RELIGIOUS TRAINING
OF
CHILDREN
IN
THE SCHOOL, THE FAMILY,
THE CHURCH.
CATRARINE E. BEECRER,
AUTHOR OF
COMMlON SENSE APPLIED TO  RELIGIONl," "LETTERS TO THE PEOPLE,"
"DOMEBSTIO ECONOMY," " DOMESTIO BEGEIPT-BOOK,"
rPHIYSIOLOGY AND CALISTHENIC,S," ETC.
NEW  YOIXK:              -
HARPER & BROTHERS, PUBLISHERS.
FRANKLIN     SQUARE.  
1864. 
a, / 2?&c
AND
BY 
By Catharine Beecher.
Appeal to the People, as the Authorized Interpreters of the
Bible. 12mo, cloth, $1 25.
Common Sense applied to Religion; or, the Bible and the
People. 12mo, cloth, $1 25.
Domestic Economy. 12mo, cloth, $1 00.
Domestic Receipt Book. 12mo, cloth, $1 00.
Letters to the People on Health and Happiness. 6lGmo,
cloth, 60 cents.
Physiology and Calisthenics. Over 100 Engravings. 16mo,
cloth, 60 cents.
Religious Training of Children in the Family, SchQQl,
and Church  12mo, cloth, $1 50.
Published by HARPER & BROTHERS, New York.
W- Sent by Mail, postage pre.paid, on receipt of the Price.
Entered, according to Act of Congress, in the year one thousand eight hundred
and  ty - four, by IHACPEPR & BROTIIEnS, in the Clerk's Office of the District Court
of the Southern I):~trict Court of New York.
I 
TO THE
SELF-EDUCATED FARMER,
UNDER WHIOSE EYE MOST OF THIS WORK WAS COMPOSED, AND WHOSE
COMMON SENSF, COUNSELS AND CRITICISM HAVE VERIFIED THE
CLAIM THAT THE COMMON PEOPLE ARE
"AUTHIORIZED INTERPRETERS OF THE  BIBLE,"
erfS Work is ]ecfcateD
BY HIIS AFFECTIONATE NIECE.
.i1
A
Ac  
CONTENTS.
CIAPTEB                                                   PAGE
I. Religious Training-what it is............................ 7
II. Family Religiouis Training-Good and Evil-Right
and Wrong................................................... 10
III. Family Religious Training-Law-The Obedience of
Faith and Hope...........................................  15
IV. Family Religious Training-the Obedience of Love
-Rational Obedience..................................... 25
V. Spiritual Religious Training............................... 32
VI. School Religious Training................................... 43
VII. Church Religious Training-what is the Church?...  52
VIII. The Primitive Church of Christ........................... 66
IX. The Puritan Church-its History........................  76
X. Primitive Church Training................................. 92
XI. Puritan Church Training................................... 101
XII. Puritan Church Training, second Part.................. 111
XIII. Puritan Church Training, third Part.................... 121
XIV. Theological Training restrained by Common Sense... 133
XV. The Bible on Infant Character and Prospects......... 173
XVI. The true Church Training................................  203
XVII. Bible Basis of true Church Training..................... 222
CORRESPONDENCE.
From Rt. Rev. Bishop, of the Episcopal Church, to the
Author............................................................... 242
Reply of the Author............................................ 244 
PAGE
From Rt. Rev. Bishop, of the Episcopal Church...... 256
Reply of the Author.............................................. 258
From Rev. Dr., of the Episcopal Church................ 277
Reply of the Author.................................................... 279
Extract of a Letter from an Episcopal Clergyman, and the
Author's Rep           ly..................................................... 288
From Rev. Dr., of the Episcopal Church, and the Au     thor's Reply......................................................... 298
From a Roman Catholic Priest, and the Author's Reply...... 303
From a Roman Catholic Priest, and the Author's Reply...... 309
From a Roman Catholic Priest, and the Author's Reply...... 316
To the Author of the Conflict of Ages............................ 326
To the Wife of a Professor in a Methodist Theological Sem     inary.................................................................. 346
Extract of a Letter from a female Friend, and the Author's
Reply................................................................. 359
Letter from the Author to a Mother................................ 380
Letter from the Author to young Friends after Confirmation.. 389
Letter to a Congregational Clergyman............................ 396
Notes...................................................................... 411
iv
CONTENTS. 
INTRODUCTION.
FOR nearly forty years the writer has been edu cating mothers and teachers. More than a thou sand of her former pupils, in almost every sect and
section of our country, during that period have been
rearing families, into many of which she has been
received as a confidential friend to learn their diffi culties and their failure or success.
As the eldest and only unmarried child of a large
family, for long periods she has also witnessed the
varied methods pursued with children in different
homes of near relatives.
The result is a deep conviction that the right
training of children is the most difficult of all human pursuits; that success is invariably proportioned to the wisdom and fitness of the methods
pursued; that the best modes are to be obtained
only by a wide experience, involving many failures, and, as yet, offering no perfect examples; that
the records of experience are indispensable to future success; and that educators, like medical men,
are bound to make such records for the benefit of
the profession.
This little volume, therefore, is offered as one
contribution to the department of religiouts trainin,.  
THE
RELIGIOUS TRAINING OF CHILDREN
IN
THE FAMILY, THE SCHOOL, AND THE CHURCH.
CIIAPTER FIRST.
RELIGIOUS TRAINING-WHAT IT IS.
THE more the human mind is accustomed to reason and discrimination, the more it is perceived
that the Creator of all things designed not only the
good of his creatures, but their best good.
The common expression that "God orders all
things for the best" conveys the only clear idea we
can have of his perfect benevolence. When it is
said that "the Judge of the whole earth will do
right," the only intelligible meaning is that God
will do that which is for the best good of his creatures. To do right, and to do that which is for the
best, are expressions which, as the people use and
understand them, signify the same thing when ap
plied to God, and equally so when applied to man. 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
By the light of nature, without any revelation
from God, men are led to the conviction that it is
Hiis will that all his creatures should do right; that
is, that they do what is best for all concerned. And
the various revelations from God, in different ages,
now collected in the Bible, all teach the same great
doctrine.
In the widest use of the term, a man is religious
just so far as his feelings and conduct are conformed to the will or laws of his Creator, as made
known either by reason and experience or by revelation.
A child is trained to be religious, in this use of
the term, just so far as he is educated to obey the
laws of God in regard to self, to others, and to his
Maker.
No person can certainly know what is for the
best'in all the affairs of life without both experience and instruction, while these often fail-to guide
us correctly. But the omniscient Creator has revealed rules for our guidance, first by seers and
prophets, and lastly by our Lord Jesus Christ, as
recorded in the Bible.
This being so, a child may be trained to be religious, to a certain extent, without any aid from
revelation; that is to say, a child may be successfully trained to obey many of the laws of God, as
they are discovered by reason and experience alone.
But it is only those -who understand the Bible
8
I 
OF CHILDREN.
aright who are most fully qualified for the proper
religious education of the young.
Religious training, then, includes all those modes
by which children are led to understand and to
obey the laws of God for securing the best good of
all, as they are discovered by reason, by experience, and by the Bible.
The term religious is often used in a more limited sense, as relating only to God arrd his worship,
while that part of religion which includes duties to
self and to our fellow-beings is called morals. -
While this limited use of the term is legitimate,
none will deny that the more comprehensive sense
is equally so. Nor will any maintain that the laws
of God in reference to ourselves and our fellow-men
are not to be included as a part of the system of
true religion.
Thd connection in which the term religious is
employed will always indicate whether it is used in
the comprehensive or in the limited sense.  In this
work it will be used in both.
In what follows will be presented some of the
modes employed in the writer's observation by
those who have had the best success in training
children to obey the laws of God, some contrasted
methods, and other connected topics.
A2
.9 
TIlE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
CHAPTER SECOND.
FAMILY RELIGIOUS TRAINING-GOOD AND EVIL              RIGHT AND WRONG.
Religious training, as previously defined, embraces
all modes of influencing a child to obey the laws of
God for securing the best good of all.
The infant commences life in perfect ignorance
and helplessness. It knows nothing of what is
good or what is evil. It knows nothing of God or
of his laws, of its own wants or of the wants of others.  Of course, the infant is unable, in every sense,
to obey God until it is taught by the combined
agency of God and man.
Its first lesson is to -learn good and evil. This it
can only do in the beginning by experience.  Thus
the pleasure of light to the eye and the discomfort of darkness; the enjoyment of warmth and the
pain of heat; the contrasts of sweet and bitter to
the taste, and of various odors to the smell; the
pleasure of motion and the discomfort of confinement-these, and multitudes of other pleasures and
pains that enter the mind through the senses, can
only be learned by experience.
