WHAT IS CALVINISM?
OR THE
CONFE.SSION OF FAITH,
IN HARMONY WITH THE BIBLE AND
COMMON SENSE,
IN A SERIES oF
DIALOJUES BETWEEN A PRESBYTERIAN' 3.I,IST=i
AND A YOUNG CONVERT.
BY THRE 
REV. WILLIAM D. SMITH, D.D.
PHILADELPHIA:
PRESBYTERIAN BOARD OF PUBLICATION.
No. 1334 CHESTNUT S'REET




Entered according to Act of Congres in the year 1854, by
A. W. MITCHELL, M.D.
in the Office of the Clerk of the District Court ao the Eastern
District of Fennsvlvania.




INTRODUC TON.
There are two cause.s which exert a powerful influence in rendering unpopular those doctrines usually styled Calvinistic. One of them is radical, and
not to be removed by reason or argument. Its seat
is in the heart. It consists in a distaste for doctrines
which are so humiliating, and therefore repugnant
to our depraved nature. The only effectual remedy
is the grace of God. When, by the renewal of our
minds, we are brought fully and cordially to acquiesce in the Divine government, and to rejoice that
the " Lord God Omnipotent reigneth," the essential
elements of these doctrines will not only form a part
of our creed, but become the nourishment of our
souls and the source of our purest and most elevated
enjoyment.
The other cause alluded to is a misapprehension
of what these doctrines really are, as understood by
those who believe them. They are often rejected
on this ground even by pious men, who, relying upon
the representations of uncandid and prejudiced writers or speakers, are made to believe that they are
dishonourable to God, and therefore not only to be repudiated, but abhorred. There are not a few, whose
religious knowledge is small, that will scarcely listen
with patience to Calvinistic preachers, because of
the erroneous impression made upon their minds by
false and slanderous statements concerning their system of faith. And when they do hear them, and
find that no such odious doctrines are preached, they
sometimes charge them with hypocrisy in concealing
(iii)




iv iINTRODUCTION.
their reall s-entiionts.  To remove these r'e,~;.
and to enlighten the umindls of such, is an
object; and hence a work which states wit 9 or
and correctness what these doctrines are, as l1d by;.<
their advocates, which explains, proves, awd illw
trates them in a kind, lucid, and convincing manner,
and thus commends itself to the attention and confidence of its readers, is of great and permanent value.
The present volume we regard as such a book; and
we most cordially and earnestly recommend it to all
candid and sincere inquirers after truth. Upon plain
and unsophisticated minds, it can scarcely fail to
make a favourable impression. We commend it,
also, to the doubting, and even to the prejudiced (if
any such are willing to read it), believing that a
careful perusal of its contents will produce a bene
ficial result.
Dr. Smith had served the church as a pastor, as a
missionary among the Indians, as an editor of a religious paper, and as a teacher of youth. For two
or three years previous to his decease, which occurred
in the autumn of 1848, he was a professor in " Anderson's Collegiate Institute" at New Albany, Indiana, where his services were highly appreciated.
Only a few days before his death, the honorary degree of D. D. was conferred upon him by the trustees of his Alma Mater, Washington College, Pa. As
a preacher, he was eminently scriptural. His manners were plain and unaffected; his temper sweet and
equable; his conversation agreeable and edifying.
He was, in short, " an Israelite, indeed, in whom was
no guile." His departure from the world was peaceful and happy. Many tears were shed over his grave,
and his memory will be long embalmed in the affections of his numerous friends. Our prayer is that
this volume may perpetuate his name and his usefulness to many generations. It is worthy of a place
in every Christian family.       JAMES WooD.




INDEX.
PAOR
Introducti n.......  7
Misrepresentations of Calvinism.   13
Decrees of God.. 28
Decrees of God continued                       39
Election........ 49
Election continued.....                   62
Original Sin...15
Free Grace.......87
Good Works.......102
Inability.......   115
Free Will.......128
Effectual Calling......                 140
Sinless Perfection. 151
Sinless Perfection continued.                161
Perseverance.......174
Perseverance continued.   186
Admission to the Church.. 200
Church Government.             212
Bible Republicanism.....                22 
Bible Presbyterianism.             231
Primitive Presbyterianism. 241
Presbyterianism of the Reformers..  23
(v)








WHAT IS CALVINISM?
DIALOGUE I.
INTRODUCTION.
Convert.-I have called this evening to
converse with you on a subject, which has
of late occupied my mind very much. 1
have recently, as you are aware, through
divine grace, had my nmind very seriously
exercised on the subject of religion, and
now have hopes that I have experienced a
gracious change, and have become a child
of God —consequently, I have felt desirous
of connecting myself with some religious
society. As it was through the instrumentality of Presbyterian ministers I was
first led to see my lost condition, and ultimately to cast myself on Christ for salvation, I had a preference for that church.
But, I have been told, you believe such
dreadful doctrines, that I have been led to
doubt what would be duty.
(7)




8           INTRODUCTION.
3Minister.- What are the dreadfil doctrines, of our church, which make you
hesitate?
Con.-I have been told, you believe that
God, by an unchangeable and arbitrary
decree, has divided the human family into
two classes, elect and reprobate-that the
elect, he has, from eternity, decreed to
save, let them live as they may. No matter how ungodly, or careless they are, they
will all certainly be saved. But the reprobate class are created for the purpose
only of eternal damnation, which God has
so arbitrarily decreed, that no matter how
earnestly and diligently they may seek
salvation, they must be lost. These, with
a great many other similar doctrines, such
as infant damnation, &c., I have been told,
are the doctrines of the Presbyterian
church, to which I must give my assent
before I could be admitted as a menmber.
JaMin.-Did any member of our church
give you this representation of our faith
and practice?
(Yon.-No, sir. I had them from a neighbour, a member of the Methodist church,
who has manifested considerable interest
in my case, and expressed his regret that
I would even attend a church, where such
doctrines are held and taught.




INTRODUCTION.           9.Min. —Did you ever hear such doctrines
advanced in our church, by any one?
Con.-No, sir.
Ailin.-I believe no one has ever heard
such doctrines advanced by any Presbyterian; and I have often been surprised at
the pertinacity with which such misrepresentations are insisted upon, as being the
doctrines of our church. Indeed, I have
rarely heard or seen our doctrines stated
in their true light, by any of our opponents. They uniformly make some gross
misrepresentation of them, such as you
mention, and then hold up to odium and
ridicule, the creatures of their own misguided, or malignant fancies. It reminds
me very forcibly of the infidel, who, in
order to show his malignant hatred of the
Bible, sewed it up in the skin of an animal, and endeavoured to set his dogs on
it. So our doctrines are always dressed
up in something that does not belong to
them, before any attempt is made to excite
odium against them. These misrepresentations, moreover, are often made under
circumsfances which preclude all excuse
on the ground of ignorance.  A  few
weeks ago, in preaching a sermon which
involved the doctrine of innate depravity,
I took occasion to melntion the ground on
which we believed ir. the salvation of in



10          INTRODUCTION.
fants- that it was not because we believed
them holy, and without sin; but, because
we believed they were sinful, and would
be saved, through the imputed righteousness of Christ. A few days afterwards it
was told with a great deal of affected, pious horror, that I had preached the awful
doctrine of infant damnation.
Con.-Such things I know have been
done, and this led me, at first, to suspect
that the representations I had of your
doctrines were not true; but my neighbour gave me a book, which professes to
give extracts from your standard writers,
and the Confession of Faith of your
church, in which I find many things to
confirm his statements. It was this that
staggered me. I could not think that any
one would deliberately publish falsehoods;
and yet I could hardly believe, that such
dreadful doctrines as I find there stated,
were in reality the doctrines of your church;
and, as I had not access to the writings
froml which these extracts are said to be
taken, and as I wish to make up my mind
deliberately on the subject, and act intelligently, I wished to make known to you
mly difficulties, having confidence that they
would be met and treated in a spirit of
candour and triuth.




INTRODUCTION.         11
Jin. -I thank you for your confidence,
and hope you will find it has not been
misplaced. What is the book that your
neighbour gave you, in which you have
found those doctrines that you say have
been charged upon us?
Con.-It is a volunle of "Doctrinal
Tracts, published by order of the General
Conference" of the Methodist church.
Min.-Are you at liberty to let me examile it?
Con. —I presume so. I will hand it to
vou, and will call again to-morrow evening.
Min.-I will examine it; and, if I find
our doctrines truly stated, I hope I shall
be able to show very clearly, that they are
the doctrines of the Bible, and of common sense. I wish you to understand,
however, that we are not responsible for
every expression that may be found in the
writings of any individual, though we may
approve of his works in the main; and
he may be classed among our standard
writers.  It is only our Confession of
Faith that we adopt as a whole, as contalning the system of doctrines taught in
the Bible.
Con.-Some of the extracts are from
the Confession of Faith of your church.




12         INTRODUCTION.
Min.-Very well; all such I am bound
to defend, and hope to be able to show
you, that the Bible, the Confession of Faith,
and common sense, are in perfect accordance with each other.




DIALOG UE II.
MISREPRESENTATIONS OF CALVINISM.
Convert.-Since I saw you, I have'leen
examining, to some extent, the Confession
of Faith of your church, and find it corresponds with my own views of doctrine
in the main, though I find some things to
which I cannot fully subscribe. But, when
I look at the Scriptural references, I am
forced to believe they are taught in the
Bible, and am constrained to leave them,
as things I cannot understand. I do not,
however, find in it, except in one or two
places, anything like the representations
I have had of it from others, or the dreadful doctrines quoted in the book I gave
you. Have you examined it?
Minister.-I have given it a cursory examination, and have been very much surprised that such misrepresentations, and
dishonest and even false quotations, should
be put forth and palmed upon the community, under the sanction and by the au
thority of a church, that has the name of
be:ng evangelical. Had it been done by
2                    (13)




14 MISREPRESENTATIONS OF CALVINISM.
Universalists, or infidels, it would hardly
have been thought worthy of notice; but,
vwhen I see it is "published by order of the
General Conference" of the Methodist
church, I cann)t but regret, that that body
would sanction, by their authority and iniluence, the publication and wide circulation of a work, characterized by such an
entire want of candour and. honesty, and
containing so many palpable misstatements.
Con.-Are any of its quotations incorrect?
Min.-There is scarcely a single quotation correct, so far as I have been able to
examine it. The first is a quotation from
our Confession of Faith, chapter 3, which
I find on page 8. It pretends to quote the
language of the Confession, but it gives
nothing more than a small part of the language, so garbled as to give it an entirely
different meaning. The quotation is as
follows: "God from all eternity did uncnangeably ordain whatsoever comes to
pass."  Now, let me read the language of
the Confession: "God from all eternity
did, by the most wise and holy counsel of
his own will, freely and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass; yet so, as
thereby neither is God the author of sin;
nor is violence cffe] ed to the will of the




MISREPRESENTATICtN3 OF CALVINISM. 15
creatures; nor is the liberty or coutingency of second causes taken awav, but
rather established." I will, at another
time, enrdeavour to show you, that this is
the doctrine of the Bible, and of common
sense. At present, it will be sufficient to
say, that, as you perceive, whilst it asserts
God's wise and holy purpose respecting
"all things," yet it says, also, that he has
"so" ordained respecting them, that "he
is not the author of sin;" that it does not
offer any "violence" or constraint "to the
will of the creatures," and in a way that
"establishes," rather than takes away,
"the liberty, or contingency, of second
causes." So, you perceive, that when all
these saving clauses are taken away from
the language of the Confession, it has a
meaning entirely different from that which
is intended.
Con.-I perceive the quotation is exceedingly unfair and dishonest.
lMiin. —On the same page is another,
equally unfair, respecting the fir ally impenitent. It reads thus: "The rest of
mankind God was pleased, for the glory
of his sovereign power over his creatures,
to pass by and ordain them to dishonour
and wrath." Now, hear the language of
the Confession: "The rest of mankind,
God was pleased, according to the un



16 MISREPRESENTATIONS OF CAL'VINISM.
searchable counsel of his own will, where.
by he extendeth or withholdeth mercy as
he pleaseth, for the glory of his sovereign
power over his creatures, to pass by and
ordain them to dishonour and wrath for
their sin, to the praise of his glorious justice."  You perceive that here, also, the
language of the Confession is so garbled,
as to give it a different meaning altogether.
Whilst it asserts that God "passes by"
the finally impenitent part of mankind,'that is, he did not determine to save
them,) and " ordains them to dishonour and
wrath," yet it is "for their sin," and in a
manner that will redound "to the praise
of his glorious justice." But all this is
purposely left out of the quotation, with
the design of making it teach the dreadful
doctrine of eternal reprobation-that God
damns man from all eternity, without any
reference to his sin, or any reason except
his arbitrary decree.
Con. —It is surprising that such things
should be published as true, and circu
iated with so much confidence. The neigh
bour who gave me the book, said, that I
might depend on it as giving, truly, the
views of Presbyterians, and that he had
the best opportunity of knowing what
their vie.ws were, e.s he was brought up




MISREPRESENTATIONS OF CAI,\ IN ISM. 17
under Presbyterian instruction, and had
Deen taught the catechism in his youth.
flfin.-As an evidence that he was either
unacquainted with the catechism, or with
the contents of the book, I will refer you
to another quotation, which I find on page
195. It professes to be from the "Asselmbly's Catechism, chapter 5." Now, as you
say you have been looking a little at the
Confession of Faith, you have perceived
that the catechisms are not divided into
chapters; and, where to find the fifth chapter of the Assembly's catechism, we will
have to ask " the General Conference," by
whose order the book has been published,
who should have known, at least, that
there were chapters in the catechism, before they referred us to one of them. But
you will, perhaps, be surprised to learn,
that there are not only no chapters in the
catechism, but no such language as is
quoted. The quotation is as follows: " The
almighty power of God extends itself to
the first fall, and all other sins of angels
and men." Now, there is no such language, or anything like it, anywhere in
either of our catechisms, nor is there anything anywhere in the Confession, to afford the least ground for a sentiment so
grossly blasphemous as this is made to be,
in the connection in which it staids. It
2*




18 MISREPRESENTATIONS OF CALVINISM.
is:n Tract number 8, entitled, "A  Dialogue between a Predestinarian and his
Friend," in which the Predestinarian is
represented as speaking the language of
Calvinists, to prove that God impels men
to sin; and, then, this quotation is given,
to prove that our catechism teaches, that
God's almighty power is exerted in cornpelling men to sin. On page 194, is another quotation of the same kind, professing to be from the "Assenlbly's Catechism,
chapter 3." But the third chapter of the
catechism will be as difficult to find as the
fifth.
Con.-But, is there not something, in
some other part of the Confession, to give
a semblance of truth to the quotation?
MJin.-Chapter 5, section 4, of the Confession, thus speaks of God's providence:
1" The almighty power, unsearchable wisdom, and infinite goodness of God, so far
manifest themselves in his pl ovidence, that
it extendeth itself even to the first fall, and
dll other sins of angels and men; and that,
not by a bare permission, but such as hath
joined with it a most wise and powerful
bounding, and otherwise ordering and governing them, in a manifold dispensation,
tc his own holy ends, yet so as the sinfulness thereof proceedeth only from the;reature, an I not from  God, who, being




ITSREPRESENTATIONS OF C.LVINISM. 19
most holy and righteous, neither is, nor
can be, the author, or approver of sin."
Now, if this was the passage that was
intended by the quotation, it is as dishonest as if thev had made the Confession
speak the language of Aristotle. The
passage, as you perceive, speaks of the
"almighty power" of God, as exercised
in his universal providence, restraining
and governing the sinful actions "of men
and angels," and overruling them for good,
by a " wise and powerful bounding." And
who but an atheist will deny this? It is
so plain a doctrine of common sense, that
I need hardly stay to reason about it; and
it is found on almost every page of the
Bible. The wickedness of Satan, in se..
ducing our first parents, as well as their
sin, have been, by his " almighty power,
unsearchable wisdom and goodness," overruled for good, and "governed to his own
holy ends."  So, also, the wickedness of
Satan in the case of Job, as well as the
sins of the betrayer and crucifiers of the
Saviour.
Con. —It is certainly a plain dictate of
common sense, as well as of the Bible,
that God overrules all things, and governs
the wicked, as well as the righteous. The
Psalmist says, in one place, that he makes
the wrath of man to praise him, and the




o0  MISREPRESENTATlINS OF CALVINISM.
remainder of their wrath he restrains
And I was struck with the conciseness
and beauty of the language of the Confession, in stating this important doctrine.
But, that any one would so garble the
passage, as to make it teach the doctrine
that God's "almighty power" is exerted
in compelling men to sin, is very strange.
But, I observed, that the book gives quotations from  Calvin, Twisse, Zuinglius,
Toplady, and others. Are these quotations
equally incorrect?
VJlin.-I have not examined any of the
writers quoted, but Calvin and Toplady.
But, I find the quotations from these, are
of the same character with those from the
Confession of Faith. On page 8, I find R
reference to Calvin's Institutes, chapter
21, section 1. Calvin's Institutes consists
of four books, and these books are divided
into chapters and sections. As the particular book is not referred to in the quotation, I suppose it must be the third that
is intended, as none of the others contain
twenty-one chapters. I have examined
chapter 21, sec(tion 1, of book 3, and call
find no such language as is quoted, nor
anything like it. And, lest there might
be a typographical error in the reference,
I examined sections 2 and 3, of the same
chapter, and section 1 of every other chap



MISREPRESENTATIONS cF CALVINISM. 21
ter in tile whole work, and can find nothing of the kind. On page 97, there is
another reference to Calvin's Institutes,
chap. 18, sec. 1. As the particular book
is not referred to, I have examined chap.
18, and sec. 1, of books 1, 3, and 4, the
only ones containing 18 chapters, and can
find no language of the kind; and am led
to believe, that there is no such language
in the whole work. The quotation is as
follows: "I say, that by the ordination
and will of God, Adam fell. God would
have him to fall. Man is blinded by the
will and commandment of God. We refer the causes of hardening us to God.
The highest, or remote causes of hardening, is the will of God." Book Ist, chap.
18, treats of the manner in which " God
uses the agency of the impious, and inclines their minds to execute his judgmnents, yet without the least stain to his
perfect purity" —and, though Calvil uses
some expressions that I would prefer to
have expressed differently, yet zno such
language as the quotation, or anything
bearing its import, is to be found.
C(on.-Could you find none of the quotations  referred to?
Min. —On page 194, I find a reference
to " Calvin's Institutes, Book 1, chap. 16,
se. 3," in the follewing language: "No



22 MISREPRESENTATIONS OF C ALVINISM,
thing is more absurd than to think any.
thing at all is done but by the ordinationi
of God." In the place cited, there is n(,
such language, or anything like it; but, in
sec. 8, I find Calvin speaking of Augustine, who, he says, "shows that men are
subject to the providence of God, and governed by it, assuming as a principle, that
nothing could be more absurd than for
anything to happen independently of the
ordination of God, because it would happen at random."  I presume this was the
passage intended, but you perceive the
exceeding unfairness of the quotation.
Calvin is speaking of God's providence,
which overrules and directs everything,
and quotes approvingly the sentiments of
Augustine, that nothing happens at random, as if God had no purpose respecting
it. But the quotation makes Calvin teach,
that God had so ordained all things, that
he is the author of sin.,
Another quotation, equally unfair, I find
on the same page; and here, for the first
time, 1 find the reference correct, though
the language is garbled and misrepresente&. It is in Book 1, chap. 16, sec. 8.
The quotation is as follows: "Every-aetion and motion of every creature, is so
governed by the hidden counsel of God,
that nothing can come to pass but what




MISREPRESENTATIONS OF CALVINISM. 23
was ordained by him." This is made to
appy-to —tI-a:efti-ois of men, which would
be unfair, even if the language were quoted
correctly; for Calvin is speaking of God's
providence over his irrational creatures,
and arguing against "infidels who transfer
the government of the world -from God to
the stars;" and adds, as encouragement to
Christians under God's government, "that
in the creatures there is no erratic power,
action or motion, but that they are so governed by the secret counsel of God, that
nothing can happen but what is subject to
his knowledge and decreed by his will."
So you perceive, -that- the language is not
only widely different from the quotation,
but it is on another subject altogether.
On page 176, I find a reference to Toplady's work on Predestination, and the
following sentiment given as his: "The
sum of all is this: One in twenty, suppose
of mankind, are elected; nineteen in
twenty are reprobated. The elect shall be
saved, do what they will. The reprobate
shall be damned, do what they can." Then
follow some garbled extracts from  Mr.
Toplady's work; and an attempt is made,
by distorting their meaning, to prove, by
inference, that such is his meaning. I
need scarcely tell you, that neither Mr.
Toplady, nor alny other Calvinistic writer,




24 MISREPRESENTATIONS OF CALVINISM.
ever penned such a sentiment. It is a
gratuitous forgery. The history of it is
this: Mr. Toplady published a work on
Predestination, which, though it contained
unguarded expressions, proved the doctrine so clearly, that Arminians felt it war,
dangerous to their system. To bring it
into disrepute, Mr. John Wesley published
a pretended abridgment of it, which was,
in fact, only a gross caricature of the
work; and yet he put Mr. Toplady's name
to it, as if it was the genuine work. To
his garbled extracts, he added interpolations of his own, to give them a different
meaning, and then closed the whole with
the following sentiment: " The sum of all
is this: One in twenty, suppose of mankind, are elected; nineteen in twenty are
reprobated. The elect shall be saved, do
what they will: the reprobate shall be
damned, do what they can. Reader, believe this, or be damned. Witness my
hand. A. T." Every word of this was
a forgery of his own. And yet, he affixes
the initials of Mr. Toplady's name, with
a "witness my hand," to make his readers believe that it was, in reality, Mr. T.'s
language. You will find this, with other
facts in the case, stated at large, in Mr.
Toplady's letter to Mr. Wesley on the subject, appended to a later edition of his




MISREPRESENTATIONS OF CALVINISM. 2E
work. Such facts need no comment. lThe
tract in which I find the sentiment again
ascribed to  Mr. Toplady, was evidently
written with a design to screen Mr. Wesley.
But such things cannot be excused, in any
way, to hide their dishonesty, when the
facts are known.
Con.-Is this the character of the quotations generally?
NMin.-So far as I have examined, they
are generally of this character. I have
marked ten or twelve more, which you
can examine for yourself, so far as Calvin's
Institutes are concerned. I have not, at
present, an opportunity of examining the
other works quoted; but, from the character of their authors, I must believe they
are as grossly misrepresented as Calvin,
Toplady, and the Confession of Faith.*
* What I have said of the " Doctrinal Tracts," has
occasioned some surprise. Some have even doubted
its truth. They think it hardly possible, that the
Methodist Church would be guilty of publishing
such misrepresentations. If the reader will take
the trouble to examine the " Doctrinal Tracts," (the
edition published in New York in 1850,) he will find
the quotations true to the letter. And he will find,
also, that the one half of their enormities has not
been exposed. Witness the following, on page 169:
" This doctrine (Predestination) represents our Blessed Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God
the Father, full of grace and truth, as a hypocrite, a
3




26  MISREPRESENTATIONS OF CALVINISM.
But, be that as it may, we are not respinsible for the opinions of either of them.,
and are therefore not bound to defend
them. But, as it respects the Confession
of Faith, the case is different. For all its
doctrines we are responsible.
Con. —I would be glad if my mind could
be relieved of the difficulty under which
it labours, respecting some of those doctrines. I am at a loss to reconcile the expressions that " God has foreordained whatsoever comes to pass," and " yet so that he
is not the author of sin," &c.
deceiver of the people, a man void of sincerity."
And page 170: " It represents the most holy God as
worse than the devil, as both more false, more cruel,
and more unjust." And again. page 172: "One
might say to our adversary, the devil,' thou fool, why
dost thou roar about any longer? Thy lying in wait
for souls, is as needless and useless as our preaching.
Hearest thou not that God hath taken thy work out
of thy hands?  And that he doeth it much more
effectually? * * Thou temptest; He forceth us to be
damned. * * *  Hearest thou not that God is the
devouring lion, the destroyer of souls, the murderer
of men?' " &c. And page 173: "0 how would the
enemy of God and man, rejoice to hear that these
things are so! * * * How would Le lift up his voice
and say,  * *' Flee from the face of this God, or
ye shall utterly perish. * * * Ye cannot flee from an
omnipresent Almighty tyrant. * * * Sing, O hell.
* * *  Let all the sons of bell shout for jcy,' " &c.
Perhaps I owe an apology to the reader fox quoting
such langulag,:




MISREPRESENTA'IONS OF CALVINISM. 27
Min. —I think them perfectly reconeilable on the plain principles of common
sense. But we had perhaps better defer
this subject until to-morrow evening.
Con.-I will be glad to embrace the opportunity, at any time you may have leisure.
[It is proper to state that the author of this book
is indebted to a sermon of the Rev. A. G. FAIRCHILD,
D. D., entitled "The Unpopular Doctrines of the
Bible," for many of the arguments and illustrations
in the following Dialogues on the " Decrees of God,'
and " Election."]




DIALOGUE III.
DECREES OF GOD.
Minister.-I think you mentioned, in
our last conversation, that one difficulty
under which your mind laboured respecting the doctrine of divine decrees, was,
that it necessarily made God the author
of sin.
Convert.-Yes, sir. I cannot see if God
has, "from all eternity, foreordained whatsoever comes to pass," without any exception, how it can be that he is not the
author of all evil as well as good.
AJin.-The doctrine is not without its
difficulties; and, though some of these
may be removed by a proper understanding of it, yet when we attempt to follow
it out in all its consequences, as with everything else revealed respecting Jehovah,
we come to a point at which we are compelled to stop; and, we must, with the
docility of children, receive what is told
us, though we cannot comprehend it. The
doctrine, however, to a certain extent, is
very simple and plain All admit that
(28)




DECREES OF GOD.         29
God is the author and disposer (ir all
things. Nothing takes place except by
his agency or permission; or, in other
words, nothing can take place, except
what he does, or permits to be done. The
Bible represents his overruling Providence
as extending to all events, however small;
the fall of a sparrow, or the loss of a hair.
He rules the wicked, as well as the righteous; and his restraining hand is over all
in such a way, that it does not infringe
upon human liberty. If this were not the
case, you perceive, it would be useless for
us to pray that God would restrain the
wicked in their designs against the Church,
or in any other respect; and, indeed, it
would close the mouth of prayer almost
entirely, to believe God either could not,
or did not govern all things, both great
and small. Now, though sin is hateful to
God, it constantly takes place in his government; and, it is atheism to say, he
could not prevent it; for he is not God, if
he cannot govern the world. We must.
therefore, conclude, he permits it, foi rasons unknown to us.
Con. —That is very plain.  To say he
could not govern and overrule all things,
according to his pleasure, would deprive
him of his character as infinite; and, to
say that he refuses to do it, and leaves the




30          DECREES OF GOD.
world to manage itself, is not only con
trary to the Bible, but is foolishly absurd.
But, what connection has this with the
doctrine of decrees?.Min.-God, in his providence, fulfills his
decrees; or, as the Bible expresses it,
"what his hand and counsel determined
before to be done"-Acts iv. 28. Hence,
our catechism says, that "God executeth
his decrees in the works of creation and
providence." His providence and decrees
are co-extensive; that is, what he does, or
permits to be done, in his providence, he
always designed to do or permit in his
purpose. This is as plain a proposition as
the other, and equally consistent with common sense. When he created the world,
lie of course did it from design; that is,
he did not do it by chance, but he designed to make the world just as he did
make it. Now, when did he form that
design? Did he form the design of creating the world, just at the time it was done,
or had he it before? If the design was
formed then, he is subject to form new desjgns, and is therefore changeable; for, it
must have been, that he saw some reason
for creating a world which he did not set
before, or some motive operated which
did not before. He must have become
more v ise. vn )re mighty, or benevolent, or




DECREES OF GOD.        31
hlave seen something in a new light, which
induced him to adopt the new design of
creating the world. But this, you perceive, is blasphemy; for it would make
him both finite and changeable. Then,
we are driven to the conclusion, that he
must have had the design from eternity.
Now, the same reasoning, applied to anything he does in creation or providence,
will issue in the very same conclusions.
If he convert a sinner to-day, he does it
from design. But, when did he form the
design? Here, you perceive, we run into
the same necessity of concluding that the
design was eternal, as in the case of the
creation of the world. The same is true
with regard to what he permits. He permitted our first parents to fall. Ie permitted Judas to betray tlie Saviour. He
permitted persecution tc arise in the
C(hurch, under Popery, &c. Did he not
know our first parents would fall, when he
created them? This, all admit. If, then,
he knew they would fall, he determined
to permit them; that is, he determined
not to prevent them; and, it's in this
sense, I use the term permission. Then,
if he knew from eternity they would fall,
he determined, or decreed, from eternity,
to permit them. So with all sin which he
sees fi't not to prevent. He knew from




32          DECREES OF GOD
eternity it wouild take place. and dlcreed
from eternity to permit it. So wie must
either admit that what God does or perinits to be done, he always designed to (lo
or permit —or deny the perfections of his
character.
C(on.-But is this permission a decree!
Min.-It is as much a decree as anything else. To decree, is nothing more
than to determine beforehand, or to fore-.
ordain; and, to resolve, or determine to
do or permit anything, is to decree it in
that sense. The word decree, in the sense
in which it is used in the Bible, and theology, signifies, "to determine the certainty of a future event, by positive agency
or permission." That which is determined
to be done, is decreed; and that which is
determined to *be permitted, is also decreed, when there is power to prevent it;
because, when it is known, certainly, that
it will be done unless prevented, and there
is a determination not to prevent it, it is
rendered as certain as if it were decreed
to be done by positive agency. In the
one case, the event is rendered certain by
agency put forth; and, in the other case,
it is rendered equally certain by agency
withheld. It is an unchangeable decree
in both cases. The sins of Judas, and the
crucifiers of the Saviour, were as un



DECREES OF GOD.         33
changeablx decreed, permissively, as the
coming of the Saviour into the world was
decreed positively. From this you can
perceive the consistency of the Confession
of Faith with common sense, when it says,
that "God from all eternity did, by the
most wise and holy counsel of his own
will, freely and unchangeably, foreordain
whatsoever comes to pass," &c. You per
ceive, also, that this is clearly reconcilable
with the following sentiment, that "he is
not the author of sin." &c.
Con.-Still, however, as God is the author of all, and the originator of the plan,
does it not still make him the author of
sin, in a certain sense?
Min.-His being the author of the plan,
does not make him the author of the sin
that enters into his plan, though he saw
fit not to prevent it. Perhaps I can make
this point, and some others connected with
it, more plain by an illustration.
Suppose to yourself a neighbour who
keeps a distillery or dram shop, which is a
nuisance to all around-neighbours collecting, drinking, and fighting on the Sabbath, with consequent misery and distress
in families, &c. Suppose, further, that I
am endowed with certain foreknowledge,
and can see, with absolute certainty, a
chain of events, in connection with a plan




Q4         DECREES OF' GOD,
of operations which I have in view, for
the good of that neigghbourhood. I see
that by preaching there, I will be made
the instrument of the conversion, and
consequent reformation, of the owner of
the distillery, and I therefore determine
to go. Now, in so doing, I positively decree the reformation of the man; that is,
I determine to do what renders his reformation certain, and I fulfill my decree
by positive agency. But, in looking a
little further in the chain of events, I discover, with the same absolute certainty,
that his drunken customers will be filled
with wrath, and much sin will be committed, in venting their malice upon him and
me. They will not only curse and blaspheme God and religion, but they will
even burn his house, and attempt to burn
mine. Now, you perceive, that this evil,
which enters into my plan, is not chargeable upon me at all, though I am the au.
thor of the plan which, in its operations,
I know will produce it. Hence, it is plain,
that any intelligent being may set on foot
a plan, and carry it out, in which he knows,
with absolute certainty, that evil will enter,
and yet he is not the author of the evil, or
chargeable with it in any way.
Con.-But, if he have the power to pre



DECI. EES OF GOD.       a5
vent the evil, and do not, is he not chargeable with it?
lJin.-In the case supposed, if I had
power to prevent the evil, yet I might see
lit to permit it, and yet not be chargeable
with it. Suppose I had power to prevent
those wicked men from  burning their
ueighbouir's house; yet, in looking a little
furthlr in the chain of events, I discover,
that if they be permitted, they will take
his life; and, I see, moreover, that if his
life be spared, he will now be as notorious
for good as he was for evil, and will prove
a rich blessing to the neighbourhood and
society. I, therefore, permit them to do
as they please. They, consequently, burn
his house, and come with the design of
burning mine; but, I have things arranged,
to have them arrested and confined in
prison, whereby they will be prevented
from taking their neighbour's life, which
they otherwise would, and he is spared for
the great good of the community. Therefore, upon the whole plan, I determine to
act; and, in so doing, I positively decree
the reformation of that man, and, the consequent good; and, I permissively decree
the wicked actions of the others; yet, it
is very plain, that I am not, in any way,
chargeable with their sins. Now, in one
or other of these ways, God "has foreo.




