneration 
 is caused by the will of man, but by the Spirit of the living 
 God operating through motives." " The creature is 
 turned — in the twinkling of an eye." " You do not — 
 make motives the cause of all the holy and sinful acts of 
 the mind, but you suppose that the cause of these actions 
 is to be found in the mind itself" " The will is deter- 
 mined to choose the Almighty through the influence of 
 motives as crowded upon the mind by the eternal Spirit." 
 " How will this serve to throw him off" from his Antinomi- 
 anism, as long as you tell him that he has a depraved 
 heart or temper that renders him entirely unsusceptible of 
 the influence of holy motives ?" On the pages of another 
 work I find the following. "God regenerates men with 
 truth as a Sovereign, when and where he pleases." " The 
 sentiment of the text may — be thus expressed : Ye are 
 regenerated through the instrumentality of the truths or 
 motives or moral suasion of Scripture." " These truths are 
 motives. They constitute the moral suasion of the Bible." 
 " Truth or motive are God's established laws of governing 
 the moral world, just as attraction and gravitation are God's 
 established laws of governing many movements in the 
 natural world." " God has ordained that our acts and 
 volitions — shall be caused by motives." " All our volitions 
 and actions are caused hj motives." 
 
 These two writers fully deny the self-determining pow- 
 er. But they both represent the action of God to be on 
 the truth, and not directly on the mind. One of them, 
 
OF MOTIVES. 205 
 
 finding fault,- says, " You had recourse to the doctrine that 
 in all the acts and exercises of the moral agent, the Spirit 
 acts directly on the mind and mind only." " Unless an 
 instiument break it will bear power applied to it to any 
 extent. Hence if God can exert an influence through the 
 truth on the mind of the sinner, inasmuch as the truth is 
 an instrument, that— cannot break, ^o through its instru- 
 mentality God can exert any influence however great." 
 " I know _ that you assert that God is unable to exert any 
 influence on or through the truth ; but — does the sujDposi- 
 tion — diminish-his claim to the — gratitude of his creatures? 
 — Is the warriour who destroys the enemies of his country 
 with swords and muskets and cannon, any the less enti- 
 tled to some distinguished meed, than if he had destroyed 
 them with his hands?" Mark this. "His hands touch not 
 the enemy, but onl,y touch tlie instruments. The other 
 writer says, "We do not deny the necessity of the Spirit's 
 special influences when we say men are begotten of the 
 truth. You do not deny the special agency of the mecha- 
 nic when you affirm that your table was made with a plane 
 and chissel and hammer." " A friend comes to your door, 
 and, finding an immense log cut — off", — inquires how it was 
 divided. You answer,-with this axe. That, he says, is — 
 untrue : for, in the first place, you cut off the log, and not 
 the axe ; in the second place, that axe has no power in it- 
 self whatever ; and in the third place, you yourself could 
 not have made such a feeble instrument accomplish so 
 great an undertaking." 
 
 Now all these representations go upon the principle that 
 the Spirit never touches the mind, but only touches the 
 
 18 
 
•20G ALLEGED DOMINION 
 
 truth, and truth touches the mind ; and that tlie mind, in 
 view of truth made clear by the illuminating Spirit, turns 
 without any other action of God. And this is old Armi- 
 uianism, with the single addition that God can make the 
 truth so clear as to ensure its success. Does this take 
 away the self-determining power 1 The only self-deter- 
 mination held by Whitby was in regard to attending to the 
 thing presented and believing it to be the greatest good. 
 As these writers, ascribe no such independent power to the 
 mind, but believe it absolutely controlled by truth divinely 
 illummed, they must be acquitted from holding to the self- 
 determining power. 
 
 This idea of God's pressing upon truth and pressing it 
 into the mind, and by the pressure, not only introducing 
 it, but shaping the affections, seems to me one of the most 
 extravagant dreams ever cpnceived. The real meaning 
 however is, that God, by a pressure upon truth, thrusts it 
 into the ei/e of the mind, and thus makes it take such 
 hold of the natural susceptibility to motives, as to cause the 
 affections which he wishes to excite. 
 