Next come the social pleasures of companionship, of sympathy, of affection, and the contrasted
10 
OF CHILDREN.
pains of solitude, neglect, and displeasure from
those around.
All these and innumerable other modes of enjoyment and suffering can be learned not at all by
instruction, but solely by "tasting the tree of
knowledge of good and evil."
After a certain measure of knowledge has been
gained by experience, the child is prepared to acquire the knowledge  gained by faith in the testimony of others As to what things are good or evil.
If a child could know nothing of the qualities and
nature of things around, and of the consequences
of its proceedings, except by its own experience,
there would be no end to its dangers and mishaps.
The greater portion of all useful knowledge, not
only for children, but for adults, rests upon faith
in the teachings of others.
Thle nurse and parent are daily training the child
to a practical faith in those who have more knowledge than itself. Such and such things must not
be touched; such and such must not be eaten;
such and such dangerous places must be avoided,
and all because some evil will ensue that the child
never has experienced, and from which it can be
withheld only by force or by faith in the teachings
of others. Thus it is that, in regard even to this
life, the child, at the very first,. is trained to "walk
by faith and not by sight."
After gaining the knowledge by experience and
11 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
by faith as to what good and evil are, and how they
are to be gained and escaped, the next lesson taught
is the law of sacrifice.
The child soon is led to perceive that much which
is good, when taken at the right time and manner,
involves evil if taken at the wrong time or place,
or if taken to excess. Thus certain kinds of food
are given only in very small quantities, when  the
little one, if left to itself, would make a whole meal
of them.  In such cases the child is instructed that
a given quantity is good, and that more than that
is evil, and that self-denial must be practiced in
these cases, so as to take only as much as is best.
Again, it often occurs that two modes of enjoyment are at hand which are incompatible, so that
one must be sacrifced to gain the other.  For example, there are two tempting objects offered, only
one 6f which will be allowed; and a choice must be
made, so that the taking of one insures the sacrifice
of the other. Here the child is taught that the
choice must be made of that which is best.
And thus there is a constant training to avoid excess, and to give up the lesser to secure the greater
good. This often involves sacrifices more or less
painful, so that the little one will sometimes weep
as it voluntarily relinquishes one kind of pleasure
as the only means of securing another which is the
best.
Still farther, the child is trained to balance and
12 
OF CHILDRIEN.
calculate good that involves some evil, so that a
given amount of enjoyment cancels or pays for a
certain amount of evil. When a great degree of
enjoyment is secured by a small amount of trouble,
the compound result is called a good. If, on the
contrary, the evil involved exceeds a given amount
in comparison with the good, the compound result
is called evil. Thus the lesson is gradually imparted that good and evil are to be regarded in two relations. In the one relation, any thing is called
good which gives pleasure of any kind; but if
this good can be gained only by sacrificing a greater good or inflicting a great evil, then, in this other
relation, the good becomes evil. Thus a delicious
fruit, in the first relation, is a good, because it gives
enjoyment; but if sickness and suffering will be
the result of eating it, it is an evil. This training
of infancy introduces the law of sacrifice in reference to self alone.
But, as the intellect develops, the existence of
other beings who suffer and enjoy is learned, and
their interests become the subjects for instruction.
Here the calculations as to the balance of good and
evil become more and more complicated, and the
two relations in which good and evil are to be
judged become more extensive. Whatever gives
pleasure to self is still called good in the first relation; but if some great suffering is involved to
others, then it is called evil, and the child must
13
;.
il
N 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
make a sacrifice for them. At last comes forth that
most difficult general law of self-sacrifice, that the
lesser good of self must always be sacrificed for the
greater good of others.
In other words, the child is trained always to
choose what is best for self when others are not
involved, and, when others are concerned, to choose
what is best for all.  Thus is established in the
mind of the child the grand law of rectitude by
which to decide every future act. If it is what
is best for all concerned, it is right; if it is not
best, it is wrong.
Thus it is seen that, in the first period of family
religious training, the child gains the knowledge of
good and evil by experience and by faith; and
next a knowledge of what is right and wrong according to the great law of sacrifice, demanding the
invariable choice of what is best for all concerned.
Here it must be noted that good and evil, right
and wrong, are often used interchangeably, as meaning the same thing; while they also are used, in
other cases, in the two relations indicated in the
preceding pages. With these, as with all other
words having several meanings, it is the connection
which decides the exact sense in each case.
14 
OF CHILDREN.
CHAPTER THIRD.
FAMILY RELIGIOUS TRAINING- LAW - THE OBE         DIENCE OF FAITH AND HOPE.
IT has been seen that in the first period of life
the infant is learning what is good and what is evil
chiefly by experience. Next it learns by experience, but more by faith in its teachers, what is
rigIht and what is wrong, as decided by that great
law of sacrifice, which the infant is gradually. trained to understand. This law is first applied to its
own enjoyments without reference to others; but,
finally, the child is trained to sacrifice the lesser
good of self to the greater good of those around.
Otfr next inquiry is as to the best modes of securing obedience to this great law of rectitude,
which all created beings must regard through their
whole existence.
Here experience is our chief guide.  We  perceive that the Creator secures obedience to some of
his laws by penalties that are both certain and immediate, while in other cases the penalties for violated law are remote and apparently uncertain.
For example, the laws which protect the body from
destruction are enforced by penalties certain and
immediate. In every experiment, the child invari
15 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
ably finds that pain follows when the finger is put
in a candle or on a hot stove. As soon as this certainty is discovered, the child obeys the law and
keeps its fingers out of the danger. So a few falls
teach the law of gravity and its penalties, and
prompt obedience is thus secured.
But food that is injurious to health brings a penalty that is remote and uncertain, and so the fear
of it has little or no influence ill restraining from
the indulgence, while this needful fear depends entirely on faith in those who warn from the danger.
In all cases, experience shows that, in both adults
and children, the more distant and uncertain are
the rewards and penalties of law, both human and
divine, the more difficult it is to secure obedience.
The most effective mode of meeting this difficulty
in the family is to make the decided command of a
parent a law enforced by a penalty that is felt to
be both certain and immediate. This being secured, obedience to all laws involving the future
welfare of the child may be rendered not only
prompt, but cheerful and uniform.
All that balancing of mind between hope and
fear which induces irritation is thus avoided. A
child never cries or frets because it can not play
with fire or jump out of a window after it learns
the certain penalties of such acts. And when an
equally certain penalty follows disobedience to pa
16 
OF CHILDREN.
rental command, an equally prompt and cheerful
obedience will result.
Nothing so surely saves a child from fretfulness
and insubordination as the certainty that willful
disobedience will be followed by a penalty such
that the forbidden enjoyment will not pay for the
certain pain. And the moment a child perceives
that sometimes the penalty of disobedience follows
and sometimes it does not, he is constantly tempted
to try whether he can escape, and is doubly irritated at the uncertain penalty when it does come.
Especially is this so in the case of nervous, irritable, and sickly children, who are necessarily subjected to annoying restraints and medical inflictions. Many such have been ruined in health and
temper for want of a strong and steady government,,to which they would have learned to yield
prompt and cheerful obedience. Such a habit of
obedience once formed, the necessity for discipline
ceases almost entirely. Nothing then is needed but
the decided tone of authority, which the child is
sure can not be disobeyed without the certain penalty. It is not the mere apprehension of the penalty that insures the obedience; it is also the blessed aid of a good habit.
The most perfect example of this mode of government known to the writer was that of her early
life. The little flock in her own nursery no more
thought of disobeying their father's decided com
17 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
mand than they did of putting their hands in the
fire. A decided "No" settled the matter, usually
without complaints or repining.
One of the earliest memories of those days was
the tearful outbursts of the next born child, of
quick and sensitive impulses.  "Stop crying, my
boy!" and the command was followed by contortions of lip and brow, and heaving chest, till all was
quiet.  Next came, "Now look pleasant!" and, at
the word, out came the smiles like sunshine through
clouds. Not only prompt, but cheerful obedience
was demanded until it became a habit.
But such decided government requires a tender
love and sympathy, which in this case was never
wanting from either parent. Our father was the
constant playmate of his children. He rejoiced
with them in all their childish joys, and his everready sympathy consoled their little sorrows. The
tones and looks of love were the staple of life to his
little ones, while discipline was sometimes administered with tears, more effective even than the rod.
Not an hour of life can the writer remember, to this
very day, when the full conviction did not exist
that, to her father, it was pleasant to gratify and
hard to deny any wish of his child.
With this strong government and tender sympathy were combined discretion and care not to mutiply rules whose violation demanded penalties, thus
bringing the young under a kind of bondage de
18 
OF CHILDREN.
pressing to the elasticity of childhood. But few
rules for the little ones, and more added only as
habit made the preceding easy, was the method
pursued. The earliest years of life are now remembered, not as a period of discipline and rules,
but rather as a joyous and perpetual play-spell.