36          DECREES OF GOD.
darned whatsoever comes to pass."  This,
as you know, is the simple language of
our catechism, which has been so long
and loudly proclaimed as the doctrine of
fatality; worse than infidelity; originating in hell, &c.
Con.-The distinction  you make between positive and permissive decrees, relieves my mind entirely; and, I do not see
how anything else can be believed by any
one who believes in the sovereignty of
~God, as the author and ruler of the universe. And, if this be the doctrine of
your church on the subject, it is surprising
that such gross misrepresentations of it
are so industriously circulated, by professing Christians. They surely do not understand it. Is this view of it given
plainly in the Confession of Faith?
Min. —I have never seen it stated in any
other work so clearly and concisely, as it
is in the Confession of Faith. Chap. 3,
sec. 1, which asserts the doctrine of decrees, says expressly, that God has "so"
decreed all things, that he is " not the author of sin, nor is violence offered to the
will of the creatures, nor is the liberty or
contingency of second causes taken away,
but rather established." Chapter 5, section 4, thus speaks: " The almighty power,
ansearchable wisdom, and infinite good



DECREES OF GOD.         87
ness of God, so far manifest themselves
in his providence, that it extendeth itself
to the first fall, and all other sins of men
and angels, and that, not by a bare permission, but such as hath joined with it a
most wise and powerful bounding, and
otherwise ordering and governing of them,
in a manifold dispensation, to his own holy
ends, yet so as the sinfulness thereof proceedeth only from the creature, and not
from God, who, being most holy and
righteous, neither is nor can be the author
or approver of sin." Here, you perceive,
the view I gave is stated in as plain language as could be used. But, further,
chap. 6, sec. 1: "Our first parents, being
seduced by the subtlety and temptation of
Satan, sirned in eating the forbidden fruit.
This, their sin, God was pleased, according
to his wise and holy counsel, to permit,
having purposed to order it for his own
glory." So, you perceive, this plain common sense doctrine is the doctrine of the
Confession of Faith. It now only remains for me to show, that it is the doctrine of the Bible; for, however reasonable it may appear, if it be not found there,
I will give it up.
Con.-I will be glad to avail myself of
further instruction on this point, at another time. I have an engagement this
4




38         DECREES OF GOD.
evening, that renders it necessary for me
to deny myself the pleasure now. Be wre
I leave, however, there is one objection
which has arisen in my mind, which I
would be glad to have removed. If God
permitted evil to come into the world, in
order that he might overrule it for good,
is not that doing evil that good may come?
JMin.-I have not said, nor does either
the Confession of Faith, or the Bible say,
that God permitted evil in order to overrule it for good. We know nothing but
the simple facts, that he permitted it, and
has overruled it for good; but, whether
that was his reason or not, he has not seen
fit to tell us; and, therefore, it is not our
place to inquire; and, if men would not
wish to be wise above what is written,
there would be less controversy and difference of opinion.




DIALOGUE IV.
DECREES OF GOD.
Convert.-In our last'conversati( in, I understood from some of your remarks, that
there is an inseparable connection between
God's decrees and foreknowledge. Yet, I
find the Confession of Faith says, in chapter 3, section 2, that " he hath not decreed
anything because he foresaw it as future,
or as that which would come to pass upon
such conditions."
Minister.-You will observe that the
Confession only says, that he did not decree anything because he foresaw it-that
is, his foreknowledge is not the ground,
or cause of his decrees; still, they are inseparably connected. His decrees are not
dependent upon his foreknowledge, nor
identical with it; but his foreknowledge
is rather dependent upon his decrees,
though perfectly distinct from them.
In the case of the distiller, mentioned
in our last conversation as all illus-Cation,
how could I know certainly that I would
go to that neighbourhood to preach, if I
(;39)




o0          DECREES OF GOD.
had not determined to go? If rr.y purpose
to go were in any degree unsettled or undetermined, I could not know certainly
that I would go. But, if I had determined
to go, then I would know it certainly.
So if God knew that he would create the
world, it was because he had determined
to do it. If his purpose were unsettled,
or if he had not cbme to the determination to do it, he could not know it certainly. But if he had his purpose fixed,
then he knew it certainly. It is i.n this
sense that the decrees of God and his
foreknowledge are inseparably connected.
Con.-I understand it, I think, now,
perfectly, and must confess that the doctrine of decrees, in all its parts, seems to
me so reasonable and plain, that I am surprised, more and more, at the virulent opposition which many professors of religion manifest against it. I find, too, from
looking at the scriptural references in the
Confession of Faith, that it is abundantly
sustained by tile Bible.
JMin. —Thbt passages quoted in the Confession, are but a few of the many with
which the Scriptures abound. Indeed, the
doctrine is so interwoven through all the
promises, calls, threatenings, and instructions of the Bible, that to take it away,
would malr q e whole. But did you notice




DECREES OF G( D.       41
tLe pecaliar force of the language oif tlhe
Bible on this point? One of the passages
quoted, is Eph. i. 11 —" In whom, (Christ)
also we have obtained an inheritance, being
predestinated according to the purpose of
him who worketh all things after the
counsel of his own will." This is stronger
language than can be found anywhere in
our standards. Here is a "predestination,"
a "purpose," and a "counsel" of God,
"according" to which he "worketh all
things."  Peter, in his first epistle, i. 20speaking of Christ, says he was "verily
foreordained before the foundation of the
world." Now it is admitted on all hands,
that God had, in the counsels of eternity,
decreed to send the Saviour for the redenmption of fallen man; but how could
that be, if the fall of man was uncertain?
In Acts iv. 27, 28, we read thus: "Of a
truth, against thy holy child Jesus, whom
thou hast anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles and people
of Israel, were gathered together, to do
whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determlined before to be done."  Now can
any one say, that the death of Christ was
an uncertain event in the purpose of God?
He knew certainly, that they would assemble to take away his life, and he had
decreed to peimit it; and thus it was fixed
4*




42         DECREES OF GOD.
apon as certain, without the smallest pos.
sibility of mistake, with the wise and al
-mighty disposer of all events.
Con.-Then are we to conclude that
Judas and his accomplices could not have
acted otherwise?
Min.-That does not necessarily follow
from the absolute certainty of their course.
They could have acted otherwise, if they
would. A man has power to do that which
it is absolutely certain he will not do, and
to refrain from doing that which it is absolutely certain he will do. Had the Saviour called "twelve legions of angels,"
which he said he could have done, and
overcome the band that came against him
with Judas, or forcibly prevented them in
any other way; or if he had impelled them
against their will to do as they did, they
could not have acted freely. But he left
them to fulfil his purpose, in doing as
their wicked inclinations prompted them.
Hence, Peter charges them with the crime,
whilst at the same time he declares that
they acted according to the purpose of
God. Acts ii. 23 —" Hii   being delivered
by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by
wicked hands have crucified and slain."
From this you -an perceive that the Confession of Faith speaks the language of the




DECREES OF GOD.        43
Bible and of common sense, when it says,
that God has so decreed all things, that
"no violence is offered to the will of the
creatures, nor is tlhe liberty or contingency
of second causes taken away, but rather
established."
(Con. —But if Cod thus brings good out
of evil, and the wicked actions of men are
all thus overruled for his glory, why are
wicked men punished?.Min.-This is the very objection that
the apostle meets, in Rom. iii. 5 —" If our
unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Is God
unrighteous who taketh vengeance?  (I
speak as a man)"-that is, he speaks the
language of a common objection, which
men might be likely to make, and no
doubt did make, then as well as now.
But how does he answer' it?  "God forbid; for, then how shall God judge the
world?" The same objection he meets in
the 9th chapter and 19th verse: "Thou
wilt then say unto me, Why doth he yet
find fault; for who hath resisted his will?"
And what is his answer? "Nay, but O
man, who art thou that repliest agairns
God'!"  This would be sufficient; but I
may add, that an action being overruled
for good. cannot, in the smallest degree,
lessen its r1imainality. In the case I have




44          DECREES O0' GOD.
already supposed, my determination  to
overrule for good the wickedness of tLose
men in burning their neighbour's house,
and attempting to burn mine, could not,
in any degree, lessen the criminality of
their actions. So you perceive, that God
can still "judge the world" in righteousness, as Paul asserts, though he overrules
sin to his own glory, and for a greater
good.
There are hundreds of other passages
in the Bible equally as plain as those I
have mentioned. Isa. xlvi. 10-" I am
God, and there is none like me, declaring
the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet
done, saying, my counsel shall stand, and
I will do all my pleasure."  Paul, in Acts
xvii. 26, says, God "hbath made of one
blood all nations of men, for to dwell on
all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the
bounds of their habitation." I shall cite
but one passage more, though I might
produce a hundred. Joseph's brethren
were, like the crucifiers of the Saviour,
very guilty in selling their brother into
Egypt; but he tells them plainly, Gen. I.
20-"As for you, ye meant it for evil
against me, but God meant it unto good,
to bring to pass, as it is this day, to save




DECREES OF GOD.         45
much people alive."  Now can anything
be plainer, than that God intentionally
permitted the selling of Joseph for important reasons, and had decreed so to do, as
well as to direct his future course,? Now I
would ask any candid man, whether the
Confession of Faith pushes the doctrine
of decrees further than the Bible? —or,
whether common sense can find any other
system of doctrine, consistent with the
character of God?
Con.-My mind is perfectly satisfied that
the doctrine of the Confession is both
reasonable and scriptural. But I have a
difficulty still, with regard to some of its
consequences. If all things are so certainly arranged in the purposes of God,
what encouragement have we to pray?
JIiin.-We have infinitely more encouragement to pray, than if events depended
upon creatures, or were suspended in uncertainty. God has so arranged all events,
that every effectual fervent prayer of the
righteous shall be fulfilled, and that without resorting to miracle, or interfering
with his other purposes. But take away
the doctrine, and we have no encouragement to pray, that I can conceive of. You
ask God to convert a sinner, but if the
matter be not in his hands, and is left to
charnce, or the sinner's o-wn natural inclih



46          DECREES OF GOD.
nations, you pray in vain. God cannot
interfere for fear of destroying firee agency.
Thus you perceive, that if God be not the
sovereign disposer of all events, the mouth
of prayer is closed. But if it be a part of
his plan, certainly to answer every prayer
of faith, then we can come to him with
confidence and great encouragement.
Con.-But does it not discourage the use
of means?
Min.-In the illustration I gave of the
distiller, did my determinations and arrangements in my plan, discourage the use
of the means in carrying it out? It embraced all the means of its accomplishment; and the arrangements of the plan
were the ground of encouragement for the
use of the means. So of God's plan. It
embraces all the means of its accomplishment; ai.d when we engage in his service,
in the use of his prescribed means, we
have the great encouragement of knowing
that it is by these he has determined to
accomplish his great work.
Con. —It is to be regretted that this doctrine is by so many misunderstood. Would
At not have been better for the framers of
the Confession of Faith, to have been a
little more guarded, and inot to have used
language that was so liable to be mlsunierstood and perverted?




DECREES OF GOD.        47
Alin.-I know not what they could have
done more than they have, without departing from Scripture truth. The Confession is easily understood by any one
rwho wishes to understand it. We mav as
well say, why did not the writers of the
Bible use other language?  There are
hundreds of passages in the Bible just as
strong as any used in the Confessloln.
Why did Paul say, " predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh
all things?9" &c. Why did he not leave
out the whole of the first chapter to the
Ephesians, and the eighth and ninth to the
Romans? Indeed I believe if the framers
of the Confession had taken verbatim
some passages of Scripture, it could not
have lessened the opposition. Jude says,
there were certain men " who were befole,
of old, ordained to this condemnation."
Now if the framers of the Confession had
taken that language as it stands, without
inserting the words " for their sin," vxiat
would our enemies have said?
Con.-I believe it is best to follow the
Bible, regardless of the opinions of men;
and I believe the truth will ultimately ccrnmend itself to all intelligent minds. I
would be glad to have some further conversation with you on some other doctrines whclh I find it difficult to under.



48         DECREES OF GOD.
stand, if it would not be trespassing too
much upon your time.
Min.-I will be glad to give you all t.fle
information I can, and will be at leisure
to-morrow evening, when we will take up
the doctrine of election, as it is intimately
connected with the doctrine of decrees.




DIALOGUE V.
ELECTION.
Converet.-Since our last conversation, 1
have been examining the Confession Of
Faith, and have been not a little surprised
that I cannot find the terms reprobate, and
reprobation, anywhere used.  I thought
they were used in contradistinction to the
terms elect and election.
JMinister. —They are not used in our
standards, I believe, anywhere, though
uniformly charged upon us, as an epithet
by which to excite odium. I have been
the more surprised at this, because they
are Scripture terms; and I would have no
objection to use them in the sense in which
the Bible uses them. They mean, not approved, or chosen; and if in this sense
applied to the finally impenitent, their use
would be proper. But the enemies of the
doctrine of election have coined a new
meaning for the words, and then charge
jus with using them, with their meaning.
The doctrinal tracts of the Methodist
church, which we examined some time
5                    (49)




50             ELECTION.
ago, ring their changes upon " e'ection
and reprobation," as if scarcely anything
else were in our standards; whereas, reprobation, in the sense in which they use it,
is neither part nor consequence of the doctrine of election.
Con.-The idea I have had of the common meaning of the term reprobation, is,
that God made a part of mankind merely
to damn them; and that he has, by his
decree respecting them, made it impossible for them to be saved, let them do what
they may; and that this is a necessary
consequence of the doctrine of election,
and so necessarily connected with it, that
they must stand or fall together.
Min.-I know this is the common mis-,resentation, but such sentinients are nowhere to be found iln our Confession of
Faith, or in ally of our standlard writers;
and only exist ill the iniaginations and,;ritings of errorists, who scarcely ever
oppose the truth without mnisrepresentation. Election has nothing to do with the
damnation of a sinogle siiner. It is God's
purpose of love and nmercy, embracino in
itself the means and agencies for carrying
it out. It embraces no decree or purpose
that hinders anly one from coming to Christ
and being saved, if they would. There is
nothing that hiln(leis their salvation but




ELECTION.            51
their own aversion to holiness, and their
love of sin; and it is for this, thbat God has
purposed to damn themn
C(on.-What then is the doctrine of
election, as held by the Presbyterian
church?
Min.-The best definition I can give of
it, is contained in the answer to the 30th
question in our Larger Catechism: "God
doth not leave all men to perish in the estate of sin and misery, into which they
fell by the breach of the first covenant,
commonly called the covenant of works;
but of his mere love and mercy, delivereth
his elect out of it, and bringeth them into
an estate of salvation, by the second coveDant, commonly called the covenant of
grace." Now one simple question will
determine the truth of this, on the plain
principles of common sense. Does God
save all men out of their estate of sin and
misery, or does he leave some to perish in
their sin, as they choose? If he saves all
mell "through the sanctification of the
Spirit and belief of the truth," then the
doctrine of election is not true; but if he
does not, then it is true.
C(on. —It is very plain, that he does not
save all men; but does he not offer salvation to all nlen?
Nlin.-Certainly. But do you suppose




52            ELECTION.
that r cthing more is necessary foi salvation than to offer it?
Con.-By no means. I believe if God
would leave men with a mere offer of salvation, not one would ever accept of it.
At least I judge so from my own experience. I fully believe, if he had not come
with the influences of his Spirit, I should
have listened carelessly to the calls of
the Gospel, until death would have sealed
my doom for ever; and I feel that I cannot be too thankful for his unspeakable
mercy.
JMin.-You believe then, that salvation
is entirely of God; or as the apostle expresses it, he is "the author and finisher
of our faith;" and that he has done a
work in this respect for you, which he has
not done for your unconverted neighbour.
But do you suppose it was on account of
anything naturally good in yourself, that
he made the difference?
Con. —I can take no praise to myself.
I was running the same course with my
wicked companions; and in some respects
1 believe I was the most wicked of all. I
know and feel that it is all of grace, and
can truly say, it is "by the grace of God
I am what I am."
JMin.-Your experience in this respect,
comrrs;pondds with the language of Scrip.




ELECTION.           53
ture, 1st Cor. iv. 7 —" Who maketh thee
to differ from another; an I what hast
thou, that; thou didst not receive?" Eph.
ii. 1 —" You hath he quickened, who were
dead in trespasses and sins." John i. 13
-" Which were born, not of blood, nor
of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of
man, but of God."  Tit. iii. 5-" Not by
works of righteousness which we have
done, but according to his mercy he saved
us, by the washing of regeneration, and
the renewing of the Holy Ghost." Indeed
the Bible everywhere ascribes salvation eltirely to God; and I have never yet been
able to find a true Christian wilo felt he
had any ground of boasting, as being in
any sense, or in any degree, the author of
his own regeneration. But as you ascribe
the work entirely to God, do you suppose
he intended your regeneration and conversion, whe i he came in mercy by his
Spirit; or was it accidentally done, without any gracious design towards you?
Con.-I can hardly suppose you serious
in asking such a question.
Jllin. —It does imply an absurdity. A
nlan who acts without design, or purpose,
is accounted foolish; and it would be both
absurd and impious, to impute anything
of the kind to God. But I proposed the
question preparatory to another. If God
5*




54            ELECTION.
acted with a gracious design in thus chang
iug your heart, when did he form that design? Do you suppose he conceived a
gracious purpose towards you at the time,
or had he it previously? And if he had
it previously, when was it first formed?
Con.-It must have been eternal, for he
cannot have any new designs. With him
there cannot be any succession of time.
Tie is "from everlasting to everlasting;"
and as his existence is eternal, and "his
understanding infinite," all his designs and
purposes must be eternal. And when I
think of his "gracious thoughts" towards
me, and attempt to trace them to their
fountain, I find myself lost in eternity..Jlin.-You have now expressed everything that is intended and embraced in the
doctrine of election. It is simply grace
traced to its eternal source. It is the design or purpose of God, to accomplish
that work of grace in the heart, which believers experience in regeneration, and to
carrv it on to perfection and glory. Now
the simple question is, Did he purpose to
accomplish this work of grace in the hearts
of all men? This no man of common
sense can believe. So you perceive, we
must either deny the doctrine of regeneration and sanctification by grace, or admit the d octrine of election. Those who




ELEMCloN.            55
pretend to relieve that salvation is entirely
by the grace of God, and yet deny the
doctrine of election, can lay but few claims
either to consistency, or common sense.
Con.-But does not the believer do
something it: his own conversion?
Jlin.-The action of the mind in believing and turning to God, is the believer's
own work; that is, he believes. God does
not believe for him. But this is the fruit
of regeneration; and they are so intimately and inseparably connected that
persons do not always distinguish between
them. They are, however, clearly distinct.
Breathing is the result of life, and always
inseparably connected with it. A person
must live in order to breathe, yet breathing is the operation of life, not life itself.
So in spiritual life. Regeneration is the
giving of life; and holy exercises are the
operations or action of a "quickened"
soul. Your own experience will perhaps
be the best illustration of the fact. Though
convinced of sin, and dreading its consequences, you felt a strong disinclination to
give yourself to God, on the terms of the
Gospel; but you were afterwards brought
to see its beauty, and its perfect adaptedness to your case. It was the same Gospel,
and the same Saviour, who had been
offered before, but you seemed to view




56            ELECTION.
them in a new light. You, ini short, felt
your views of God and religion chang'ed,
in a way that led you to desire and seek
what you formerly disliked and slighted.
Now it is this change of views and feel.
ings, that is called regeneration, and is
the work of God; and the exercises of
love, faith, and hope, and the action of
giving yourself to God, consequent upon
your change of feelings, is conversion.
Now it is admitted on all hands, that you
acted freely, and felt that you were exercising and doing those things yourself;
but the question is, Did you change your
own feelings? This you have said, and
the Bible everywhere declares, is the work
of God. In doing it he accomplished a
gracious design, which he had toward you
from eternity; and that gracious design
was your election. Hence it is sometimes
called personal election, because God has
the same gracious design toward each inlividual whom he calls.
Con. —It is surely a doctrine that is calculated to excite gratitude in the heart of
a Christian; but does it not show partiality in God, in doing more for some than
others?.Alin.-God distinguishes, it is true, but
he is not partial; for partiality means a
preferring one before alrother, without




ELECTION.            57
sufficient reasons, or overlooking just
claims, If any of the human family could
claim anything at the hand of God, there
would be cause of complaint, that some
were passed by in his purpose of mercy.
But when all equally deserve hell, if he
see fit to save some, for a display of his
mercy, and leave others to the fate they
choose, for a display of his justice, though
the former have great ground of gratitude,
the others have no cause of complaint.
Suppose the monarch of some mighty
empire hears that some province of his
dominions has rebelled. Having no pleasure in their death, he sends them an offer
of pardon upon consistent terms, and they
all refuse to accept it. Still inclined to
mercy, he sends out ambassadors, who use
every entreaty with the rebels, but in vain.
They call their monarch a tyrant, and persist in their wicked rebellion. The compassionate monarch, still unwilling to give
them up, goes among them himself; and
by his own personal influence, prevails on
a greater part of them to accept his proposals of pardon. But as such signal ob-.
stinacy ought not to go unpunished, he
executes the sentence of the law on the
rest. Thus the greater part are reconciled,
and the rest are punished. Now whlo




68            ELECTION.
could accuse the monarch of partiality, or
blame his course?
But vary the case a little. Suppose this
monarch has foreknowledge, and can
clearly foresee the rebellion long before it
takes place. He reasons with himself
thus: "I see that some years hence, part
of my kingdom will rebel. WVell, I wvill
send them a proposal of pardon. But I
know they will all reject it. I will then
send special messengers to explain to them
their danger, and the honourable manner
in which I wish to save them, and to use
every entreaty to bring them back to their
allegiance. But I see they will reject all.
I will then go myself, and prevail on the
greater part of thenl to accept my offer,
and will punish the remainder as ensamples to my whole empire. But seeing that
my proclamation and my messengers will
effect nothing, shall I omit to send them?
No, I will send them to convince all of
my sincerity in offering pardon and mercy;
to show what obstinacy existed in the
hearts of the rebels; and to convince all
of the wisdom, justice, and mercy of my
pl)ceedings."
Now can we find any more reason to
blame the monarch, because his determinations were formed previously to the
rebellion? Can we condemnn him for tak



ELECTION.            59
ing the course he ought to have taken, if
his purposes had not been formled until
the time? Was he partial in determining
to make a public example of' some of the
rejecters of his mercy? Can any one say
that his determination  to  save some,
wroneed the others? Did his decree to save
some, fix the condition of the others, so
that it was impossible for them to accept
his offer of pardon? They fixed their
condition themselves. They were "ordained to wrath and dishonour for their
sins."  But will any one blame him  for
not constraining all to accept his offer?
This were to allow him no room for the
exercise of discretion. Or will any one
say he ought not to have used his influence to persuade any, but left all alike?
Then there would have been no objects
upon whom to exercise mercy.
Now though we cannot find an illustration that will exactly, in all points; meet
the case, yet I have, I believe, in this, exhibited our view of election in every material point, and you can easily make the
application of it in your own mind to God,
as the sovereign of the universe, and this
world a rebellious province.  God in infinite mercy, has offered pardon to the
rebels of Adam's race, through his Son.
HIis language is,' Whos )ever will, let him




60            ELECTION.
come."  But all refuse; and if left to
themselves, every individual of mankind
will reject the offer, and everlastingly perish. Christ would have died in vain, and
there could be no trophies of his mercy.
But God determined that this should not
be the case.  He sends his Spirit, and
sweetly constrains them to yield, in a man
ner that will for ever redound to the praise
of his mercy and grace. What proportion
of the human family he has included in
nis purpose of mercy, we are not informed;
but, in view of the future days of prosperity
promised to the church, it may be inferred that the greater part will, at last, be
found among the number of the elect of
God. But although the number is unknown to us, it is "certain" and "definite" with God; so that he cannot be disappointed, either in finding among them
one whom he did not expect, or in losing
one he purposed to save. This is what
our Confession of Faith means, and all it
means, in saying that the number is so'" certain and definite, that it cannot be
increased or diminished."
I have now, I think, shown you that
the doctrine of election is in every point,
a plain dictate of common sense. I wish
also to show you that it must be true,




ELECTION.              61
from the. character of God and the Bible.
But our conversation has been sufficiently
protracted at this time.  Call when you
have leisure, and we will plrrsue the sub.
ject further, inl the lgt ct God's word.
8




iA] AL(G TE VI.
ELECTION.
Convert.-Since our last conversation, I
have been reflecting on the views you presented, and am  constrained to acknowledge, that I can find no other doctrine
consistent with facts, the character of God,
and the Bible. It is a fact that must be
conceded, that God is the author of regeneration; and this once conceded, the
doctrine of election must be true, or we
at once deny his character as infinite. But
still there are some consequences of the
doctrine, which seem to me irreconcilable
iwith  God's goodness and  sincerity, in
offering pardon to sinners. Does it not
iender it necessary that some must be lost,
and some must be saved?
Minister.-Y-ou fail to distinguish between necessity and certainty. If you
were to say, it renders it certain that some
will be lost, and some will be saved, then
you have the true issue; but this, you perceive, alters the case materially. There
is no necessity placed upon the impenitent
(62)




ELECTTON.            63
to refuse the offers of the Gospel, though
God knows certainly they will. But even
that certainty does not flow fromn the doctrine of election. Take away the doctrine,
and see if the case will be any better.
Will any be saved without election, that
will not be saved with it? If you take
away God's special purpose to save, every
sinner of Adam's race will most certainly
perish.
Con.-But still it seems that God cannot be sincere in offering salvation to all
men, when it is certain that some will not
accept it.
Min.-If he had formed no purpose to
save any, and offered salvation to all,
knowing they would refuse, could he be
sincere?
Con.-Certainly; for if they would accept, they would be saved. Besides, he
might offer, knowing certainly they would
refuse, to show his willingness to save, and
the justice of their condemnation.
/VYin.-You have now answered the objection; for God's purpose to save some,
does not affect, in any point, the light in
which he stands to the rest, or the relation
in which they stand to hinm. They are left
just as they were; and still, if they would
accept his offer, they would infallibly be
saved; and It is just as much their duty




64            ELECTION.
to repent and be saved, as if he aad elected
none.
Con.-But will the doctrine not discourage the use of means, and making exertions to obtain salvation?
Min.-To whom can it be discouraging?
Surely not to ministers of the Gospel.
When Paul was preaching at Corinth, he
was discouraged until God preached to
him the doctrine of election. In the midst
of his discouragement, how cheering it
must have been to be told of God, "Be
not afraid, but speak, * * for I have much
people in this city."-Acts xviii. 10. Now
here we have election from the mouth of
God; and what could be more encouraging than to be thus informed, that God intended to convert a number of that wicked
city through the instrumentality of his
preaching?  Now you will observe, God
did not tell Paul he had all the city, nor
how many. It was enough for Paul to
know he had some. He could then go
forward, confident of success. Take from
me the doctrine of election, and I have
not the least hope of success. But when
I know that God has determined to save
a vast number of the human family in
every age, "by the foolishness of preaching," I can go forward in the use of his
appointe. means w ith confident hope




ELEC'TION.           65
Neither can it be discouneaql,ig to sinhers. It is the sinner's only hope. Take
it away, and despair must shroud the whole
race of Adam. But the sinner can now
come to God, trusting in his special purpose of mercy, feeling that his help is laid
upon one who is mighty to save, and who
will irfallibly save every one who comes
to him through Christ. I know the doctrine sometimes makes careless sinners
uneasy, and wicked men uniformly hate
it. But what does that amount to? Simply
this. They refuse mercy, and wickedly
reject God's grace; and knowing that they
cannot be saved in sin, and being unwilling to repent, they hate the whole system
of grace. But if any one truly desires
salvation, and wishes to turn from sin, he'finds in the doctrine of election the richest encouragernent. Would it not be encouraging to the people of Corinth, to
know that God had purposed to convert a
nlumber of them, and make them trophies
of the cross? But is the doctrine discouraging to the praying Christian? He acknowledges the truth of it every time he
prays that God would convert sinners, and
butild up his Church. And it is the fact,
that God has promised to give this. world
to his Son, and gather the vast multitude
of his elect from every nation, that is his




66            ELECTICN.
only encouragement to pray. I have, indeed, sometimes wondered what encouragement those have to pray, who denoy the
doctrine. If it be not true that the wolrk
is God's, and he has purposed to carry it
(on, why need any one pray? If the work
be left to the decisions of sinners, or to
chance, the proper course would be to pray
to those who have the work to do. It is
foolishly absurd, as well as impious, to
deny that the work is God's, and then pray
that he would do it. So you perceive it is
tile denial of the doctrine, that discourages prayer. But what encouragement it
affords, to know that God has purposed to
carry on this glorious work, until the
blessed religion of Jesus shall triumph
over the whole world, and has declared,
too, that it will be done, in answer to the
earnest prayers of his people.
Con.-I see much depends upon a righlt
understanding of the doctrine. But still,
is it not calculated to do harnm?
JMin.-lIow can it do harm? We have
seen that it contains the only ground of
hope to the minister as well as the sinner.
Vho was a more zealous advocate for the
doctrine than Paul?  There is no modern
writer who states the doctrine so plainly,
or in so forcible language; and yet who
was rlore zealoui and indefatigable in l-a



ELECTION.            67
hours? And the reason is plain. I-Ic
knew that God had determined to save a
great many in the world, and had placed
the instrumentality in his hands. This,
with love to his Master, constituted the
glorious motive that actuated him in all
his labours. Can it do harm for a minister to believe that God, the Father, has
promised the Saviour "a seed," which
shall surely be gathered, as the glorious
reward of his sufferings? and that his is
the important work, so far as instrumentality is concerned, of gathering this promised seed to the Saviour? Could there'be any higher motive placed before the
mind of a true lover of the Lord Jesus
Christ? Or can it do harm to preach this
doctrine as a motive to Christian effort, or
as an inducement for sinners to believe?
When a sinner is told that there is nothing
on the part of God to keep him away;
that there is nothing but his own unwillingness and hatred of God, that stands in
the way of his acceptance; and that if he
wvill only give himself to God, on the
terms of the Gospel, he will be among
those whom God has purposed to save; he
>eas the greatest encouragement that can
be given, to look to God for grace, and
pray that he may be included in the num.
Ieor of his chosen.