 Allowing that the mind, in all its holy affections, is 
 consciously moved by the rational considerations involved in 
 truth, (a point about which no one. can doubt,) it does not 
 follow that the action of God which precedes these affec- 
 tions is on the truth and not on the mind. How can God 
 act upon truth ? If this were done some change must be 
 wrought in truth, in point of form or place or j>osition or 
 motion, or in some other respect : but what change in form 
 or position or place or motion, or in any other respect, can 
 be wrought in truth .' God makes the truth seen and fell 
 
OF MOTIVES. 207 
 
 and loved : can you prove that this is not done by an ope- 
 ration on the mind? Can it not be infallibly proved that it 
 is done by an operation on the mind, and cannot be done 
 by acting on any thing else? All the change that can be 
 predicated of truth in this case, respects it, not as an active 
 instrument, but as a passive object. It is seen, felt, and 
 loved by an active mind which did not see, feel, and love 
 it before. Is not this all the change that can be predicated 
 of truth ? Can you prove any more 1 Can you conceive 
 any more ? Does the Bible say any where that the action 
 is not on the mind to cause it to see, feel, and love the 
 tnith? In reference to the conscious piercings of truth 
 when reflected on and felt, we hear indeed of " the sword 
 of the Spirit;" but that is a figure of speech from which 
 nothing so particular and exact can be inferred. Does not 
 the Bible every where speak of the action as being on the 
 mind ? And in which has the change actually taken place 1 
 The truth remains the same and the mind is changed. 
 What it did not see it sees ; what it never felt before it 
 feels ; what it hated, " in the twinkling of an eye" it loves. 
 One is the active agent whose action is changed, the other 
 is the passive object which can only receive the regards of 
 the mind, and remains forever the same. You can see 
 with your eye that the change is not in truth but in the 
 mind; and therefore that the power has not been applied 
 to truth but to the mind. Truth is indeed the instrument 
 of the new affections ; but it is so made, not by any action 
 in truth, but by a new action of the mind ; not by any im- 
 pression on truth, but by an immediate impression on the 
 mind. This seems so self-evident, that the contrary opinion 
 
208 ALLEGED DOMINION 
 
 appears to rae one of the most curious instances of turning 
 the emblem of a figure into literal reality, and even of 
 transferring to truth, to thought, the attributes of matter, 
 and to a passive object the energies of a conquering agent, 
 that I recollect to-have found in the history of mind. Why, 
 all these piercings of " the sword of the Spirit" of which 
 you speak, are nothing but the actings of mind in view of 
 truth. Let God, by his energies upon the soul, put mind 
 into action in view of truth, and all is done. 
 
 One of these writers, without intending it, falls into 
 a happy manner of illustrating the very truth I am sup- 
 porting. "To declare God cannot — regenerate men v.ith 
 truth, is to deny his omnipotence. For aught we know, God 
 could have made the blowing of the rams' horns, not only 
 shake down the walls of Jericho, but also convert all its 
 inhabitants. — He opened the blind man's eyes \\ith spittle : 
 and if he pleases he can regenerate us with truth." And 
 pray, did he apply his po^ver to the rams' horns or to the 
 walls? to the spittle or to the eyes? And had he made 
 those trumpets the antecedents to the conversion of the in- 
 habitants, would the power have been applied to the trum- 
 pets or to their hearts ? 
 
 But there is another question. If the action of the 
 Spirit is immediately upon the mind, is it upon the head 
 or the heart? Upon the head perhaps in convict'on ; upon 
 the heart surely in conversion. The mind will never 
 choose God and his ways until religion appears to it the 
 greatest good. And can religion be the greatest apparent 
 good to a mind of bad affections ? If not, a power must be 
 exerted behind the affections, prior, in the order of nature 
 
OF MOTIVES. 209 
 
 to religion's appearing the greatest good ; prior therefore 
 to the mind's being swayed by motives to love and choose 
 religion. 
 
