OF JUL 2 iges ^ 3X^14-8 .C8TT DISCOURSE, DELIVERED BEFORE THE GENERAL ASSOCIATION CONNECTICUT, AT 1T3 ANNUAL MKETINO, N c in - £) a tJ c n , I tt tt t , 18)0. BY NATHANIEL HEWITT, D.D. HARTFORD. PRINTED BY ELIHU GEER, 264 STATE -ST REET. Mnroxi.. D 1 S C OURSE. Era. iv. 3— 6. "Endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called In one hope of your calling ; One Lord, one faith, one baptism, One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all." The obvious meaning of this passage is the true one; and that is as if it read thus ; — " The religion of Christians is divine, and it is therefore one and the same in all of them. By means of il they coalesce in one mystical body. United in this celestial manner, whatever differences in other respects may appear among them, are to be borne with reciprocal meekness, always keeping in all tilings the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace." Each of the principal members of this paraphrase, in their order, will be particularly considered, and an application to this General Association will conclude the discourse. I. The religion of Christians) being divine, is one and the some in (ill of them. " One Lord, one Faith, one Baptism" only can be from heaven, in application effectual, and in result eternal. ]>y whomsoever this may be questioned, it will be at once admitted by those who contend not only that truth is the instrument of sanctification, bul also thai in no ease can tin-human soul be sanctified withoul it. Without admitting the necessity of the presence and perception of truth in every soul in order t<> its renewal, yet it is unquestionable thai the scriptures throughout .are so far from tolerating for ;i moment any other than the true religion, as instituted by God, and regulated by His word, that on the contrary there is no sin of man against which the Lord our God, who is a jealous God, more fiercely rages, than that of attempting to corrupt or supercede it, by the inventions and commandments of men. There are those who confess that the Christian religion is objectively one and the same, who, nevertheless, waver in their apprehensions as to its subjective identity in the souls of true believers. Truth, they admit, is uniform and fixed ; but as perceived by different persons, it is various ; and also that it is in the same person different at different times. That persons called Christians hold diverse and even opposite doctrines, and even true believers differ in many respects from each other, is lamentably true. But this is far from being the same with the supposition, that the truth itself is a different thing in different minds. For where the truth in a given instance is apprehended, the perception itself is a true one, otherwise the truth is not apprehended. There can be no subjective truth unless it corresponds to the objective truth. The notion that subjective religion may vary indefinitely and yet be true, or equivalent to the true, opens wide the door to libertinism ; and by denying that one and the same Lord, one and the same faith, one and the same baptism are essential in all cases, they are made of no importance in any. To prevent misapprehension of the point here stated, let it be distinctly understood that, a positive and uniform faith and practice, and that conformable to scripture, in all who pre recognized as Christians, does not exclude in believers a subsequent growth in grace and in the knowledge of God ; nor, by consequence, an inequality among them in respect to more or less of faith and holiness. Whilst all of them arc partakers of "like precious faith," some may be stronger than others, just as men, women and children have a common humanity, and in thai respect are alike, equal and entire. As to the essential articles of the gospel of Christ, fundamental to a true church, and indispensible to rightful membership in it, something- will he said in the sequel ; and its place here be supplied by a brief consideration of the manner in which this subject is oftentimes regarded. Some are opposed to all creeds or confessions of faith. Others tolerate them, if they are short and indefinite. Others receive them as articles of peace, or mere symbols of concord. Others again, as containing the substance or raw material of doctrine, to be wrought up at the will and pleasure of individuals. It is obvious that these several classes agree in the main as to one point, viz. that there is no fixed and definite body of revealed doctrine, the knowledge and belief of which is a test of character. What James Arminius directly aimed at 230 years ago, and failed to accomplish, has come to pass in our times, in effect if not in form. He wished to comprehend the whole Protestant world in one denomination, by excluding all creeds, save the recognition of the scriptures as a divine revelation, and the practice of the outward ordinances of the gospel, and the maintenance of good morals. He did not regard doctrinal points as indifferent, but he would leave every one to his own opinions, free to maintain them, provided he did not make any system of doctrine a test of Christian character and essential to salvation. When thoroughly sifted, and especially when their practice as an expounder of their real opinions is adverted to, it will appear, that so far as any test is used, except the wish of an admission to their fellowship, it is one relating to the disposition of men rather than to that of their faith. Moral qualities are deemed decisive of Christian character. For example — one affirms that he wishes to discover the truth and to do his duty, and he purposes to devote himself to the pursuit of wisdom and righteousness, adding that he holds the scriptures to be the word of God. Now according to the theoretical and practical principle of those who are opposed to creeds excepting in a loose and-general way, this person exhibits sufficient evidence of Christian character to be