In contrast to this strong and steady method, the
writer has often seen what may be called the coaxing mode. This is adopted by parents who are
either too weak to govern, or who fancy they can
govern without punishing.
The first evil that results from this is irritation
when the child can not be coaxed, and, finally, is
forced, by violent methods, to give up his will.
There are many things a child desires which it is
impossible to secure, and yet no substitute can be
found that will satisfy.  The contests and irritations thus resulting, in the end cause far more suffering to the child than the short discipline that is
needful to establish a firm and strong parental authority.
Another very great evil in this coaxing mode is
the eventual loss of faith by the child in those who
control. For the almost certain result is that coaxing promises are made, or hope in some way awakened, which ends-in a failure. When this is done,
the child is irritated, not only with fear of having
his desires crossed, but with the memory of past
failures of coaxing promises. Parents who govern
19
4e, 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
by this mode are in perpetual parley and barter
with their little ones, and in the end make more
fretting, anger, and suffering in one day than the
whole period of discipline experienced by a child
under a strong and steady government.
Still another method is very common among parents who have a strong will, and intend to maintain parental authority by penalties. This may be
called unsteady or irregular government.
Some who govern in this way have a general
idea that children must be trained to obey their 
parents, and so they try to enforce obedience without any method or rule. They give their commands, and sometimes the child is punished for disobedience and sometimes not, and thus is always
tempted to disobedience by the hope of escape.
This mode is especially injurious to children of decided character and strong will. To such, submission to rule is particularly distasteful, and there
is no way to secure chIeerfuil obedience but by a
strong and a steady government. Where this is
wanting, there will either be frequent and stout
conflicts between parent and child, or the child
will avoid them by concealment and duplicity, or
by absolute lying.
In repeated instances the writer has seen children, naturally inclined to be honest and truthful,
thus injured by unsteadiness in government. Others of nervous temperament have become habitual
20
I 
OF CHILDREN.
ly irritable and ill-tempered by such irregular discipline.
Another, but less frequent evil, is over-government.  When both parents are united in a strong
and steady discipline, there needs to be great care
taken not to multiply rules that make frequent
liability to disobedience.  If young children are
obliged by penalties to be careful of their dress,
careful of furniture, mindful of table proprieties,
and encompassed with many  other conventional
rules, the result will be, either such frequent violations of authority as involves continual fear of punishment, or a hardening of the conscience and the
whole nature.
To avoid this, a great part of the requirements
made of children may be in the form of advice or
requests, which involve no penalties if disregarded.
In observing the management of children of different families, no one thing has so strongly impressed the writer as the necessity of varying modes
of discipline to diversities of character. A mode
of treatment adapted to one child would often be
almost ruinous to others of diverse temperament.
Some children of sensitive natures suffer more from
a frown or a reproof than others do from the severest discipline. Some children are born with a
sensitive conscience; others seem to have this part
of their nature developed only by diligent culture.
Some children can be governed by love alone;
21 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
others demand the intervention of fear of penalties,
and would be ruined without it. This being so,
general rules must always be modified to meet peculiarities of natural character. But there are a
few general principles gained by experience which
will apply to all cases.
One is that, after a habit of prompt obedience is
formed, it is always better to govern by hope of
reward rather than by fear of punishment. Hope
of good cheers, enlivens. Fear, if the predominant
motive, is depressing to mind and body. This is
the chief reason why the labors of slavery, extorted by fear of the lash, are so listless and so unproductive, while those of the free are so cheerful and
so profitable.
This principle is of especial value in the nursery.
The hope, at least of commendation for success,
shOuld always be dominant in the young; and
where extra and protracted efforts are demanded
to conquer any defect, the chief stimulus should always be hope of reward.
In view of this, the government of parents and
teachers who chiefly notice faults, and rarely express pleasure and approval for good conduct, is
very unfortunate.
Another general principle applicable to all cases
is that the child should always find sympathy and
pity for shortcomings in those who are training to
virtue and piety.
22
I 
OF CHILDREN.
It needs ever to be borne in mind that self-control and self-sacrifice are more difficult to a child
than to one whom practice and habit have inured
to this discipline. The impulsive nature of childhood revolts from rules and constraint, and these
multiplying bonds should be entwined with much
tenderness and sympathy. It should often be conceded that many things required are hard; that
there is a bravery and nobleness in submitting
with patience; that it is expected that there will be
failures; and that, so long as there is a wish and effort to do right, these failures are causes for tender
pity and sympathy.   Instead of magnifying the
evil done by the child, in order to prevent future
repetition, as is often incautiously done, the educator needs often to palliate and excuse, and thus
encourage to try again.
"gamma," said a little boy one day, "I am tired
of being good; I don't want to be good any longer."
This is the frequent result of an over-stringent and
unsympathizing government.
Another very important principle is what is usually called honor. This is a combination of selfrespect and respect for the opinions of others. It
is a powerful principle, anti-holds sway even over
the most debased; so that it is said "there is honor
among thieves." It is the last good principle to
forsake depraved men.
The power of this good principle is often seen
23
,, 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
among young boys, who, while disobedient to parents, truants from school, and vile in language and
character, still will often suffer almost martyrdom
rather than betray a companion, and thus violate
the rule of honor established among their fellows.
While this principle is often abused to evil, it is
not employed by Christians in the nursery, or in
school and church, so often or so effectually as it
often is by persons who attempt no spiritual training. Such will often succeed, by this influence, in
making their offspring more honest, truthful, and
honorable than many children who have been urged
by the most powerful motives of the spiritual world.
The principle of honor is most valuable in cultivating habits of truthfulness, that most noble element of character. A child can not understand the
importance of this virtue in early life. A strong
andstrict discipline tempts timid children to lie in
order to escape blame or punishment, and to meet
this difficulty some parents describe lying as an
awful sin, and punish severely for it. Yet a child
can not see the great evil of the deed, but looks rather at the benefits of thus escaping from penalties.
But if all around seem to regard falsehood as
mean and cowardly-if it is called brave and noble
to speak the truth-if all prevarication and deceit
are pointed out as degrading and contemptible, the
child is more powerfully influenced to avoid this
fault than by any severer methods.
24
i
i
I 
OF CHILDREN.
CHAPTER FOURTH.
FAMILY RELIGIOUS TRAINING- THE OBEDIENCE
OF LOVE-RATIONAL OBEDIENCE.
IN the previous chapters we have seen that the
law of sacrifice demands that the lesser good be always sacrificed to the greater. This is the-general
law of rectitude, including all the laws of God which
are to be enforced in the family as well as through
future life.
It has also been shown that hope of good to self,
including hope of escape from evil, is the leading
influence to secure obedience to law. This hope of
good is guided mainly by faith in the teachings of
those who control the young.
But, though the first lessons of obedience are enforced by faith and hope, there is another more happifying principle which is better than either, and
that is love. In Scripture phrase, "Now abideth
these three; faith, hope, charity (or love), and the
greatest of these is charity."
Love includes as its main feature the desire to
please the one loved. The easiest and happiest way
to induce obedience to law is so to secure a child's
love that it will have a strong desire to please the
one who controls. Some children feel such love
B
25
- I 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
for a parent or teacher that almost any sacrifice is
a pleasure if it will please the one thus loved.
The relation of the parent to a child is especially
fitted to call forth this happifying principle of obedience. Love is always induced toward those who
are constantly bestowing good. The infant commences the discipline of life under the mother whose
bosom supplies his chiefjoy. Her tender looks and
tones of love are another unfailing source of pleas- 
ure. And, as life advances, the ceaseless ministries
of parental tenderness call forth the gratitude and
love which seeks expression by efforts to please
tose who have thus awakened affection.
Some parents make this the leading principle in
the government of their children. They habitually
keep before the mind of the child its obligation to
please and obey in return for the love and kindness
of their parents. They diligently cultivate a sense
of gratitude for parental favors which is to be expressed by obedience.
So, also, benevolence and self-sacrifice for the
good of others is cultivated. The little ones are
taught that they are to do kindnesses to others as
others do to them. The child is led to be generous and self-sacrificing, not only by precept and
example, but these obligations are enforced by authority.  Where the parents have power to control, no child is allowed to act meanly or selfishly
toward others any more than he is allowed to in
26
I
I
i 
OF CHILDREN.
jure himself by self-indulgence or excess. The in terests of others are constantly presented as mat ters of care and concern to the child, and as what is
due in return for benefits received.
Instead of pursuing such a course as this, how
often it may be seen that even the most conscientious parents habitually train their children to be
selfish, as much so as if they deliberately planned
and intended to secure this end. The little one
finds himself the chief object of attention; his wants
and wishes are the great concern of all around;
whatever he desires must, if possible, be secured;
servants, brothers, sisters, nurse, father and mother,
all bend obsequious to his wishes. He grows into
a consciousness of his importance, and learns to feel
that it is his right to have precedence of all others,
and receives all as his due. Indifference and neglect of the feelings of others is the natural result.