 Let us examine this subject. I have no occasion to 
 explore the Scriptures or to dive into metaphysical reason- 
 ings : I make my appeal directly to the common experi- 
 ence of mankind. Tell the duellist of the value of life, of 
 the claims of humanity, of the claims of God ; and what 
 does it avail ? While those fiendish passions rage in his 
 heart, the greatest apparent good to him is honour and 
 revenge. Tell a drunkard of the ruin of his property, 
 the decay of his constitution, the griefs of his family; you 
 can fasten no motives upon him ; because, with his pro- 
 pensities, the greatest apparent good is the gratification 
 of his appetite. Tell the miser of the wants of the dying 
 heathen, the sacrifices of Calvary, thexommands of God ; 
 and you cannot extort from his withered hand a cent ; 
 because, with his sordid attachments, the greatest appa- 
 rent good is wrapped up in mammon. Nothing can ap- 
 pear the greatest good that is opposed to the prevailing 
 appetites and passions. If light cast upon tlie under- 
 standing was sure to control the heart, it ought to appear 
 that every inan does as well as he knows how: that 
 wherever the knowledge of divine truth is found, there 
 reigns the love of God ; that as no where below the heavens 
 is knowledge so perfect as in hell, no where below the 
 heavens does holiness so much abound. Truth and rea- 
 son will ne\ er gover-n a wicked heart ; will never there- 
 fore, under all the lights of the illuminating Spirit, and 
 even of the last judgment, (for they are nothing but truth 
 IS* 
 
210 ALLEGED DOMINION 
 
 and reason still,) transform it into the image of God. 
 Then certainly they will not do it always. To say that 
 this is breaking up all moral agency by denying a "sus- 
 ceptibility to motives in the wicked, is arraying your power 
 to comprehend the secrets of nature, against all the facts 
 in the universe. It is an eternal fact that the damned will 
 not be holy, because their bad affections will never yield 
 to truth : tlien, according to your assumption,- there is no 
 moral agency or sin in hell. 
 
 The sole question respects the power of truth ; for the 
 self-determining decision about attending to it and be- 
 lieving it is disclaimed. And if truth, more faintly and 
 unsteadily seen, cannot exhibit to the mind the greatest 
 apparent good in opposition to prevailing passions, can it 
 when more plainly and constantly seen ? Then the reason 
 why Judas does not now love as well as Peter, is that 
 God does not present truth so plainly and steadily to his 
 mind. There is no depravity to prevent the success of 
 truth ; or if there is, it operates only to turn away the at- 
 tention, an evil which a clearer view of truth would cor- 
 rect. A distinct view of truth, according to this, would 
 make religion appear to Judas the greatest good, though 
 diametrically opposed to his satanic temper. If you say, 
 there is no chance for religion to appear to him the great- 
 est good, because, in his state of unchangeable reproba- 
 tion, it offers nothing which to self-love can appear a good ; 
 I ask, is he not under obligations to love God and his 
 service ? and yoii say, there can be no moral agency, and 
 therefore ho obligations, without a present susceptibility to 
 motives founded in self-love. If Judas is still under obli- 
 
OF MOTIVES, 211 
 
 gations, he is infinitely to blame that God and his service 
 do not appear to hiin the greatest good ; and therefore he 
 has all the susceptibility to those motives which is neces- 
 sary to a moral agent. 
 