admitted to church-membership, and with few exceptions, so far as personal religion is concerned, even to the Christian ministry. If this be no1 so, how is it to be explained, that persons claim to be recognized as Christians and as Christian ministers, whilst they cither do not positively believe or do actually reject articles of faith held as vital principles by those of whom they demand the right hand of fellowship, and complain of them as oppressors and persecutors if their demand is denied ? On what other ground can this demand be made except on that of moral integrity, in sincerely holding his opinions, and in wishing and aiming to discover the truth? If the question was, whether men possess religious liberty and the rights of conscience, and are independent of all human authority in matters of religion, it is on all hands already settled. But that is not the case in hand. The demand is made, not of the right to think for themselves, but to be regarded and treated as Christians, let them think as they may, provided they are conscientious therein. That persons of this description are really indifferent ID doctrinal truth as a test of character, appears in another particular. In all past time as well as the present, men of lax faith and who have swerved from the severer principles of their age, or of that communion in which they were trained, have earnestly desired to maintain a good standing with those whose belief and practice they have renounced. How now can this course be justified, except on this general ground, that modes of faith are not a tesl of character ? For to hold fellowship with men of a false faith is more than to receive others as Christians with no faith at all, but only a determination to embrace one as soon as it can be found. In short, there is no medium between a fixed body of Christian doctrine and order, commensurate with the salvation of individuals and the integrity of the visible church as the pillar and ground of the truth, and a libertinism of principle and practice- more or less licentious, ending in infidelity. Those men then, who are tenacious of all that is held by them as scripture truth and duty, and who are rigid and uncompromising in their principles, are right in one point, if not in all. They have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, or what they verily believeto be such, in respect to person's. C;ill them mistaken as to their faith, if you will, and teach them the way of God more perfectly it* you can, but denounce them not as malignantS and persecutors. IF. // is by. means of their union in faith and obedience^ that Christians are united with each other. Having one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one Father, who is in them all, true believers coalesce in one body, being members one of another, and have one spirit. Being joint partakers of Christ, eating his ilesh and drinking his blood, they are ail one in him. Hence the church is fitly called the mystical body of Christ, " Being joined to the Lord, it is one spirit with him." The fellow ship of saints, is first with the Father and His Son Jesus Christ, and then one with another, as its natural consequence and effect. Without this previous union with Christ, there is no Christian union with each other, or with the church. New faith is the bond of union — the marriage-ring, with Christ : " Christ dwells in the heart by faith." This is the bond of union which when manifested brings all who have like precious faith together, making the society — the church of the faithful. The union of men resulting from their communion in the faith of Christ is irresista.ble and unavoidable. No true believer in Christ, when he discovers the like faith in another, can help loving him. Re what he may in other respects, Barbarian, Sythian, bond or free — a friend or an enemy before, ignorant or learned — a prince or a beggar — just so soon as the image of Christ appears in him, out goes his heart to him, and he cannot help it. The. outward manifestation of his love may by a thousand causes and occasions be prevented and restrained, but the inward affection is irrepressible. On the other hand, it is impossible for a true believer to receive and love as a brother in the Lord any one, who does not exhibit the faith of Christ. However respectable and amiable he maybe in other particulars, or however closely allied to him he may be by nature and all social and civil affinities, yet if he be not Christ's, or does not appear to be his, it is impossible to give him the heart of Christian fellowship, whatever he may do with his hand. For this faith there is — there can be — no substitute — no equivalent. It may be counterfeited, it ma}' be denied — it may be derided and trodden under foot ; but it has no equal. From this view of Christian fellowship, it is plain that true believers are not at liberty to make terms of union at their option. Men can associate for various purposes and with various persons at their option, and dissolve their societies at will. Not so with Christians. The church is the house of the living God — it is the body of Christ — it is the temple of the Holy Ghost — it is the pillar and ground of the truth. It is no contrivance of men, nor is it at their disposal. All who are made overseers in the church are not Lords of God's heritage. The} 7, are overseers to feed and cherish, not to work and drive. They are merely ministerial in their office, and can neither originate nor abrogate any thing. To come worthily to the communion of saints is not theirs to give, but to them for whom it is prepared of the Father. The truth of all this, is in a general way acknowedged for the most part, whilst it is virtually denied by many. To set forth the present state of the visible church even when it is in its best estate, and to assign the chief causes of its internal difficulties and its outward dangers, though it would be seasonable, and