68             ELECTION.
But I grant there is one way'., w;hich
these doctrines are the occasion (I. ilarm.
When our enemies misrepre:cItd them,
and endeavo r to make people believe
that we rmake God the author of sin; that
we deny free agency, and the use of means;
and loudly proclaim  that our doctrine' came from hell, and leads to hell;" and
that, "according to our belief, sinners may
rest secure, the elect must be saved, and
the rest must be damned, do what they
may," &c., people will take occasion to
say, "if so large, respectable, and upright
a class of Christians, believe a doctrine
which is pronounced'worse than infidelitv,' there is no truth in religion."  In this
way the doctrine is the occasion of much
harm. But because others wickedly "turn
the truth of God into a lie," must we,
therefore, give it up?  We may as well
say that Christ should not have preached
concerning "his kingdom," because he
was wickedly misrepreselted as claiming
an earthly crown.
(Con.-I know such assertions are often
made; and I could not but wonder that such
awful doctrines were believed by a class
of Christians that seemed so generally
pious and upright in their deportment, and
at the same time so zealous in the cause
of Christ. I found them as a body, gene



ELECTION.            69
rally, the most liberal in sustaining the
cause of benevolence, and making at least
ftal as many sacrifices and efforts for the
spread of the Gospel, as any others.
JMin.-Let us now attend to some direct,
proofs of the doctrine of election; and I
would remark that it must be true, in the
first place, from the character of God and
his promises.
Laying aside the thousand other promises he has made on this subject to his
church and people, I will only mention the
reward promised to the Saviour. Would
Christ suffer and die on an uncertainty?
Would the Father subject his Son to all
the infinite load of wrath which he bore
for sinners, without any certain prospect
of an adequate result? And if he himself
had not made it certain, how could it be
certain? If it were placed in any other
hands but his, it could not be certain.
Let us for a moment suppose that God
has not positively determined to bring any
one to Christ; and where is the certainty
that any will come?
Con.-In that case it would be certtain
that none would come..lAiin. —Then you perceive we are at once
driver to the conclusion that he determined to "make them willing," or there
could le no certainty that the Saviour




70            ELECTION.
should "see of the travail of his soul, ana
be satisfied."  We might reason in the
same way respecting all the attributes of
God. It is inconsistent with any one of
them to deny his special purpose of mercy.
But enough has been said, in the light of
reason. Let us examine the Bible, arid
see if it teaches the doctrine; for however
reasonable it may appear, if it be not
plainly taught there, we nmust give it up.
Eph. i. 4 —" 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;" and that his
meaning might be the more plain, he adds
in the 5th verse, "Having predestinated
us unto the adoption of children, by Jesus
Christ, to himself, according to the good
pleasure of his will." And in the 11th
verse of the same chapter, he says, "In
whom also we have obtained all inheritance, being predestinated according to the
purpose of him who worketh all things
after the counsel of his own will." Does
not this look like the doctrine of election? 
But again, Rom. viii. 28-" We know that
all things work together for good, to
them that love God; to them who are the
called, according to his purpose."  "For,
whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the inlgce of




ELECTION.            71
his Son. * * Moreover, whom he did
predestinate, them he also called, and whom
lie called, them he also justified, and whom
he justified, them he also glorified." Now
if the doctrine of election be not true, we
may safely challenge any man to tell us
what the apostle means by such language.
But in 2 Thess. ii. 11-13, he uses still
l-tronger language: "And for this cause,
God shall send them strong delusion that
they should believe a lie, that they all
might be damned, who believed not the
truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness." Is the language of our Confession
stronger than this, when it says, they were
" ordained to wrath and dishonour for
their sins."  People may call this reprobation, or give it any other opprobrious
epithet, and say, "it originated in hell,"
&c.; but there it is in the language of
Paul, much more strongly expressed than
in our Confession. But in the very next
verse, we have the doctrine of election,
expressed in language equally strong:
"But 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."  He expresses the sarne sentiment in: language equally explicit, in his




72            ELECTION.
2d epistle to Timothy, i. 9-" God hath
saved us, and called us with an holy call.
lng, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace,
which was given us in Christ Jesus, before
the world began." Such is the language
of Paul on the doctrine of election; and
any person is at liberty to weigh our Confession of Faith in this balance.
But let us see what our Saviour himself
says on this point. John vi. 36 —"All
that the Father giveth me shall come to
me, and him that cometh to me I will in
no wise cast out."  Here he first states
God's special purpose of mercy, in giving
him a seed to serve him, and the certainty
of their coming; and then adds the encouragement it affords for sinners to believe. He, it seems, did not think the
doctrine discouraging. Those that the
"'Father gave him," he calls his sheepJohn x. 27-" 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 hands. My Father, who
gave them me, is greater than all, and
ione is able to pluck them out of my
Father's hands."  And in allusion to the
Gentiles, who had not yet had the Gospel
preached to them, he says, in the 16th:




ELECTION.            73
verse, "Other sheep I have, which are net
of this fold; them also I must bring, and
they shall hear my voice." If this does
not express a special purpose of mercy
towards all those that shall be eventually
gathered in, language has no meaning.
But finally, he tells us of a day in which
he will preach the doctrine to the assembled universe, amidst the awful grandeur
of the judgment, and with a voice more
awfully impressive than ten thousand thunders. Matt. xxiv. 31-" And he shall send
his angels, with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his
elect from the four winds." And in the
25th chapter, and 34th verse, he tells us
how he will address them: " Come ye
blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom
prepared for you from the foundation of
the world." And to the others who, as
Paul expresses it, "had pleasure in unrighteousness," he will say, "Depart ye
cursed into everlasting fire, prepared for
the devil and his angels." Thus his pur'pose of mercy will be fulfilled in a manner worthy of it, and of himself; and his
urpose of judgment, too, respecting the
finally impenitent, will be fulfilled in a
manner that will for ever vindicate him
from the charge of partiality.
Con.-It will certainly be a granc' and
7




74           ElLECTION.
glorious winding up of a scheme, equally
grand and glorious; and I think it will
then be acknowledged that the whole plan
was laid in eternal and infinite wisdom
and love, and executed in infinite grace
and glory. I begin to see now the beauty
and consistency of the Calvinistic scheme,
because it is the scheme of the Bible.
Those doctrines I find are justly styled the
"' doctrines of grace," and I would like to
examine with you some more of the prominent points of this scheme, if I have not
already consumed too much of your time.
JMin.-I consider my time well spent in
vindicating the truth from the aspersions
of its enemies. I shall be pleased at any
time to examine with you any other doctrine of our Confession, about which you
have any difficulty.
Con.-There are some things about the
doctrine of total depravity, that I cannot
fully understand. I have no doubt as to
the fact; but how we are held responsible
for Adanm's sin, presents a difficulty to my
mind.
Min.-We will take up that sublject at
our next i!:terview.




DIALOGUE VII
ORIGINAL SIN.
Minister.-In our last conver;ation y. n
mentioned a difficulty under  hich your
mind laboured, respecting the doctrine of
hereditary depravity; but I think you
stated that you had no difficulty as to the
fact that all mankind are depraved.
Convert.-Judging from the exhibitions
of human nature, as they are seen on the
general face of society, I do not see how
any one can deny the fact. Looking at
these exhibitions, under any circumstances
yet found in the world, it seems to me
that any reflecting mind must be convinced  that mankind are, by nature,
" wholly inclined to sin," as I find it expressed in the Confession of Faith.
M/in.-Your sentiments accord with the
language of the Bible, which gives a much
stronger picture of the state of man by
nature, than our Confession. Paul in the
first and third chapters of his epistle to
the Romans, states it at length, in as
strong language as can be used; and in
(75)




76e          ORIGINAL SIN.
hundreds of other places, we find man.
kind spoken of as being "in the gall of
bitterness and bonds of iniquity." Gen.
vi. 5-" God saw that the wickedness of
iman was great on the earth, and that every
imagination of the thoughts of his heart
was only evil continually." Gen. viii. 21
— " The imagination of man's heart is evil
from his youth." But I need not multi.
ply proofs of a fact which, as you say, is
proved by every day's observation.
The simple fact of the universal wickedin.ess of mankind, has always proved a
great difficulty with those who deny the
doctrine of innate depravity. Some have
attempted to account for it, from the influence of example —that men are wicked,
because they are surrounded with a bad
influence. But whence the universal bad
example? This is endeavouring to account for a fact, by referring to the fact
itself; and is about as wise as to say that
men are wicked because they are wicked.
Others have said that it is an abuse of
their freedom of will. But why the universal abuse of free will?  It is admitted
onll all hands, that the will is free. But
why does it uniformly choose evil? There
must be some cause that operates in inclining the will to act as it does. This
meth,,d of accounting for the fact, is, if




ORIGINAL SIN.         7't
possible, more absurd than the other, and
is about as consistent with common sense,
as to account for the changes of the wind,
by the turnings of a weathercock.
Con. —I do not see how we can avoid
the conclusion that there is in man an innate propensity inclining him to evil.
Min.-The next step, then, is to inquire
whence, and upon what principles came
this propensity to evil. If this world be
inhabited by a depraved intelligence, how
came it to be so? Man was not so created. The evil cannot be imputed to
God. The fault must be in man himself.
"God made man upright, but they have
sought out many inventions," is what the
Bible tells us on this point, and to this
statement we must all assent. It is ad.
mitted, too, on all hands, I believe, that
some how, in consequence of the fall of
our first parents, all the evil found in the
world has been entailed upon their posterity; but the principles upon which this
is to be accounted for, is a point much
controverted, and about which you say
your mind labours.
Some say that there was nlot any legal
connection between Adam and his posterity, and that they had no concern whatever with his sin, but that the present
state of r mnkind is to be accounted for on
7*




78          ORIGINAL SIN.
the simple principle of transmission. As
a tree propagates its kind, so the posterity
of Adam naturally inherit his nature.
The advocates of this doctrine express
great abhorrence at the idea of being held
in any way legally responsible for the sin
of Adam; and represent it as highly tyrannical in God, to hold us responsible for
a sin committed so long before we were
born. But they forget that they are quarreling with an admitted fact in the governinent of God. They admit that all evil is
entailed upon us, in consequence of Adam's
sin, and yet deny that we had any concern with it whatever. Now what could
Ie more tyrannical than this? In the government and providence of God, we are
visited with all the tremendous consequences and dreadful evils of a sin, with
which we had no concern whatever. If
we had no concern with his sin, it is certainly the highest injustice and tyranny to
visit us with any of its consequences.
tHow much more consistent with the character of God, and with common sense, to
admit the simple fact as it is expressed in
our catechism, that we "sinned in him,
and fell with him."
Con. —But how could we sin in him.
Min. —Upon the simple principle of
-epresentation, which enters into all God's




ORIGINAL SIN.          79
dealings with us. It is easy to understand
how a man acts through a representative,
or agent. And who would ever think of
calling it injustice or tyranny, to hold a
person responsible for the actions of his
agent, or representative? The people of
a State act in and through their representatives in the Legislature. If they make
wholesome laws, the people, with themselves, reap the benefit; and if they make
unjust and oppressive laws, the people,
equally with themselves, are involved in
the evil consequences; and in this way
the people become liable to all the evils
resulting from  such mal-administration.
It is in this way, upon the principle of
representation, that we all "sinned in
Adam, and fell with him," and became.
liable to all the consequences of his sin,
equally with himself. This is the sense
in which the term "guilt" is used in our
Confession. We are not guilty of Adam's
sin personally, but liable to punishment
on account of it; and it is in this way that
we say his sin is imputed to us; that is
it is set to our account.
Con.-But is not this doctrine liable to
objection, on the ground that we had nothing to do with his appointment as our
representative?
Miri.- Under the circumstances, it was




80          ORIGINAL SIN.
impossible that we could select our vn i
agent to act for us; but the simple question to be determined is, was it just, wise,
and merciful in God, thus to deal with us
on the principle of representation? and
when we could not choose our own representative, to choose one for us? Will any
one say that it would have been better for
the human family that each should have
stood singly for himself in the great trial
of obedience? In that case we must leave
out of view the covenant of grace and the
Saviour; for each individual, standing for
himself upon the great trial for life or
death, can have no reference to another.
Then all mankind, from infancy to ageevery moment-is on trial; and the moment any one fails in thought, word, or
action, then eternal death is the penalty,
without a single gleam of hope. The feeble infant, with no distinct conceptions of
law or penalty, with almost no power to
distinguish between good and evil, unable
properly to appreciate the tendencies of
conduct, and more than all, without any
knowledge that it is placed on such a trial;
yet is every moment standing in such a
relation to God and his law, that the indulgence of a single sinful feeling brings
upon it all the weight of the infinite penaltj of God's law. Now, does it not display




ORIGINAL SIN.          8itfe goodness of God to put that infant on
trial, in the person of such a perfect being
as Adam?  And when the Bible reveals
the fact, that this was actually done, who,
in the name of common sense, and of
wisdom and goodness, can find fault, and
say it was unjust and tyrannical?
But, to put the matter in a still more
favourable light, suppose that all should
be kept by God until maturity, and then
put on trial; and even allowing them to
be as fully endowed with moral strength
as Adam was, yet placed upon the awfully
solemn trial, under such circumstances,
that the moment any one should sin, in
thought, word, or deed, his case is for ever
as hopeless as that of the fallen angels,
(who stood precisely in those circumstances,) and the case is very little better.
Now, is there any one, of all Adam's race,
who would prefer thus to be placed? Does
it not show in a striking light the wisdom
and goodness of God, in thus putting us
on trial in our original progenitor, and
thereby increasing, more than ten thousand-fold, his motives to obedience? Does
not the principle of representation, upon
which God deals with us, commend itself
to the plainest dictates of reason and con.mon sense? And who will find fault with
his Maker for e' acting a representative




82          ORIGINAL SIN.
for us, when we could not, undt:r tLe cir.
cumstances, choose one ourselves? And
moreover, he appointed the very person,
whom all mankind would have chosen, if
it could have been left to them.
Con.-Is this what is meant in the Catechism by the "covenant," which it says
was " made with Adam, not only for himself, but for his posterity?"
Min.-Yes; the agreement entered into
between God and Adam, whereby he stood
as our representative, is called a covenant,
because there were certain stipulations to
be fulfilled, and a reward promised; and
on the other hand, a penalty threatened
for the breach of it.
Con.-But is all this clearly revealed in
the Bible?
Min.-We are not told, in express
words, that there was a covenant made
between God and Adam; and the opposers
of the doctrine have attempted to triumph,
because it is not stated in so many words
that there was such a covenant transac.
tion. But such attempts at triumph are,
to say the least, very silly. I once heard a
Socinian triumph in the same way, because
he said the words " divinity of Christ,"
were not to be found in the Bible. And
a Universalist, also, once in my hearing,
pretended to triumph, because he said the




ORIGINAL SIN.         83
words " future punishment," were not found
in the Bible. You can easily perceive
that such things only betray their weakness. The question is not, Are the exact
words, by which we express an idea, found
in the Bible; but is the idea there plainly
taught? The idea of the representative
character of Adam, and of his covenant
relation to us, is as plainly taught in the
Bible as almost any other truth. Rom.
v. 19 —" By one man's disobedience many
were made sinners." Verse 12-" Bv one
man sin entered into the world, and death
by sin, and so death passed upon all men,
for that all have sinned."  We are here
taught as plainly as can be, that death is
the consequence of sin; and the reason
that all die, is, "that all have sinned."
Now, we know that many die in infancy,
before any actual sin can be laid to their
charge. Then how have they sinned? It
is impossible to explain it on any other
supposition, than that they sinned in
Adam; and they could not sin in him in
any other way, but by representation.
Con -Do you then believe that those
dying in infancy will be condemned on
account of their original sin?
J.iin.-That is not a necessary conclusion. Reasoning from analogy, we mav
cnclude that it is consistent with God's




84          ORIGINAL SIN.
character and manner of dealing witl
mankind, to save them through the atonement of Christ. Paul tells us, Rom. v.
14-that "death reigned from Adam to
Moses, even over them that had not sinned, after the similitude of Adam's transgression"-that is, infants who had not
sinned actually. Now, seeing that they
are involved in the consequences of Adam's
sin, without actual participation, they may
be included in the purpose of mercy
through Christ, without actual participation by faith. But if saved they will be
saved as redeemed sinners, and will unite
with all the host of God's elect, in singing
"glory to the Lamb that redeemed us,
and washed us in his blood." Now, it is
plain that they cannot be redeemed, if they
are not lost; they cannot be washed, if
they are not polluted; they cannot be
saved through Christ, if they are not sinners. If they are saved through Christ, it
is ain incontrovertible proof that they are
sinners through Adam.
But further, Paul says, Rom. v. 18"By the offence of one, judgment came
upon all men to condemnation." If this
does not prove that all men are liable to
condemnation on account of the sin of
Adam, language has no meaning. And
there is no way that they could become




ORIGINAL SIN.         85
thus liable, but by sustairi;iig to him a
covenant relation, such as I have spoken
of. Many other passages are equally clear
in teaching the same truth, by plain and
necessary deduction, which I need not
enumerate. But we are not left to this
mode of proof entirely.  It is plainly
manifest. that every item  essential to a
covenant, is contained in the transaction
between God and Adam; and the term
": covenant," is given to it by Hosea, vii.
9-" They like men have transgressed the
covenant." The literal rendering of the
Hebrew is, "They like Adam have transgresqed the covenant." The Hebrew
phrase, "ke Adam," which is here used,
is so rendered in Job xxxi. 33-" If I covered my transgression, as Adam," &c.;
from which it is plain that the idea of a
covenant with Adam was familiar to the
inspired writers.
1 leave now given a few, and only a few,
of the many arguments that might be
drawn from reason and the Bible, as well
as from facts, to prove the representative
character of Adam, and our covenant relation to him, on the ground of which his
sin is imputed to his posterity; and they
consequently inherit a sinful nature, having
"sinned in him, and fallen with him in
his first transgression." Enough, how8




86           ORIGINAL SIN.
ever, has been said, I think, to sllowv y'oa
that the doctrine of our Confession of
Faith on this subject, is the doctrine of
the Bible, and of common sense.
Con. —My mind is entirely relieved of
its difficulty; and I find the doctrine of
imputation, so far as it respects Adam's
sin, is far different from what I had conceived it to be.
Min. —The other part of the doctrine,
viz: the imputation of Christ's righteousness as our only dependence for salvation,
I presume you understand more clearly.
Con.-I have made it my only dependence, and rejoice to do so; but still I would
be glad to understand it more fully, as my
Methodist neighbour tells me that faith,
and good works are, at least in part, the
meritorious ground of my justification..Min. —We will take up that subject in
our nex; conversation.




DIALOGUE VIII.
FREE GRACE.
Minister.-In establishing the doctrine
of the imputed righteousness of Christ, as
the only ground of our justification in the
sight of God, it is important, in the first
place, to have a clear understanding of
our relations to him, and the claims of his
law.
Convert.-Are we still under obligations
to obey the law of God, notwithstanding
we have broken it and incurred its penalty?
M~in. The fact that we have broken
God's law, cannot free us from obligations
to serve and obey him, in the smallest degree. But we are speaking now, more
particularly, of what is necessary to escare the penalty justly due us as sinners.
It is said by some that God has relaxed
the original terms upon which eternal life
was first promised, and that he has been
graciously pleased, for Christ's sake, to
make a new covenant with man, in which
he promises to pardon our sins if we re(87)




88           FREE GRACE.
pent; and since we cannot render- perfect
obedience during all our life, he will accept of our imperfect obedience, if it be
sincere. This, I suppose, is the opinion
of your Methodist neighbour, whom you
mentioned as maintaining, that we are justified, in part at least, by works. But this
is only an attempt to " establish our own
righteousness," and is not only unscriptural, but absurd. The law of God is a
transcript of his character, and was so intended to be. "Be ye holy, for I am holy,"
was the sanction that accompanied it; and
who will dare to set up a lower standard?
If its claims are let down, then it is abrogated, and a new one set up through
Christ. But Christ says expressly, that he
"came not to destroy, but to fulfill." Besides, if there be a change in God's law,
it is no longer to us a transcript of his
character, and cannot be a perfect standard of holiness.  Consequently, too, the
principles of his government are changed;
and things which were once sins, cannot
now  be so accounted; and things that
were once duties, are now dispensed with,
wh)ich casts a severe, if not impious, reflection upon both the Governor and his law.
It is, in fact, nothing more than salvation
by works, and casts away altogether the
ueeessity of a.  Saviour; for if the high




FREE GRACE.           89
authority of the law may give t   ay (for the
accommodation of a criminal, why was it
necessary that any obedience or satisfaction should be rendered to it by another
ill his stead? The obedience and sufferings of the Saviour were, in that case,
mere works of supererogation, given to a
law, which, after all, did not necessarily
demand them.
Con.-But may we not suppose that the
sufferings of Christ were intended to show
God's hatred of sin in such a light, that he
might consistently pardon sin, without an
impeachment of his law or character, when
the sinner sincerely repents?
LMin.-The sufferings of the Saviour do
exhibit, in a very striking light, the great
evil of sin; and it was no doubt intended
that they should do so. But if we. stop
there, we make the atonement a very small
matter. It represents God as making a
show of respect for his law and government, which, in fact, does not exist, if he
can look over a violation of it without the
satistiaction it demands; and the atonerlent of the Son of God was nothing
more than this governmental display,
which would be unworthy of an earthly
king. This theory is, however, becoming,
very popular at the present day; and what
is more strange, it is advocated by some




90           FREE GRACE.
who call themselves Presbyte ians, and
profess attachment to the Confession of
Faith, though they are not now in our
connection. But to see in a still clearer
light the unreasonableness of these systems, we have only to consider what are
in reality the claims of God's law, as laid
down in the Bible, which, I have already
said, is necessary to a right understanding
of the subject. "Love the Lord with all
thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with
all thy strength, and with all thy mind,
and thy neighbour as thyself," is what God
claims of all his intelligent creatures.
Alnd will any one say he asks too much,
or that it would be consistent with his
character to accept of anything less?'God is love;" and in this summary of
his law he has given us a transcript of his
character. It is the same grand principle
that binds angels, and all the intelligent
universe. It is like himself, and all his
works; simple, yet grand, majestic, and
glorious in its simplicity. It extends to
every faculty and power of the creature,
"heart, soul, strength, and mind;" and,
being thus the basis, or grand principle of
his moral government, it is as unchangeable as himself. The moment he should
dispense with any of its requirements, and
accept frcm a creature an Abedience that




FREE GRACE.             91
was defective, the stabilities of his throne
would be undermined. Hence, Christ says,
that "till heaven and earth pass, one jot or
one tittle shall in no wise pass fiom the
law, till all be fulfilled.  Think not that I
am come to destroy the law, or the prophets.  I am not come to destroy, but to
fulfill." —Matt. v. 17, 18. It is, therefore,
not only absurd(, but impious, to plead
that the law is changed, for the acconmnodcation of sinfill man. Sooner may we ex-,)ect Jehovah to annihilate universal creaiion, than give up "one jot or one tittle"
sef that law, which is the transclaript of lhis, haracter.  Now, it is this law, which
laimrns obedience originally fronm us, and?ts claims we must answer in ourselves, or
iy another, if we would inherit eternal
I fe; and I presume I need not stay to
),rove, that no sinner of Adam's race can,
~1 himself, answer its denlallds.
It is proper, also, that we slhould notice
l-ere the penalty by whichl obedience to
ti e law  of God is einforced.  It corres).onds with the law in its greatness and
rustice. Death, with all the drcadtiul (ol —.eqruences which the Bible attaches to thlat
ierm, when speaking of it as a penalty
1createned, is a punishment in which will
1-c exhibited for ever the greatness, jusk-'e, and majesty of God, and his law.




92           FREE GRACE.
We, therefore, as sinners, having incurred
this penalty, the law has a two-fold claim
upon us-satisfaction and restitution. The
law must be satisfied, to place us on terms
of reconciliation with God; and then it
requires complete and perfect obediencc
to entitle us to life. It is equally plain,
that no finite creature can give to the law
the infinite satisfaction it requires; and
this is one reason that the punishment of
the wicked must be eternal.
Con.-Mankind are then, by nature, in
a very wretched condition..Min.-That is very true; and this is no
doubt one reason that so much opposition
is manifested toward the doctrines of
grace. Volumes have been written, the
Scriptures have been perverted, and every
expedient has been tried, to prove that the
spiritual condition of mankind is not so
bad. But the only effect that can result
from it, is to make sinners more careless.
It is always best for us to know the worst
of our spiritual condition. If there were
no remedy provided, it would be humane
to endeavour, as far as possible, to allay
fears that could be of no avail. But when
God has graciously provided a remedy, it
is unfaithfulness to the Saviour, and cruelty to the souls of men, to attempt to




FREE uRACE.            93
hide, in the smallest degree, their real
condition.
But this brings us to speak of what
God, in infinite mercy, has done to save
us from  this wretched condition.  The
Son of God took upon himself to answer
the claims of the law in our stead, both as
it respects obedience and satisfaction, and
in both respects satisfied its claims to the
full. By his obedience and sufferings he
has wrought out a righteousness, on the
ground of which we may be accepted.
And here again, God deals with us on the
principle of representation. The Saviour
stood, and still stands, as our representative and agent. Our sins were imputed
to him-that is, they were set to his account-he engaged to answer for them,
and was thus treated as a sinner.  On the
other hand, his righteousness is imputed
to us; that is, it is set to our account, and
we are treated as righteous, on the ground
of what he has done for us. All this is
briefly, yet clearly expressed in our Contession of Faith and Catechismls.  "Justification is an act of God's free grace,
wherein he pardoneth all our sins, and accepteth us as righteous in his sight, only
for the righteousness of Christ inlmuted
to us, and received by faith alone."Shorter Cat., Quest. 33.




94            FREE GRACE.
Con.-What do you understland by faith.
as you use the term in this connection?
MJin.-It is simply the act of the soul in
casting  itself upon  Christ, and  trustilg to his righteousness for salvation; or,
as our catechism  expresses it, "Faith in
Jesus Christ is a saving grace, whereby
we receive and rest upon him alone for
salvation, as he is offered to us in the Gospal."-Quest. 86. Christ is offered us in
the Gospel, as a Saviour who has fulfilled
the law, and satisfied the justice of God in
our stead; and we are invited to come,
and be saved through him.  When we accept of him as our Saviour, and cast ourselves upon him for salvation, the act of
the soul in so doing is faith; and hence,
in this sense, it is called "saving faith." It
is then that the righteousness of Christ is
set to our account, and made ours through
faith.
Con.-Is faith, then, a necessary colldition of our salvation?.Mlin.-It is necessary, but can hardly be
called a condition, in the sense in which
the term is generally used; at least it is
not a meritorious condition.  There can
be no merit in simply accepting a thing
offered, though it is necessary that we accept it before it can be ours.  It is in this
sense that faith is necessary to our salva




FREE GRACE.            95
tion. TWe must accept of the salvation
ofT1red tllrough Chr;3t; and in the acceptancte of it, God makes it over to us.
IIlence, the catechism says, it is " received
by faith alone."  And from this, also, you
will be able to understand the numerous
texts of Scripture which speak of salvation by faith.  "He that believeth and is
baptized shall be saved, but he that believeth not shall be damned."- Mark xvi.
16. "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ,
and thou shalt be saved."-Acts xvi. 31,
&c. We are also said to be "justified by
faith."-iRom. v. 1. "Therefore it is of
faith, that it might be by grace."-Rom.
iv. 16.  "Justified fi-eely by his grace
through the redemption that is in Christ
Jesus." —Rom. iii. 24. Besides many other
passages, which I need not enumerate.
C(on.-But a difficulty presents itself to
my mind here, respecting the atonement
of Christ, and which I have heard urged
against the doctrine of an infinite satisfaction being given, or the full penalty of the
law endured by him. How could he give
an infinite satisfaction in so short a period?  He did not suffer eternally, nor
did he suffer remorse, &c., which was due
the sinner.
Jlin. —Eternal death, strictly speaking,
was not the penalty of the law. It became




96           FREE GRACE.
so from the nature of the persons incur.
ring it. They are finite, and cannot give
the full satisfaction, in all conceivable
time; therefore, they must atone for their
sins eternally. But an infinite being may
give infinite value to an atonement in time.
Thus, the divinity of the Son of God
stamps his atonement with infinity. We
are told he "magnified the law, and made
it honourable." No finite being could thus
magnify the law, or show its greatness and
dignity in any clearer light, because it was
made for them, and all owe it obedience.
But the Son of God, being infinite in all
the perfections of Deity, did not owe it
obedience for himself; and when he made
it the rule of his life, and condescended
to satisfy its claims, he "magnified it, and
made it honourable," in a light in which it
never was before. Its holiness, justice,
majesty, and excellence, are displayed in a
more glorious light than they could have
been in any other conceivable way. The
law is more honoured and magnified by
the obedience and satisfaction rendered to
it by the Son of God, than it could have
been by the perfect obedience and eternal
death of all the intelligent creatures in the
universe. Hence, the apostle calls it "the
righteousness of God."-Rom. iii. 21, 22,
and in several other places. It is this obe.




FREE GRACE.           97
dience and satisfaction of the Son of God,
that constituted the glorious righteousness, on the ground of which God has
offered salvation to all who believe on his
Son. It is a righteousness as great, perfect, holy, infinite, and glorious as God
himself; a righteousness, on the ground
of which he can be just, and yet the justifier of every one who will believe, however sinful and polluted he may be. Nay,
more: it is a righteousness, on the ground
of which he cannot only be barely just,
but also glorious in its exercise. His justice, holiness, truth, mercy, and every attribute, will be for ever glorified in the
justification extended to every believing
sinner, through the glorious righteousness
of his Son.
Now, when God has lavished his love
and wisdom on such a plan of salvation,
so glorifying to himself, and so suitable
for us, how strange that men, in the pride
of opinion, will endeavour to find out
another! And when we are offered such
a righteousness as the ground of our salvation, we may well ask whether any one
truly loves the Saviour, who will bring up
his own faith and obedience, and plead
them before God as meriting salvation;
as if the glorious righteousness of the Son
of God wore not sufficient.
9




'98          FREE GRACE.
Con.-It cannot be salvation by grace,
If we merit it in any degree ourselves.
Any true Christian will desire to ascribe
all the glory to his Saviour. At least it
so seems to me. It surely contributes in
no small degree to the enjoyment of the
tbelieving sinner, to ascribe all the praise
to his Saviour.
Jlin.-Let us now see what the Bible
days on these points. And first let us examine what proofs it contains that our
sins were imputed to Christ, and that he
took our place under the law. Isa. liii. 4,
6 —" Surely he hath borne our griefs and
carried our sorrows. * * But he was
wounded for our transgressions; he was
bruised for our iniquities; the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and
with his stripes we are healed. All we
like sheep have gone astray; we have
turned every one to his own way; and the
Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us
all." Verse 11-" By his knowledge shall
my righteous servant justify many, for he
shall bear their iniquities." Verse 12"He bare the sin of many." 2 Cor. v. 21
-" He hath made him to be sin for us, * *
that we might be made the righteousness
of God in himn"  Here both truths are
plainly stated, that our sins are set to his
account, and his righteousness to ours.