 Self-love is essential to a rational being : for if I regard 
 my own happiness as worthless^ I shall see nothing valua- 
 ble in the happiness of others. And if all happiness is 
 worthless, there is nothing for reason to seek or approve. 
 Nothing is reasonable or unreasonable. It is then essen- 
 tial to our nature to be influenced, in personal matters, by 
 that which promises to us the highest happiness. But we 
 have social, and still more extended affections, which 
 reach after the happiness of their objects irrespective of 
 our own. Whatever tends to gratify these personal or 
 disinterested affections, will appear to us a good ; and that 
 will appear the greatest good which is calculated to gratify 
 the feeling which for the time is the strongest. Whatever 
 then falls in with the predominant affection, will offer the 
 strongest and the prevailing motive. This is only saying, 
 what none can doubt, that all beings, good and bad, will 
 follow their prevailing inclination. What motives then 
 shall prevail, must depend on the state of the affections. 
 Of course, if a motive which ought to be the strongest, 
 will, when clearly exhibited to the mind, certainly prevail, 
 there is no depravity in the universe. If the mind is 
 prepared to relish and fall in with the truth when clearly 
 seen in its own proper character, there was no aversion to 
 it to obstruct belief, and, considering its infinite supe- 
 riority to the w^orld, nothing that could steadily draw away 
 the attention Irom it to the world. Nb antecedent depra- 
 
21*2 ALLEGED DOMINION 
 
 vity therefore kept out a clear exhibition of truth to the 
 mind, or rendered the convicting Spirit necessary. If 
 that illuminating influence was necessary to penetrate the 
 vail of criminal unbelief, produced by selfish aversion, 
 that aversion and unbelief must also be overcome, before 
 the mind will relish the truth even when it is fully present- 
 ed. But if there is no such aversion or unbelief to over- 
 come, but a readiness to fall in with truth as soon as it is 
 clearly seen, theire is no depravity at all. It must always 
 depend on the temper or affections whether truth shall 
 prevail or not. It is a wrong state of the heart which 
 makes a bad motive the strongest. Cure that temper and 
 the motive becomes the weakest. Something must first 
 be done upon the heart to make the truth the stronger 
 motive, urge it whoever will and with whatever power 
 of eloquence. This is a point wholly overlooked. 
 
 God and self are the only rivals for supreme affection. 
 One man loves God supremely, another love himself best 
 and God not at all. No motives can influence the latter but 
 those which are adapted to his self-love or social affections. 
 Do you say, they could be addressed to his reason ? But 
 his reason is exclusively employed in weighing the motives 
 by the interests to which they refer. To his conscience ? 
 But what appeals to conscience can do against reigning 
 selfishness, may be learnt from the history of the damn- 
 ed. Now would stronger motives addressed to self-love, 
 persuade him to love God? How could such motives more 
 strongly persuade him to love God than to love himself? 
 to love God better than himself? This brings out the 
 inconsistency of the whole scheme. The grand fault is. 
 
91*? 
 OF MOTIVES '*^'^ 
 
 the sinner loves himself supremely ; and when he cannot 
 o-et honour, wealth, or pleasure, his dearest interest lies m 
 gratifying the malignant passions which disappomtment 
 
 has excited. 
 
 This is not a mere prejudice to be corrected by light. 
 It is the necessary effect of selfishness, and would 
 be the same in all the light of hell, in all the light ot 
 the last judgment, in all the light which heaven itself 
 could pour upon mere intellect. Against that selfishness 
 God arrays himself in his commands and prohibitions, and 
 loads it with the penalty of eternal death. This rouses 
 the war. This perpetuates hostility of the deadliest type. 
 All this time the sinner knows that if he would love, God 
 would make him happy. That motive addressed to selt- 
 interest against his reigning passions, has no effect. He 
 does not love, but loves himself supremely, and hates God 
 as the infinite enemy and punisher of selfishness, and hates 
 him the more the more he is seen. The enmity is not a 
 delusion to be curedl^y light. It is not a false image oi 
 God that is hated. If it was, the enmity would be a 
 hallowed aversion to an idol. It is enmity to the true 
 God It is enmity to his whole character and govern- 
 ment It is enmity which light, instead of curing, will 
 only acraravate. It must be so if it is the true God that is 
 hated tnd if he is hated in all his character. The more 
 a thing is seen that is hated as a whole, the more it will 
 be abhorred. Light is of vital importance to lead forth 
 good affections which already have a cause, but it cannot 
 cure enmity so radical as that of the carnal heart. What 
 new unfolding of the divine character or of the smner's 
 