might be useful, is yet here and now impossible. A few observations only ean now be made ; and these, if not heard with candor, will be made in vain. The terms of church fellowship take their conditions from the point of light in which the church itself is regarded. According to scripture the final cause of the gospel and all its ordinances, is the salvation of souls from sin and death by bringing them to Christ by faith in time, and by vision in eternity. In this sense, the kingdom of Christ is not of this world. It is not meat or drink, but righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Ghost. Itcometh not with observation, but is internal; and terminates not here, in observation ; for we walk by faith, and live by faith, and die in and by faith. The redemption of Christ is not a temporal but an eternal redemption : for in the world the church is in tribulation — groaning and travailing in pain — waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our bodies. Where this view of the church is held, all its administrations of the word and ordinances, and its use of the keys, will be regulated by the one single principle mentioned — the salvation of souls from sin and death by bringing them to Christ, and building them up in him. Hrrc is the faith and pati&ice (/saints, and of them who keep (he commandments of God. On the other hand, where the church is regarded as an organ of this world's reformation, by which its temporal state is to be altered and elevated ; governments, laws, learning, agriculture, commerce, manufactures, manners and customs to be redeemed from the hands of wickedness, and the kingdom of Christ become the kingdom of this world, the terms of communion and modes of church. administration will take all those forms, u Inch in the judgment of church rulers and leaders, will best fit the gospel and its institutions to the regeneration of the world. Of course, the door is opened to the wisdom of men, to shape divine things now in this way, now in that, as occasion and policy may prescribe. Hence the 2 10 ministry no longer copies the example of* the apostles, who gave themselves continually to prmjer and the ministry of the word. They have something else to do. Pastors of churches give heed to other cares, than that of the flock, over which the Holy Ghost hath made them overseers. It would sound strangely in our ears, were a bare recital made of the various employments of professed ministers of the gospel. The apology for this desecration of the ministry is found in the supposed adaptation of all their devices to the world's conversion. Just so, as to the terms of fellow- ship in churches and in the ministry. Whoever is fitted for usefulness in the world, and makes a good member of civilized society, and especially if disposed to aid in reformation at home and elsewhere, and is willing to con- form to the external worship of the church, and wishes for admission to its communion, is by no small number regarded as worthy of it. Here let no one say, that by most of those to whom the foregoing observations nrc in any degree applicable, the spiritual and eternal nature and design of the gospel is as firmly held as by any others, and is by no means neglected. Be it so. Yet, let observation and experience decide, if the junction of temporal with spiritual — the mixing of secular with sacred, both in labours, expedients, and hopes, has not been at the expense of the latter, and resulted in putting the spiritual and eternal in subordination to the temporal. Specifications here might easily be made ; but that charity that hides a multitude of sins, imposes silence. The notion of a general purgation of the world, and its amendment as to all temporalities through the medium of the Christian religion, has some strong affinities, as to its particular effects, to the notion of an intermediate slate of purgation and amendment after death. This intermediate state either before or after death, separates the soul of man from eternity. The preacher for example, before whose mind is spread out a captivating prospect of temporal changes just now about to be realized, and which are to be 1 1 hastened by his agency, and these changes to be radiant with celestial glory, cannoi l>ut be dazzled by the lustre thereof'; and be detained and live fixed in them. Is he woi now separated from eternity? All that is eternal is removed from proximity and contact with his soul. Do you say thai it is an image of eternity? Be it so. As an image of God, separates from God and is idolatry, so an image of the celestial Jerusalem, the eternal city of God, here below separates from the spiritual and eternal, and is carnality. In the mind of the Papist, the force of divine and eternal things is repelled by the interposition of purgatory. That intermediate state makes a great gulph between them. Every form of an intermediate state of Christ's kingdom on earth, between his spiritual dominion by faith in the soul of man here, and his triumphant reign in body and soul in glory hereafter, makes a like separation and digs as broad and deem a gulph. The extension of the gospel to all nations, and the conversion of individuals to Christ, is a totally different thing from an universal or general conformation of nations to the spirit of pure Christianity, and the reign of universal plenty and comfort — refinement and love. Read the New Testament carefully, and with your eye on this question, and you will find Christ and the Apostles invariably connecting the present with eternity, and that eternity as just at hand. All the motives they urge come from eternity and return there. Time and earth and outward things are everywhere and always made momentary and contemptible — nay as insidious enemies — to he watehed against with ceaseless jealousy, to be resisted without intermission, and to be o\ . rcome and overcome unto death. In short, the true doctrine of Christ crucified, makes, when