To make voluntary sacrifices for the comfort and
convenience of others is no part of his training or
experience. He is trained to a habit of selfishness.
While a child is being trained to the prompt
obedience of faith and love, there needs also to be
a rational obedience, induced by enlightening the
mind as to the reasons for all the laws and rules enforced. This is especially needful in cases where
self-enjoyment must be sacrificed for the greater
good of others.
The gradual process by which our Creator intro
27 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
duces this principle of self-sacrifice is very instructive.
The infant's first experience in life is the highest
illustration and example of self-sacrifice in the
mother's love and care for its useless little self.
Next, a second infant appears, when this example must begin to be imitated. - The first-born must
give up to another its place in the mother's arms,
and must become a secondary instead of the chief
object in the nursery. Then it must share its toys
and treasures with its baby playmate, and give up
its plans and wishes, and help to protect, amuse,
and aid the little one. Thus the nursery commences the first lesson of self-sacrifice for others.
Next, the school leads onward to still more difficult lessons; for it is a stranger, and not beloved
parents, who controls; and it is strangers, and not
brothers and sisters, for whom sacrifices must be
made. There new and more extensive rules of
self-government, justice, benevolence, and self-sacrifice for the general good are made known and enforced.
After this come the relations of neighborhoods
and of civil society, demanding other and more
comprehensive laws of self-sacrifice for the common good.  Then the claims of a whole nation are
to be taken into account; and, lastly, the whole
world is to be admitted into the great family of
man, and every individual comes under still more
28 
OF CHILDREN.
comprehensive rules demanding self-sacrifice for
the general good.
Thus, as capacities expand and reason is matured,
the obligations to sacrifice self for the good of others become more and more numerous, and, unless
previous training has inured to it, the duty becomes
more and more difficult.
In the first period of infancy the child can not
be made to appreciate the reasons for most requirements, and obedience must rest upon faith alone.
Some parents protract the obedience of faith indefinitely, and take little pains to enlist the intelligence
of the child in support of law. The consequence
is, that the reasoning powers and the power of selfgovernment are both undeveloped. The child
obeys without reflection or forethought, very much
as a machine performs its work.
In the Chinese nation we have an illustration of
this mode of training carried through the nursery,
the family, the school, and the state, thus dwarfing
the whole nation in the noblest features of a rational manhood.
Instead of this, the wise parent, having first secured the prompt obedience of faith, enlightens the
child as to the reasons for requirements which its
present capacity can comprehend, while for all others the obedience of faith is still enforced.
The child is taught that all self-control of its
own appetites and passion results at last in higher
29 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
enjoyment in the very respects in which self-denial
is enjoined. The benefits of a good habit are also
described, making what is at first a difficult effort "
easy and pleasant.
So, also, in regard to the self-denial enjoined for
others, instead of the bare command, " Help your
little sister," or "Share your pleasant things with
your playmates," the child may be strengthened by
being taught that it is noble and right to do so;
that such conduct will secure love and respect; that
this is the way to form habits of benevolence and
self-sacrifice, which, in the end, make a hard duty a
pleasure; that the contrary is base and selfish; that
neglecting to do so is mean and despicable, and will
tend to form a habit of selfishness which will make
it more and more difficult to be generous, just, and
noble.
In training a child to be truthful, the parent may
simply forbid known falsehood, with a severe penalty for disobedience. But if, at the same time, the
evils of deceit and lying are pointed out, and also
the benefits to self and to others of a character for
truth and honor, the power of motive will be greatly increased, and thus obedience be made more certain and more easy. So of all the virtues to be secured in family training.
In attempting to treat children as reasonable beings, some parents begin too early, and try to reason and persuade as the chief reliance, while au
30
I
I 
I
OF CHILDREN.
thority and penalties are as much as possible relinquished. The usual result of this course is pettishness or uproarious contests whenever the parent
fails to convince. The only safe mode is to insure
first the prompt obedience of faith, and then teach
the reasons for it afterward.
Some parents seem to put themselves on an
equality with their children, coaxing and pleading
as if dependent on the will of their little ones, This
is the direct mode of cultivating an imperious and
domineering manner, or a pettish and complaining
habit. Where the parents give up habitually, the
children often become ill-tempered tyrants. Where
the parents retain some authority, there are incessant conflicts, complaints, and struggles, ending in
ill humor at all defeats. The writer has seen some
of the finest natures ruined by such training as this,
and others escaping only by the force of a fine natural organization, or the intervention of others in
the family or school who administered more wisely.
31 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
CHAPTER FIFTH.
SPIRITUAL RELIGIOUS TRAINING.,
THE preceding is the mode of religious training
to which the principles of common sense would
guide all of every age and nation. It is that for
which God has arranged the family state, and toward
which his providence guides all men.:All this
would naturally result from reason and common
sense, without any reference to a future state and
the invisible world. 
A spiritual religion is that for which we are dependent not so much on reason and experience as
on revelations from God. It rests on faith "in
things not seen," and in beings not known to the
senses. In Christian nations, all instruction in this
department of religious training is based on the revelations from God contained in the Bible.
At what period of life a parent should commence
the communication of the existence, presence, and
character of God, as the first element of spiritual religion, must vary with the character and development of each child.
In the nursery the child is under the constant
care of its parents, and is preparing to know and
32
I 
OF CHILDREN.
love its Savior just in proportion as they are his true
representatives. Love, patience, meekness, gentleness, sympathy, self-denying labors and cares, united
with firm and steady government-these are the
traits which a child can be taught to transfer in
conception to his heavenly Father only as he has
seen them exhibited by his earthly parents.
It is the mother who has the first' lesson of spiritual training committed to her hand. If she is so
happy as to find in the father of her children one
who has exhibited that union of strong government
with tender love and sympathy so important in life's
dawn, then, when she begins her first lesson of a
"Father" in heaven, the very name brings the truest conception possible to a young mind of the God
and Savior to whom she would lead her child.
In the past experience of the little one, it has been
his earthly father, who most of the time was absent
in providing for the wants of his family, who still,
when with him, loves him, cherishes him, governs
him, pities him, comforts him, and sympathizes in
all his pleasures. Such is that heavenly Father
who, though unseen, is ever present, and who not
only hears and sees all he says and does, but knows
his very thoughts.
It is impossible for a child to conceive of a spirit
without body. The first idea of a child must inevitably be, that God is a being with a human form,
in a place called Heaven, and yet able to know our
1',2
33 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
thoughts, and to see and hear all that is said and
done in this world.
This being so, Jesus Christ, as "God manifest in
the flesh," and "by whom all things were made," is
the one especially adapted to the wants of mother
and child in her first attempts to give true ideas of
the existence and character of the Creator. At a
very early period, Jesus Christ may be made known
as he who not only made all creatures, but who
made them to be happy. Then the lesson can commence that there are right and wrong ways of seeking to be happy, and that once Jesus Christ came
into this world to teach his creatures the true and
best ways of happiness-that for this end he not
only instructed, but set an example. And that he
might teach children, as well as men and women, by
his example, he became a little child, and set a perfect example of obedience to his father and mother.
The hard duty of sacrifice, not alone to secure
the best good for self, but to promote the best good
of others, may then be illustrated by the life of our
Savior. Thus, to deny self daily, and take up the
cross, can be constantly referred to and illustrated
by the example of the invisible yet ever-present
Savior. He may be presented as the loving and
tender Father in heaven, who knows how hard it
is to bear the trials of childhood, because he has
himself "suffered in all points" as children do. In
cases of difficult duties required, the conviction may
34 
OF CHILDREN.
be cultivated that the kind Savior is the sympathizing witness of every infant effort to do right.
In cases of failure or wrongdoing, instead of
magnifying offenses, and chastening the conscience
with upbraidings, it may be conceded that for
young beginners in self-denial and self-sacrifice the
path is thorny and difficult, and that the tender
Savior feels pity and sympathy for them, is patient
and forgving, and is pleased with every effort to do
right, however many failures there may be. And
every gain in self-conquest and good habits may be
recognized as a matter of thankfulness, and especially pleasing to the tender and loving Savior.
Thus a child may be gradually and intelligently
led to form habits of self-denying benevolence as
the chief way to please an ever-present heavenly
Father. And a sense of his constant inspection,
love, asd care may become the most protecting restraint from sin and stimulus to well-doing.
The writer has repeatedly witnessed the happy
results of a mode of religious training similar to
that here indicated, some of which will be more
minutely described.