214 ALLEGED DO.MIXION 
 
 interests can make a selfish enemy love God better than 
 himself? Such an affection is not to be bought by any 
 bribe offered to self-love. Self-love in the natural heart 
 is selfishness, and is the source of all the enmity. It will 
 never give its suffrage in favour of God, and no bribe will 
 engage its influence to turn the soul to the love of him. Nor 
 will appeals to reason bring the enemy to yield. If such 
 appeals had always governed him, he would not have been 
 an enemy to God. Or if, before reason was mature, he 
 was hurried into transgression and placed under the con- 
 demning sentence of the law, can mere appeals to reason 
 call back his selfish heart to the love of that purity which 
 reproaches him and of that justice which annihilates all his 
 interests? to love that holy and condemning God better 
 than himself? This is saying that among all the bad pas- 
 sions of the universe, no wretch is too bad to be controlled 
 by reason if reasonable motives are set clearly before him • 
 that the rage of the damned is nothing but a delusion, — 
 the result of a wrong judgment founded in prejudice which 
 light would correct. And then all sin is the effect of 
 ignorance, and holiness is the unfailing effect of sufficient- 
 ly enlarged knowledge : and then there is nothing in 
 mind, — in its temper or affections, — to prevent it from 
 being holy Avhen sufficiently enlightened. But where is the 
 proof of all this ? Not in the Bible : not in a single text : 
 and I know that your unaided reason cannot pry so deep 
 as to see all this, in direct opposition to the word of God. 
 
 No motives acting on the mind before that causal in- 
 fluence which produces love, will cause love. To make 
 religion appear the greatest good, there must first be a 
 
OF MOTIVES. 215 
 
 change in the temper or alTections. And that very ap. 
 pearance, if made to the whole mind, implies love ; if 
 made to the understanding only, it will not control the 
 heart. No intellectual assent will make religion appear 
 the greatest good to a mind of bad affections. No ad- 
 dresses of truth therefore to the understanding by God or 
 man, will alone produce love. A heart that can reject 
 the word of the eternal God, could not be woft by the 
 eloquence of any agent. " If they hear not Moses and 
 the Prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one 
 rose from the dead."* If the Spirit himself causes religion 
 to appear the greatest good, he must first sanctify the 
 heart. 
 
 But if light cannot convert sinners, why, you say, is it 
 employed upon them ? It is employed upon them to show 
 the consistency and kindness of God in offering motives 
 which they ought to use for their good. Light is neces- 
 sary also to show them their obligations, guilt, ruin, and 
 dependence for salvation. And this antecedent convic- 
 tion, where regeneration ensues, will fill them with great- 
 er humility, love, and gratitude all their days. But on this 
 point I have spoken so fully in the seventh of the Park- 
 street Lectures, that I may hope to be excused from 
 enlarging here. 
 
 To prove that no power is exerted upon us but 
 motives, confident appeals are often made to our con- 
 sciousness. But what does consciousness report ? Here 
 is a mind opposed to the truth. All at once it yields to 
 
 ^ Luke 10. 31. 
 
•210 ALLEGED DO.MI.MON 
 
 the same truth, \\ithoul intellectually discovering any 
 thing new in it ; only its afTections are changed, and it 
 feels that the truth is reasonable. All at once, without 
 any new and pressing view of truths preceding, more 
 than it has had for days, tlie heart is softened into love 
 and acquiescence in the divine will. Can you prove from 
 consciousness that nothing has been there but motives ? 
 