it takes effect, a double crucifixion — the true believer is by it "crucified unto the world and the world unto him." A mistaken philosophy also has led some persons to unscriptural views of the qualifications for church member- ship and the ministerial ollice. They suppose that there 12 remains in fallen man, a natural aptitude to gospel truth and o-race. Being thus susceptible, nothing more is necessary in order to bring sinners to Cfmst, than to present him and his benefits fairly before their minds. As there is a natural congruity, in the opinion of these persons, between the susceptibilities of man on the one hand, and the qualities of the gospel, on the other, to excite and to hold them ; just as soon as they come in contact, the attraction of affinity takes effect in cohesion, and union is consummated. The chief thing wanting, when the means of grace are adequately employed, to effect this mutual embrace of man and the Saviour, in any given case, is the attention of the sinner to the subject. A purpose to attend — a willingness to open the door for the admission of the truth, secures this condition ; and though the desired effect may not instantly follow, yet the process is begun, and if continued will certainly reach the desired termination. A profession of religion now answers two purposes — it secures attention and is an additional motive to continued attention. By this view of man's nature, a consent to attend to religion is substituted for its actual reception. Of those who embrace this erroneous scheme, some belong to the Calvinistic communion, and they reconcile it with the doctrines of depravity and grace as held by their brethren in the following manner. It is a constitutional property of man to seek his own happiness. This is the impulsive cause of all his voluntary actions both good and bad, for it is his susceptibility of pleasure and pain, which renders him an active and moveable being. This self-love, as it is a necessary and unavoidable element in every act, gives moral quality to none. As therefore a good man and a bad one are moved to action by the same impulse, viz. the pursuit of their happiness, the difference between them, is not in their persons, but in their actions, of which alone moral qualities are predicable. They have thus the doctrine of depravity, because they confess that mankind are guilty of depraved conduct — of total depravity, for 13 previous to repentance, they acknowledge that all the voluntary acts of man, arc contrary to the divine law, and thus all his actions being depraved, he is guilty of total depravity. They also confess that man himself is totally depraved; but in a. reflexive sense: his actions being depraved, and his actions being -his own, their moral qualities revert back to him, and he may in this sense be called a depraved man. But this is not the evangelical doctrine of the depravity of man. That doctrine is, that man himself is depraved, and hence his actions are depra- ved ; — "for who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean . ? " Besides, this exposition of total depravity excludes the doctrine of man's natural depravity — a cardinal point in the Calvinistic system ; and, it may be added in biblical theology. Nevertheless, the persons of whom we are speaking, scruple not to affirm, that man is depraved by nature. They use the word nature in a sense which enables them to say that man sins by nature without having a previous sinful nature. Their notion of self-love furnishes the solution of what, on the face of it at least seems like a contradiction — that man is a sinner by nature and yet has not a sinful nature. Self-love being a natural and blameless principle, and common to both sinful and holy actions, an4 freedom to act either way being also a natural attribute of man as a free and accountable agent, he may be said tq act naturally when he sins, and to be by nature a sinner and yet not have a sinful nature. This theory is simple and easily intelligible, and as its advocates claim, relieves the old doctrine of the depravity of man, of its most difficult and distressing point, viz. — that man is himself depraved. For if man's actions only are bad, he himself is blameless, except reflexively and in relation to his actions. In few words, man is a sinner in his actions and by them — not in and of himself. To prevent mistakes, by actions here are meant the internal purpose as well as the external deed. Accordingly in regeneration, no more is required than a 11 change of conduct — a reformation of life — not any ot himself. The change is in his actions, not in him. As a sinner he procured his happiness illegally, as a saint he does the same lawfully; of course he is the same both before and after regeneration, the alteration being in his mode of life, not in its principle and motive. The self-love scheme, or as it is sometimes called, the happiness system, logically carried out, results in a conclusion, from which many amongst us, who seem to favor that system, would doubtless revolt. " For if our own happiness, (I borrow here from another*) that is, the happiness of ourselves or of the species, be the sole object and rule of man, he needs no other. If any other rule is to be referred to, to guide us in our pursuit, then this rule, and not our own happiness, is our ultimate law ; and this law would have no validity except as the dictate of a supreme authority over man ; and that supreme authority is God : and thus obedience to God, and not benevolence to man, either to ourselves or to others is the criterion of our duty, and the essence of our perfection. But this would little suit the enlightened eudacmonist, who by his first maxim, necessarily excludes the idea of a divine revelation." In this vew of human nature, and of man's depravity, it is plain that a purpose to reform one's life, is the beginning of true holiness ; or regeneration. This purpose is elicited by shewing to man that his happiness is best promoted by obedience to God. All therefore that is needful to secure his regeneration — to elicit this purpose — is to present him the truth as to the pains of sin and the profits of holiness. Whatever secures this — secures his effectual reformation. If he now be willing to civehis continued attention to truth and the means of regeneration and sanctification the work is done as to his conversion ; and he ought to be forthwith admitted to the church as a disciple of Christ. The grace 'London Quarterly, March, 1840. American Edition. 