In one case, her residence in the family was very
transient, where the eldest child was a little girl of
four or five years of age. She was of feeble constitution, and highly nervous and sensitive organization, with active intellect and strong will. She
was thus one who, under wrong training, would
35 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
speedily have developed much of what is often
called "the old Adam," which usually consists in
the avoidance of self-denial and rule, or else expressions of irritability and anger at being controlled. She was just the kind of child that indulgence makes imperious, irritable, and self-willed;
while a kind but strong and steady government
induces uniform and cheerful obedience. In the
first visit it was noticed that the little one seemed
healthy, cheerful, modest, obedient, and loving.
Instead of the hot-bed training in close parlor,
nursery, and school-room, which leads to irritable
nerves and the ill government of a feeble child,
most of little Anna's time was spent amid the
woods, brooks, and fields of her summer haunts, or
the sports of winter's snows. No nice dress or ornamented pantalettes to be taken care of; no racing,. climbing, or noisy plays were to be shunned.
To keep out of dangerous places, and to be kind
and obliging to playmates, were about the only
rules of out-door life. At meals, when guests were
present, they saw her take her simple food without
asking for any other; while, instead of absorbing
the chief attention of parents, or interrupting the
conversation of guests, she listened in quiet, or
spoke modestly when addressed.
The chief aim of the parents at this period seemed to be to secure a happy mind in a healthy body,
and a prompt obedience to the few rules required.
36
i 
OF CHILDREN.
No attempt was made to expend the small fountain
of nervous power in one so delicate by any intellectual efforts save those the Creator ordains for
every child as it learns its mother tongue, and studies the properties and philosophy of the world of
wonders around.
The next visit was made when this child was apparently seven or eight years of age. At this time
the family was in an extensive boarding establishment, and among its inmates I frequently heard
expressions of pleasure at the success of the mother
in the religious training of this child. Some of
them seemed to think that few mature Christians
give such good evidence of the humble, obedient,
and loving spirit of a true disciple as this little
one; still, she was not without faults that required
watchful care to repress.
It appeared that the child was not only truthful
and conscientious herself, but, in the beautiful charity of rectitude, imagined all children were the
same; and when, with tearful surprise, she found
her mistakes in this matter, guided by the mother's
discretion, she was earnestly pursuing her heavenly yet childish mission of striving to reform those
who had been deprived of the blessings she had enjoyed in her early-religious training.
It was at this period she heard persons spoken
of as Christians, and others as not so, while, at
sacramental occasions, the Christians remained and
37 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
the others left the church. One day, after such an
occasion, she said, "Mother, I love Jesus Christ; I
try to obey him all day; when I do wrong I am
sorry, and pray to him to forgive me and help me
to do better. Mother, do you think I am a Christian?"
Having decided that a true Christian is one who
habitually strives to obey Christ in all things, the
mother felt no hesitation in answering the little one
that she was one of the lambs of Christ's flock, such
as he; on earth, took in his arms and blessed as heirs
of the kingdom of heaven.
She was early taught a common form of infant
prayer. One day she said, "Mother, I want to
pray myse, because when I say my prayers it does
not seem to me as if I was talking to my dear Savior." The mother encouraged this, and ever after
the child Was heard to tell all her little wants, and
express her love, and gratitude, and happiness in
the simple language of infant life.
At a sacramental occasion she once heard the
minister give this invitation to the congregation:
"All those who love our Lord Jesus Christ, and
who intend to obey him in all things, are invited
to come to his table."
On hearing this, the child whispered, "Mother,
I love the Lord Jesus, and intend to obey him in
all things; may I eat of the bread?"
This may serve for the present to illustrate one
38
I 
OF CHILDREN.
of several cases in which Christian life commenced
in the nursery with little or no use of any other
doctrine of revelation than the character, teachings, and history of Jesus Christ, as "God manifest in the flesh," together with an appropriate use
of the influences thus secured.
There is no period in the training of the young
where the diverse constitutions of children are so obvious as when spiritual religion first is introduced.
Some have a nature peculiarly adapted to such
influences. Others, diversely, but equally well endowed, seem to have little receptivity for such ideas
till a mature period of life.
In the same nursery will be found one child who
is imaginative, sensitive, reflective, and possessing
strong susceptibilities of emotion. Such can be led
by the influences of spiritual religion to an early
experience, dangerous and almost miraculous.  Another child, with vigorous body and strong nerves,
seems to have nothing but the animal nature first
developed. The same sort of training as makes his
delicate little sister a precocious saint, passes over
his mind as the idle wind. The outer world fills
all his eye and thoughts. Play, and nothing but
play, has any attraction or can fasten his attention.
He listens with a momentary wonder at pictured
realities of a future life, and in a few moments the
impression is all gone. And yet a day is coming
when conscience, and reason, and the spiritual ele
39 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
ment will be developed as strongly as is now the
animal.
Children are not only differently constituted, but
the development of the various faculties varies as
greatly; and every parent needs to take this into account in judging of the diverse success of religious
culture in their different children. A healthy, robust child, with fine animal developments and a
strong will, may be as well developed morally,
when he has become perfectly obedient to parental
rule, as another child in whom the spiritual element
is more largely developed.
The Apostle Paul teaches  that "milk is for
babes" in reference to the discretion needed in selecting the truths to be used for beginners in Christian life. In the preceding example of successful
training, it will be noticed that no reference was
made to the invisible world, or to the rewards and
penalties of the future state.
The Old Testament training of our race exhibits
God's example in this very thing. The patriarchs
and Israelites were visited by God and angels in
human form. The ritual had a visible Shekinah.
Prophets and seers received direct instructions from
God; and all that was attempted was to bring
this nation to obey the laws of God relating to this
,life only, while all the sanctions were exclusively
temporal rewards and penalties. Though a future
state was recognized, no use was made of it as a
motive to secure obedience.
40
I 
OF CHILDREN.
The attempt to influence children by fears of
hell, of the devil, and of the day of judgment, ordinarily results in false conceptions, that agitate
without any compensating healthful results. These
are topics which should be reserved for the investigations and influences of more mature life.
The great difficulty in regard to the use of motives of fear in respect to the future state is that
they affect most vividly those who least need them,
while those who most demand such influences are
unaffected by them.
Some children who have a highly sensitive and
nervous organization, combined with great conscientiousness and a lively imagination, are greatly
excited by such appeals, and, if timid as well as
sensitive, are often overwhelmed with terrors.
Many times the writer has heard her pupils describe the fear and distress that darkened the whole
period of childhood by representations which still
are very common both in the family, in children's
books, and from the pulpit.
In one case a friend stated that such was the
state of her mind thus induced in early life, that
she repeatedly had meditated killing an infant
brother whom she passionately loved, because she
was told that infants escaped all such dangers;
and when disease blasted the beautiful flower, the
poor child, in spite of her poignant grief, was glad
that death had ended for the babe the risks of
41 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
such dreadful horrors as in her forebodings might
be her own doom. And yet this child had far
less said to awaken such fears than is often done
by parents and teachers.
In the writer's family history this point is well
illustrated.
A little book, called "Hymns for Infant Minds,"
written by the lovely and gentle Jane Taylor, was
the nursery favorite both with parents and children.
One of these hymns, which the writer probably
always skipped in reading, or contrived to forget
after hearing, fastened the most painful and abiding
impressions on a younger sister of vivid imagination, strong feelings, and timid nature. She was so
affected by this hymn that for years it haunted her
in hours of darkness, often banishing sleep, while
sometimes, covering her head, she lay sweating
with distress and dread. And yet, bashful and
sensitive, she never ventured to reveal her sufferings. It read as follows:
How dreadful, Lord, the day will be
When all the tribes of earth shall rise,
And those who dared to disobey
Be dragged before thine angry eyes.
The wicked child, that often heard
His pious parents speak of Thee,
And fled from every serious word,
Shall not be able then to flee.
42
iI 
OF CHILDREN.
No; he shall see them burst the tomb,
And rise, and leave him trembling there,
To hear his everlasting doom
With shame, and terror, and despair.
While they appear at Thy right hand,
With saints and angels round the throne,
He, a poor trembling wretch, shall stand,
And bear Thy dreadful wrath alone.
No parent then shall bid him pray
To Him who now the sinner hears,
For Christ himself will turn away,
And not regard his sighs and tears.
CHAPTER SIXTH.
SCHOOL RELIGIOUS TRAINING.
THE.period when a child most needs the motives
of the spiritual world is when it passes from the
nursery to the school-room. There temptations
become more numerous, new and more difficult duties are imposed, while parental inspection and authority cease for a while.
The child must now obey a stranger whom it has
not learned to love and trust, and who can show no
special interest in one pupil more than in another;
one who must stand in the same relation to a child,
in enforcing law, as does the Great Teacher and
Ruler of all in regard to his creatures.