 I kr^ow that the mind, so far as it is consciously in- 
 fluenced, is moved by reasons, or it would not act ration- 
 ally. To this 2)rccise influence all agree to refer those 
 texts which speak of the instrumentality of the word. 
 There is no disagreement then about what the Scripture 
 expressly declares on this point. It is admitted too on all 
 hands that Gjod is there represented as the Author of 
 regeneration. On these two great points we are agreed. 
 Every proposition which you claim to support by an ex- 
 plicit declaration of Scripture, we admit. But you go 
 further. You undertake to explain the mode of divine 
 operation by a theory of your own. You say, if God calls 
 forth the exercises of the mind by motives presented to 
 the intellect, he does not give dominion to motives by an 
 influence on the heart. But the Bible says no such thing. 
 This is an inference of your own. Against that inference 
 I set the foregoing reasonings, and I fortify them by an ap- 
 peal to numerous texts which declare that the divine 
 operation is on the heart. " A new heart will I give you 
 and a new s[)irit will I put within you ; and I will take 
 away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you 
 a heart of flesh." " Thou also hast wrought all our works 
 in us." " The love of God is shed abroad in our hearts 
 
OP MOTIVES. 217 
 
 by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us." " Ye are — 
 the epistle of Christ, — written, not with ink, but with 
 the Spirit of the living God, not in tables of stone, but in 
 fleshly tables of the heart." " I will put my law in their 
 inward parts and write it in their hearts." 
 
 If we would lay aside our systematic terms and our 
 attempts to explain the mode of divine operation, and limit 
 ourselves to the simple, intelligible facts, we should get 
 nearer together. Our consciousness tells us that revealed 
 truths are the objects towards which the mind acts, and 
 are the reasons which influence our affections and voli- 
 tions. This is all we know, and all that any of us, on 
 either side, pretends that the Scriptures teach about the 
 instrumentality of the word. And all we know of divine 
 efficiency is, that God wills that the mind should see the 
 truth, and it sees it ; that the mind should feel the truth, 
 and it feels it ; that the mind should love the truth, and 
 it loves it. We plead for nothing more. Can you look 
 far enough into the secrets of nature to see that it is not 
 so 1 Can you bring a single text to prove that it is not so ? 
 Even on your plan you must admit that God wills holiness 
 in those who become holy ; and you cannot pretend to 
 prove from Scripture or even to conceive of any other in- 
 strumentality of truth than that it is the object of the 
 affections and the reason in view of which the soul acts. 
 The former is all we ask ; the latter we fully admit. Why 
 then should there be any dispute ? It all grows out of 
 your attempt to explain the mode of divine operation ; 
 that is, to theorize about the manner in which truth 
 affects the natural susceptibility to motives ; a point about 
 
 19 
 
218 ALLEGED DOMINION 
 
 which you know nothing unless it is revealed ; and no 
 susceptibility is revealed which dispenses with divine 
 efficiency. I know that the will which you ascribe to 
 God is not efficient. That is the grand point of dispute, 
 brought up out of the explanation of the mode. You have 
 too a zeal for uncontrolled liberty : but what is uncon- 
 trolled liberty that is absolutely controlled by motives ? 
 
 If, from a notion that it better comports with freedom, 
 you still insist that the operation is on the head ; what 
 matter, I ask, if the influence absolutely controls, whether 
 it is on the head or heart 1 whether it is before the mind , 
 by motives thrown into its eye, or behind it, unseen and 
 unfelt 1 You say, if the mind is controlled by motives it 
 acts with perfect spontaneity ; and so it does upon our plan. 
 We know that we are willing, and therefore free, even if 
 we are made willing in the day of God's power. But I 
 throw the odds against you. That motives adapted to the 
 existing temper should control the mind, accords, not only 
 with our most familiar experience, but with all our notions 
 of liberty. We are moved by the motives which please us. 
 But a domination of motives that asks no leave of the dis- 
 position or desires, but encounters and destroys them all, 
 is so new and anomalous a thing, that I know not what to 
 say of its bearing upon liberty. We may suppose a case 
 where motives so overwhelm the mind as almost to take 
 away its freedom ; as where a child, by horrid representa- 
 tions, is terrified into a hated measure. This is a case 
 that may be ; but the other is so unmanageable in thought, 
 that I will not pronounce upon it further than to say, that 
 it has no existence but in the dreams of imagination. 
 