FREE 3JR CE.          99
There is Lo other conceivable sense in
which he could be "made sin," or we
" made the righteousness of God." 1 Pet.
ii. 24-" His own self bare our sins in his
own body on the tree; by whose stripes
ye are healed." Here, again, both truths
are thrown together. 1 Pet. iii. 18 —--
"Christ also hath once suffered for sin,
the just for the unjust, that he might bring
us to God." These, with all the texts
which speak of hinm as " dying for us,"
and being a "propitiation for us," and a
" propitiation for our sins," (of which kind
hundreds might be adduced,) prove the
doctrine of his substitution in our stead,
as plainly as language can prove it. If
they do not prove that the death of Christ
was a true and proper sacrifice for sin in
our stead, human language cannot state it.
That his righteousness is imputed to us,
is taught in language equally plain. And
I would observe that all the passages which
deny salvation by "w'orks," the "deeds
of the law," &c., by necessary implication,
prove that we are saved only by the r;ghteousness of Christ. Rom. iii. 20-28"Therefore by the deeds of the law shall
no flesh be justified in his sight. But now
the righteousness of God without the law
is manifested, * * even the righteousness
of God, which is by faith of Jesus Christ,




100          FREE GRACE.
unto all, and upon all them that believe.
Being justified freely by his grace throug}
the redemption that is in Christ Jesus,
whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare
his righteousness for the remission of sins
that are past, through the forbearance of
God. To declare, I say, at this time, his
righteousness that he might be just and
the justifier of him which believeth on
Jesus. Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law?  Of works? Nay;
but by the law of faith. Therefore, we
conclude that a man is justified by faith,
%without the deeds of the law." Now, is it
not strange that any one pretending to
common sense, and to be guided by the
Bible, would, in the face of all this plain
and unequivocal language, uphold salvation by works, in any degree whatever?
But further still, the apostle reasons the
case at length in the fourth chapter; and
in the fifth, in drawing a parallel between
Christ and Adam, states the doctrine again
with equal plainness. Rom. v. 18 —" By
the righteousness of one, the free gift
came upon all men  unto justification of
life." Verse 19-"By the obedience of
one shall many be made righteous." Chap.
x. 3, 4-" But they being ignorant of God's
righteousness, and going about to establish their own r'ghteousness, have not sub



FREE GRACE.          101
mitted themselves to the righteousnef.s of
God. For Christ is the end of the law
for righteousness to every one that be]ieveth." Phil. iii. 9 —"That I may win
Christ and be found in him, not having
mine own righteousness, which is of the
law, but that which is through the faith
of Christ, the righteousness which is of
God by faith."  But I need not multiply
quotations, which might be done to almost
any extent.
Con.-I find that the Calvinistic doctrines are justly styled the doctrines of
grace, and yet those who deny them, lay
strong claims to a system of "free grace,"
and " free salvation."
MJin.-It is only another of their inconsistencies. How can that be free, which
is merited or bought by works? If our
good works merit salvation, it is a contradiction in terms to call it free. So Paul
reasons, Rom. iv. 4-" To him that work.
eth is the reward not reckoned of grace,
but of debt."  And further, verse 16-' Therefore it is of faith, that it might be
lay grace." And again, Rom. xi. 6 —" If
it be of works, then it is no more grace."
So, according to Paul, they can lay no
claim to the doctrine of a " free salvation,"
who maintain that it is in any sense by
works.
9*




DIALOGUE IX.
GOOD WORKS.
(.onmcrt. —Since our last conversation I
have been reflecting upon the doctrine of
imputation, and examining the Bible, and
find that it is one of its plainest doctrines.
And in taking all its features, and viewing thenl together, they present a very
grand scheme, and show the glorious work
of redemption in a light that I think must
surely recommend it to any burdened and
heart-broken sinner, seeking to escape the
wrath of God. And though I feel that it
is the only doctrine upon which I can
safely depend, yet is it not liable to objection, on the ground that it leaves good
works and holy living entirely out of
view?
Minister.-It only leaves them  out of
view as the meritorious ground of our
salvation; but in every other respect it secures and establishes them. This is the
very objection which Paul newets in the
last verse of the third chapter of his epistie to the Romans. lie lays down, in lan(102)




GOOD WORKS.          103
guage that cannot well be misunderstood,
the truth that we are "justified by faith,
without the deeds of the law;" and then,
knowing that the objection you speak of
would be urged against it, he anticipates
it in the last verse: "Do we then make
void the law through faith?"  That is, if
we by faith place all our dependence for
salvation upon the righteousness of Christ,
and none upon our own obedience to the
law, will it not make us careless about that
obedience, and lead us to think that the
law has no further claims upon us, and
thus "make void the law," as requiring
of us a holy life? But how. does he answer it? "God forbid: yea, we establish
the law."  This might be sufficient; but
it will not be amiss to look a little further,
and see how  faith establishes the law.
We have already seen how it establishes
the law, in answering all its claims through
tle righteousness of Christ; and that it
establishes it also as the believer's rule of
life, is equally plain.  To show this, I
need not go further than your own experience. When you first obtained a hope
of salvation through Christ, what seemed
to be the most prominent feeling of your
heart?
Con. -I was overwhelmed with a sense
of the love of God, as manifested through




104          GOOD WORKS.
the Saviour. And when I thought of the
Son of God, suffering and dying to redeemn me from hell, I felt as if it would be
the joy of my life to serve him with my
wth ole heart.
Jin.-Do you think it possible for any
one to exercise faith in Christ for salvation, without experiencing, in some degree, the same feelings of love and devotion?
Con.-I do not see how it is possible for
any one to look to the Son of God as his
Saviour, without loving and desiring to
serve him; and at the same time, desiring
to be made holy, and conformed to his inage and example.
Min.- You have now answered the objection in your own experience, which is,
in a greater or less degree, the experience
of every true Christian. True faith will
never be found in the heart of any one,
without producing its legitimate effects,
love to Christ, hatred of sin, and a desire
after holiness, and conformity to the law
of God in all its parts. So Paul describes
it. Gal. v. 6-" Faith which worketh by
love."  And Peter, in Acts xv. 9, ascribes
to it the effect of "purifying the heart."
And in Acts xxvi. 18, we are said to be
" sanctified by faith."  So it is plain, both
from Christian experience and from Scrip



GOOD WORKS.           105
ture, that the effect of faith is to produce
love and holiness in the heart of the believer; and thus his sanctification is carried on. Faith is the first act of a regenerated soul; and then immediately the
work of sanctification commences, which
is carried on through the instrumentality
of faith. It sanctifies as well as justifies.
Just as surely as any one has the faith that
justifies, he has also the faith that sanctifies. It is impossible to separate them.
It is true, faith is not meritorious in either
case, but only instrumental; but it is always just as surely instrumental of the
one as of the other. It is absurd to suppose
that any one can have faith in Christ, that
is, depend upon him for salvation, without
loving him; and it is equally absurd to
suppose that any one could love him, without at the same time desiring to obey all
his commands. And I know not how any
true Christian, who really loves his Saviour,
and understands his own heart, can plead
the objection that an entire dependence
upon Christ for salvation, weakens his
sense of obligation and " makes void the
law." It is a reflection cast upon true religion, unworthy of a Christian.
All this is plainly taught in our Confession of Faith, as well as the Bible. Chap.
11, sec. 2- -"Fa th, thus receiving and




106          aGcD WORKS.
resting on Christ and his righteousness, is
the alone instrument of justification; yet
it is not alone, in the person justified, but
is ever accompanied with all other saving
graces; and is no dead faith, but worketh
by love." Again, chap. 16, sec. 2 —" These
good works, done in obedience to God's
commandments, are the fruits and evidences of a true and lively faith," &c.
And that faith should, and does produce
these effects, is surely a dictate of common
sense. Let any one have true faith, ai.d
then holiness of heart and life is a certain
consequence.
Con. —But is faith not sometimes to be
understood in a more extended sense, than
simply depending on and trusting in Christ
for salvation?
MIin.-Though this is its principal act,
it extends to, and acts upon, everything
that God has revealed. As it is expressed
in our Confession, chap. 14, sec. 2 —"By
this faith a Christian believeth to be true
whatsoever is revealed in the word, for the
authority of God himself speaking therein;
and acteth differently upon that which
each particular passage thereof containeth; yielding obedience to the commands,
trembling at the threatenings, and embracing the promises of God for this life, and
that which is to come," &c. The apostle




GOOD WORKS.           107
also says, " By faith we know the worlds
were made," &c. And again, "He that
cometh to God must believe that he is,
and that he is the rewarder of them that
diligently seek him." But faith in all
these acts is subordinate, and dependent
for its right exercise upon the principal
act. It is only when we are brought to
look to God through Christ, that we have
right views of his character as he is revealed in his word, and admit with the
heart all his claims. Then we see, in a true
light, what he says of the evil of sin, the
justness of our condemnation, and the
freeness of his mercy and grace in our
justification. Then, when we look into
his word, all its blessed truths come home
to our I earts, with a point and clearness
before ulnknown.  Its threatenings and
promises, precepts and exhortations, have
a peculiar force and pungency, which tell
upon our conduct and pursuits, and produce earnest desires for sincere and constant obedience.  "With the heart, man
believeth unto righteousness." Thus faith.
secures holiness; and view it as we may,
either in its principal act of dependence
on Christ for salvation, or in its cordial acceptance and approval of all the other
truths of God's word, it "'establishes the
law" as the great rule of obedience, in.




108          GOOD WORKS.
conformity to which the believer strives
to live. "Working by love," which is
"the fulfilling of the law," it secures this
glorious result, wherever it is found in sincerity and truth.
Thus, the plan of salvation exhibits the
wisdom of God in all its features. It
saves lost sinners, transforms them from
sin, and secures the practice of holiness,
yet in a way that excludes boasting or selfglorification in the smallest degree, and
gives all the praise to God.
Con.-But is there not some sense in
which faith and holiness commend us to
God?
MJin.-They commend us to God as obe
dient children striving after conformity to
his law, and reflecting his image. Eph.
v. 1i, 2-" Be ye followers of God as dear
children, and walk in love, as Christ also
hath loved us, and given himself for us."
Of such Paul says, Rom. ii. 29-" Whose
praise is not of men, but of God." Indeed,
the Scriptures everywhere teach that good
works, by which I mean all the graces of
piety brought out into active operation,
are pleasing to God; and only in their
performance can we expect his blessing,
and the approving smiles of his countenance. And this is said to be one grand
object of salvation. Tit. ii. 14 —"That




GOOD WORKS.          109
he might purify to himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works."  Besides,
they are evidences of the sincerity of our
faith, both to God and man. It is only in
their performance that we can "let our
light shine," and exhibit to the world the
excellency of that religion we profess.
They are the true tests of Christian love;
and even in the sight of God prove our
faith to be of-the right kind. As he said
to Abraham, "Now I know that thou
fearest God." And the apostle James
tells us, that "by works his faith was
made perfect."-James ii. 22. That is, it
was proved to be of the right kind.
Con.-But does not James say in the
same connection, that Abraham was justified by works? And how is this to be reconciled with the language of Paul?
Alin.-The most common interpretation
given to the language of James is, that he
was speaking of our justification'n the
sight of men. And it is true, that it is
only by good works that we can sustain a
Christian character. But the apostle evidently speaks of justification in the sight
of God; for he says in the 14th verse,
"Can faith save him?"  The doctrines
called Antinomianism were prevalent in
the days of the apostle, which taught that
the gospel released believers from obe1o




110          GOOD WORKS.
dience to the law, and it is very evident
that it was against this that James was
writing, and also no doubt to refute the
doctrine that justifying faith was a mere
speculative belief, which produced no sanctifying influence upon the heart. In verse
14 he says, "What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he have faith and
have not works? can faith save him?"
That is, can that kind of faith save him?
In the original it is "he pistis," the faith,
or the kind of faith mentioned. In the
19th verse he says, "Thou believest there
is one God; thou dost well; the devils
also believe and tremble." From this it
is very plain that the faith of which he is
speaking, and which he says cannot save
a mall, is the same that the devils have;
and he adds in the following verses, " Wilt
thou know, 0 vain man, that faith without works is dead?  Was not Abraham,
our father, justified by works when he had
offered Isaac his son upon the altar?
Seest thou how faith wrought with his
works, and by works was faith made perfect? And the Scripture was fulfilled
which saith, Abraham believed God, and
it was imputed unto him for righteousness
Ye see, then, how that by works a man is
justifiel, and not by faith only."  The
cripture, which the apostle says was




GOOD WORKS.          111
fulfilled by Abraham offering his sao, is
Gen. xv. 6. "And he believed in the
Lord, and he counted it to him for righteousness."  The faith that Abraham exercised in this instance was belief and confidence in the promise that he should have
a son, including the promise of a Savior. It was by this act of faith that
Abraham was justified, as Paul tells us in
Rom. iv. 3, 10, 11 —" Abraham believed
God, and it was counted unto him for
righteousness." "How was it then reckoned? When he was in circumcision, or
in uncircumcision?  Not in circumcision,
but in uncircumcision. And he received
the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had, yet
being uncircumcised."
Here both apostles are plainly together,
in teaching that Abraham was justified by
that act of faith. But this was more than
twenty years before the offering of his son,
in which James says this Scripture was
tifulfilled. Now, will any one pretend that
the apostle intended to teach, that Abraham was not justified until he offered his
son? This would be inconsistent both
with scripture and common sense, and the
language of the apostle himself. In what
sense, then, was this scripture fulfilled in
the off; rinu of his son?  Plainly in this,




112          GooD WORKS.
that he thereby proved his faith to be of
the right kind, a genuine faith of the gospel, working by love, and producing obedience to the commands of God. There
Is no other conceivable sense in which it
could be fulfilled. Neither can we suppose;hat the apostle intended to teach, that
true evangelical faith is ever found without good works; and unless we deny a
plain passage of scripture, written by
Moses, and quoted by both James and
Paul, we must conclude that he only intended to teach, that we cannot be justified by a "dead faith," which is "without
works;" and that a believing, active faith,
which "works by love and purifies the
heart," is necessary to our justification.
For he expressly says, that "Abraham's
faith was perfected by his works," that is,
he showed thereby that it was not a dead
faith. Therefore we are "justified by
works, and not by faith only," inasmuch as they are the evidence and certain
fruits of a justifying faith. A faith that
does not produce them is not only useless,
l)ut is worse than useless. It is a cheat,
an injury to ourselves and others. When
we, in the exercise of faith, confide ourselves to Christ for salvation, we do it
upon his own terms, one of which is, to
do whatsoever t.e commands. To do this




GOOD WORKS.          113.s not only the obligation, tut the desire
of every one who is truly united to him.
by faith. He who has the gooa works
which spring from true faith is justified,
but he who has them not is not justified,
for they are inseparable. "Without holiness no man shall see the Lord."
Con.-But is there not some sense in
which our good works merit reward?
Miin. —They will be rewarded; but it
will still be of grace. Christ tells us, Luke
xvii. 10 —"When ye shall have done all
these things which are commanded you,
say, we are unprofitable servants; we have
done that which was our duty to do."
Still they will all be graciously rewarded.
Matt. x. 42-" A cup of cold water given
to a disciple in the name of a disciple,
shall not lose its reward." Moses, we are
told, Heb. xi. 26, "had respect unto the
recompense of reward."  We need not
fear that God will overlook anything done
with love to him through faith in his Son
It is revealed as one great ingredient in
our happiness in heaven, that " our works
shall follow us."-Rev. xiv. 13. We need
not fear to expect too much at the hand
of God. Only let us expect it in the right
way, "not of debt, but of grace." Our
works follow us in heaven. They do not
go before, to open tilhe heavenly gates, or
10 *




114          GOOD WORKS.
gain us access there. That is done by our
Saviour. But they follow us, and shall be
taken account of by our Saviour. "I was
an hungered, and ye gave me meat," &c.
And whilst we shall rejoice in the gracious
and glorious reward which he condescends
to bestow upon our poor service, the burden of our song shall be "to the praise of
the glory of his grace."-Eph. i. 6.
Con.-There is a passage of Scripture
that I have met with somewhere, which
says, "whatsoever is not of faith, is sin;"
which I found difficult to understand; but
I think T now begin to see its meaning.
As faith is the foundation of the other
graces, nothing is acceptable to God which
does not flow from right feelings. But
still, is there nothing good in the outward
morality and upright conduct of those who
are out of Christ'
Min.-This involves the doctrine of
ability, or what a mall can do, and what
he cannot do, in his natural state, which
we wil consider at our next interview.




DIALOGUE X.
INABILITY.
Convert.- -In examining the Confession
of Faith, since our last interview, I find,
in chapter 9, sec. 3, the following language, respecting man's inability; " Man,
by his fall into a state of sin, hath wholly
lost all ability of will to any spiritual good,
accompanying salvation; so, as a natural
man, being altogether averse from that
which is good, and dead in sin, is not able,
by his own strength, to convert himself, or
prepare himself thereunto."
But the Bible commands men to repent
and believe, and to make to themselves
new hearts, &c. Now, is there not a seeming inconsistency in commanding what
there is no ability to perform?
Jlinister.-There can be no inconsistency ir commanding any one to the extent of his obligation. Whatever is the
duty of any one, God has a right to command, regardless of inability, when that
inability is brought on by the sinner himself, and is ill it-self wrong. It is surely
(115) 




116           INABILITY.
the duty of all to love God  It is a plain
dictate of common sense. tnat whell any
one has done wrong, he ought to repent
of it. But how can he repent of it if he
loves the wrong? We know that, all metl
naturally love sin, and hate God. How
can they repent of sin while they love it?
or how can they love God while they hate
him?  This is the "inability of will,"
of which the Confession speaks. The will
is influenced in choosing and refusing, by
the state of the heart. It is this that always gives weight to the motives presented.  Whilst the heart is filled with
enmity to God, all motives to love him are
presented in vain. Now, the simple question is, can a man change his own heart?
What resources has he within himself,
that he can bring to bear upon the deep
rooted enmity of his heart, that will produce such a change in the inner man, as
to fill him  with love for that which he
hates? The only faculty that could( pos3ibly have any such effect, is the understanding, or judgment; but it is so darkened, that it can have no proper conception of holy and spiritual things. " The
natural man," says Paul, 1 Cor. ii. 14,
"receiveth not the things of the Spirit of
God, for they are foolishness unto hlim;
neither can he know them, because they




INABILITY.          117
are spiritually discerned." The ap. stle is
contrasting the "spiritual" and "natural
man," that is, the regenerate and unregenerate, and this is what he tells us of the unregenerate. And the language he uses is
much stronger than that used in our confession. " The natural man receiveth not
the things of the Spirit of God." He rejects them. All the motives by which
their acceptance may be urged, are entirely
without avail. And why? Because "they
are foolishness unto him"-he has no
proper conception of them. " Neither can
he know them."  He can have no proper
understanding of their value, excellence, or
necessity, "because they are spiritually
discerned." In order to see them aright,
and appreciate them, he must be made a
" spiritual man." His understanding must
be enlightened, and his affections changed.
HIow any one can take a plain common
sense view of this passage of Scripture
alone, in its obvious sense, and yet contend
for the doctrine of full ability, I amn at a
loss to see. Yet, it is equally plain, that
those very things t6 which the "natural
nian" is thus wholly disinclined. he is under the strongest obligation to perform. It
is his duty to love God with all his heart,
and to " receive the things of the Spirit of
God," and prmctise upon them-to repent




118           INABILITY.
of his sins, and to turn to God. Hence, it
is perfectly consistent for God to command
the sinner thus to do. It would be giving
up the claims of his law if he did not.
C(on.-But is not the inability in the case
inconsistent with the obligation?
JMin.-rThe idea that ability is the measure of obligation is not uncommon; and
of late has been widely propagated as an
axiom in morals and theology, and is hailed
by many as a new discovery, that is to clear
up the knotty points of perfect freedom of
will, and absolute dependence on God. It
is boldly asserted, that man is under no
obligation to do anything, for which he has
not full and perfect ability in himself. But
this position is one of the most glaring absurdities to be found in the whole catalogue
of errors, now afloat. If inability cancels
obligation, Satan is under no obligation to
love God, and his fiendish enmity to God
and immortal souls is no sin. If I murder
the head of a helpless family, I am only
accountable for the murder, and not for the
wretchedness and misery that I thus bring
upon the family, which I have no power to
alleviate. My inability to soothe the sorrows, and alleviate the wants of the widow
and orphans, cancels my obligation. There
is no escape from such dreadful consequences of the f.o:-trine, except its abettors will




INABIT.-TY.         119
go one step fir-ther back, and say that God
is the author of man's inability to obey his
commands. This, I presume, none will
dare ldo. Man's inability is his own fault;
and to pretend that it frees him  from
obligation, subverts all moral government.
Sin, thenl, is its own apology.  The sillner can stand up boldly and say, I am
not able in myself to love God. I hate him
so that I cannot love him; therefore I am
not under obligation to love him. It lifts
the sinner above the law of God. He requires obedience; the sinner disables himself; and, therefore, he is not bound to
obey. Rebellion against God is then the
only sure road to independence. But I
need not follow such absurdities further.
You can see clearly, that nlan's inability
to obey the law of God, can in no sense
free him from obligation.
Con.-But has not man some kind of
ability? I have some where in the course
of my reading met with the doctrine that
man is naturally able to love and serve God,
bIut morally unable-that is, he could if he
would.
Min. —That the sinner's inability is mor
al, is admitted on all hands; and that it is
of such a nature that he could obey if he
would, is not, I believe, denied by any.
But this is the same as saying he could




120           INABILITY.
love God, if he loved him. The unwil.
lingness to obey-the aversion to God, and
holiness-is the inability in the case. This
is the moral state of the soul; it is wickedly unwilling, and therefore unable, without a gracious change. Until such a change
is effected, the sinner never will love God,
and in this sense, using the language of
the Bible, we say he cannot, that is, there
is no cause to produce the effect. Christ
says, "No man can come to me, except the
Father which has sent me, draw him." And,
again, he shows the nature of this inability:
"YTe will not come to me, that ye might
have life."
If those who contend that the sinner has
a natural ability, would tell us plainly what
they mean by it, and what it amounts to,
we would know better how to answer themJf they mean by it that he has all his natiral faculties, we admit it. But if these are
not a sufficient cause to produce the effect,
why contend that they constitute an ability
to do that which they cannot do a Man
has ability to love, and therefore has ability
to love God, is about the amount of their
reasoning. But this is about as wise as to
say, that because it is the nature of water
to flow, it therefore has a natural ability to
flowuphill. This strikes you asan amusing
absurdity; but it is not a whit more absurd




INBILITY.           121
than to contend, because man has all his
natural faculties, that, therefore, he has a
natural ability to love God. The nature of
water is a cause just as adequate to the production of the effect in the one case, as the
nature of man in the other. All his affections and inclinations are turned away from
God, and flow in an opposite direction.
Con.-But we daily see men of the world
living in some degree according to the
commands of God. We see honesty, sobriety, and in short, morality in all its
moral beauty, exhibited in the lives of unregenerate men. Does not this contradict
the idea of a total inability to do good?
Jlin. —Man has an ability to do many
things that are good in themselves, and indeed, to do anything predicable of his nature as man, which he chooses to do, or
in other words, that he is willing to do.
As it respects outward morality, many motives may be brought to bear, which will
induce men to live in accordance with its
rules, viz. a respect for public opinion, a
desire of reputation, &c.,-and not unfrequently, a hope that thereby they may recommend themselves to God, and finally
escape hell. Sometimes, indeed, it is their
enmity to God and religion, that induces
them to live lives of strict morality, that
thereby they may compare with +he Chris11




122           INABILITY.
tian, whom they watch with a l eagle eye,
and endeavour to magnify his failures, in
order to bring reproach upon religion. In
all these instances, however, it is easy to
see that " God is not in all their thoughts."
Their hearts are still alienated from him,
and they refuse to acknowledge his authority. They live morally, not because God
nas required it, but from some other selfish
motive. They refuse to pray, neglect and
violate the Sabbath, refuse to repent and
confess the Son of God, neglect or oppose
religion, and in short exhibit very plainly
the enmity of their hearts to God. It is
true, they will not admit that they hate
God, and perhaps they think they do not;
but if they hate religion and holiness, they
hate God, for this is his character. They
cannot hate the one without hating the
other, or love the one without loving the
other. If any one love God, he will love
religion, and yield himself in obedience to
its dictates; and if he hate religion, he
hates God. They are inseparable. Hence,
P'aul says, Rom. viii. 7-" The carnal mind
is enmity against God; for it is not subject
to the law of God, neither indeed can be."
The apostle, you perceive, couples the hating of God and his law together, as characteristic of every unregenerate man.
Then while the heart is thus at enmity




INABILITY.          1'23
with God, the strictest c ai;,vard lt orality
is nothing in his sight, for he tells us himself, "The Lord looketh on the heart."
Thus you perceive, that the doctrine of
man's inability to change his own heart,
and perform acceptable obedience, is not
inconsistent with the fact, that unregenerate men are often moral in their lives.
Con. —But does it not destroy the distinction between right and wrong, to maintain that the moral man does no more to recommend him to God, than the grossly
wicked?
Mlin. —It is not meant that they are both
viewed precisely in the same light. Christ
commends the Pharisees for their morality,
but reproves them  for neglecting "the
weightier matters of the law, judgment,
mercy, and faith;" and tells them, also,
that they could not enter into the kingdom
of heaven, or be accepted of God, because
in all their boasted morality their hearts
were not right. All these things ye do,
that ye may be seen of men. Verily, I
say unto you, ye have your reward. God
has so arranged, in his providence and government, that morality and amiability are
rewarded. Or, perhaps, it would be better
to say, that the reward which we most earnestly seek shall be obtained. The supreme
desire of the Pharisees was to obtain a high




124           INABILITY.
religious reputation, and they obtained
it. They had their reward. If a man
wishes to obtain the character of honesty,
and gain the confidence of his neighbours,
let him pursue the proper course, and he
will obtain it-he has his reward.  If
a child loves his parents, and wishes to retain their affection and confidence, he has
but to pursue the proper course, and he obtains it-he has his reward. But still
it is true, in all such cases, that " to be seen
of men" is the ruling motive, and " God
is not in all their thoughts." They would
pursue the same course if God had given
no law; and as it respects his requirements, their hearts are still in a state of
rebellion. They reject Christ, and the
authority of God, altogether.  And as
there are different degrees of punishment
in the future world, they may not, perhaps, be "beaten with as many stripes"
as the grossly wicked, yet they are equally
far from salvation, until the enmity of their
hearts is changed, and they are led to the
practice of morality and religion from love
to God.
This may be illustrated on the simple
principles of common justice and common
sense. In a gang of pirates we may find
many things that are good in themselves.
Though they are ii wicked rebellion




INABILITY.          125
against the laws of the goverinent, they
have their own laws and regulations, wh ch
they obey strictly. We may find among
them courage and fidelity, with many other
things that will recommend them as pirates. They may do many things, too,
which the laws of the government require,
hut they are not done because the government has so required, but in obedience to
their own regulations. For instance, the
government requires honesty, and they
may be strictly honest, one with another,
in their transactions, and the division of
all their spoil. Yet, as it respects the government, and the general principle, their
whole life is one of the most wicked dishonesty. Now, it is plain, that whilst they
continue in their rebellion they can do
nothing to recommend them to the government as citizens.  Their first step
must be to give up their rebellion, acknowledge their allegiance to the government, and sue for mercy. So all men, in
their natural state, are rebels against God;
and though they may do many things
which the law of God requires, and which
will recommend them as men, yet nothing
is done with reference to God and his law.
But the regulations of society, respect for
public opinion, self-interest, their own
character in the sight of the world, or some
11*




126           INABILITY.
other worldly or wicked motive, reigns
supremely; and God, to whom they owe
their heart and lives, is forgotten; or, if
thought of at all, his claims are wickedly
rejected, his counsels spurned, and the
heart, in obstinate rebellion, refuses obedience. Now, it is plain, that while the
heart continues in this state the man is a
rebel against God, and can do nothing to
recommend himself to his favour. The
first step is to give up his rebellion, repent
of his sins, turn to God, and sue for pardon and reconciliation through the Saviour.
This he is unwilling to do, until he is made
willing. He loves his sins, and will continue to love them, until his heart is
changed.
You can now see clearly the force of the
passage of Scripture, which you spoke of
in our last conversation-" Whatsoever is
not of faith is sin"-Rom. xiv. 23. The
same truth is stated in Romn. viii. 8" They that are in the flesh cannot please
God."  And Heb. xi. 6- "Without faith
it is impossible to please him."
Con.-Are we then to conclude that all
the good actions of unregenerate men are
sins?
Min.-They are not positively sinful in
themselves, but sinful from defect. They
tack the principle which alone can make




INABILITY.          127
thexm righteous in the sight of God. In
the case of the pirates it is easy to see that
all their actions are sin against the government. While they continue pirates,'heir
sailing, mending, or rigging their vessel,
and even their eating and drinking, are all
sins in the eyes of the government, as
they are only so many expedients to enable them to continue their piratical career,
and are parts of their life of rebellion. So
with sinners. While the heart is wrong,
it vitiates everything in the sight of God,
even their most ordinary occupations; for
the Opain, unequivocal language of God is,
"The ploughing of the wicked is sin."
Prov. xxi. 4.
Crn. —This places all men, by nature,
in a very dreadful condition-their whole
life being nothing but sin-a "treasuring
up of wrath against the day of wrath"and no ability to help themselves.
MJlin.-It places them entirely dependent
upon the sovereign grace and mercy of
their offended God. And this, according
to the Bible, is their true condition. Such
exhibitions of the true state of mankind
are, I know, offensive to unregenerate men
generally; and many have tried to find
out a system of doctrines more palatable
to the popular mind. But all such attemt'ts are unfaithful to God, and the souls




128           INABILIMr.
of men. That teacher of religion has but
a poor errand to the sacred desk who attempts thus to "sew pillows under the
arms" of his hearers, as Ezekiel describes
the effeminate teachers in his day. It is
an attempt to heal the hurt of the sinner
slightly, and crying peace, where there is
no peace. His lost, ruined, and helpless
state needs to be constantly set before him;
and until he is brought to feel it, he will
never seek help where alone it is to he
found.
Con. —But as the sinner's inability consists in his wicked love of sin, and unwillingness to love God, has he not some
power over his will, that might be exercised in determining his choice of God and
holiness?
fMin.-I have already remarked, that the
will in choosing is influenced by motives,
and the motives preponderate according to
the state of the heart, or moral taste. But,
perhaps, it would be useful for us to look
at this a little further, before proceeding to
the arguments drawn from the Bible respecting man's inability; both of which
we will consider at any time you may have
leisure.




DIALOGUE XI.
FREE WILL.
Minister. —The doctrine which we proposed to consider this evening, namely, the
powers of the will, is one that involves a
great many abstruse questions, which it
would not, perhaps, be expedient to enter
upon largely at present. But I will endeavour to give you a plain, common sense
view of it, if I can, without any metaphysical subtleties.
Convert.-You spoke at our last interview of an inability of will; but is this
consistent with freedom of will? Is not
the will capable of acting freely, ard of
choosing what it pleases?
Min.-Certainly; but this is not the
question at issue. It is admitted on all
hands that the will is free, and does choose
what it pleases. But the question is,
whether the will has power to choose contrarv to what it pleases, or anything that
is in direct opposition to what it does
choose. It is admitted on all hands that
choice is made according to the highest
(1/9)




130           FREE WILL.
pleasure, oi strongest inclination; and thle
point to be considered is, whether it has
power to choose, in direct hostility to its
strongest inclinations, and whether these
strongest inclinations do not always operate in determining choice.
Con.-But do not men often choose that
which is contrary to their desires and inclinations?
MJin.-They often choose what is in
some respects disagreeable; but there is
always some other motive, which at the
time influences the choice, which in other
circumstances would not be made. For
instance, a man may and can eat wormwood, but he will not do it, unless there
be some inducement presented, which influences his choice in so doing, and makes
it, for the time, his strongest inclination.
But then the question still remains,
while his ruling inclination, or pleasure,
continues to choose as it does, that which,
upon the whole, seems most desirable, is
there any faculty or power in the will to
act contrary?-that is, is there any cause
adequate to the production of such an effect? There can be no effect without an
adequate cause; and when there is a cause
adequate to the production of an effect,
there must be some greater cause to prevent that effect, or to produce its opposite.