Its associates are strangers of various ages, tastes,
43 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
and tempers, all placed on an equality as to rights
and privileges, fitly representing the great world
for which the child is to be trained to still more
difficult and complicated rules and duties.
Here it is that a sense of the presence and inspection of a heavenly Parent, whom the child regards as the ceaseless observer not only of acts, but
of feelings and thoughts-a tender Father whom
it has learned to love and to desire to please, may
become the most powerful of all influences to stimulate to well-doing and to protect from sin.
It is at the head of a school from diverse families, whose children have experienced diverse modes
of training,.that a teacher is enabled to retrieve
parental neglect or mistakes, and add new power
to parental influenced This is especially the case in
reference to the employment of the motives of the
spititual world. A large portion of every school
comes from families where spiritual religious training is entirely neglected, or where it is administered with great mistakes and deficiencies.
For this reason, the teacher needs to begin with
explaining to his flock that the great end of school
education is to train them to a loving and prompt
obedience to the laws of God, as the best and only
sure way of being happy.
Our Father in heaven should be described as one
who loves little children even more tenderly than
any earthly parent can do; who sees what is best
44 
OF CHILDREN.
for them to make them truly happy, both in this
life and forever. The Bible should be appealed to
as the book in which this loving Parent has given
all needful rules for right feeling and action in order to attain the best and highest happiness; and
in administering school rules and government, it
should often be appealed to as the standard of truth
and duty.
Before the rules of punctuality, order, and silence
are enforced, the reason and conscience should be
enlisted by explaining how the enforcement of
such rules promotes the comfort and happiness of
all concerned, teachers, children, and parents.   It
should be shown how selftsh it is to break over
rules which are made for the best comfort and enjoyment of all.  It should be shown how those
who thus sacrifice the good of the many for the
gratification Of one, in the end lose more than is
gained by this course.
The duty of self-sacrifice for the common good
should be continually held up as a noble and generous aim, and one in which we are imitating Christ,
our great exemplar, who came as our Savior from
selfishness and its consequent miseries.
The children may be trained to self-sacrifice not
only in cheerful obedience to rules for the common
good, but by personal efforts to aid those who are
younger, or who are subject to any infirmities.  As
an illustration of this, the following experience of
45 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
the writer in a little school which for a few days
came under her care, is offered.
One of the pupils was a remarkably fine child
both in disposition and intellect; but an accident
in early infancy had interrupted her education, so
that, while in size she was apparently the eldest,
she was, in point of acquirement, the youngest in
the school. She was anxious to learn, and very docile to any attempts for her improvement. Nothing was needed but constant and persevering efforts to bring her mind to its appropriate development.
But, unfortunately, her very social and affectionate nature was accompanied with peculiarities somewhat annoying, so that, while she was constantly
seeking to join in the groups and sports of the children, they thoughtlessly endeavored to exclude and
avoid her.
It was a real trial not only to the young, who had
formed no habits of self-sacrificing benevolence, but
to her teacher, who felt annoyed by the noisy and
impulsive intrusions of the child, and troubled by
her desire for society and sympathy.
After some attempts to modify some disagreeable
habits, and also some experiments on her capacity,
the attempt was made to use religious motives with
some of her companions to meet the difficulty. A
bright and amiable child was selected, who shall
here be named Fannie. After some chat with her
46
i 
OF CHILDREN.
on other topics of childish interest, this conversation
ensued:
"Fannie, do you think you are a Christian?"
" No, ma'am,   was the reply, and an expression
of sadness passed over the ingenuous young face.
"Do you wish to be a Christian?"
"Yes, ma'am;" and the tears began to start.
"Do you know what it is to be a Christian?"
"No, ma'am," with a look of uncertainty.
"Does your mother teach you to pray to Jesus
Christ?"
" Yes, ma'am."
"And do you pray to him every day?"
" Yes, ma'am."
"And do you say prayers that are taught you, or
do you make your own prayers?"
"I make my own prayers."
Both the parents of this child were trained to believe that all children come into this life with such
depraved natures that they never feel or do any
thing that is truly Christian, and acceptable to God,
till he regenerates their ruined nature.
This point was not referred to, from uncertainty
as to how far the child had been so instructed.
"Fannie, Jesus Christ came into this world to
teach us how to be good and happy, and also to help
us to become so; and one way in which he helps
us is by his own blessed character and example.
He was living in his glorious and beautiful home,
47 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
in heaven, with his Father and the blessed angels;
but he gave it all up, and came to this world to
teach poor ignorant and sinful creatures the way to
be happy.  It was not pleasant to live with them.
It was painful to toil and suffer for such ungrateful,
ignorant, and sinful beings. But he spent thirtythree long years in such wearisome and painful labors. And now his example and teachings are
written in the Bible for our guidance, while he
watches over us in heaven, and he sees and loves
all those who try to follow him. Moreover, he saw
how difficult it is to do all that he teaches, and so
he promised to send his good Spirit to help all who
try to follow his commands.
"Whenever, therefore, you do not like to do any
thing which you ought to do, then say to yourself,
' Now I will be like Christ, and deny myse,f, and take
up'my cross, as he did.' And when you thus are
trying to follow him, his good Spirit, in some way
not explained to us, will help you. And then you
are a follower of Christ, and so are beginning a Christian life.  And the more you go on trying to be
like Christ, the better Christian you are.
"Now, here at school, you have a great opportunity to follow Christ, such as children seldom have.
Here is poor Bessie, who by a great misfortune has
been kept from school, so that, though she is so large,
she is behind all the other children, and she can
not be made to catch up with them in knowledge
48 
OF CHILDREN.
without a great deal more labor and attention than
any teacher can give who has so many scholars.
"Then the poor little girl has some disagreeable
tricks that make the children shun her, and yet she
is affectionate, and social, and wants to be with them
all the time, and she feels grieved and mortified to
see them run away from her.
" Now every day you can say to yourself,' I will
deny myself for poor Bessie, as Christ did for me
and for us all. I will help teach her to read; I
will play with her, and try to make her happy;
and so I shall please our dear Savior, and he will
send his good Spirit to help me.' Dear child, do
you now understand how you may become a Christian?"*
"Yes, ma'am;"  and the tears glistened amid
smiles.
"And will you try to-morrow how much you can
do for Bessie, and thus do for your kind Savior?
He loves and cares for the poor child even more
than your tender mother cares for you, so that every thing you do for her he receives as done for
himself."
Tears fell abundantly, and watered the good seed
thus sown.
The next day Bessie came to me with a joyous
smile. "Please hear me say another lesson; Fannie has been teaching me." In the afternoon she
*See Note A.
C
49 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
came again. " Only see! I have read all these pages
to Fannie, and she is going to hear me read some
every day."
Fannie came herself to tell of other things she
was going to do for Bessie, and seemed elated with
her success.
This is a ease where the seed was sown on remarkably fine soil, and yet, even in this case, after
the novelty and first enthusiasm had ended, the
young Christian would falter, just as older ones do,
without the constant line upon line of instruction,
and the constant personal influence of a religious
teacher and friend. The head of a school enjoys
the combined advantages of both parent and clergyman; and the school is that great transition period when the child is passing from the limited field
of action in which the interests of our family are
concerned, to the higher plane where the whole
world, and its relations to eternity, are to be included.
In the New Testament this new relation is recognized where the Jewish dispensation (or law)
is spoken of as " a schoolmaster to bring us to
Christ." The Jewish dispensation was the transition period of the race to a higher plane of action,
as the school is to the child.
In pursuing this elevated plan, the teacher can
habitually assume that the school is a commonwealth, in which each individual has a common interest as much as the teacher.
50 
OF CHILDREN.
Some of the most successful teachers, in carrying
out this idea, commit a great part of the school responsibilities usually borne by the teacher to the
pupils. Thus a committee takes charge of the
school-room and premises, to secure neatness and
order in every part. Another committee is instructed to devise and enforce modes of securing
quiet and punctuality. Still another supervises the
recitations and scholarship, and devises methods of
improvement. Rewards are offered to the whole
school for the success of these committees in elevating and improving its general interests, thus engaging every pupil to lend aid.
The writer has seen a very large school in the
highest state of order and improvement, where the
teacher, by this method, was relieved of almost
every care but that of supervising his committees,
hearing his classes, and giving general instructions
to the whole school. At the same time, the motives of spiritual religion were brought to bear on
practical daily life in a way more effective than
either parent or clergyman could command, in preparing children for the duties of mature life.
51 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
CHAPTER SEVENTH.
CHURCH RELIGIOUS TRAINING- WHAT IS THE
CHURCH?
RELIGIOUS training in the family, as has been
shown, teaches first what is good and evil, and next
what is right and wrong; as best or not-best for the
child itself. Next is taught what is right or best for
the whole in relation mainly to the family, a small
community who love each other, and whose interests are one.