OF MOTIVES. 219 
 
 That in common matters God is able at pleasure to 
 control the world by motives, I fully admit ; because those 
 motives are adapted to the governing temper or affections, 
 and chiefly to self-love or the desire of happiness, w^hich is 
 inseparably interwoven with the nature of all things that 
 have life. But even in common matters he cannot control 
 the mind by motives opposed to the prevailing temper or 
 affections ; much less, by motives thus opposed, can he 
 turn the carnal heart from sin to holiness. 
 
 One of the writers already quoted says, " The fact that 
 the individual is averse to the truth, or to the course which 
 the motive suggests, does not prove that the motive can 
 exert no influence over his decisions and his conduct. 
 Adam, in a state of holiness, was influenced by the motives 
 which Satan presented. — Moral suasion often influences us 
 to engage, with all our hearts, in undertakings to which 
 at first we were utterly disinclined. Motive, repeatedly 
 urged, often overcomes our reluctance. If we were already 
 inclined to the course, the motive would be entirely use- 
 less."' That temptation prevailed with Adam before God's 
 influence was withdrawn, is an assumption often made by 
 those who know that this is denied by the asserters of di- 
 vine efficiency. When brought therefore against this doc- 
 trine, it is a mere begging of the question. And in regard 
 to the other cases referred to, no one doubts that the judg- 
 ment and choice are often changed by new truths present- 
 ed; but the truths must offer an apparent good, and for 
 this purpose must be adapted to the prevailing temper or 
 affections. If they convince a man that a change of pur- 
 pose is for his interest or for that of his friends, they are 
 
•220', ALLEGED DOMINION 
 
 adapted to self-Jove or social affection, (which are common 
 to all ;) and if not opposed by stronger motives, will pre- 
 vail. If they convince a Christian that a change of pur- 
 pose is a duty and will glorify God, they are adapted to his 
 habitual temper, and unless counteracted by some tempta- 
 tion addressed to a sinful passion, will prevail. But divine 
 truth can find in the unregenerate no affection to address 
 but self-love inflamed into selfishness and enmity against 
 God. And how can its appeals to self-interest persuade a 
 man of such a temper to subject that interest to the glory 
 of God? If it is the true character of God that is hated, 
 the truth throws light on nothing but a hated object ; and 
 how can such an illumination persuade a selfish enemy to 
 love God better than himself? Such an operation would 
 be altogether different from that moral suasion, of every 
 liour's occurence, which, in ordinary matters, is effected 
 by motives adapted to self-love and addressed to obvious 
 interest. 
 
 I cannot dismiss this subject without expressing my 
 high admiration of the point and power with which the 
 duty and importance of immediate submission are urged 
 upon the impenitent by some of our brethren on the other 
 side. In this they are worthy of all imitation. And if they 
 are ever to obtain any advantage over us in point of success 
 and consequent intrenchment in the confidence of man- 
 kind, it will be exclusively owing to this. Why should not 
 the followers of Calvin and Edwards and Brainerd wake 
 up to this duty ? The way is open for as urgent appeals 
 on our plan as on theirs. We hold to a complete natural 
 abilitv, the true basis of obligation. AVe know that God 
 
OF MOTIVES. 221 
 
 commands immediate repentance. It is impossible to urge 
 this duty upon sinners with too high a pressure, unless our 
 language or manner countenances their native self-depend- 
 ence. And we have as much encouragement as our 
 brethren can have on their principles. Such is the coin- 
 cidence between natural and supernatural operations, that 
 what would prevail if there was no supernatural power, is 
 most likely to prevail now. Would to God that all the or- 
 thodox would rise up to an importunity with sinners, not to 
 be exceeded by either class who deny the efficiency of the 
 eternal Spirit. 
 
 THE E NB 
 
DATE DUE 
 
 ^^g0m 
 
 m 
 
 
 
 \Wm*Vl|*'*Pi 
 
 f 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 CAYLORD 
 
 
 PRINTED IN US A. 
 
11 
 
 '■* 'T»