FREE WILL.           131
No w, it is admitted on all han s, that motives arll inclinations are the causes which
operate, in producing the acts of the will
in choosing and refusing; and that the
will always does act in the way in which
the strongest inclinations lead. But it is
still contended by the advocates of the human ability scheme, that there is in the
will a power to choose in opposition to its
strongest inclination. But where is their
proof?  They admit, that though there is
such a power, it never acts. Then it is
admitted, that it is not a cause adequate to
the production of the effect. Why, then,
contend for it?  Of what use is it?  It
produces no effects in morals or religion
It only serves the purpose of some philo
sophizing theologians, to bolster up their
system, which they find cannot stand with
out it. But let us look at it. A man in
certain circumstances, with motives operating without, and inclinations within, is
induced to act in a certain way. He
chooses that to which his strongest inclinations lead him. Here are cause and effect. Now, if under the same circumstances, and with the same inclinations,
his will has a power to choose the contrary of what it does, he either makes the
choice, or he does not. If he makes the
contrary choice, then his will chooses con



132           FREE WILL.
trary to what it does choose, which is a
self-contradiction.  If he does not make
the contrary choice, then there is no cause
adequate to the production of the effect,
and the power of the will to choose contrary to its choice amounts to just nothing
at all.
Con.-But might he not choose otherwise if the will were so inclined?
JMin.-Certainly; but that is not the
point. I am endeavouring to show you,
that it always does act as it is inclined;
but the point is, has it power to choose
contrary to its choice, whether it be inclined or not, and in spite of all opposing
inclinations? Scales will turn illn an opposite direction, if there be a preponderating weight-a cause adequate to the effect-but without it they will not. No
more will the will act in opposition to its
strongest inclinations and motives. The
cause in the one case is just as adequate to
the production of the effect as in the other.
Thus, the faculty of will, in good and
bad men, exerts their volitions; but the
character of these volitions is determined
under given motives, not by the natural
faculty itself, abstractly considered, but
by the moral state of the heart; and if it
be in a certain moral state, it cannot be a
property of the will to put forth choices




FREE Wll11           183
of an opposite moral character, for It is ad.
mitted that the heart always rules the
choices of the will; and consequently, you
perceive, we are brought back to our forIner conclusion, that nman in his natural
state is unable to love God, and put forth
holy exercises, because his strongest inclinations and desires lead in an opposite direction. He is wickedly unwilling, and therefore unable. He chooses sin deliberately
and freely, and always will until a gracious
change is wrought by the Spirit of God.
"Verily, verily, I say unto thee, except a
man be born again he cannot see the kingdom of God."-John iii. 3.
Con.-But when motives are presented,
and the will chooses or refuses, according
to the moral state of the inner man, without any power in itself to put forth choices
contrary to that moral state, is the doctrine not liable to objection, on the ground
that the motives are often presented under
circumstances over which the man has no
control?
Min.-It is true that the motives are
furnished in the providence of God. The
murderer is kept in life, in God's providence, and is indebted to God for strength
to kill his victim, and also for the opportunity. Joseph's brethren could not have
cast him into the pit, or sold him, if it had
12




134          FREE WTLL.
not been so arranged in the provider.ce of
God that he was sent to them. In this
way they were furnished with the external motive. And I know the objection is
urged, that if God furnish the nmotives, he
is in this sense the author of sin. But of
all the objections of errorists, this is among
the most silly, that because God places
manll in circumstances, and gives him opportunities to do good, because he chooses
to pervert them to evil purposes, God is,
therefore, blamable with his sin.
A man makes a musical instrument, with
the design that it may delight him with its
sweet, harmonious sounds; and when itis
made he finds it "good." It answers the
purposes for which it was designed perfectly; but from some cause it becomes
damaged, and then, under the same process which formerly produced harmony,
there is now nothing but discord. Now,
it is plain, that though he is the author of
the sound,he is not the author ofthe discord.
That arises from the defect of the instrument. And for certain reasons that may
operate, he may keep it in order externally, and touch its strings, knowing that it
will produce discord, and still not be the
author of it. So God keeps in order the
system of the world, in all its various operations of life and action; and his provi



FREE WILL.          135
lence with men is all so arranged, that if
they were holy, the external motives he
presents would at all times produce good
results. Had not Joseph's brethren indulged a wicked hatred toward him, his
coming to them would have afforded an
opportunity of doing good to him and
their aged father. But their wicked hearts
perverted it into an occasion of evil.
Con.-But does not this doctrine of inability tend to make sinners more careless?
Will they not say, that as they cannot
change their own hearts, all efforts to seek
God, and all striving after holiness are useless?
Min.-I believe it has just the opposite tendency. It is because the sinner
does not feel his lost and helpless condition, that he remains careless. There is
not a careless sinner in the world, who is
not a full believer in the doctrine of perfect ability. It is his resolution to repent
and turn to God at some future time, that
keeps him easy; and he feels perfectly
competent to the task. He has no sense
whatever of his absolute dependence upon
God. He believes that it is something that
he can attend to at any time, and at some
convenient tihme he will do it.
And just in proportion as you strengthen
that belief; you increase his carelessness,




136          FREE WILL.
and lull him to sleep on the awful brink
of eterral ruin. It is only when he is
brought to feel his entire helplessness, and
dependence upon sovereign grace, that he
will seek help where it is to be found.
Then, and not till then, will he rejoice in the
truth, that his " help is laid upon one who
is mighty to save." It is the hiding of this
wholesome truth that has tended to make
so many fitful professors of religion, and
made religion with many to consist in a
kind of spasmodic or occasional action.
They are taught, that if they purpose to
serve God, that is all the change they need;
and that this is as easily done as to raise
the hand. They may, and often do, change
the outward purpose; but if the heart be
not changed by divine grace, they will be
sure to change back again. "He that
striveth' for the mastery, is not crowned,
unless he strive lawfully."  And the only
lawful way for a sinner to strive, is with a
feeling of dependence on God, and with the
earnest prayer, "Create in me a clean
heart, 0 God; and renew a right spirit
within me."
Caon.-I believe it is always best for us
all to know the worst of our spiritual condition.
AJlin. -Let us now look at what the Bible
says on the doctrine of inability. And I




PREE WILL           137
would remark, in the first place, that the
doctrine is plainly taught in all those passages which speak of the necessity of reeneration. John iii. 3 —" Except a man
be born again, he cannot see the kingdom
of God"-and 7 —" Marvel not that I said
unto thee, ye must be born again"-with
many other passages, which I need not
enumerate.
Again, it is taught in all those passages
which ascribe this work directly to the
Spirit of God. John iii. 5-" Except a
man be born of water and of the Spirit, he
cannot see the kingdom of God." Acts xvi.
14-" The Lord opened her heart, that she
attended to the things which were spoken
of Paul." 1 Thess. i. 5 —" Our gospel came
not unto you in word only, but in power,
and in the Iholy Ghost." 1 Cor. 3, 6,
and 7 —" I have planted, Apollos watered,
but God gave the increase. So, then, neither is he that planteth anything, neither
he that watereth, but God that giveth the
increase."  Phil. ii. 13-" It is God that
worketh in you, both to will and to do."
Ezek. xxxvi. 26 and 27 —" A new heart als:)
w.ill 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 my3 Spirit
within you, and cause you to walk in my
12 *




138           FREE WILL.
statutes." John i. 13-" Which were born
not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh,
nor of the will of man, but of God." But
I need not enumerate further. The Bible
everywhere ascribes the work of producing
holiness in the heart of a sinner, to the direct agency of God. And there is not a
single word or passage which ascribes it to
the sin ner himself.
C(on.-I do not recollect ever to have
seen or heard it asserted, that any passage
of Scripture directly asserts that the sinner
is the agent in his own change of heart:
but it is inferred from the fact that he is
commanded to do it.
Min. —That argument is based upon the
false assumption, that there is nothing
duty, which there is not full ability to perform; the absurdity of which, I think, I
clearly showed you in our last conversation.
But let us look at those passages of the
Bible, which assert the doctrine of inability in plain and unequivocal language.
John vi. 44 —" No man can come to mle,
except the Father which has sent me, draw
him."  Eph. ii. 1-" You hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and
sins." 1 Cor. ii. 14-" The natural man
receiveth not the things of the Spirit of
God, for they are foolishness unto him;
neithel can he know them, because they




FREE IrLL.           139
are spiritually discerned." Rom. viii. 7
—, The carnal mind is enmity against
God: for it is not subject to the law of
God, neither indeed can be."  These, with
other passages, quoted in our former conversation, " They that are in the flesh, canlnot please God," &c., present the doctrine
i l ]anguage that cannot be softened down,
without destroying their sense altogether.




DIALOGUE X1I.
EFFECTUAL CALLING.
Convert.-Since our last conversation, I
have been reflecting on the views you presented respecting human ability, and feel
constrained to believe, that man in his
natural state is not able of himself to
change his own heart. Indeed, it is so
plain a truth, that I now rather wonder
that it should be controverted by any one
who has thoroughly considered the subject.
I find even the "Doctrinal Tracts" of the
Methodist church, teach it in plain language. On page 134, it is said, that " no
sinner can believe, but by the almighty
power of God." But I find it also stated
in the same connection, that God gives to all
men " sufficient grace" to enable them to be.
lieve, and consequently "their death lies
at their own door." And, my Methodist
neighbour contends, that if this were not
done, God could not be sincere in offering
salvation to all men.
Minister. -That is the most common doetrine of those who reject the doctrines of
(140)




EFFECTU AL CALLING.     141
grace, respecting regeneration, effectual
cali ng &c.: and, you might have observed,
that the "Doctrinal Tracts," in the same
connection, teach that this is necessary,
not only "to maintain the sincerity of
God," but also " to vindicate his equity at
the great day, in condemning the impenitent." I am at a loss to know, how any
amount of grace short of regeneration, can
be called "sufficient."  If it does not
change the sinner's moral tastes and inclinations, it is not sufficient to enable him
to believe and repent. How can he repent
of sin, when he still loves it? There never
was, and never will be, a single instance
of a true penitent, whose heart is unchanged. I need not stay to prove, that
God does not give "sufficient grace
to all men," in this sense. The outward
calls of the gospel are gracious, but no one
except those who deny the operations of
the Spirit altogether, will contend that
this is'"sufficient."  The movements of
the Spirit, which many experience in coInviction, are gracious, but all admit that
these are not "sufficient." What could we
think of a teacher of religion, who would
tell a sinner under conviction, that he had
grace enough, and need not look for more!
And, the fact of telling him to pray for
more, and of praying for such an one that




142      EFFECTUAL CALLING.
he might have more given him, is sufficient
proof that it is not deemed "sufficient."
If this be what is meant by "sufficient
grace," it is calling that sufficient which
is not sufficient; and, if they mean any
other kind of grace, I know not what kind
it is.
Con.-It seems to me contrary to all
Christian experience, to maintain that any
kind or degree of grace, is sufficient to lead
a sinner to Christ, short of that which
changes his heart, and gives him new views
and feelings.
Min.-But you have not yet seen the
worst feature of this doctrine of " sufficient
grace to all men." It is based upon the
assumption, that without bestowing this
grace, God could not be sincere in offering
salvation, or just in condemning unbelievers. Then he was bound to save all
the human family without an atonement.
For, if it would be unjust in him to condemn them, it would be just to save them,
and whatever is strict justice, he is bound
by every perfection of his nature to do.
Then, without the atonement, and this
" sufficient grace," all men would be saved.
But God has provided a Saviour, and gives
this " sufficient grace, " to make it consistent
with his justice to condemn solme, who do
not believe. This not only nmakes God the




EFFECTUAL CALLING.      143
author of sin, but it makes him the author
of the eternal death of every impenitent
sinner. I do not suppose, that the abettors
of the doctrine intend to teach a sentiment
so grossly blasphemous, but the conclusion
is legitimate and necessary. If what they
teach be true, this must be true likewise.
The same doctrine is taught in different
language on page 154, of the "Doctrinal
Tracts."  "The moment Adam fell, he had
no freedom of will left; but God, when of
his own free grace he gave the promise of
a Saviour, to him and his posterity, graciously restored to mankind a liberty and
power to accept of proffered salvation."
Now, if there were no freedom  of will
there could be no accountability. It is a
plain dictate of common sense, that a man
is not accountable for anything he does not
do willingly and freely. Then, where
there is no freedom of will, there can be
no sin. But God gave them a freedom of
will to capacitate theln to sin. Hence,'ll
mankind are sinners by the grace of God!
But I need not follow further the absur:.ties of such doctrines. They are all only
miserable shifts to get clear of the doctrines of grace, and to fix up some scheme
that will lead the helpless sinner away from
his entire dependence on the free, unmer.
ited, sovereign grace of God.




144      EFFECTUAL CALLING.
Con.- But, is this clearly reconcilable
with the commands and exhortations of
the Bible to come to Christ, which I have
heard Presbvterian ministers urge as stren
uously upon sinners, as any other class of
preachers?
Min.-It is the duty of the sinner to
strive;. and, to those who do so, God has
given gracious promises. But, they
should always be taught to strive with a
feeling of dependence, and earnest looking to God for grace. This is the course
marked out in the word of God. "Work
out your own salvation with fear and
trembling, for it is God that worketh in
you both to -will and to do of his good
pleasure." You perceive, that the apostle,
instead of making the dependence of the
sinner an excuse for doing nothing, makes
it the ground of his encouragement to
work. There is no language in our Confession of Faith more forcible or comprehensive than this. God works in us
"both to will and to do;" and, thereupon,
the apostle bases his exhortation to " work
out our salvation." And, "what God
hath joined together, let no man put asunder."  Let these things always be kept in
mind, and followed out, and there is no
danger of mistake in going too far on
either hand. No one cam err in striving




EFFECTUAL ATLLIN G.     145
too earnestly for salvation, if it 1 e done in
the right way. No more can any one err,
at the same time, in casting himself upon
God, with too much dependence and
earnest prayer for grace. Hence, boasting
is excluded by the law of faith; and every
true Christian is prepared to say, "By
the grace of God I am what I am." This,
however, could not be the case, if any part
of the work of regeneration were his own.
"' Who maketh thee to differ?" is the emphatic inquiry of the apostle on this subject; and, let any one who thinks he has
had any part in his own regeneration, answer the question if he can, in accordance
with the language of the Bible.
You can now see the truth of the language of our catechism, when it says,
"We are made partakers of the redemption purchased by Christ, by the effectual
application of it to us by his Holy Spirit."
And further, "The Spirit applieth to us
the redemption purchased by Christ, by
working faith in us, and thereby uniting
us to Christ, in our effectual calling."
And, again, "Effectual calling is the work
of God's Spirit, whereby convincing us of
our sill and misery, enlightening our
minds in the knowledge of Christ, and renewing our wills, he doth persuade and
enable us to embrace Jesus Christ, freely
13




146      EFFECTUAL CALLING.
offered to us in the Gospel."  Shorter Ca.
techism-answer to questions 29, 30, 31.
This language ally one may compare with
Scripture.  Rorn. viii. 30-" Whom  he
did predestinate, them he also called, and
whom he called, them he also justified."
2 Thess. ii. 13 -" God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation, through
sanctification of the Spirit and belief of
the truth." 2 Cor. iii. 3 —" The epistle
of Christ nlinistered by us, written, not
with ink, but with the Spirit of the living
God, not in tables of stone, but in fleshly
tables of the heart."  2 Tim. i. 9-" Who
hath saved us, and called us with an holy
calling, not according to our works, but
according to his own purpose and grace."
Ezek. xxxvi. 26-" A new heart also will
I give you, and a new spirit will I put
within you," &c. Ezek. xi. 19- 1" will
give them one heart, and I will put a new
spirit within you." Psa. cx. 3 —" Thy
people shall be willing in the day of thy
power." Eph. ii. 1-",You hath he quickened who were dead in trespasses and
sins." Verse 5- "Even when we were
dead in sins, hath quickened us together
with Christ, (by grace ye are saved.)"'
Verse 8 —" By grace are ye saved through
faith, and that not Af yourselves, it is the
gift, of Godl." -Fut, I need not enumerate




EFFECTUAL CALL1N G.     147
further, though it would be easy to find
hundreds of texts which teach the same
truth. The Bible, you perceive, teaches
abundantly the doctrine of "sufficient
grace," but it is in a sense very different
from that taught in the " Doctrinal Tracts."
The sufficient grace of the Bible is that
which finds man "dead in trespasses and
sins, calls him with a holy calling, gives
him  a new  heart, makes him  willing,
quickens him unto life, and leads him to
Christ"-or, as our Catechism expresses
it, "persuades and enables him  to embrace Jesus Christ." It is in this sense
that "faith is the gift of God;" and, indeed, this is the only conceivable sense in
which it can be.
Con.-But does not the doctrine of
" sufficient grace to all men," meet, in the
most satisfactory manner, the objection,
that God is partial in giving more grace
to some than to others?
Min..-Even if it did, we are not bound to
adopt it, when it is so plainly contradicted
by the Bible. I believe, however, that
this is the ground upon which it is based.
Men are unwilling to allow God his sovereignty, either in providence or mercy.
And when the Bible tells us he distinguishes in his dealings with man, they reject the doctrine. and call it partiality in




148       EFFECtUAL CALLING.
God to give anything more to one than to
another; and leaving the plain doctrine
of revelation, endeavour to patch up a
scheme of their own, which they boast of
as vindicating the character of God, when,
in fact, it robs him of his sovereignty.
But still their scheme, instead of relieving, increases the difficulty.
Con.-How does it increase the difficulty? If God gives to all men the same
amount of grace, there surely can be no
charge of partiality..Min.-There would still be the same
ground for the charge, unless he would go
further, and place all men precisely in the
same circumstances, and give them precisely the same dispositions, that, according to this scheme, all might have precisely the same opportunities of improving
their equal amount of grace.  Similar
causes operating in similar circumstances,
must invariably produce similar effects.
The amount of grace that is "sufficient"
to lead one man to the Saviour, will invariably lead another of the same disposition, placed in similar circumstances. And
if all men possessed the same dispositions,
and were in the same circumstances, what
is sufficient for one would be for another,
and all woul I be saved. But all are not
ir the same (ircumstances, and have not




EFFECTUAL CALLING.      149
the same opportunities. Some ale born
of Christian parents, whose instructions
and prayers are blessed to their conversion. Others are taught from their infancy to disobey God and contemnn religion.
Some never hear of a Saviour, or of tho
true God. Now, over these circumstances, they themselves have no control; and
those who accuse God of partiality because
he discriminates in grace, and contend
that it would be injustice to bestow more
upon one man than another, are bound to
explain, upon the same principles, the
facts of his providence, by which he orders the lots of men in the world.  But
here they will find an insuperable difficulty, because they cannot deny the fact, that
some are placed in circumstances better
calculated to result in their salvation, than
others.
How much more consistent with common sense, and with the disposition we
ought to exercise toward God and his
word, to take the simple language of the
Bible, that "he has mercy on whom he
will have mercy " and will have trophies
of his grace out of all nations and cliasses
of men. And whenever any one turns
aside from the truth of the Bible, to reconcile what, in the pride of opinion, he conceives to be difficulties. he will only find
13 *




150       EFFECTUAL CALLING.
himself surrounded with difficulties still
more perplexing and insuperable.
Con. It seems to me a fact that cannot
le disputed, that God distinguishes both
in his providence and grace, and the objection of partiality, I perceive, amounts
to a denial of his sovereign right to do as
he pleases, which the Bible everywhere
ascribes to him, and which it must be imr
pious to controvert, either directly or in.
directly.
But there is another point upon which I
wrish to have your views, about which I have
felt some difficulty; I mean the doctrine
of perfect sanctification in this life. I feel
that I am very far from what I should be,
and my desire is to get clear of all sin.
We are commanded in the Bible to "be
perfect;" and yet I know your church
holds that absolute perfection is not attainable in this life. I feel that it is a question of great practical importance, and
would like to have all the information I can
derive from every source..JAin.-Call at any time you find convenient, and I will endeavour to give you
a plain, scriptural view of it, both as it reKpects our duty and privilege.




DIALOGUE XIII,
SINLES9 PERFECTION.
Mlinistjr. —Thc doctrine we proposed to
examine this evening, viz: Whether:xy
one in this life ever attains to absolute sinless perfection, is thus plainly expressed in
our Confession of Faith: "No mere mlan,
since the fall, is able in this life perfectly
to keep the commandments of God, but
doth daily break them, in thought, word,
and deed."-Shorter Catechism, Ans. to
Qu. 82. I need not stay to prove, that
"the commandments of God" are our
standard of holiness, and anything that
comes short of a perfect fulfilment of all
their requirements, in all respects, is not
perfect obedience. And we not only sin
in every- positive violation of the law, but
also in every want of perfect conformity to
all its holy requirements. Gal. iii. 10" Cursed is every one that continueth not
in all things which are written in the book
of the law to do them."  It is a plain dictate of common sense, as well as of the Bible, that in failing to do, or to be, what
God r(equires, is sinf-,l. as well as doing,
( 151)




152       SINLESS PERFECTION.
or being, what he forbids.  Ilence,'mr
Catechism says-" Sin is any want of conformity unto, or transgression of, the law
of God."-Shorter Cat. Ans. to Qu. 14.
Convert.-Are we then to account all our
infirmities sinful; and all our consequent
mistakes and aberrations, whether voluntary or involuntary?
Min.-Everything that is not in strict
accordance with God's requirements must
be sin. He requires nothing but holiness,
and whatever he requires, it is our duty
to give. I know it is said by the advocates of the doctrine of perfection, that our
infirmities and mistakes are not sinful;
and yet, they contradict themselves by
saying, that " every such mistake, were it
not for the blood of atonement, would expose us to eternal damnation."-" Doctrinal Tracts," p. 311. That is, God would
be just in sending us to hell for ever, for
that which is not sin! A sentiinent more
derogatory to God can scarcely be imagined. It is only another attempt to degrade the law of God-to take from it its
strictness and spirituality, and brinlg it
down to the low and cornmmon views entertained of it by men of the world. It is too
generally lost sight of in the world, that
the law of God, in its holy requirements,
extends to the feelings of the heart, the




SINLESS PERFECTION.       153
thoughts, and exercises of the inner man;
and errorists almost uniformly fall in with
the feelings of the world, and make the law
of God a matter of such small moment,
that perfect obedience is comparatively
easy. But the Bible speaks in different
language. What it mainly insists upon,
is right feelings and dispositions; and it
chiefly condemns feelings and dispositions
that are wrong, because from these proceed all the outward conduct.  "Out of
the heart," says Christ, "proceed  evil
thoughts, adulteries, murders," &c. And
Solomon says, "Keep thy heart with all diligence, for out of it are the issues of life."
Love is a feeling, repentance is a feeling,
faith is an inward exercise of the soul, humility is a feeling, hope, patience, resignation, charity, meekness, kindness, contentment, &c., are all feelings. Yet who that
reads the Bible carefully, does not perceive
that all these are required as indispensable
duties? And on the other hand, enmity to
God is a feeling, unbelief is a feeling, selfishness, pride, impenitence, love of the
world, covetousness, envy, anger. hatred,
revenge, &c., are all feelings, and all are
forbidden as the worst of sins. Hence, it
is evident, that to form anything like a
proper estimate of our character in the
right of God and his law, we vlust first




154       SINL CSS PER}ECTION.
and chiefly have respect to the feelings and
dispositions of the heart. And before we
can be perfect, we must in all these respects, lbe absolutely and entirely free from
the least failure, and exercise all those feelings as purely as the angels in heaven.
~Con. —In that case, I do not believe that
any one, who has a proper view of himself,
will ever claim to be perfect..Min.-It is, I believe, generally claimed
on the ground of perfect love. They claim
to have perfect love; and, as the apostle
says, "love is the fulfilling of the law,"
therefore, they are perfect. But any one
who thinks he has as muchl love as he
ought to have, has very grovelling ideas of
his obligations to God, or very superficial
views of himself. But there are other
classes of sins, which are rather consequent
upon those of the heart and feelings, of
which we must take account in forming a
proper estimate of our character in the
sight of God and his law. The Bible says,
that vain, trifling, and foolish thoughts are
sinful.  Christ classes "evil thoughts"
with "thefts, murder, adultery," &c. "The
wicked" is not only commanded to "forsake his w ays," but also " the unrighteous
man his thoughts."  Again, we are told,
that "the thoughts of the wicked are an
abomination unto the Lord,"' &c.  And




SINLESS PERFECTION.      155
God says, in another place-" IThai, 0
ea:th, I will bring evil upon this people,
even the fruit of their thoughts." Indeed.
the character of the man seenms to be in
sonime measure determined by his thoughts.
"For as a man thinketh in his heart, so is
he." These passages, with many others
that might be quoted, prove very clearly,
that much sin is committed in thought.
And if vain and foolish thoughts are sinful, we may not only ask, who is perfect?but, who can enumerate the sins of a single day? We should remember, too, that
thoughts are the language of spirits, and
each one has a tongue in the ear of God.
Christ answered the thoughts'of those
around him, as if they had spoken. It is
no wonder that God says, " every imagilation of the thoughts of man's heart, is evil
continually." But this is not all, yet. We
must also take into the account, the sins
of our tongues.  And here I need not
speak of falsehood, slander, profanity, &c.
These, all know and admit to be sins. But
Christ says, that "every idle word, whichl
nien shall speak, they shall give account
thereof in the day of judgment."  Mere
idle words, then, are sins, andCnr.- But what are idle words?
lMin.-All that are not necessary, and
that do not tend *(, produce some good re



156      SINLESS PERFECT-ON.
suit. The commands of the Bible are,
"' Let no corrupt communication proceed
out of your mouth, but that which is good,
to the use of edifying;" " let your speech
be always with grace, that it mav minister
grace to the hearers;" " nor foolish talking,
nor jesting, which are not convenient, but
rather giving of thanks." These rules
-may be thought too strict, by the advocates
of perfection, but they are the rules which
God lays down in his word, by which we
are to order our conversation. Every word
which does not comport with these rules,
is an " idle word," and sinful in the sight
of God. Then, where is the man who will
stand up before God and say, that in this
respect alone, he is free from sin?
But still more: When we take into the
account our actions in general, the mountain rises still higher. Here I need not go
further than to speak of our sins of omission. The command is, "Withhold not
good from him to whom it is due, when it
is in the power of thine hand to do it, for
to him that knoweth to do good and doeth
it not, to him it is sin." From this it is
plain, that whenever we have an opportuIity of doing good, either to the souls or
bodies of others, and neglect to improve it,
we sin both against our fellow-men and
against God. But further: God tells us,




SINLESS PERFECTION.     157
"Whether ye eat or drink, or whatsoever
ye do, do all to the glory of God." This
applies to all our words and actions, and
proves beyond controversy, that every
word we speak, and every action we per.
form, which is not done with a view to
promote the glory of God, is sinful. Of
how many sins, then, are we guilty?
And where is the perfect man, in this
respect? Again: we are commanded
to "pray without ceasing," to " rejoice
in the Lord always," &c. Every moment that we have not a holy, prayerful
frame of mind, we sin. It is admitted
on all hands, that it is a sin to swear profanely; but few reflect that it is also a sin
not to pray, whenever it is our duty or
privilege. But I need not enlarge, though
much more might be said in contrasting
the obedience of the best men, with the
high and holy requirements of the law of
God. Enough has been said, however, to
show you the truth of the language of our
Confession, that "we daily break the commandments of God in thought, word, and
deed."
Con. —&s it respects the simple fact, that
all men are sinners, and that, in this life,
no one ever attains to such a degree of perfection in holiness as to be entirely free
from sin, I think it cannot be controverted,
14




158       SINLESS PERFECTION.
if we allo v tile law of God, in all its holy
requirements, to be our standai d. Indeel,
I have never had much difficulty in my
mind as to the fact, that all come far short
of perfect holiness in this respect. But
how are we to understand the commands
of God requiring this perfection, if it be
not attainal)ble?
Min.-The fact that it is unattained, and
unattainable, does not arise from God, but
from ourselves, and therefore it is no less
our duty, and it should be the constant
aim of every Christian. Indeed, no true
Christian can rest satisfied with himself,
while he feels any remaining corruption,
and consequently the warfare is still con.
tinued; and, as the Bible expresses it, he
goes on "from strength to strength." His
standard of holiness is God himself, of
whose character the law is a transcript.
With the commarlld before him, "Be ye
holy, for I the Lord your God ant holy,"
lie finds no place to stop short of this, until, like the angels in heaven, he reflects
fully and perfectly the image of his Maker.
Con.-B-ut are there not some passages
of Scripture, which favour the idea that
some are perfect, or that perfection has
been attained in this life by some?
JMin.-We are told to " mark the perfect
man, and behold the upright, for the end
of that man is peate." Paul says, " Let us




SINLESS PERFECTION.       159
therefore, as many as be perfect, be thus
minded," &c. "Be perfect, be of good
comfort,"&c. Noah, we are told, "was a
just man and perfect," &c. But it is plain,
from the connection in which the word is
used in other places, that it does not mean
an entire freedom from all sin. The primary signification of the original word,
which Paul uses in his exhortation to the
Corinthians, "be perfect," is collecting together the disjointed or broken parts of a
body or system, so as to make it uniform
or complete, and that no part be wanting,
and there is such a thing attainable, and
often attained, as perfection, in this sense:
that is, a perfect gospel character. For instance, if a professor of religion be in the
habit of prevarication, or if he be covetous
or niggardly in his dealings, or in any way
exhibits to the world traits of character in..
consistent with his profession, they are
blots in his Christian character which cast
a shade over the whole, and excite doubts
as to the reality of his piety. In this respect, every Christian should and can be
perfect: that is, he should exhibit the Christian character complete in all its parts.
But to love God as much as we should, to
exercise constant faith, in all the strength
and unwavering con idence that he require.s, to have hope, lepentance, humility,




160        SINLESS PERFECTION.
and all the Christian graces and virtues in
constant perfect operation, and to be entirely free from sin in the sight of God, is
a very different matter. The Saviour evidently uses the term "perfect" in the former sense, when speaking to the young ruler-" If thou wilt be perfect, go sell all that
thou hast," &c. Surely he did not mean,
that thereby he would be free from all sin.
Perfection, then, in the Bible sense, means
Integrity, sincerity in our profession, unfeigned love to God, and respect to all his
commands. But as our time will not permit us to enter fully into the Bible arguments on this subject, we will defer it to
our next interview.




DIALOGUE XIV.
SINLESS PERFECTION.
conv.rt.- Your views of the sinfulness
of all men in the sight of God, presented
at our last interview, cannot, I think, be
objected to, except on the ground that it is
discouraging to the Christian to know that
his desires cannot be accomplished, until
he ends his earthly career. It must be the
most earnest desire of every true Christian
to be free from all sin; and will it not
have a tendency to paralyze his efforts to
grow in grace, to know that his whole life
Is to be spent in endeavours to attain to
that state of perfection which none ever
find?
Minister. —I believe it has just the opposite tendency, judging both from the Bible
and all Christian experience. Would it be
discouraging to a man on a journey, to
know that the object he had in view was
to be obtained only at the end of it?  It
would tend to encourage him all the way,
to know certainly that he would finish his
journey, and there, and there only he
14                   (161 )




162      SINLESS PERFECTION.
would obtain the object he had in view.
The way might be long and the journey
difficult, but the certain prospect of gaining the desired object would still cheer
him in his toil. So Paul expresses his experience, Phil. iii. 13, 14-" Forgetting
those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before, I press toward the mark, for the prize
of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus."
This is very far from the language of a
Perfectionist. He counted all his former
good works and attainments in sanctification only worthy of being forgotten, in
comparison with those that were yet before
him. But how eagerly he presses forward,
knowing that the prize was yet before him,
encouraged with the hope which animates
every Christian, that perfect meetness for
heaven, and release from the world, will be
found in immediate connection.
It is, moreover, the desire of every Christian to grow in grace, and while he finds
himself advancing in holiness, and growing
in conformity to the image of God, he finds
in this his greatest encouragement to press
on still toward the high and glorious prize
that is before him, perfect holiness and
perfect happiness in heaven. Perfect happiness must always be an immediate connequence of perfe3t holiness; and how




SINLESS PERFECTION.     163
could Paul say he was pressing on to obtain the prize, if he had already obtained
it? In this way, the doctrine of perfection
is destructive of growth in grace. A low
standard is set up as the mark of Christian
attainment; and when any one entertains
so good an opinion of himself as to think
he has arrived at it, all further advancement is at an end. Such an one must conclude that he has attained to that which
the apostle, in his burning zeal, felt himself wanting. And I can only say, that I
think a person who sets up this claim, has
yet room to make considerable advancement in the grace of humility.
Con.-It has always struck me unfavourably, to hear any one claiming to be perfect; but knowing that the grace of God
is all powerful, and that freedom from all
sin must be the desire of every Christian,
I found difficulty in deciding that no one
obtained the blessing. But in looking at
the high standard of holiness which the
Bible has set up, I think every one, who
has a proper view of himself, will decide
with the apostle, that it is a "prize of the
high calling of God in Christ Jesus," which
is yet far before him.
Min.-Let us now look more particularly at some arguments from the Bible.
James speaks the language of Christian ex



164       SINLESS PERFECTION.
perience, when he says, James iii. 2-" In
many thil.gs we offend all." After thus
stating the general truth, that "all" are
sinners "in many things," he goes on to
speak of particular offences, which cast a
stain upon the Christian character, and I
think plainly teaches the doctrine of Chris.
tian perfection, in the sense in which I
spoke of it at our last interview, that is, a
perfectly consistent gospel character, exhibiting to the world the piety and integrity of the inner man, and the sincerity of
his profession.  " If any man offend not in
word, the same is a perfect man, and able
to bridle the whole body," &c. He teaches
the same doctrine in chapter i. verse 27"Pure religion and undefiled before God
and the Father is this, to visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to
keep himself unspotted from the world."
Paul says, Phil. iii. 12-" Not as though I
had already attained, either were already
perfect."  In whatever sense he uses the
word here, it is plain that he did not connider himself perfect.
Con.-But are we to suppose that Paul
did not maintain a perfect gospel clharacter?
Min.-So far as we know. he did; but
if he here uses the word in that sense, it
only shows, what is always the fact, that




SINLESS PERFECTION.     185
the true Christian, who is striving after holiness, and endeavouring to "let his light
shine," feeling his own failures, always
puts a worse estimate on his own character, than others who cannot see him as he
sees himself. A man who advances in any
degree near perfe, tion in this sense, in the
eyes of others, will always be found the
last -man to claim it for himself. In what
a striking contrast, then, the language of
the apostle appears, to that of our modern
boasting Perfectionists! But further, Solomon in his prayer at the dedication of the
temple, recorded in 1 Kings viii. 46, beseeches God to be merciful to the sins of
his people, and expressly says, "For there
is no man that sinneth not." Again, Job
ix. 30, 31-" If I wash myself with snow
water, and make my hands never so clean;
yet shalt thou plunge me into the ditch, and
mine own clothes shall abhor me. For he
is not a man, as I am, that I should answer
him, and we should come together in judgment." Here it is plainly taught, that
however pure we may be in the eyes of the
world, yet with God we are vile and plolluted. The same is taught in stronger language still, in chapter xv. 14 —" What is
man that he should be clean? And he
that is born of a woman, that he should be
righteous?"  Bnt he speaks more expli.