Next is taught what-is best for the whole in the
school, where strangers are brought together whose
opinions and interests are diverse.
Thus far the laws of God, and the motives for enforcing them, may be taught simply with reference
to this life; and many parents and teachers have
great success in cultivating the social and moral
virtues, without any reference to dangers and duties connected with a future life, and without'employing any motives of the spiritual world.
In the Old Testament we find a similar mode of
training. All the duties required related to this
life, and were enforced by temporal rewards and
penalties. Although a future state was recognized
and the immortality of the soul was believed, no
52 
OF CHILDREN.
recorded revelations were made of dangers and duties in reference to the eternal state, nor were the
Jewish nation required to interest themselves in
the temporal or spiritual welfare of any out of the
bounds of their own nation.
To believe in Jehovah as the only true God, and
to profess this belief by the rite of circumcision, were
all that was required, even of aliens, to make any
person a member of the Jewish congregation, and
entitled him to all its privileges. Infants were circumcised, as born into this congregation, to be trained to this faith in Jehovah.  The whole congregation, including infants and all circumcised believers
in Jehovah, constituted "the Church of God" of the
Old Testament.-Acts, vii., 38.
The standards of the Presbyterian Church thus
define the visible Church:
"The visible Church is a society made up of all
such as, in all ages and places of the world, do profess the true religion, and of their children.'"
This definition includes both the Jewish and
Christian Church.  The latter differed from the
Jewish in substituting baptism in place of circumcision, and in taking Christ's teachings in place of
those of Moses. All persons who professedfaith in
Christ, together with their children, were, according
to this definition, members of the visible Church.
Nowfaith, or belief, is used by all men in all ages
to signify sometimes mere intellectual conviction
53 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
or belief, and nothing more. At other times it signifies this belief, together with thefeelings and conduct that result appropriately from this belief. The
first is called a dead faith, as it does not produce its
appropriate fruits. The last is called a living or
saving faith.
In regard to the Church of God in the Old Testament, no one ever claimed that the qualification
demanded for membership was any thing more than
the intellectual belief that Jehovah was the true
God, and the professing this belief by circumcision.
All adults who were circumcised professed to believe in Jehovah, and thus in their obligations to
obey his laws as revealed by Moses. But as there
were all degrees of obedience, no attempt was ever
made to divide the Jewish congregation into two
portions —one, as those having only a dead faith,
and the other as those having the living faith. All
were together, as one church, to be trained by the
ministries of that church into obedience to God's
laws.
When Jesus Christ came, he first clearly revealed the danger of our race in reference to a future
life, and the obligations resulting not only in reference to self and one nation, but in reference to the
whole world. Hie taught, for the first time, that the
dangers of the future life are so great, that the chief
object of this life should be to escape them ourselves, and to aid our fellow-men to escape them.
54 
OF CHILDREN.
It was in reference to these new dangers and
new duties that Jesus Christ instituted his Church.
The greatest perplexity and confusion have arisen
from the fact that the expression the Church of
Christ has been used in diverse senses without such
clear definitions as alone can prevent this confusion.
The New Testament speaks of all Christ's obedient followers in all times and places as "Christ's
body, the Church." The Episcopal communionservice defines Christ's Church as "the mystical
body of the Son, which is the blessed company of
all faithful people."
This is also called the invisible Church.
Thus it is seen that there are two uses of the
word Church, viz., the invisible Church universal, including all that have a true and living faith in God
and Christ, and the visible Church universal, including all who profess faith in God and Christ, with
their children. These are both unorganized.
But all matters in dispute on this subject relate
to the organized Church in distinction from one that
is unorganized. A congregation or company of
people are organized only when they have officers
to represent and act for the whole, rules to be enforced, and the power of receiving and excluding
members.
The Roman Catholics and some called  HighChurch in the Episcopal denomination claim that
55 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
the visible Church universal was organized by the
apostles, the ministry ordained in direct succession
from the apostles being constituted the officers; to
act for the whole body.
Thus, on this view, all baptized persons all over
the world constitute one great organized body, of
which all ministers, so ordained, are the officers,
while each local church is only a part of this one
great body, and not a distinct organization by itself.
But this is simply a theory, to which facts do not
correspond; for the Roman Catholic Church, and
the Episcopal Church, and the Greek and Armenian Churches, all claim to have their ministry ordained in direct succession from the apostles, and
yet no one of them recognizes either of the others
as belonging to their body, nor their ministers as
officers  acting for and representing their own
Church. The visible Church universal certainly,
at this day, is not organized as one body by having
officers to represent the whole body, and the same
rules to be enforced.
There are now but two modes of organizing the
Church of Christ, viz., the local and the denominational.
The local Church consists of individuals organized as one body, with officers to act for the whole.
The denominational Church consists of a number
of local churches united as one body, with officers
to act for the whole.
56 
OF CHILDREN.
Thus, in various towns, we find a local Episcopal
Church and a local Presbyterian Church, each consisting of individuals united as one body, with officers to act for the whole.
Again, we find a denominational Episcopal Church
meeting in General Convention, consisting of the
clergy and lay delegates representing local churches
of that denomination. These are organized as one
body by having officers, constitution, and rules.
So the denominational Presbyterian Church, consisting of ministers and delegates of local churches
meeting in General Assembly, is organized with officers, constitution, and rules as one body.
The only way to join a denominational Church
is to become a member of a local Church of that
denomination.
We do not find in the New Testament or in history trat any denominational churches existed in
the first Christian age.
The question then is, What was the local Church
as organized under the apostles of Christ?
The English word church came from the Greek,
through the Goths, to our Saxon ancestors. It is
formed by certain changes from the Greek word
KvpiaKo'c, signifying belonging to the Lord.
In the Greek Testament ecciesia is the word which
in our Bible is translated by the now English word
church. This word ecclesia is used 114 times in the
Greek New Testament, and it always signifies a con                       C2
57 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
gregation or assembly of people, without indicating
the kind of persons.
Thus, in Acts, xix., 32, the ecclesia or "assembly"
were heathens; in Acts, vii., 38, the ecclesia were
Jews; in Philemon, the ecclesia is one family; in
Romans, i., it is the congregation of Christians in
one city; in 2 Thessalonians, i., 1, it is the congregation of Christians in one province; in Acts, ii., 47,
it is the congregation of Christians generally, without regard to place; in Colossians, i., 18, it is the
great congregation of all saints in all places and
all ages, or the invisible Church universal.
This being so, the word ecclesia, or church, in the
New Testament signifies simply a congregation of
people, and we are to find out by other means than
this word alone what kind of persons constituted
the organized Church of Christ.
A~ll agree that, in order to be an organized Church
of Christ, there must be officers to act for the whole
body, rules to be enforced, and power to admit and
to exclude members.
The points of difference are as to what class of
persons constitute the Church of Christ, and how
this Church is organized.
In regard to these points there are these diverse
views:
The first is the Roman Catholic view before mentioned, viz.: the organized visible Church of Christ
consists of all who have received Christian baptism.
58 
OF CHILDREN.
The apostles organized it by instituting a ministry,
ordained in direct succession from the apostles, as
officers to represent and act for this one indivisible
Church in all ages.
The ministry, thus ordained, are authoritatively
to interpret Christ's teachings for the laity; baptism admits to this Church, and also confers a partial or an entire remedy of the injury done to
the mind of the baptized person by Adam's fall.
The clergy also receive, by ordination, the power
of communicating the Holy Spirit at confirmation,
and of imparting certain spiritual influences in the
Eucharist.
On this view, there are no local visible churches
as distinct organizations, but only parishes, in which
all the baptized are members of the one organized
visible Church of Christ on earth.
Now, as there is no way to unbaptize, and as most
of the scoundrels of Christendom have been baptized, while the debased  priests of the Romish,
Greek, and Armenian churches, as much as the
Episcopal, have been ordained in apostolic succession as officers, this view of the organized visible
Church of Christ is a painful one; especially so,
inasmuch as it is claimed that it is the clergy of
these debased churches who have the right of deciding the true interpretation of the Bible.
As to administering the discipline of this vast
Church, including all baptized persons, nothing of
59 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
the kind is, at the present day, either taught or attempted.
The only Scripture texts used to establish the
Roman Catholic view are Matthew, xvi., 18, 19, and
Matthew, xviii., 15-21.
The "power of the keys" given to Peter and to
"the Church" in these two passages all agree signifies the power of discipline and expulsion from
the Church on earth, which Christ here promises
to confirm in heaven.
All agree, also, that the Church is to exercise this
power by its officers. The only question in dispute
is this: Are the officers of the Church who are to
exercise this power diocesan bishops, ordained by
the apostles for this purpose, who transmitted this
power only to other diocesan bishops ordained in
direct succession from themselves? The Roman
Catholic and lHigh-Church affirm it. Others hold
that this power of discipline is given to any local
Church, to be exercised by officers whom it appoints for the purpose.