15 of the Holy Spirit is acknowledged to be necessary to cllect this. Pelagius confessed there was a langour in man which required the exciting grace of Cod. But the work of the Spirit was to revive the native powers of man, not to infuse new vital principles. Hence the action of the Spirit was a divine moral suasion with him, not a new creation. In this way the doctrinal phraseology of Calvinism in the article of depravity and its immediate adjuncts is retained and employed, whilst its meaning and force are taken away. According to scripture and the faith of our received standards, depravity is a personal quality, derived from birth, and inherent in the soul, defiling the man and all his actions. In the intelligible and decisive figure employed by Christ — the tree is corrupt and cannot but bring forth corrupt fruit. The obvious sense of scripture as we read along from chapter to chapter and from book to book is that men themselves are corrupt, and all ther actual wickedness is ascribed to their personal depravity. In the brief and comprehensive saying — "The wicked will do wicJtedm" wc have the first truth as to this matter, that sinful actions proceed from sinful agents. Regeneration in like manner is personal, affecting the agent: a change in him — " Ye — must be born again." Men become " new creatures" not by reformation of life — but on the contrary, they lead a new life, because they have been made new creatures, " created in Christ Jesus unto good, works." — In a thousand forms this truth appears throughout the scriptures. And as to both points, the ordinary conceptions of the body of plain believers, accord with the obvious meaning of scripture. In all ages of the church pious men have felt and deplored their inward corruptions, and have prayed for internal sanctification. The writings of godly men, and the examples of scripture saints furnish us with boundless evidence that according to their bitter experience, there is " indwelling sin" in man, independent of his purposes and actions — "for when they would do good evil is present with them" and the "evil 16 which they would not that they do." " They find a law in their members, waring against the law of their minds, and bringing them into captivity to the law of sin, which is in their members." Whether Romans vii. 9 — 25, be applied to man before or after regeneration is immaterial to the point in hand, for in either case it is fatal to the self-love scheme, and to the notion of liberty of choice either way. That man is a depraved and ruined creature from his birth, and "by nature a child of wrath," is indeed most appalling ! Consternation and amazement impel us instinctively to turn away from its terrors, and to resist the conviction of its reality. If we draw nigh to explore it, reason reels, philosophy grows frantic, the spirit faints, and hope expires. Wretched men that we are! who shall deliver us from the body of this death ! No wonder that the doctrine of man's guilt and condemnation from his birth is the mognum scandahfin of the system which holds it, and of all who profess, proclaim and defend it. When traced to its origin in the fall of the first man, or when developed as to its malignity and vastness in the light of its remedy, by the crucifixion of the second man — the Lord from heaven, the wonders multiply — prodigy on prodigy ! To know these things as true, to feel them, so as they shall not be a savor of death unto death, transcends our powers. The Jew rages and exclaims — blasphemy ! The Greek mocks — and exclaims foolishness ! The called of God only — both Jews and Greeks are able to say — being strengthened thereunto with all might by the Spirit in the inner man — "We thus judge that if one died for all, then were all dead !" How acceptable now to the unsanctified mind of man, is the persuasion that his case as a sinner, though dangerous is not ruinous, having the means of escape in himself and at hand. For if that love of his own happiness, which has led him to sin, is adequate to lead him to repentance and holiness, then the way of life is as wide open as that of death, and he is as capable of the one as he has been liable to the other. This is 17 indeed a great light to them who before apprehended that they wen- in the region and shadow of death! No wonder that this cheering belief is bailed as glad tidings of great joy! How tenacious of it! how ready and earnest to defend it ! " All that a man hath will he give for his life." But we must hasten, and therefore proceed to notice the manner in which die doctrine of grace is disposed o£ . Recording to the evangelical system, that internal and inherent change wrought in man by divine power in regeneration, by which he is inclined and enabled to embrace the gospel with saving faith, is called grace because it is the tree gift of God's mercy, and the name of the cause is given to the effect. It is by the grace of God that sinners repent and believe the gospel. As this grace is not common to all, but the privilege of apart, it is rightly called special. J nis word grace, and the phrase special grace, are retained by those of whom we are speaking, but in a different sense from that just given them. As they explain grace, if they be not misunderstood, it is not a divine work in them, but an external work for them, and on this wise. God foreseeing by scicntia m<