166       SINLESS PERFEC ION.
citly still, in ix. 20-" If I say I anm perfect,
it shall also prove me perverse." What a
commentary on the language of a Perfec
tionist! Again, Eccl. vii. 20-" For there
is not a just man upon earth, that doeth
good, and sinneth not." Isa. lxiv. 6" We are all as an unclean thing, and all
our righteousnesses are as filthy rags."
These passages in themselves are sufficient
to prove, that the Bible does not consider
any one perfect in the sense in which Perfectionists claim it. But further still. Christ
teaches us to pray, "Forgive us our trespasses," &c. This direction is given for
secret prayer, and therefore these "trespasses," for the pardon of which we are to
pray, are our own individual sins. And
it is also plain, that it was intended for our
daily use. The fourth petition in this summary of prayer given for our direction, is,
"Give us this day our daily bread," or'"give us day by day our daily bread," and
the next petition in immediate connection
is, " forgive us our trespasses," &c.
It will not, I presume, be denied, that
this direction was also intended for Christians. But, if any one be perfect, he cannot pray according to tOle direction of
Christ, for he has no sins to be forgiven.
Indeed, the prayers of a man who esteems
himself perfect, nust be short and few, if




SINLESS PERFECTION.     167
he may be said to pray at all. He needs
no grace to overcome any sinful propensity. "The Wbdy of sin and death," which
troubled the apostle so much, is with him
perfectly sanctified and holy. He, then,
needs neither mercy nor grace. But these
are by the apostle made the main errand
of a believer at a throne of grace. ITeb.
iv. 16-" Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain
mercy and find grace to help in time of
need."  But a Perfectionist has no "time
of need;" he needs no more "grace" or
"mercy;" he has all the grace he needs,
and no sins to be forgiven, and consequently has no errand to a " throne of grace."
As to the Christian experience recorded
in the Bible, it is anything but perfectionism. The most extensive records are those
of David and Paul. And if perfection
were to be found anywhere, we might su*ly expect to find it in the experience of
these eminent servants of God. But what
is the fact? We find them  lamenting
their sins and short-comings, recording
their earnest longings after more entire
conformity to the law of God, and praying
for more grace to enable them to advance in
the divine life. We find no intimation anywhere that they thought themselves perfect, but everywhere the reverse. Time




168      SINLESS PERFECTION.
will not permit us to examine the numer.
ous passages in which they record their
sinfulness as their constant experience.
But we will look at some of them. Psa.
xxv. 11 —" For thy name's sake, O Lord,
pardon mine iniquity; for it is great."
xxxi. 10 —" My strength faileth because
of mine iniquity, and my bones are consumed." xxxviii. 3, 4, 5-" Neither is
there ally rest in my bones, because of my
sin. For mine iniquities are gone over
my head; as an heavy burden, they are
too heavy for me. My wounds stink, and
are corrupt, because of my foolishness."
xl. 12-" For innumerable evils have compassed me about; mine iniquities have
taken hold upon me, so that I am not able
to look up; they are more than the hairs
of mine head, therefore my heart faileth
me." This does not look much like perfection; and much more of the same kind
might be given. The 119th P almrL is almost one continued confession of failure
in duty, and prayer for quickening grace.
Verse 5th —" O that my ways were directed to keep thy statutes."  25-" My soul
cleaveth unto the dust: quicken thou me
according to thy word." 29-" Remove
from me the way of lying, and grant me
thy law graciously."  32 —" I will run the
way of thy commandments, when thou




SINLESS PERFECTION.     169
shalt enlarge my heart."  81-" My soul
faLinteth for thy sal1ation; but I hole in
thy word."  96 —"1 have seen an end of
all perfection; but thy commandn ent is
exceeding oi:.ad." 123 —" Mine eyes fail
for thy salvation, and for the word of thy
righteousness."   131-" I  opened  my
mouth and panted: for I longed for thy
commandments."  176-" I have gone
astray like a lost sheep: seek thy servant;
for I do not forget thy commandments."
All these express the exercises of the pious
soul, that feels its short-comings, and longs
after greater conformity to the law of God,
but they would sound very strange in the
mouth of a Perfectionist.
Paul gives his experience in language
equally plain, and, if possible, more strong
and explicit. Rom. vii. 14-25-" For we
know that the law is spiritual; but I am
carnal, sold under sin. For that which I
do, I allow not: for what I would, that do
I not; but what I hate, that do I. If then
I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law, that it is good. Now then it is
no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. For I know that in me, (that
is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing:
for to will is present with me; but how
to perform that which is good I find not.
For the good that- I would. I do not: but
15




170       SINLESS PERFECTION.
the evil which I would not, that I do.
Now if I do that I would not, it is no more
I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
I find then a law, that when I would do
good, evil is present with me. For I delight in the law of God after the inward
man. But I see another law in my memnbers, warring against the law of my mind,
and bringing me into captivity to the law
of sin which is in my members. 0 wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me
from the body of this death? I thank
God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So
then, with the mind I myself serve the law
of God, but with the flesh the law of sin."
This, in itself, if there were not another
passage in the Bible, is sufficient to prove
that the apostle was a stranger to anything
like sinless perfection.
Con.-But does not this, taking it all together, prove too much, and, therefore,
prove nothing? Does not the apostle use
language which cannot be true of the
Christian?-" I am carnal, sold under sin."
Can this be true of any one who is a true
believer?  He says in another place, of
Christians, " Ye are not under the law, but
under grace." How, then, can they be
"sold under sin?"
Min.-It is a very strong expression, I
admit; and those who advocate the doc



SINLESS PERFECTiON.      171
trine of perfection, have laid hold of it to
prove that the apostle is not giving lis
own experience, but the feelings of a sinner. But the falsity of such a view, is
clearly shown in the 22d verse-" I delight iln the law of God after the inward
nman."  And he gives the language of a
true believer in the 25th verse-" I thank
God through Jesus Christ our Lord." It
is as impossible to apply this to an unconverted sinner, as the whole passage to a
Perfectionist. But the expression, "carnal, sold under sin," is of very easy solution, if we allow the apostle to explain himself, which he does in the verse immediately following-" For that which I do,
I allow not," &c. The word "for," connects the two verses, and shows that the
one is explanatory of the other. The simple meaning, therefore, is, that he was an
unwilling " servant" of his inward propensities, against which he was struggling,
and from which he desired to be free, but
which he still felt maintaining their power
over him, and still "bringing him  into
captivity."  It expresses, in very strong
terms, the inward conflict which every
Christian experiences and  understands.
The passage taken together, contains an
unanswerlable proof that, perfection ill holiness is not attainable in this life, or at




172      SINLESS PERFECTION.
least that the apostle had not aitained it
when lihe wrote this account of his experience. And to my mind it is clear, that
a Perfectionist, instead of having comgleted the Christian warfare, has it yet to
egin.
Con.-But have we no account of any
one in the Bible, who claimed to have attained perfection in holiness?
JMin.-Not unless the Pharisee may be
so called, who, Christ tells us, "went up
to the temple to pray."  He claimed to be
perfect, even before God. He had no sins
to be pardoned, and no grace to ask, in his
own estimation; but thanked God that he
was so good. "Lord, I thank thee that I
am not as other men," &c. Whether he
knew in his heart that he was a sinner or
not, we are not told, but we know he
claimed to be perfect, and wished to be so
esteemed. Ile had no errand to a throne
of grace but to enumerate his virtues, and
thank God that he had no sin. But it is
only another proof of the truth of the saving of John, 1 John i. 8-" If we say that
we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and
the truth is not in us."
Con.-But if so much of our nature still
remains unsanctified, does it not afford a
groul7d of fear, that it will entirely overcome di our holy purposas and resolutions,




SINLESS PERFECTION.       173
and prove the cause of our final apostacy
from God and holiness?
Min.-Every Christian no doubt feels,
that if the warfare were to be carried on
in his own strength, there would be little
doubt as to the result. But the fact that
they feel their own weakness, teaches them
where their strength lies, and it is thus
made instrumental in their perseverance
in holiness, through divine grace.
But as this involves the general doctrine of perseverance, we wil l consider it
at our next interview.
15 *




DIALOGUE XV.
PERSEVERANCE.
Convcrt.-The sentiment you advanced
at our last interview, that the remaining
corruptions of our nature are instrumental
in our perseverance in holiness, seems to
me a paradox, which I cannot fully understand, or reconcile with the doctrines of
grace. Does it not make sin one of the
means of grace?
Minister.-A person who feels that lie is
sick, and uses means for his recovery, does
not make his sickness instrumental in his
restoration.  It is his knowledge of his
disease, that leads him to the use of pro-per means. So, if a Christian's sense of
his remaining imperfection, lead him to
tlla feluntain of grace, in the use of proper
means, it does not make his sin a means of
grace. I mentioned it, however, as a fact
in Christian experience, to show that our
imperfection, in this life, was no argument
against our final perseverance, but rather
in favour of it. Such was Paul's experience, when he says 2 Cor. xii. 9, 10(174)




PERSEVERANCE.           175
"Most gladly, therefore, will.I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of
Chllrist may rest upon me.  * * * For,
%when I am weak, then am I strong."  It
was not his weakness, in itself, that was
Ihis strength; but feeling his weakness,
he was led to look for grace, that he might
enjoy its almighty power.  Such, I need
hardly tell you, is the experience of every
Christian, unless we may except the Perfectionist, whose experience in this, as in
everything else, differs from that of Paul.
When you look at yourself, and realize
your short-comings and failures, and how
far your heart is, in many respects, from
what it should be, does it not lead you,
not only to pray for, but to admire and
love that grace, which can, and does elevate, refine, and quicken a heart so cold
and insensible?
(Mon.-I can truly say, that such is my
experience; and I have often admired the
language of one of our hymns:
"Almighty grace! thy healing power,
How glorious-how divine!
That can to life and bliss restore
So cold a heart as mine."
JMin.-This is simply what the apostle
means by "glorying in infirmity." And it is
easy to see how such experience has a tendency to keep the Christian constantly at a




176         PERSE fERANCE.
throne of grace, where he fin Is his only
hope of perseverance in holiness. This is
the ground upon which the doctrine of
perseverance is based. It is not of man,
but of God. I need not stay to prove, that
we are entirely dependent on God for persevering grace. The work of sanctification is his, and his entirely.
Con. —But is not the Christian actively
engaged in his own sanctification?
JM/in. —te "works out his own salvation"-but still " it is God that workethin
him, both to will and to do."-Phil. ii. 12,
13. The Christian grows in grace, but it
is God that enables him. His mind concurs
in the work; so that he is not only actively, but zealously engaged in it; but it is
in striving to obtain that grace, upoll
which he feels he is entirely dependent.
All his exertions and prayers are to this
end. But this, instead of proving that his
final perseverance depends upon himself,
proves the contrary. If, then, the perseverance of Christians in a life of faith and
holiness, depends upon God, and any
finally and totally apostatize, it must be
because God is either unable or unwilling
to carry them forward in their Christian
course to complete salvation. That he is
unable, I presume none will contendthat he is unwilling, will not, I think, be




PERSEVERANCE.         177
contended by any one who has anything
like a proper estimate of his character, as
revealed in his word, and exhibited in his
providence and grace. He has regenerated, justified, and, in part, sanctified
them; he has given them to his Son as
trophies of his cross, pardoned all their
sins, adopted them as soQns and daughters
into his family, and the Saviour has prepared mansions for them in heaven. Then,
to say that God is unwilling to preserve
them, would, it seems to me, be as absurd
and blasphemous as to say that he is unable. 1 Thess. iv. 3-" This is the will of God,
even your sanctification."  If, then, the
work be his, and he be both able and willing to perform it, we may conclude it will
be done.
Con. —But though God is willing and
able to save them, may he not be provoked
to withdraw his Spirit, and leave them to
final apostacy, as a punishment for their
sills?Min.-God might, it is true, if he saw
fit, withdraw his gifts, and tLe abandoned
sinner would have no just cause of complaint. But the question is, will he do it,
after all that he has done for him?  His
gifts were free, and entirely unmerited.
There was no compulsion. Neither was
there itny wai4t'f c(nlsideration. Men




17 8         I'ERSEVERANCE.
may bestow gi t1t I aconsiderately altd rashly,
and afterwal 4ls tieLd occasion to withdraw
them; but (ioft's gifts are bestowed with
a full knowltelIte of all or any difficulties
that might arisce in the way of their continuance. lie knew when he gave them,
whether anylt lulg would ever require himn
to withdraw thlenm. If he gave them with
a knowledge that he would withdraw them,
(which all mulst admit, if they should ever
be withdrawtl,) then he acts a part more
capricious tlLati men; for no man would
bestow a gift when he knew that it would
be so abused that he would be compelled
to withdraw It. Yet the advocates of the
doctrine of " falling from grace," as it is
termed, would have us believe, that God
regenerates, justifies, pardons, and in part
sanctifies, or as some say sanctifies perfectly, those who he knows must bear
his wrath in hell for ever. Surely, the advocates of such a doctrine, do not consider
what they teach.
Con.-But may we not suppose that his
grace is bestowed conditionally: that is, if
the Christian improve the gift, it will be
continued and increased; but if not, it will
be withdrawn?
Jllin. —That supposition will not relieve
the difficulty. Let us suppose that the
grace of justification, or pardon, is be



PERSEVERANC E.          179
stowed conditionally. Balt a, conditional
pardon is no pardon at all  If it be suspended on anything to be dtte, it is not
granted-it is only pronllsed  But if a
man is not actually pardoltni asld justified,
he is not a Christian.  It is Imt an unregenerated, unjustified sinler, that we say
will be enabled by God t, 1,esevere, but
the true Christian, who is -e"ally a child of
God, who  has  actually  beenl justified
through fhith, one whose tieart has been
changed by divine grace, X tho has exercised faith inll the merits (,A.Jesus Christ,
who truly loves God, feel.t thankful for
the mercy and( grace hi-.las received,
rejoices to believe that he  rl Ia idoned and
accepted of God; and yet the is not pardoned, if it only be promised cuI,ditionally,
and he is not yet at libert3 ev\en to hope
for heaven.  How could %\e exhort such
an one? We couldnotexloril hiim to continue in a state of justificaitt, l; for he is
not yet justified.  We could nlot exhort
him to continue a Christiat.; tf,r he is not
yet a Christian-the wrath ol (God is still
abiding on him, and he is LtJl  in a state
of condemnation-the cursv i- l ot yet removed.
But there are other difficulties arising
from such a supposition. If pardon and
justificationu be suspended upon the condi



180         PERSEVERANCE.
tion of perseverance in holiness, they cannot be bestowed on account of the merits
of Christ; and thus it is subversive of the
main principle of the gospel. How much
more consistent with the plain dictates of
common sense, to believe, as the Bible
tells us, that when a sinner believes and
repents, all his sins are actually pardoned,
and that, on the ground of the righteousness of Christ, he is justified and accepted
as righteous in the sight of God, and is
fully reconciled, and adopted as a child of'
God, and an heir of heaven, and the mansions of glory, to which he will certainly
be received.
Con.-Are we, then, to suppose that the
perseverance of the Christian is altogether
unconditional? That is, are we to suppose that he will certainly obtain complete
salvation, whether he live a holy life or
not?
Min.-That is supposing a contradiction.
It is perseverance in holiness that is secured; and it is secured in the same way
with his regeneration and justification.
You recollect that when we were considering the doctrine of election, it was made
plain from the fact, that God is the author
of regeneration and conversion from sin to
holiness; because, when God converts a sinner, he does it from design, and as he can




PERSEVERANCE.         181
have no new designs, it must have been
eternal. Nlow, his design is not to save
any one in sin, but " through sanctification
of the Spirit and belief of the truth."-2
Thess. ii. 13. His purpose to save embraces both regeneration and sanctification.
When you look at God's mercy and grace,
in your conversion, and trace it back to its
source, you find the doctrine of election;
and you have only to trace it forward to its
completion, to find the doctrine of perseverance. You have said that God, in your
conversion, was fulfilling his gracious design which he must have had toward you.
That design was, of course, to save you
through the operations of his Sjpirit, transforming you anew, and making you meet
for heaven. Thus, holiness is ni't a condition of perseverance, but a part of it; and
to suppose that it is irrespective of holiness, is a contradiction. HIere, too. we see
an argument for the truth of the doctrine,
which, to my mind, is conclusive. If
God's design, in your conversion, were not
to save you finally, it could not be a gracious design. When he sent iLis Spirit to
change your heart, and enable you to believe on his Son; raised your affections to
himself, and fixed your hopes in heaven,
if he only designed to lead you fc~rward fbr
a time, and then leave you to go t, hell at
16




182          PERSEVERANCE.
last, his design was anything but giacious.
But let us suppose such a case. A  man,
through the grace of God, is converted at
thirty years of age. All his sins are pardoned. He is justified, and in part, sanctified, admitted to communion and fellowship with God, rejoices to believe that he
is forgiven and accepted of God through
the merits of Christ, and is cheered with
the prospect of complete salvation. He
lives a Christian life for one or two years,
" falls from grace," loses entirely all his interest in religion, dies a child of Satan,
and goes to hell. How will such an one
give his account?  The sins of his.first
thirty years have all been pardoned through
Christ. But if he be punished only for the
sins of the last few months, he does not receive according to his deeds. His punishment is not in proportion to his guilt,
which is contrary to the principle s of justice, and the plain declarations of the Bible.
But the supposition that any one, who has
been truly regenerated and sanctified,
washed in the blood of Christ, and adopted
as a child of God, will at last be left of
God and sent to hell, is so inconsistent
with the character and dealings of God,
that it olnlv needs to be mentioned to see
its absurdity. Yet all this absurdity is involved in the doctrine of "falling from
grace."




PERSEVERANCE.         183
Con.-But will it not ha e a tendency
to make the Christian feel sek ure, and relax his efforts to advance in holiness, to
know that his salvation is certain and unllalterably fixed in the purpose and good
pleasure of God?
JMin.-It is often urged by the enemies
of the doctrine of perseverance, that it is
dangerous. It is not uncommon to hear
them say, that if the doctrine be true, any
one may live as he pleases. I once heard
a preacher say: " If I believed such a doctrine, I would care nothing about growth
in grace, or living a holy life." But such
objectors forget, that if they speak according to their feelings, they give strong evidence that they are strangers to the love
of God, and cast a severe reflection upon
true religion. Suppose a father, when
about to settle a patrimony upon his son,
is told that it will be dangerous to do so,
lest, when the son should know that all
was securely his, he would treat him unkindly. What severer reflection could he
cast upon the son?  And what mournful
evidence it would be of the son's entire
selfishness, and want of love to his father,
to hear him say, that if his father would fix
the patrimony securely in his hands, he
would not care how he treated him! Just
sulch is the evidence that the professed




184         PERSEVERANCE.
Christian gives of his love to God, who
says that if he once felt sure of heaven, he
would not care how he lived. I admit that
it would be dangerous to make heaven
sure to such. Whether it would be dangerous or not, for a father thus to settle
the patrimony upon his son, would depend
altogether on the nature of the son's feelings towards him. If they were altogether
selfish, it would be dangerous. But if the
son truly loved his father, it would increase his filial attachment to know that
his father had done so much for him. The
more he would give the son, the more the
son would love him. So, if a Christian
have true love to God, we need not fear to
tell him how much God has done for him.
The more he sees of the love of God, the
more his own heart will be warmed with
the heavenly flame, and he will desire the
more to be conformed to his image. I
think it will be admitted, that it is the experience of every Christian, that the
brighter and firmer his hopes are of heaven, the more he desires to be made meet
for it; and just in proportion as faith is to
him the certain "evidence (or confidence)
of things not seen," he presses with eagerness "to the mark, for the prize of the
high calling of God in Christ Jesus."
The doltrine of perseverance, then, to a




PERSEVERANCE.           185
true Christian, is one of his gleatest incentives to growth in grace; and every one
upon whom it has a contrary effect, blas
much reason to doubt the reality of his religion. His love to God cannot be sincere.
But as our conversation has been sufficiently protracted at present, we will defer
the Bible argument on the subject to aaop
ther time.
16*




DIALOGUE XVI.
PERSEVLRANCE.
Uonvert.-There is one argument against
the doctrine of perseverance, drawn from
facts, that I have found difficult to meet, or
answer. There are many cases of persons
who give all the evidences of a change of
heart, and seem, for a time, to enjoy all
the comforts and blessings of true religion,
who return to the world and sin, and become worse than they were before.
Minister.-They thereby prove, in the
clearest manner, that their religion was
vain. They have not had that sealing of
the Holy Spirit, with which he indelibly
marks the heirs of grace. I know it is
counted uncharitable to say, that all such
had only a false hope, and that their house
was only built on the sand; and, though
by saying so, we come under the anathema of the zealous advocates of the doctrine of" falling from grace," we know we
are not the first who have been thus denounced, and will likely not be the last. The
doctrine of perseverance was one of the
distiuguishing loctrines of the Reforma_ _~s




PERSEVERANCE.         187
tion, and met with the bitterest (pposition from the Pope and his adherents. The
Council of Trent decreed, that "if any person shall say that a man who has been
justified cannot lose grace, and that, therofore, he who falls andsins was never truly
justified, he shall be accursed." But the
denunciations of Papists, and other errorists, cannot affect the truth of a doctrine
plainly taught by the Saviour himself. He
tells us that many, who had such false
hopes, will appear at the day of judgment,
to whom he will say, "I never knew you;
depart from me, ye that work iniquity."Matt. vii. 23. Now, if the doctrine of
" falling from grace" be true, some at that
day could contradict the Jcudge, and tell
him, " You did know me; I was regenerated by your Spirit; I was justified
through your righteousness; pardoned
through your blood; sanctified by your
grace; enjoyed seasons of communion with
you; you heard my prayers; called me
brother; and I rejoiced that you were' not
ashamed to call me brother,' (Heb. ii. 11,)
for I was a true child of God." Now, it
is very plain, that all this would be true,
if any fall away, totally and finally, who
once had true religion; and the saying of
the Judge, that he "never knew them,"
would not be true. But the language of




188          PERSEVERANCE.
the Saviour plainly teaches, that all pia.
fessors of religion, who are finally lost,
were only false professors, and were entire
strangers to.true religion. WVe are thus
placed under the necessity of contradicting
this plain statement of Christ himself, or
of disbelieving that any who are true
Christians will finally be lost.
Con. -But are there not other passages of
Scripture, which seem to favour the doctrine, that a Christian may totally and
finally apostatize, and be eternally lost?
Min.-There are several passages that
make such a supposition, from which the
advocates of the doctrine think it clearly
proved. It is, however, only supposed; it
is no where directly asserted: whereas, it
is again and again directly asserted, that
they shall not fall away. And, it is a plain
dictate of common sense, that we should
never make a supposition contradict a positive assertion, or give the supposition a
preference, to establish a doctrine which
contradicts the assertion.  There are such
suppositions made respecting God himself.
The Psalmist, in  the eleventh  Psalm,
speaks of God being the great foundation
of his trust and hope, and adds, in the
third verse, "If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do?" This
is a supposition that God would prove un



PERSEVLRANCE.         189
worthy of our confidence, or should fail in
his promises, &c. And the supposition is
made to excite our gratitude, in contrasting our privilege of trusting in God, with
the wretchedness of our condition, if that
foundation were taken away, and we could
no longer put our trust in him. Now, who
would ever think of taking this supposition to prove the possibility of God failing
us, as a rock upon which we may at all
times trust with unwavering confidence?
And yet, it is just as legitimate a course
of reasoning, as to argue from the supposition of the Christian being lost, that he
may be. Such suppositions are frequent in
the Bible, and they are not intended to
teach, that the cases supposed will actually occur; but, as in the case above, to show
us tile excellence of the opposite truth.
Con.-But are there no positive assertions in the Bible, that Christians do, or
may, finally and totally apostatize and
perish?
JAin.-I have not been able to find a
single passage in which it is asserted; and
all the passages that I have seen quoted by
the abettors of the doctrine, amount to
nothing more than suppositions, such as I
have mentioned. One passage upon which
they rely very much, i Ezek. xxxiii. 13s" When I shall say to the righteous, that
he. shall surely live; if he trust to his own




190          PERSEVERANCE.
righteousness and commit iniquity, all his
righteousness shall not be remembered;
but for his iniquity that he hath committed,
he shall die for it." It is supposed, by the
most eminent commentaltors, that the
"righteous" here spoken of, are to be understood as those false professors of whom
Christ will testify, he never knew them.
This understanding of the passage, is rendered more forcible from the fact, that
they are warned against "trusting to their
own righteousness," which is always a characteristic of the false professor. If that be
the import of the term, as here used, it affords no proof, or even a supposition, of
the true Christian falling away. But even
if we understand by the term " righteous,"
true Christians, it only amounts to a supposition, or what is termed a hypothetical
statement. It contains a two-fold hypothesis: " If he trust to his own righteousness," and if he "commit iniquity."  Now
it will be admitted, I think, that there is
no danger of a true Christian " trusting to
his own righteousness."  Yet the case is
supposed; and because it is supposed, is no
proof that he will. Neither is the supposition of his " committing iniquity," so as
finally and totally to apostatize, any proof
that he wvill.
But another passage which is always




PERSEVERAN'CE.         191
quoted, and relied on, to prove the doctrine, is Heb. vi. 4, 5, 6 —" For it is im-.
possible for those who were once enligl itened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift,
and were made partakers of the Holy
Ghost, and have tasted the good word of
God, and the powers of the world to come,
if they shall fall away, to renew them again
unto repentance."  This passage, you perceive, contains a supposition, and a positive assertion based upon it. The supposition is of the Christian "falling away,"
and the positive assertion is, the iinpossibility of their being " relleed again unto
repentance." But those who plead it as
proof that the supposed case may occur,
overlook entirely the positive assertion,
which directly disproves their whole system. They contend, that a true Christian
may fall away entirely, and be renewed
again —that a person may be a child of
God to-day, and a child of Satan to-nlorrow, and, again, a child of God the next
day. They seem  to forget entirely, that
almost all these hypothetical statements
respecting falling from a state of grace,
have coupled with the hypothesis, this positive assertion; so, if these  statements
prove anything at all respecting their system, it is, that it is false. But they are
hypothetical statements, which were not




192         PERSEVERANCE.
intended to prove, that the cases suppose(
would actually occur, but to show us the
necessity of continuing in holiness to the
attainment of final salvation. They are incentives to watchfulness, diligence, and
prayer; and thus are the means of our
perseverance in grace. God deals with us
in this, as in all things else, as rational
creatures, and works upon us by means
and motives, addressed to our hopes and
fears. This, I think, is plain from the context. The apostle, after having given this
solemn warning, adds, in the ninth verse,
"But beloved, we are persuaded better
things of you, and things that accompany
salvation, though we thus speak." And
then he goes on to speak of the "oath"
and "promise" of God, that "we might
have a strong consolation, who have fled
for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set
before us." Thus, upon the supposition
that the apostle, in this passage, is speaking of the true Christian, it proves nothing
for the Arminian. But I am inclined to
believe, that he is speaking of those who,
in common language, "have sinned away
their day of grace." We know that when
a sinner has been visited with a great many
warnings, and made the subject of the
operations of the Holy Spirit, warning and
convincing of sin, if he wickedly resist all,




PERSEVERANCE.        193
there is a point at which the forbearance
and mercy of God will cease, and he will
be left to himself, to take the course he
has deliberately chosen. And when God
says of any one, "let him alone," he is
"given up to his own heart's lusts:" for
him there is no hope. And though by
the word enlightening him, and the Spirit's striving, he has been brought almost
into the kingdom, yet he " falls back into
perdition." Now it seems to me, that the
apostle exactly describes the case of such
an one; and all he says may characterize
one who has never been truly converted.
They were "once enlightened." So are
those who hear the gospel, and understand
its doctrines: they are not savingly enlightened, but enjoy the light of the gospel in a very important sense. They have
"tasted of the heavenly gift."  This is
true of all God's creatures, and more especially of those who enjoy the blessings of
the gospel, and have, to any extent, felt
the operations of the Spirit. They were
"made partakers of the Holy Ghost." So
is every sinner, who has been seriously impressed, in view of his sins and danger.
They have " tasted the good word of God."
So had the thorny ground and stony ground
hearers, in the parable of the sower. They
have tasted, also, of the "powers of the
17




194         PER3EVERANCE.
world to come." It is difficult to determine
what is the precise meaning of this expression. If we are to understand by it,
hopes of heaven, thousands have them who
are not true Christians. But we can found
no argument upon a conjectural interpretation. Then, as any and all these blessings may be enjoyed by those who are not
true Christians, it seems to me the most
likely the apostle is speaking of such. But
be that as it may; the passage, as we have
seen, plainly contradicts the Arminian doctrine of falling from grace, and being again
renewed. There are other similar passages, but this, I believe, is considered by
them as the most conclusive in their favour, and consequently, the doctrine has
very little support in the Bible.
Cdon.-But are there not commands and
exhortations, in difelrent parts of the Scriptures, addressed to true Christians, which
seem to imply that they are ill danger of
being lost, if they indulge in sin?
Jlin.-The ftact that God will preserve
tlhem, does not supersede the use of all legitimate means to secure the end. His
purpose to save them, embraces all the
means of its accomplishment. He saves
by his word andl ordinances, and a diligent
improvement of opportunities and privileges. This being his instituted plan of




PERSEVERANCE.         1{5
effecting his purpose, exhortations and admonitions do not necessarily imply any uncertainty as to the issue. They only point
out the manner and order, in which the
design will be accomplished. Paul, in a
storm at sea, exhorts the sailors to remain in
the ship, and work for their lives, and tells
the centurion if they went away they would
all be lost; but will any one say, that there
was in reality any uncertainty as to the issue? God had promised that they should
be saved, and his character was at stake.
But still, the exhortation of Paul was one
principat means of their safety. So the exhortations and warnings addressed to
Christians are made the means of their
perseverance.
But let us now look at some of the plain
declarations of the Bible on this subject.
And here I would observe, that we are not
compelled to resort to suppositions and inferences, but have plain and positive statements, proving as clearly as language can
prove, that true Christians will be preserved
to complete salvation. Psa. lxxxix. 30-37
— "If his children forsake my law, and
walk not in my judgments: if they break
my statutes, and keep not my commandments; then will I visit their transgression
with the rod, and their iniquity with
stripes. Nevertheless my loving kindness




196          PERSEVERANCE.
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. Once ha ve I sworn by my
holiness, that I will not lie unto David.
His seed shall endure for ever, and his
throne as the sun before me. It shall be
established for ever as the moon, and as a
faithful witness in heaven." In this psalm,
as in many others, David is made to personify Christ. This is plain from verse
27, and other parts-" I will make him my
first-born, higher than the kings of the
earth." In the 19th verse, God says-"I
have laid help upon one that is mighty,"
&c. Indeed, the whole scope of the psalm
shows that it is so to be understood. Then,
the "children" that are spoken of, are the
spiritual children of the Saviour, true followers of the Lamb. And we can scarcely
conceive how their security could be explressed in stronger language. Though
they shall be chastised for their sins, yet
his "loving kindness" will never be withdrawn, nor shall his " faithfulness fail."
I might here properly refer to a melancholy instance of the lengths to which errorists will go, to support a favourite theory. In the "Doctrinal Tracts" of the
Methodist, Church, page 212, the writer,
in endeav uringto evade the force of so




PERSEVERAN CE.        197
plain a statement of the doctrine of perseverance, says, that the covenant spoken of
ill this lxxxix. psalm, "relates wholly to
David and his seed." He then nmisquotes
the 35th verse. Instead of saying, "I will
not lie unto David," he quotes it, "I will
not fail David." And to crown all, he
says, "God did also fail David."  " He did
alter the thing that had gone out of his
lips, and yet without any impeachment of
his truth. He abhorred and forsook his
anointed. He did break the covenant of
his servant," &c. The only reason he
gives for saying that God broke his covenant is that it was conditional. That it
was not conditional, in the sense which he
affirms, I will not now stay to prove; for
even if it were, it is still both false and impious to say, that "God broke his covwnant, and altered the thing that had gone
out of his lips."  When a writer thus
speaks of God, and misquotes his word,
we need not be surprised at all his misrepresentations of Calvinism.
But let us see what Christ himself says
on the doctrine of perseverance. Matt.
xxiv. 24 —" There shall arise false Christs,
and false prophets, and shall show great
signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it
were possible, they shall deceive the very
elect." John x. 27-29 —" My sheep hear
17 *




198         PERSEVERANCE.
my voice, and I know them," (will he ever
say he " never knew" them?) "and they
follow me: and I give unto them eternal
life; and they shall never perish, neither
shall any man pluck them out of my hand..My Father, which gave them me, is greater
than all; and no man is able to pluck them
out of my Father's hand." Does not this
look as if the Saviour meant to teach that
believers are secure in the hands of God?
But let us hear Paul. Rom. viii. 35-39
-" Who shall separate us from the love
of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress,
or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or
peril, or sword? * * Nay, in all these
things we are more than conquerors,
through him that loved us. For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor
angels, nor principalities, nor powers,
nor things present, nor things to come,
nor height, nor depth, nor any other
creature, shall be able to separate us from
the love of God, which is Christ Jesus our
Lord."  I cannot conceive how the doctrine could be stated in language more
plain and forcible. I shall only add one passage more, though I might add scores. 1
Pet. i. 5 —"Kept by the power of God,
through faith, unto salvation."  Here the
whole doctrine of perseverance, through
grace, faith, and holiness, is stated in a
manner both concise and beautiful.




PERSEVERANCE.        199
If we needed arguments from inference
and supposition, we have them, too, in
abundance. One, that seems to me incontrovertible, is drawn from the intercession
of Christ. His prayer is —" Holy Father,
keep through thine own name, those whom
thou hast given me." Will the Father
keep them, or deliver them over to Satan?
We may leave the Arminian to answer.
Other inferential proofs, equally conclusive, might be given, but I thin;k I have
said enough to show you, that our Confession of Faith speaks the language of the
Bible, and of common sense, when it says,
chap. xvii. sec. 1-" They whom God hath
accepted in his Beloved, effectually called
and sanctified by his Spirit, can neither totally, nor finally, fall away from the state
of grace, but shall certainly persevere therein to the end, and be eternally saved."




DIALOGUE XVII.
ADMISSION TO THE CHURCH.
Convert. —During the progress of our several conversations, on the different points
of religious truth which we have considered, my mind has not only been relieved, but edified, and my desire to unite
with some evangelical church has been in.
creased. My preferences for the Presbyterian Church have also become stronger;
but, still, with my limited knowledge, I do
not know that I am prepared to say: "I
sincerely receive and adopt the Confession
of Faith, as containing the system of doctrines taught in the Holy Scriptures."
My hesitancy does not arise from any opposition I have to any of its doctrines, but
fiom my limited acquaintance with it. I
have not, until recently, made it a study,
and have not been able to compare it, in
all its parts, with the Bible, so as to adopt
it intelligently. And, I suppose, to adopt
it "sincerely," means both a cordial and
intelligent reception of all it teaches, as being in accordance with the Bible, And
(200)




ADMISbION TO THE CHURCH.   201
this, I have understood, you require of all
your members.
JMinister.-While you have had a mis.
representation of our doctrines, you have
also had a false representation of our practice. I know it is common with those
who wish to frighten young converts from
joining our church, to tell them that they
must have the Confession of Faith'" crammed down their throats."  But our
form of government does not require it,
nor have I ever known a single instance
in which it has been required by any one
of our church officers, that the members
of the church should all adopt the Confession of Faith. It is required of all our
church officers, but not of its members. It
is not supposable, that all whom we might,
in other respects, consistently receive to
the church, are so well acquainted with all
our doctrines, as to adopt them intelligently. Some who do not oppose them, are
sometimes at a loss to understand them.
It is common, in some sections of our
church, to require those who unite with
us, to receive and adopt the Confession of
F'aith, "as far as they are acquainted with
it, and understandit;" but I have never
known any one go further.
Con.-I could willingly and cheerfully
d ) that, and cannot see any reasonable ob



202    ADMISSION ro THE CHURCH.
jection to such a course. But does the
Confession of Faith contain no general requirement on the subject?
AJlin. —The "Directory  for Worship,"
chap. 9, sec. 3, requires, that "those who
are to be admitted to sealing ordinances
shall be examined as to their knowledge
and piety." And sec. 4 requires, that
those who, when uniting with the church,
receive the ordinance of baptism, shall,
" in ordinary cases, make a public profession of their faith in the presence of the
congregation."  Thus, "knowledge and
piety" are required of all, and a "public
profession of their faith," of those who, at
the time, receive the ordinance of baptism.
How far the examination, as to knowledge
and piety, shall be extended, and what
may be comprised in the public profession
of faith, required of others, is left to each
church session, to decide according to circumstances.  Thus, while piety  and
knowledge to some extent, are made indispensable requisites to membership in
the Presbyterian Church, other things,
though desirable, are not absolutely required. If a church session have satisfactory evidence that any one is a true child
of God, and has knowledge of God and divine things, to such an extent, that he can
p- )fitably participate in the sealing or



ADMISSION TO THE CHURCH.   203
dinances of the church, it is all they require.
Con.-What is the common practice of
church sessions in such cases?
MJin.-The candidate for admission is
examined on some of the leading points of
Christian experience, upon which, any one
who has the exercise of a true Christian,
can easily give satisfaction. In connection with this, he is also examined on some
of the leading doctrines of Christianity,
especially, as connected with his experience. Thus, the ground of his hope is
ascertained, and his faith in Christ is exhibited, which will qualify him for a member of the visible church; as, by regeneration and faith, he has been made a member of the body of Christ.
This course must commend itself to every reflecting mind, as the safest, both for
the church and those who wish to become
its members. A person cannot profitably
participate in the sealing ordinances of
the church, unless he have knowledge to
discern the spiritual blessings which they
represent. No one can rightly commemorate the Saviour, in the ordinance of the
supper, if he have not faith and love. Neither would he make a suitable member of
the church. All such members are an injury to the church, and their profession is
an injury to themselves. To keep the




204   ADMISSION TO THE CHURCH.
church from being filled with such meni
bers, the framers of our excellent formula.
ries made piety and a certain degree of
knowledge, prerequisites to membership.
But this was going as far as they felt warranted by the word of God.
The General Assembly of our church
speak particularly of this, in their pastoral
letter of 1839: "The terms of Christian
communion, adopted by our church, have
been in accordance with the divine command, that we should receive one another
as Christ has received us. We have ever
admitted to our communion all those who,
in the judgment of charity, were the sincere disciples of Jesus Christ. If, in some
instances, stricter terms have been insisted
upon-if candidates for sealing ordinances
have been required to sign pledges, to
make profession of anything more than
faith, love, and obedience to Jesus Christ,
these instances have been few and unauthorized, and, therefore, do not affect the
general character of our church. We fully recognize the authority of the command,' Him that is weak in the faith, receive ye,
but not to doubtful disputations.' The
application of this command, however, is
entirely confined to private members of
the church. It has no reference to the admission of men to offices in the church,"




ADMISSION TO THE CHURCH.   205
&c. (Minutes of the General Assembly
for 1839, p. 183.)
When such has always been the liberal
policy of our church, you can perceive how
much truth and honesty belong to those,
who represent us as requiring all our members, to " swallow the Confession of Faith."
Con.-But what is the reason of the distinction made between the officers and
members of the church?
Min.-The officers are entrusted with
the management of all the concerns of the
church; and it is a plain dictate of common sense, as well as of the Bible, that
they should be men, who are not only well
instructed in the doctrines of the church,
but also cordially receive them. While
the Bible commands us to stretch the
broad wing of Christian charity over all
who give evidence of being true disciples
of Christ, and to receive them to our
Christian fellowship, it is very pointed in
its directions respecting the qualifications
of all who bear rule in the house of God.
They must not be "novices."  They must
"hold fast the form of sound words."- 2
Tim. i. 13. "IHolding fast the faithful
word, as he hath been taught, that he may
be able by sound doctrine, both to exhort
and to convince the gainsayers."-Tit. i.
9. "Holding the mystery of the faith in
18




206    ADMISSION TO THE CHURCH.
a pure conscience."-1 Tim. ill. 9. This
is in exact accordance with the requirement of our Confession, that all our officers should "sincerely receive and adopt"
our form of sound words. I might mlention many other passages bearing upon the
same point, but it is not necessary, as the
importance of having all our officers, cor(lially and intelligently, to embrace the
same system of faith, will be obvious, when
you look at their stations and duties. Our
church, in some sections, for a time, pursued a different policy, but it had nearly
proved her ruin.
Con.-But is true piety made an indispensable requisite, in all who wish to unite
with the church?
Min.-So far as the true state of any
one can be ascertained, it is. No one can
search the heart, but there are some points
in Christian experience, from which, in
general, a correct judgment may be formed. And if, upon examination, any one
gives satisfactory evidence, that he has not
experienced a change of heart, he is uniformly rejected.
Con.-But would it not be better to receive every one who applies? Is not the
prospect of conversion greater in the
church, than out of it?
Min. —If the means of grace were access




ADMISSION TO THE CHURC l.    207
sible only to church members, there would
be some reason for sinners to seek ladmission. But that is not the case. All the
array of means of God's appointment, for
-he conversion of sinners, is intended for,
and brought to bear upon, those who are
out of the church. Indeed, when an unconverted sinner joins the church, he rather puts himself out of the way of many
of those means of grace, which are intended for his benefit. Of what use, then, is
a mere nominal connection with the
church? A voluntary connection with
the church, was by Christ and the apostles
considered a profession of religion, and has
been so ever since. Indeed, if it were not
so, there would be no distinction between
the church and the world. I need not
stay to show you the great utility and importance of having the people of God
united in a society, distinct and separate
from the world. Anything that tends to
break down this distinction, is ruinous in
all its tendencies. And there is no better
way to do it, than to have crowds of ulnconverted sinners gathered into the church. It
is not only thus ruinous to the church, but
it is injurious to the world, as it creates the
impression, that a mere profession of religion is all that is necessary. The Presbyterian Church, for these reasons, has al



208    ADMISSION TO THE CHURCH.
ways made true piety an indispensable re.
quisite, in all her members. I do not mean
to say, that all her members are true disciples. We cannot, with all our care,
judge the heart. We find that ministers
and elders, even in the days of the apos.
ties, were sometimes deceived in this matter; but it is always our aim to guard it
as well as we can. We know that the
higher we can raise the church above the
world, the more clear and manifest we can
make the distinction, the better it will be,
both for the church and the world.
Con.-Your practice in this seems to me
both wise and scriptural. It is certainly a
happy reflection to any church member,
that all his fellow-members have given satisfactory evidence to its officers, that they
are true disciples of Christ.  But there
are some other denominations who pursue
a different course. I have heard ministers
proclaim from the pulpit, that the proper
course was, "first to join the church, and
then seek religion," that " the church was
the best place to get religion," &c. And
I myself, was often urged to join their
church, when they knew, as well as myself, that I had no change of heart, but
was fighting against God, in all his love.
JMin.-I know that has become mourntfully comlmno. Many have been thus per



ADMISSION TO TUE CHURCI-   209
suaded, that they will gain God's favour by
insulting him. If the church be not a religious society, what is it? It is called the
"household of the faithful, the body of
Christ," &c. And for any one to unite
with it, who does not belong to Christ, is
making a false profession, and "lying both
to God and man." It would be strange,
indeed, if this were the way to secure the
favour of the great Head of the Church.
The apostles pursued a very different
course. They received to the church vast
numbers, but we are told it was " of such
as should be saved."-Acts ii. 47. And
we know, that the character of the church
for piety, stood so high, that it was a living
reproof to the world. So much so, that
we are told, Acts v. 13, that "of the rest
durst no man join himself to them, but
the people magnified them." What a commentary is this upon the practice of those
who spend their zeal in gathering crowds of
sinners, of all classes, into the church,
seemingly more anxious that they should
give their names to the church roll, than
their hearts to God.
Con.-But would it not be better that,
in the examination of candidates, for ad.
mission to the church, it should be conducted by the whole church, instead of its
offiiers merely? The whole church would
18*




210    ADMISSION TO THE CHURCH.
then not only have the benefit of the can.
didate's experience, if he be a true child of
God, but it might be more satisfactory, also,
that each member should hear and decide
for himself.
Min.-In some particular and remarkable
cases of conversion, it would, no doubt, be
edifying and useful for all the members
of the church to hear the candidate tell
what God has done for him. But particular cases should never be made the ground
of a general rule; and, I think, the experience of all churches who receive their
members by a profession of their faith, as
we do, will testify, that, as a general rule,
it is more proper and expedient, to have it
done by the officers of the church. But
this involves one of the principal features
of our form of church government, for
which, we believe, we have scriptural authoritv and precedent. And a full and satisfactory consideration of this subject,
would require more time than we can now
devote to it. But if it would be gratifying to you, we will consider it at some fiture time.
Con.-I have never had any difficulty
on the score of church government. The
Presbyterian form has always struck me
as wise and orderly, though my preferences
for it are not the result of any examination




ADMISSION TO THE CHURCH.   211
of its principles. Iwould, therefore, be glad
to embrace any opportunity of examining
it more particularly.
Mlin.-Call when you have leisure, and
I will endeavour to explain it to you, in the
light of the Bible and of common sense.




DIALOGUE XVIII.
CHURCH GOVERNMENT.
Convert.-As I mentioned to you at our
last interview, I have never thought much
on the subject of church government, and
have looked upon it as a matter of expediency merely; supposing there was no particular form authorized in the Bible, and
consequently, it was left for the church to
adopt any form of government, that according to circumstances might be deemed the
most expedient.
Minister.-It is inconsistent with the Saviour's love to the church, and his care
over her, to suppose, that in a matter affecting her interests so deeply, he would
leave it entirely to the management of human wisdom. There are certain grand
principies which the Bible gives for our direction, in all our duties toward our fellownlen, and especially as members of the
church, in our duties to the church itself,
and to each other individually. And ill
devising means for her peace, prosperity,
and order, and labouring for her and our
spiritual welfare, X -e surely cannot suppose
(212)




CHURCH GOVERXMEN'.       213
that we are left without direction by our
great and glorious Head. For this very
purpose, we are told, that he instituted
certain orders of men in the church, with
peculiar offices and duties. Eph. iv. 11,
12-" He gave some apostles, and some
prophets, and some evangelists, and some
pastors and teachers, for the perfecting of
the saints, for the work of the ministry,
for the edifying of the body of Christ." 1
Cor. xii. 28-" God hath set some in the
church, first apostles, secondarily prophets,
thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then
gifts of healing, helps, governments."
Con.-But some of these orders and gifts
do not now exist, and may we not conclude
that they were all only designed to continue for a time?
Min.-The extraordinary offices and
gifts of those times are not now necessary,
as the canon of revelation is complete;
but as " pastors," or " teachers, helps, and
governments," are still necessary for the
church in every age, they are continued.
But I mentioned those texts to show, that
the officers of the church are of God's appointment. And I believe all evangelical
denominations of Christians admit that
some officers of the church, with peculiar
duties, are divinely appointed, but all do
not agree as to their number, rank, and




214      CHURCH GOVERNMENT.
duties, and the manner in which they
should be appointed by the church, acting
under the authority of her Head; and the
difference of practice in these several particulars, constitutes the different forms of
church government that now exist.
Con.-How  many different forms of
church government are there now found?
Miin.-They may all be classed under
four general heads, viz. Popery, Episcopacy, Independency, and Presbyterianism.
There are, it is true, several varieties under each of these general kinds, but they
all partake of the essential features of one
or other, to such a degree, that they clearly
belong to that class. For instance, the
Episcopal and Methodist churches, though
differing in some respects, both have all
the essential features of Episcopacy, and
are in fact Episcopal in their government.
And on the other hand, Presbyterians, Reformed Presbyterians, Associate Presbyterians, and Associate-Reformed-Presbyterians, with the Dutch and German-Reformed
churches, though they differ in some
things as to church polity, all partake of
the essential features of Presbyterianisnm,
and are in fact Presbyterian in their government. There are also different shades
of Independency or Congregation alism.
some more and some less purely indepen.
dent.




CHURCH GOVERNMENT.       215
Con.-What are the grand, distinguishing features of Presbyterianism?
JMin.-Presbyterianism is a spiritual republicanism-the grand distinctive feature
of which is, power and authority invested
in those who are chosen by the people, as
their representatives or agents, to rule in
their name. Thus it secures all the advantages of an aristocracy without any of
its accompanying evils, and forms a union
of all the different branches and sections
of the government, more complete and
binding than can be found in a monarchy,
because it is a union by consent of the
people, and ratified by them, in their capacity of members of the community. In
Independency, there is no union which
binds the different parts together, with any
thing like a common feeling of interest.
Each congregation is entirely independent
of all others, and acting and living in its
separate individual capacity, does not feel
that it is an integral part of a common
whole, bound by the same system of laws
and regulations. Aristocracy and monarchy preserve a union of the different
parts, but they deprive the people of their
inalienable rights, of choosing their own
rulers, &c. Republicanism, whilst it secures
union, leaves the people in full possession
of all their rights and liberties. It leaves




216       CHURCH GOVERNMENT.
all free, yet brings all under law. It places
none above law, and leaves none below it.
Con.-But if the Presbyterian form of
church government be thus based upon
republican principles, how can it be said
to be taken from the Bible? Republicanism is of recent date, as I believe our
own government is the only one that has ever existed upon pure republican principles.
Min.-Tbe close resemblance of our republican form of government to Presbyterianism, shows very clearly that they have
the same origin, but it proves that true republicanism has its origin in Presbyterianism. Any one who traces their points of
similarity, must be convinced that they
have the same origin. Presbyterianisln
has its several official departments, legislative, judicial, and executive, with this difference from our civil government, that all
these duties in our church government, belong to the same set of men. Every church
court sits and acts in these several capacities, as circumstances require. And when
any church court is about to sit in a judicial capacity, it is the duty of the Moderator, who is the presiding officer, to remind
the body of " their high character as judges
of a court of Jesus Christ, and the solemn
duty in which they are about to act." —
General Rules for Judicatories, 39. These




CHURdH GOVERNMENT.        217
duties, in our civil government, are vested
in different bodies, but they all exactly correspond with i lir several church courts.
Our church Session, as a judicial body, corresponds with our magistrate's court, the
Presbytery with our County court, the Synod with our State court, and the General
Assembly with our United States court.
As a legislative body, the church Session
corresponds with our township officers,
called in some States trustees, and in others
by different names. They meet, consult,
devise measures, and make regulations for
the general welfare of those who have chosen them to their office. The Presbytery
corresponds with our board of County Commissioners, the Synod with our State Legislature, and the General Assembly with
the Congress of the United States. With
each body, also, from the lowest to the
highest, are the several executive officers,
with whom the similarity is equally striking.
Add to this, the grand principle of delegated power in a representative system,
which forms the basis of both our civil and
church governments, and the similarity is
still more striking. Other p Sints of similarity might be noticed, but this is suffieient to show any one, that one is modeled
19




21.8     CHURCH GOVERNMENT.
after the other, preserving all the grand
features and outlines entire.
Con.-They must have had the same origin, but how do we know that Presbyterianism is the original, and republicanism
the model?.Min.-From simple historical facts. Vere
know that Presbyterianism existed, in all
its purity, long before our government was
thought of, and even before America was
discovered. We know that it was persecution for Presbyterian principles, that
drove our forefathers to this continlent.
For asserting their inalienable rights, and,
in some instances, endeavouriing to intlse
republican principles into the governments
of Europe, they were persecuted, and fled
to this country, bringing their principles
with them. They had learned them from
the Bible, and prized them  dearer than
life. These principles formed the basis of
all their colonial governments, and when
they were infringed upon by the mother
country, they maintatained them with their
blood. The same grand principles of civil
and religious liberty, for which they were
persecuted, and fled to this country, were
those which appeared conspicuous in the
contest, and for which they contended in
the arduous struggle. When their liberties were achieve i. and the several colonial




CHURCH GOVERNMENT.       219
governments formed one grand tonfederacy, the same principles were embodied
in the federal constitution. And there
they stand, giving us more consistent liberty, both civil and religious, than has
ever been enjoyed by any nation under
heaven, except, perhaps, that found in the
theocracy of the Jews. The secret of our
success as a republic is, that we have a government, whose principles are the republicanism of the Bible, which is only
another name for Presbyterianism. To
Presbyterianism, then, as derived from the
Bible, we are indebted for our excellent
torm of government. The sound of liberty-civil and religious liberty-is delightful; but it is an exotic in this dark world,
and we should never forget. that those
principles, in the successful operation of
which we rejoice, are drawn from the treasure of God's word, which gives to us, under all circumstances, perfect rules of life.
Con.-But where do we find in the Bible, any set of laws or regulations, designed for civil governments?  The accounts we have of civil governments, are
mostly of monarchies; and, in the New
Testament times, Christians were subjects
of the despotic governments then in existence. I was not aware that republicanism,
in any shape, was taught in the Bible.




220      CHURCH GOVERNMENT.
Min. —I know it is too generally thought
that the Bible is adverse to human liberty.
But I think I shall be able to show you,
that the governments established by God,
whether of Church or State, were all
founded upon the same grand principles
of Republicanism  and Presbyterianism,
which characterize ours. But as this invrestigation would require more time than
we can devote to it at present, we will deler it until another time.




DIALOGUE XIX.
BIBLE REPUBLICANISMI.
Convert. —Did I understand you as saying, at our last interview, that, according
to Presbvterianism, all the authority and
power of the officers of the church were
derived from the people?  You did not,
I believe, say so in words, but I understood it as one of the principles of the system, that the power to rule must come
from the people; and yet I cannot reconcile that with the Bible and the Confession of Faith, both of which acknowledge Christ as the fountain of all authority.
Miinister.-The  power  and authority
which belong to the office, are derived
firom Christ. All church officers hold their
commlnission from him. But the authority
to exercise that power, inherent in their respective offices, over any congregation, depends on the will of the people. If I am
ordained a minister of the gospel, I have
all the rights and privileges attached to
that office, by the great Head of the
19 *                    ( 221)




222      BIBLE REPUBLICANISM.
church; but I have no authorily over any
congregation that does not choose me as
their pastor, or that does not voluntarily
subject itself to the Presbytery of which
I am a member. The same is true of elders; and thus, ministers and elders, are
the elected representatives of the people,
the rulers whom they have voluntarily
chosen. The people choose the persons
whom they wish to bear rule over them,
and then look to the Head of the church
to clothe them with the authority requisite
to constitute them their rulers. Thus, the
authority of Christ, as Head of the church,
and the grand principle of representation,
are both acknowledged and preserved in
perfect harmony.  And in this too, you
can see another point in which republicanism shows its Bible origin. The people,
in a republican government, elect their
officers, but they do not commission them,
or induct them into office. That must be
done by the proper authorities. Election
is not considered as, in itself, vesting men
with the peculiar rights and privileges belonging to the office to which they are
elected. But when elected they are, by
the constituted authorities of the government, clothed with the proper authority,
to act as thle representatives of those by
whom they are elected and are invested




BIBLE REPUBLICANISM.     223
withl the rights and privileges belonging to
their respective offices.
Con. —I perceive the resemblance is
striking; but that our form of civil government is derived from the Bible, is a
fact, I think, very little regarded, if known,
or thought of at all, by the generality of
men..Jin. —I know it is very little regarded,
but still the facts are conclusive proof, that
such is the case. The Bible gives us the
first pattern of civil liberty and equality,
that ever existed on republican principles.
The pride and selfishness of man naturally
tend to the extremes of power and wealth
on the one hand, and oppression and poverty on the other. But that happy medium, where all are free and independent,
yet all under law, none but God knew how
to secure. And in the examples he has
given us in his word, we have a light to
guide us, which stands out as a beacon amid
the dark conflicting elements of all other
systems. I wish to direct your attention
in the first place, very briefly, to the civil
economy of the Jews, as established by
God, when he brought them from Egyptian
bondage, and gave them civil and religious
freedom. The different tribes formed one
grand confederacy, similar to ours, each
one teeing govereign in itself, for all the




224       BIBLE REPUBLICANISM.
purposes of self-government. Tile doc,
trine of appeals, from the lower courts to
the higher, is distinctly laid down; their
highest court of appeal being the Sanhe
drim, or seventy, corresponding to our fed.
eral court. The election of their rulers,
was upon republican principles.  Moses
issues to them a proclamation: "Take ye
wise men and understanding, and known
among your tribes, and I will make then
rulers over you," &c. That is, you elect,
and I will commission, to their respective
offices. Moses was their civil ruler, or
president, first chosen by God himself, and
afterwards by the common consent of the
people. We do not read that there was a
formal ratification of his appointment, as
there was in the case of Joshua, his successor. We find them saying to Joshua, "All
that thou commandest us, we will do. *
* *   According as we hearkened unto
Moses, so will we hearken unto thee," &c.
-Josh i. 16, 17. The power of their civil
rIulers was very limited; and they were
(listinctly told, that even if they should
choose a king he must not consider hinlself in the light of a monarch. IHe must
be chlosen from  amonog the people. He
must lnot "multiply horses to himself."
lie must not " multiply to himself silver
and gold," &c. He must be undle': the law




BIBLR aEPUBLICANISM.    225
equally with the rest. His heart mE tt not
be "lifted up) above his brethren," &c.Deut xvii. 16-20. Indeed, it is doubtful
whether their constitution and government
could have been so perfectly free, and yet
efficient, had it not been that God himself
was, for four hundred years, the supreme
executive. When they desired a king,
they were distinctly reproved for their folly,
and warned of the encroachment on personal and public liberty, which would be
the consequence. But even then, though,
at their request, the executive authority
was placed in the hands of a king, the republican form of government was not
changed.
Con.-But how could a republican form
of government exist under a king?
Jlinl. —The person who was nominated
for their king by God, was accepted by the
people by acclamation; and though called
a king, and invested with executive authority, was, in fact, nothing more at first,
than commander-in-chief ofa republic. His
power and authority were limited, and regulated by a covenant or constitution, called
" the manner of the kingdom," which was
distinctly declared to the people; and, being
ratified by them, was recorded in the statute book, and preserved as the palladium
of tb eir r gyhts. " Samuel wrote it in a book,




226      BIBLE REPUBIICA NISM.
and laid it up before the Lord." —.1 Sam.
x. 25. We find the popular side of the
government was so completely predominant, that even David did not dare openly
to take the life of the lowest of his sub.
jects, or even to punish offenders. Whenl
Uriah stood in his way, he had to resort to
stratagem; and when Joab deserved death,
he dare not execute it himself.  "These
sons of Zeruiah," he says, " are too hard fot
me."  Their influence was so great, that
he found it impossible to have them condemned by the proper authorities, without
which he dare not proceed against them.
These principles, however, were afterwards
lost sight of, the people became corrupt,
and their kings became despots; but for
four hundred years, they enjoyed as much
freedom in their government, as is consistent with efficiency, inl any age that the
world has yet seen, or probably will see.
Another excellent feature of this republican system, was the equal distribution of
their land, by which every adult male was
a landholder-the veritable owner of the
soil on which he lived. There xvere no entailed estates, no hereditary nobility. Every family possessed i is own land. This
simple principle of ownership, in fee-simple, of the soil, is one of vast importance
to a republican government. Indeed, it




BIBLE HREPUBLI.4ANI'M.      227
would seem t( be one of its essential features.  It encourages industr\, inculcates
patriotism, and is one of the main springs
of civil liberty. Provision was made, in
the laws given by God to Moses, for the
rprpetual preservation of this principle, so
long as their constitution was held sacred.
It; through misfortune, or other contingencies, any family was compelled to sell
their land, it could not be alienated from
the family longer than the year of jubilee.
So that every fifty years the land reverted
back to its original owners, in the regular
line of descent. The law respecting the
ownership of land, is very minutely laid
down in the xxv. chapter of Leviticus,
which, if you have never examined particularly, will amply repay you for an attentive
perusal.  It shows divine wisdom, in its
excellent provisions.  A man by carelessness, or wickedness, might deprive himself of all the benefits arising from owue-lship in land; but no vice, or slothfulness,
or misfortune, could deprive his family of
their portion of the soil.
In the setting apart of the tribe of Levi
as public instructors, there was provision
made for a general system of education,
which resulted most happily, in raising the
whole mass of the people, to a degree of
refinement and  intelligence, then  not
equalled in the world.




228      BIBLE REPUBLICANISM.
Con. -But where do we find, in the laws
given by God to Moses, anything like a
civil constitution, or a system of laws expressly designed for their civil economy?
Min.-In those laws we find three
classes.  First, those which are called
moral, which are obligatory on all men,
under all circumstances, universally and
perpetually.  Second, those which are
called ceremonial, which prescribe the
rites and forms of the Jewish worship.
Third, those which are called judicial,
which relate entirely to their civil economy, and in which we find all the principles
which I have mentioned as the prominent
features of republicanism, standing out
conspicuously.  They preserve, in the
hands of the people, as much personal
liberty as ever was, or perhaps can be,
combined with a permanent and efficient
national government. These laws, moreover, were formally adopted by the people.
When Moses rehearsed to them the words
of God, they answered with one unanimous voice-" All the words which the
Lord hath said, we will do." Thus their
laws, their civil constitution, were accepted
and adopted. This adoption of their con,
stitution, was repeated at the death of
Moses; and, by a statute, ever after, from
generation to generation, once in seven




BIBLE REPUBLICANISM.      229
years, the tribes were required to meet in
a great national convention, solemnly to
ratify their constitution.
From this very brief view of the Jewish
government, you may see the origin of
those principles of civil and religious liberty, which prove so rich a blessing wherever
adopted, and fairly carried out.
Con.-But is there any proof that their
ecclesiastical affairs were conducted upon
the same principles?
JMin.-I have before remarked, that foi
four hundred years, in the theocracy of
the Jews, God himself was the supreme
executive. Consequently, their civil and
ecclesiastical polities were blended, to a
considerable extent, in one system. Their
several courts seem to have had the adjudication of all matters, both civil and religious. This was necessary, considering
the circumstances under which the Jewish
government was instituted and existed. It
seems to have been the object of G d, in
establishing the Mosaic economy, tc. ort+ify his people againlst idolatry, and preserve
a pure religion, as well as to stop the
march of despotism, lust and blood, which
darkened and cursed the whole world besides. The nations of the earth had cast
off his allegiance, and turned their back
upon him, and his commandments. iHe
20




230      BIBLE REPUBLICANISIM.
chose for himself a nation to   hom he
committed his word and his worship, and.
who, as a pattern of excellence in all respects, might exhibit to an apostate world
the "blessedness of that nation whose God
is the Lord." It was, therefore, necessary, that God should appear conspicuous as
teir immediate lawgiver and executive,
in all that pertained to their welfare, both
civil and religious. The blessed effects of
true religion upon a national government,
were also to be exhibited, and, consequently, we find their civil and ecclesiastical
polities blended in one system. Even their
great national convention, at which they
deliberated upon, and, if necessary, modified their constitution and laws, was called
"'an holy  convocation."  Their church
~oovernment, therefore, partook of the same
features which characterized their civil government, and here we find Presbyterianism in all its essential features. But as on
this point I wish to be a little more specific, we will take somne other opportunity
to consider it more at length, than our
time ta present will permit.




DIALOGUE XX.
BIBLE PRESBYTERIANISM.
Convert.-Since our last conversation, I
hlave been examining, to some extent, the
account we have in the Bible respecting
the government of the Jews, as established
by Moses, according to the direction of
God, and find very frequent mention made
of "Elders," who seem to have been officers or rulers among them. Is it from that
title and office, that the office and title of
"Ruling Elder" of the Presbyterian systeni are derived?
MJfinister. —The term Elder literally signifies an aged person. The word in the
original languages of the Bible has the
samne signification. Persons of age and experience were usually selected to fill stations of honour and trust, because of their
gravity and wisdom; consequently, the
term Elder became an established title ot
office. The titles of Alderman, Senator,
and others, are of the same origin. The
term Presb3 ter is simply the Greek word
(231 )




232     BIBLE PRESBYTERIANISM.
for Elder, transferred into our langnago
with a slight change in its orthography,
without being translated.
The office of Elder is derived from that
which the title signified with the "Elders
of Israel," that is, the elders of the Presbyterian Church hold a similar station,
with similar duties and obligations. The
1" Elders of Israel" seem to have been the
acknowledged representatives of the people, acting for them, and in their name.
Even during their bondage in Egypt, they
seem to have had those who were termed
Elders officially, who acted by authority in
behalf of the people. God said to Moses,
Ex. iii. 16 —" Go and gather the Elders of
Israel together, and say unto them," &c.
Here was a message that concerned the
whole mass of the people, and no doubt
was designed for them; yet Moses was
commanded not to deliver it to the people
themselves, but to their representatives,
the Elders, whose duty it would consequently be, to make it known to the people.
Moses was also commanded to take with
him " the Elders of Israel," when he should
go with the message of God to Pharaoh,
(Ex. iii. 18,) that he might see that it was
the voice of the whole congregation of
Israel speaking through their Elders.
Moses b;mself was not counted sufficient,




BIBLE PRESI-YTERIANISM    233
which shows they had no aristocract, the
J)eople were not required to attend, which
is contrary to independency; but the Elders of the people were called, to whom it
was committed.
Con.-But we read frequently, that God
told Moses to "speak unto the children of
Israel;" from which it would seem, that
the people themselves were most generally appealed to.
Min. —In such cases, we are to understand the direction of God to Moses, to be
in accordance with their established usage.
He had, in the first instance, named the
Elders particularly, as those through whom
Moses should communicate to the people
his messages; and, consequently, it is to be
understood, that when God tells him to
"4 speak unto the children of Israel," he
meant that he should communicate with
them through the same channel. This is
plain from the fact, that it would be impossible for Moses to deliver his messages
to the whole congregation of the people.
It was impossible, in their eircumstances
to assemble the whole multitude; and, if
assembled, he could not speak to them all.
It is, therefore, most natural to suppose,
that it was always done through the Elders, especially, seeing that they are so frequently men >;oned as those through whom
20O




234     BIBLE PRESBYTERIANISM.
God and Moses communicated with the
people. In Ex. xvii. 5, 6, the Elders were
selected to witness the miracle of striking
the rock in Horeb. We find them, also,
on other occasions, selected for similar
purposes.-Ex. xxiv. 1, 9.
The principle of representation is vel-r
strikingly exhibited in Lev. iv. 13-15" If the whole congregation sin," &c., "the
Elders of the congregation shall lay their
hands upon the head of the bullock,"
brought for a sin offering. Here it is plain,
that the Elders were viewed as representing the whole congregation; and what
they did in the name of the congregation,
was accepted by God as the act of the
whole.
In many instances during the journeyings of the Israelites through the wilderness, the Elders are spoken of as being
called together by Moses, to deliberate on
important matters, or to receive communications for the people. The following
passages you may note down and consult
at your leisure-Ex. xviii. 12; Numb.
xi. 16, 25; Deut. xxv. 7; xxix. 10; xxxi.
28; xxxiii. 7; Josh. xxiv. 31. In these
and many other passages, you will find
Elders spoken of in their official capacity,
as acting authl oritatively for, and in behalf
of the people. Their care over the morality




BIBLE PRESBYTERIANISM.     235
and religion of the people, and the beneficial effects of their supervision, are spoken
of in Josh. xxiv. 31- "Israel served the
Lord all the days of Joshua, and of the
Elders that overlived Joshua, and which
had known all the works of the Lord that
he had done for Israel." The frequent
mention made of them through the whole
period of the Jewish history, shows verx
clearly, that even in their lowest condition,
they did not lose sight entirely of the principles upon which their government was
first established.
Con.-But when their civil government
was changed under their kings, would it
not also have the effect of changing, or
modifying, their system of church government, seeing that they were so intimately
connected in their first establishment?
MJin.-To what extent their civil government became changed, it is difficult to ascertain. It was more or less despotic under their different kings, in proportion as
each one was disposed to regard his duty
to God and man. Still, however, we finnd
some traces of republicanism, in the darkest periods of their history. But as the
civil government became changed, the
church seems to have separated fiom it.
We find in the synagogue service and order, a system of church government en,




236      BIBLE PRESB fTEIRIANISH.
tirely distinct and separate, compri sing iv
itself a complete system of church polihtv.
It is, indeed, contended by some very at)bl
biblical scholars, that this distinction between the civil and ecclesiastical polities
of the Jews, existed from the first setting up
of the tabernacle in the wilderness. Thiere
can be no doubt, however, that it existed
afterwards in the order and service of
their synagogues.
Con.-When was the synagogue sel vice
first established?
JMin.-It perhaps cannot be clearly ascertained. Philo, in his life of Moses, gives
some good reasons for the opinion tLat it
was instituted by him. Dr. P'rideaux contends, that it could not have existed previous to the return of the Jews from their
captivity in Babylon. His reasoning, however, is not conclusive.  He founds his
opinion mainly upon the fact, that the
reading and expounding of the Scriptures
then extant, was the most prominent of
synagogue services, and as copies of the
Sciiptures were not generally distributed
previous to the captivity, the synagogue
service, he thinks, could not have existed.
The other services of the synagogue, however, praise, prayer, and exhortation, might
have existed previously; and, after the
captivity, reading and expounding the law




BIBLE PRESBYTERIANISM.    237
may have been added. It does not appear
that the Jews were at any time restricted
to any particular place for the performance
of their devotional exercises, though their
sacrifices could only be offered at the tabernacle, or temple. We know that praise
and prayer were offered, and instruction
given, at the "schools of the prophets,"
of which we find mention made as early
as the days of Samuel. How long before
Samuel they were instituted, cannot be
clearly ascertained. The devout Israelites
were in the habit of assembling at these
schools, for the purposes of devotion and
instruction, on their new moons and Sabbaths. 1 Sam. x. 5-11; xix. 18-24. 2
iKings iv. 23. The natural course would
be, that these places for meeting would be
multiplied, as the wants of the people
seemed to demand, and a regular order of
conducting divine worship would be introduced. In Ezek. xiv. 1, and xx. 1, compared with Neh. viii. 17, 18, we have intimations that such was the case. In Psa.
lxxxiv. there seems to be a direct allusion
to such places of worship; and, in Psa.
lxxiv. 8, the Psalmist, speaking of the desolations wrought by their enemies, says
expressly, "They have burnt up all the
synagogues of God in the land."
Tl'e most natura. ccuclusion, therefore.




238     BIBLE PRE SBYTERIAN1SM.
is, as it seems to me, that the prophets and
holy men-"i' the Elders of Israel" —under
the direction of God, instituted the synagogue service at a very early period, first
by devout assemblies at the schools of the
prophets, and the houses of holy men; and
these domestic congregations being multiplied, as the wants of the people seemed
to demand, and becoming fixed in certain
places, a distinct system of church polity,
and a regular order of conducting divine
service, was introduced. This point, however, is not of much importance to our
present inquiry. We know that there was
such a system in existence when our Saviour came upon earth; and that when
the Christian church was set up as a regular organization by the apostles, they
adopted the order of the synagogue.
Con.-But was that Presbyterianism?
AJlin. —In every synagogue there was a
bench of Elders, consisting of three or
more persons, who were entrusted with its
whole government and discipline. The
synagogues were the parish or district
churches of the Jews, in which the Elders,
as a court, or bench of rulers, received
nmemibers, judged, censured, and excluded,
or excommunicated. Their sentence of
excommunication was termed  " puttinlg
him out of the syL'agogue" —John ix. 22,




BIBLE PRESBYTERIANISM.     239
and xii. 42-and the Elders were called
"the rulers of the synagogue," of whom
we have frequent mention in the New Testament. We find, therefore, that in the
synagogues, all the essential principles of
Presbyterianism were universally  estaolished. The sirnilarity in every important
point was exact.  We find, also, that in
addition to this bench of Elders in each
synlagogue, there was one principal overseer, who was called the "Bishop," or
" Angel of the church," who was the presiding officer, or Moderator. From theses
lower courts, also, there was an appeal te
the "great synagogue" at Jerusalem; thus
blending the whole community together
as one visible professing body.
In this, I believe, all commlentators and
biblical scholars agree, be their prepossessions as to church  government what
they may. Did time permit, I could quote
to you Stillingfleet, Vitringa, Selden, Grotius, Lightfoot, Thorndike, Burnet, Godwin, Neander, Spencer, and others, who
all agree, in every important point, respectIng the order and polity of the synagogue.
Thile testimony of these eminent men is:rendlered more conclusive from the fact,
that they were not Presbyterians, with,
perhaps, one or two exceptions. I might
also quote Dr. Gill, and Dr. Adarn Clarke,




240     BIBLE PRESBYTERIANISM.
as teaching the same truth. The extensive
learning and deep research of these eminent men, no competent judge will call iL
question; and as one was a Baptist and
the other a Methodist, they cannot be accused of favouring Presbyterianism, further than in giving what they conceived
to be the plain sense of the Scriptures.
The first converts to Christianity were
mostly native Jews, and as they had been
accustomed to the exercise of church government in the manner specified, entirely distinct from the temple worship, which
was ceremonial and typical, it is not surprising that it should be adopted by the
apostles in the organization of the primitive church. That this was the case, we
have abundant evidence, which is so conclusive that it seems to me a matter of
wonder that it should be controverted. At
a future time, I will give you a brief summary of the evidence that the primitive
church was truly Presbyterian, and continued so until it was corrupted by Popery,
which will, I think, convince you of the
Scriptural warrant for Presbyterianism.




DIALOGUE XXI.
PRIMITIVE PRESBYTERIANISM.
(onvert.-A  difficulty has occurred to
nmy mind since our last conversation, respecting the officers of the synagogue.
You spoke of Elders, but I do not recollect that you said anything about Ministers, as belonging to the established order
of the svnagcogue, unless the presiding officer, "the Angel of the church," acted in
that capacity.
JMinister.-It was one of the duties of the
chief rulers of the synagogue, to teach the
people from the Scriptures.  This they
did sometimes by way of conference, or
questions and answers, and sometimes by
continued discourses, like sermons. These
different ways of teaching they called by
the general name of searching, and the
discourse was called a search, or inquiry.
The chief ruler or president also invited
others, whom he thor.ght capable, to speak
in the synagogue; and that honour was
generally offered to strangers, if any were
present, who were thought to have the
gift of speaking.-Luke iv. 16 —22; Acts
21                      (241)




242   PRIMITIVF PRESBYTERIANISM.
xiii. 14, 15. These presidents, or chief
rulers, together with the bench of Elders.
were called rulers. Hence, in the prinritive church, the preacher or pastor, together with the bench of Elders, were called
by the general name of Elders. Paul, in
giving instruction to Timothy, tells him,
" Let the Elders that rule well, be counted
worthy of double honour, especially they
who labour in the word and doctrine."-1
Tim. v. 17. From which it is plain, that
there was a class of Elders, who did not
labour in word and doctrine. Peter called
himself an Elder, and we know he was a
preacher. We know, also, that there were
Elders who ruled, yet did not preach, because there was a plurality of them or
dained in every church, however small, and
we cannot suppose that in every church
they had a plurality of pastors.
Con.-But how do we know that these
Pastors and Elders sustained the same
office, and were clothed with the same aunihority, which we now find invested in the
officers of the Presbyterian Church?
Min.-We find the Elders represented
as " overseers" of the church. " Take heed
therefore unto yourselves, and to all the
flock over the which the Holy Ghost hath
made you overseers."-Acts xx. 28. They
are also called rulers.  "ITet the Elders




PRIMITIVE PRESBYTERI ANiSM.  9243
that rule well." —1 Tim. v. 17: "Obey
them that have the rule over you," &Re.HIeb. xiii. 17. The people, too, are exhorted to obey them, to submit to them,
&c., as to persons charged with an oversight of their spiritual interests. "And
we beseech you, brethren, to know them
which labour among you, and are over you
in the Lord, and admonish you; and to
esteem them very highly in love for their
work's sake.-1 Thess. v. 12, 13. "Obey
them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves," &c.-lIeb. xiii. 17. Now,
when we find a plurality of Elders ordained
in every church, and one of these Elders' labouring in word and doctrine," and
others not; and when we find that the
people were exhorted to obey them, and
submit to them in the Lord; and, also,
that these Elders were chosen by the people, and ordained to their office by the laying on of hands; we have all the essential
principles of Presbyterianisrr. This will
appear to you the more plain, when you
recur to the fact I before noticed, that the
term Presbyter is the same with Elder. In
the one case it is translated, and in the
other it is simply transferred, with a slight
change in orthography.
Con.-But we find the word Bishop often used to denote an office then existing




244   PRIMITIVE PRESBYTERIANISM.
in the church, and does not this faci afford
some ground for Episcopacy?
AJin. —The term "Bishop," like that of
Presbyter, is transferred into our language
without being translated. It means an
overseer, and we have it so translated in
several instances. " Take heed to yourselves, and to all the flock over the which
the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers," (or Bishops.)-Acts xx. 28. The
Elders are styled Bishops, as they have the
oversight of the flock, and the terms Bishop, and Elder, are titles given interchangeably to the same persons, which
plainly shows that the term Bishop was no
more than the title which designated the
pastor, or overseer of a single church. We
do not find in the New Testament a single
trace of Episcopacy, in its modern form.
Indeed, the placing of one minister above
another is expressly forbidden. There is
but one commission given by the Lord
Jesus Christ to his ministers: "Go and
teach all nations, baptizing thern in the
name of the Father, and of the Son, and of
the Holy Ghost."  And anything like one
mIinister being placed higher in authority
than the rest, and having rule over them,
and possessing alone the powTer of ordination, is directly in the face of the commands of Clhrist, and all the instituted or



PRIMITIVE PRESBYTR [AN1SM.   245
tier of the primitive church. There is not
a solitary instance in all the New Testaiment, of an ordination being performed by
a single individual, but the power is uniformly represented as being possessed, and
exercised, by the ordinary pastors, and performed by the " laying on of the hands of
the Presbytery."-1 Tim. iv. 14; Acts xiii.
3; which corresponds with Presbyterianism, and with  Presbyterianism  alone.
That this was the form of church government adopted by the apostles, and left in
universal use when these inspired men left
the church to their successors, it reallv
seems almost impossible that any impartial and candid reader of the New Testament can entertain a doubt.
Con.-But have we also authority, or
precedent, for the several church courts
which we find in use in the Presbyterian
church?
Jlin.-It is very plain, that the whole
church, as it then existed, however scattered, was regarded as one body, all governed by the same laws, and subject to
the same authority. When a subject of
importance arose, about which there was
diversity of opinion, we find the matter
considered and decided by a synod composed of the " apostles and elders."-Acts
xv. We have in this chapter an account
21 




246   PRIMITIVE PRESBYTE1LIANISM.
of the doings of the Synod, which met at
Jerusalem, and have it particularly stated,
that their decision respecting the overture
which was brought before them, was sent
down to " all the churches," carrying with
it the authority of the Synod for their regulation. We find, also, that this decree
with others, was recorded and delivered to
the churches, to be registered, preserved,
and obeyed. As Paul and Timothy "went
through the cities, they delivered them the
decrees for to keep, which were ordained
by the apostles and elders which were at
Jerusalem." —Acts xvi. 4. Here, then, we
find an assembly of ministers and elders
acting as the representatives of the whole
church, and pronouncing authoritative de
cisions, which were intended to bind the
whole body. If this be not Presbyterianism, we will search for it in vain, either ill
Scotland or America.
Con.-lHow  long did the church continue under Presbyterian government, and
what was the cause of the change?
Mlin.-It is difficult to ascertain precisely the time of the first departure from
Presbyterianism.  The change was.,,o
doubt, small at first, and thought to be trivial. Clemens Romanus, an eminent F'a.
ther, who lived near the close of the first
cent urs, in a letter directed to the Chrii.




PRIMITIVE PRESBYTERIA /ISM.   247
tians at Corinth, chides them for having,
at the instigation of a few leading men,
departed, in one respect, from the wise
and wholesome system of church governinent established by the apostles.  "It is a
shame," he writes, "yea, a very great
shame, to hear that the most firm and ancient church of the Corinthians should be
led, by one or two persons, to rise up
against their Elders. *   *   *  Let the
flock of Christ enjoy peace, with the Elders that are set over them.  * *   *  Do
ye, therefore, who first laid the foundation
for this sedition, submit yourselves to your
Elders."  Two things are plain from these
expressions. First, that the Corinthian
church had been organized upon Presbyterian principles, and had so continued for
a time, probably during one generation.
Second, that a departure from it was
viewed by this eminent Father as deserving of censure. This, however, was only
a solitary case, and the defection did not
become general for a length of time afterwards. But it shows how prone men are
to depart from the simplicity of the order
of the primitive times. The testimony of
the Fathers is abundant and clear, that the
church, in general, continued to enjoy the
primitive Presbyterian form of governtmut  for at least twc centuries. Did timle




248   PRIMITIVE PRESBYTERI.NISM.
permit, I might quote to you, Ignatills,
Polycarp, Irenpeus, Cyprian, Origen, Am.
brose, Augustine, Justin  Martyr, and
others, as stating the same truths, that in
the early ages of the church, the different,
distinct churches were under the care of
a Bishop, or Pastor, and a bench of Elders, and that there was no priority, or
pre-eminence of rank among the ministers.
Indeed, for the first two hundred years after Christ, we find no traces of either Prelacy or Illdependency, except they may be
traced in the few departures from Presbyterianisml, which we find condemned and
censured by the Fathers. Ambrose, who
lived in the fourth century, in his commentary on 1 Tim. v. 1, says, that "the
synagogues, and afterwards the church,
had Elders, without whose counsel nothing
was done in the church, which grew into
disuse, by what negligence, I know not,
unless, perhaps, by the sloth, or rather the
pride, of the Teachers, while they alone,
wished to appear somrething."  That there
were Elders and Teachers, as distinct
classes of officers in the primitive church,
Ambrose asserts positively, and expresses
his opinion, that they "grew into disuse,
from the sloth or pride of the teachers."
We find from  the history of those times,
that both the Ministry and Eldership of




PRIMITIVE PRESBYTERIANISM.   249
the church, declined in zeal and faithfulness. The pictures given of the cupidity,
nutual encroachments and strife of the
clergy, even in the third century, by Cyprian, Origen, and Eusebius, are truly
mournful. In such a state of things it is
not surprising, that the simplicity of the
primitive church gave place to a system
which flattered ambition, and fed voluptuousness.  Among  such  ministers, a
grasping after preferment, titles, &c.,
might be confidently expected. The pastors in the large cities, and more opulent
towns, began to claim a pre-eminence and
peculiar powers, which by little and little
were admitted, and at length established,
as a part of the order of Christ's house.
And, finally, the bishops became "lords
over God's heritage," rather than " ensamples to the flock;" and to crown all, one
was proclaimed " universal Bishop," under
the title of Pope-declared to be the " Vicar of God," —with universal, unlimited
authority over the souls and bodies of all
nmen in the world.
Con.-And was thew primitive order of
the church so entirely lost in this universal
corruption, that none remained to bear
witness to the truth?
Min. —The Paulicians we find, in the
seventh century, lestifyinl  against the en



250    PRIMITIVE P.ESl YTERiANtSM.
croachments of Prelacy, and afterwards the
Waldenses and Albigenses, still more distinctly and zealously, protested against the
errors of the times, and especially, the encroachments on Presbyterian simplicity.
It was, indeed, supposed that the Waldenses were prior to the Paulicians. The noted
Reinerius, who lived near three hundred
years before Luther, and had once resided
with the Waldenses, though he afterwards
became one of their bitterest persecutors,
in a treatise he wrote against them, ascribes
to them a very early origin. He said they
were " the most pernicious to the Church
of Rorne of all other heretics, for three reasons. First, because they were older than
any other sect, for some say they have been
ever since Pope Sylvester, (A. D. 314,) and
others say from the time of the apostles."
Their origin is too remote to be traced with
distinctness and certainty. That they were
Presbyterian both in doctrine and order,
must be admitted by all. John Paul Perrin, their historian, who was one of their
ministers, speaks particularly of their El.
ders and Pastors, as distinct classes of officers in the church, and represents their
Synods as composed of Ministers and El-'ers.  Gilly, another historian of the Wal-'lenses, quotes their Confession of Faith, as
eont.aili.ng the following declaration-: - It




PRIMITIVE I'RESBYTERIANISM.   251
is necessary for the church to have Pastors,
to preach God's word, to administer the
sacraments, and to watch over the sheep
of Jesus Christ; and also Elders and Deacons, according to the ruies of good and
holy church discipline, and the practice of
the primitive  church."  This not only
shows beyond doubt that the Waldenses
were Presbyterians, but it also shows what
they believed respecting the Presbyterianism of the primitive church.  Other historians of undisputed authority, assert the
same respecting the Waldenses, and the
Bohemians, and the Albigenses, who were
different branches of the same people, and
called by different names, as they lived at
different times, and in different places.
Moreland, Ranken, Comenius, Bucer, and
others, all give decisive testimony to the
fact, that these witnesses for the truth, during the long period of darkness and cor.
ruption which overspread the church, were
decidedly Presbyterian, both in doctrine
and order..*
Thus I ]have endeavoured to give you a
very brief and hasty view of Presbyterianism from the days of the apostles to the
reformation by Luther.  To the facts that
* See a very interesting " History of the Waldenses." illuntrated with beautiful engravings, published by the Board
of Publication.




252   PRIMITIVE PRESBYTERIANISM.
I have stated, volumes of testimony might
be given, but circumstances would only
permit us to glance at a small part of it.
But from what has been said, you can perceive the puerile ignorance manifested by
those who allege that Presbyterianism was
invented by Calvin.
Con.-Were the Reformers Presbyterian
in their sentim ents and practice?
Min.-All the Reformers, of any note,
agreed upon all the essential principles of
Presbyterianism. But as our conversation
has been sufficiently protracted at this time.
we will on some future occasion examine
what history says on that point.




DIALOGUE XXII.
PRESBYTERIANISM OF THE REFORMIERS.
Convert.-In our former conversations I
have not noticed, that amlong the officers
of the Presbyterian church, you said anything respecting Deacons, yet they are frequently mentioned in the New Testament;
and I find, also, mention made of them in
the Confession of the Waldenses. They
are also, I believe, in most Presbyterian
churches that I am acquainted with.
Jllinister.-The office of Deacon is a very
important one, and should be found in every church, where circumstances require
and admit of it; still, however, it is not an
essential part of Presbyterianism, that is, a
church may exist, and act upon Presbyterian principles, in which they  are not
found. The want of this office does not
destroy its Presbyterianism; whereas, a
Presbvterian church cannot exist without
Elders. Deacons existed in the synagogues, and were afterwards introduced by
the apostles into the primitive church, as
soon as c'ircumstances seemed to require it.
22                       (253 




'354      PRESBYTERIANISM OF
We find that the church had existed for
some time, and when "'the number of
disciples was multiplied," circumstances
seemed to call for the appointment of some,
whose special business it should be to attend to the temporal concerns of the church,
especially to superintend her benevolent
operations.-Acts vi. So in every church
in which this part of its business requires
much of the attention of the minister and
elders, if the circumstances at all admit of
it, they should have " Deacons set over the
work," who should be solemnly ordained
by prayer and the laying on of hands, in
the same way that the other officers are ordained. The importance of the office to
the church you can easily perceive, and it
shows in a very clear light the wisdom of
the Great Head of the churcll, in arranging
all things necessary to her peace, comfort
and prosperity.  Hence, we find, that
though the office of Deacoil has not been
uniformly  found  in  all I'resbyterian
churches, yet it has been generally contended fbi by those, who seek entire conformity to the order of the primitive church.
C(on.-Was Calvin the first of the Reformers whlo soulght to establish Presbyterianism according to the order of the primitive church? 1 have thought, that perbaps this gave rise to the idea, that he




THE REFORMERS.         255
originated it. If he was the first of the
Reformers who adopted it, the more ignorant might conclude that it originated with
him.
Min.-Tbhe allegation that Presbyterianism originated with Calvin, has not even
that foundation.  Ulric  Zuingle, the
leader of the Reformation in Switzerland,
who lived Icnrg before Calvin, and died before ever Calvin saw Geneva, or had appeared among the prominent Reformers,
thus speaks on the subject of Ruling Elders: "The title of Presbyter, or Elder,
as used in Scripture, is not rightly understood by those, who consider it as applicable only to those who preside in preaching:
for it is evident, that the term is also sometimes used to designate Elders of another
kind, that is, Senators, Leaders, or Counsellors."
- Ecolarnpadius, whom D'Aubignie in his
history mentions as one of the bright stars
of the Reformation, and who was contemporary with Luther, but died before Calvin
came on the stage of action, thus speaks
of Ruling Elders: " But it is evident, that
those which are here intended, are certain
Seniors or Elders, such as were in the
apostles' days, and who of old time were
called Presbuteroi, whose judgment, being
that of the most prudent part of the church,




256.      PRESBYTERIANISM OF
was considered as the decision of the whole
church." The testimony of Bucer, Lasco,
Peter Martyr, and others, is equally clear
as to the fact, that Presbyterianism was
one of the grand principles of the Iteformation. Luther, himself, in speakling Of
the Bohemian church, says: "There hath
not arisen any people since the times of
the apostles, whose church hath come
nearer to the apostolic doctrine and order,
than the brethren of Bohemia. * * *
In the ordinary discipline of the church
they use, and whereby they happily.govern the churches, they go far beyond us,
and are in this respect far more praiseworthy.?' Now, in view of the fact before
stated, that the Bohemian Church was
strictly Presbyterian, the.....-sentiments, of
Luther are plain.  Melancthon, Farel,
Viret and others might be added to the
list of eminent Reformers, who all agree
on the great principles of Presbyterianism,
viz: equality of rank among ministers,
and the government of the church by Ministemrs and Elders.
Calvin, when he first settled at Geneva,
found the church there in great need of
discipline, and for attempting to establish
a system that would exclude gross offenders
firom tile sealing ordinances of the church,
ae was banished from the city and retired




THE REFORMERS.. 2'7
to Strasburg.  While there, feeling the
great want of some regular system  of
church discipline, he opened a correspondence with some of the principal men of
the Bohemian church. Coinenius, in his
history of the Bohemians, gives some extracts from some of his letters, in which
he speaks in high terms of their form of
church governnment, as being not only wise
and wholesome, but also in accordance with
the apostolic order. Near four years afterwards he was recalled to Geneva, and
made it one of the conditions of his accepting the pastoral charge of the church,
that he should be permitted to have a
bench of Elders, to conduct the discipline
of the church, according to the plan in
use among the Bohemians. Thus, Presbyterianism was established ln-Geneva,
and became general- in -— the Reformed
Churches in Switzerlatid, Germany, Holland, France, Hungary, Scotland, and
throughout Europe generally, with the ex
ception of England.
Con.-Why was it not received and
adopted in England?
JAin. —In the reformation from Popery
in England, the kings and bishops mostly took the lead. To them, as a matter of
course, the simple republicanism of the
Presbyterian system would not be agreea22 *




258       PRESBYTERLINISM OF
ble. Ecclesiastical pre-eminence had long
been established, and it is not surprising
that they should wish to retain it. Accordingly, while they adopted the system
of doctrine taught by the Reformers generally, they retained many of the features
of Popery in their system of church governnment. This, however, was contrary
to the expressed opinion of many of their
most learned and pious divines. Not a
few of the brightest stars of the Church of
England have given their decided opinion
in favour of Presbyterianism. The truly
venerable and pious Dr. Owen, gives his
opinion on 1 Tim. v. 17, in the following
unequivocal language: " This is a text of
uncontrollable evidence, if it had anything
to conflict withal, but prejudice and interest. A rational man, who is unprejudiced,
who never heard of the controversy about
Ruling Elders, can hardly avoid an apprehension, that there were two sorts of Elders, some who labour in the word and
doctrine, and some who do not so do. The
truth is, it was interest and prejudice which
first caused some learned men to strain
their wits to find out evasions from the
evidence of this testimony. Being found
out, some others of meaner abilities have
been entangled by them. *  *  * There
are, then, Elders in the (,hurch. There




THE REFORMERS.         259
are, oI ought to be so, in every church.
With these Elders the whole rule of the
church is entrusted. All these, and only
they, do rule in it."  This, from an Independent divine of so much eminence and
piety as Dr. Owen, is as strong human testimony in favour of Presbvterianism, as
any one can wish. Dr. Whitely bears the
same testimony, iit lanlrlage equally plain.
Thorndike, Whitaker, antd others, clearly
express the same opinion; and even Archbishop Cranmer, once proposed the introduction of Ruling  Elders into the Church
of England. From all this testimony it is
plain, that though Prelacy was established
in the national church, many of her most
eminent men were in favour of Presbyterianism, as being in accordance with apostolic order. I have purposely avoided
quoting the opinions of P'resbyterians, because they might be considered partial to
their own system.  Out,whell we find the
system  supported by the arguments of
Episcopalians and Independents, partiality
to Presbyterianism cannot be alleged. I
night add testimony, equally plain, from
manv others, both Episcopalians and Independcents, but I think I have said enough
to convince you, that the order of the
Presbyterian church, as well as her doctrine, is in a(.cordance with the Bible and




60 PRESBYTERIANISM OF THE REFORMERS.
common sense, and has received the suf
frages of the wise and good in every age.
Did time permit, it would be a pleasant
task to trace with you the history of the
Presbyterian church more at large. Millions of her martyrs lhave sealed the truth
of her doctrines with their blood; and
though persecuted in every age, she still
lives, and witnesses for the truth. But
for this I must refer you to history.
TRJC E&D.