The New Testament evidence that there were
local churches organized with officers, having rules
to enforce, and the power of receiving and expelling members, is abundant. The single expression
"the seven churches of Asia" seems alone sufficient
to settle the matter. There are thirty-five different
churches named in the New Testament.
As to any historic evidence that there was only
60 
OF CHILDREN.
one organized Church of Christ, Lord Chancellor
King, a distinguished writer of the English Episcopal Church, says:
" I find the word ecclesia once used by Cyprian for a collection of churches, as the ecclesia of Numidia and Africa,
otherwise I can not remember that I ever met with it,
in this sense, in any writings of this or the rest of the
fathers; but whenever they speak of the Christians in
any kingdom or province, they always said-in the plural
-the churches; never in the singular."
Passing the Roman Catholic view as a mere unpractical theory unsupported by evidence, we find
that, as a matter of fact, there have been only two
modes of organizing the local Christian Church.
The first is properly called the primitive Church
of Christ, consisting of any number of Christian
people, with their children, statedly meeting as a
congregation, having officers to sustain the worship
and ordinances of Christ. -
The second may properly be termed the Puritan
Church, as first instituted by the Puritans. It consists of a portion of a Christian congregation, who
unite by profession and covenant as regenerated persons, believing a certain creed, and admitting by
majority vote only such as, on examination, give
evidence of such regeneration and belief.
This kind of Church has no constitution, creed,
or laws, except such as are imposed by a majority
vote.
In defense of the Puritan Church, its advocates
61 
THIE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
bring those passages of the New Testament which
show that the first local churches of Christ were organized with ministers to preach, and with other
officers, also, for temporalities; and that they exercised discipline by casting out unworthy members
from their communion. But they do not seem to
perceive that these texts do not show that the ecclesia that exercised this discipline was regenerated
persons, holding a given creed, and organized within the ecclesia that met for worship.
What needs to be proved is that each local ecclesia of the New Testament consisted of two oryanized bodies- one, the whole congregation of worshipers, and the other that portion of it which constituted themselves judges of their brethren, to decide when regeneration existed, and how far doctrinal and practical errors should exclude from baptism' and the sacrament.  This is never attempted.
The defenders of the Puritan Church never have
offered even one text from the Bible to prove that
each local ecclesia, or congregation of stated w6rshipers, had an inner ecclesia organized with officers-the two corresponding to the New England
parish and church-nor do they quote from history
in its defense.*
* The writer is justified in this statement by the fact that this
work, before printing, was submitted to some of the most learned
defenders of the Puritan Church, and neither from them, nor from
the Bible, nor from any other book, has there been any evidence
62 
OF CHILDREN.
In the primitive Church, faith in Jesus Christ is
assumed to be complex in nature, involving diverse
particulars and many degrees of advancement in
each. The first step is a knowledge of Jesus Christ,
and the intellectual conviction that he is authoritative Lord of faith and practice; then follows the
desire or purpose to obey him; then a seeking to
understand his teachings; and then more or less
obedience. In this view, the Church is a congregation organized to train men, women, and children to faith in Jesus Christ, and thus to prepare
them for heaven.
On the Puritan theory of a Church', faith in Christ
is the result of a new creating act of God, changing
the nature of the mind, and the Church is an organized collection of persons who, being regenerate,
have already attained the faith that secures heaven.
The Congregationalists and Baptists, in this country, have carried out this theory of the Puritan
Church more consistently than any other sects; for,
by these, all children are excluded from the Church
till Church officers examine and find evidence of a
regenerated nature.
The Presbyterians, both Old School and New,
are required by their standards to organize only
one ecclesia, which includes the whole parish. It is
obtained to establish the Puritan mode of organizing the local
Church of Christ, as sanctioned either by the teachings or example of the apostles.
63 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
the whole congregation or parish who choose the
elders and the minister to act for and represent
them, and every man of the parish is entitled to a
vote who will agree to be guided by the officers
they elect.
Of the children it is said
"they are to be taught to read and repeat the Catechism, the Apostles' Creed, and the Lord's Prayer.  They
are to be taught to pray, to abhor sin, to fear God, and
to obey the Lord Jesus Christ.
":And when they come to years of discretion, if they
be free from scazdal, appear sober and steady, and have
suffcient knowledge to discern the Lord's body, they ought
to be informed it is their duty and their privilege to
come to the Lord's table."
Thus, by the standards of both portions of the
Presbyterian Church, the children are "born within the pale of the visible Church;" there is no organized inner ecclesia, but the whole congregation
and the Church are one and the same.
But, under the influence of the Puritan element,
a large portion of the Presbyterian churches have
adopted the inner ecclesia, which shuts out the
childreinfrom the Church.
The Methodist denomination, also, organize the
Church to consist, not of the congregation, but only
of the regenerate, thus excluding the children.
The Episcopal Church is the only large denomination in this country which, in theory and practice, has retained the local primitive Church organization.
64 
OF CHILDREN.
According to the Thirty-nine Articles, the "visible
Church of Christ is a congregation of faithful people" in which the pure Word of God is preached,
and the sacraments of Christ duly administered.
Here "faithful people" is used in the generic
sense, including men, women, and children;  and
"faithful" signifies having faith in Christ, without
deciding how much or how little.
The Episcopal ocal Church is a congregation of
believers in Christ, organized with a minister and
church - wardens as officers, "in which the pure
Word of God is preached, and the sacraments of
Christ be duly ministered."  This is what constitutes them a visible Church of Christ. In addition to
this, the congregation adopt the liturgy and constitution of the Episcopal denominational Church, and
this constitutes them a local Fpiscopal Church.  The
childref are born into the Church as were the Jewish children, and baptism is the seal or sign of their
membership, as was circumcision in the more ancient Church.
We are now prepared to answer the question
what is the organized local Church of Christ as established by the apostles according to the New Testament, and also according to other history.
This will be the subject of the next chapter.
65 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
CHAPTER EIGHTH.
THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH OF CHRIST.
IT is claimed that the only organized Church of
Christ in the New Testament was the local Church,
and that this church consisted of the whole, and not
of a portion of a congregation statedly assembling
to worship. The following presents evidence of
this from standard historians. In Mosheim [Book
I., Chap. ii.] are the following statements:
.~~
"In those primitive times, dach Christian Church was
composed of the people, the presiding officers, and the assistants or deacons. These must be the component parts
of every [organized] society. The principal voice was
that of the people, or the whole body of Christians; for
even the apostles themselves inculcated by their example that nothing of any moment was to be done or determined on but with the knowledge or consent of the
brotherhood: Acts, i., 15; vi., 3; xv., 6; xxi., 22.
"The assembled people therefore elected their own
rulers and teachers, or by their free consent received
such as were nominated to them. They also, by their
suffrages, rejected or confirmed the laws that were proposed by their rulers in their assemblies; they excluded
profligate or lapsed brethren, and restored them; they
decided the controversies and disputes that arose; they
heard and determined the causes of presbyters and deacons; in a word, the people did every thing that is proper for those in whom the supreme power of the community is vested.
66 
OF CHILDREN.
"Nor in this first age of the Church was there any
distinction between the initiated and the candidates for
initiation; for whoever professed to regard Jesus Christ
as the Savior of thile world, and to depend on him alone
for salvation, was immediately baptized and admitted
into the Church. But, in process of time, as the churches became enlarged, it was deemed advisable and necessary to distribute the people into two classes, thefaithful and the catechumens. The former were such as had
been solemnly admitted into the Church by baptism, and
who might be present at all the parts of religious worship, and enjoy the right of voting in the meetings of the
Church. The latter, not having yet received baptism,
were not admitted to the common prayers, nor to the sacred supper, nor to the meetings of the Church.
"The rulers of the Church were denominated sometimes presbyters or elders, and sometimes also bishops; for
it is most manifest that both terms are promiscuously used
in the New Testament for one and the same class of persons: Acts, xx., 17, 28; Philemon, i., 1; Titus, i., 5, 7;
1 Timothy, iii., 1.
"That the Church had its public servants or deacons
from its first foundation there can be no doubt, since no
association can exist without its servants: 1 Timothy,
iii., 8, 9.
"There were also in many churches female public
servants, or deaconesses, who were respectable matrons or
widows appointed to take care of the poor, and to perform several other offices.
"In this manner Christians managed ecclesiastical affairs so long as their congregations were small and not
very numerous. But when the churches became larger,
and the number of presbyters and deacons, as well as the
amount of duties to be performed, was increased, it became necessary that the council of presbyters should
have a president, a man of distinguished gravity and prudence, who should distribute among his colleagues their
several tasks, and be, as it were, the central point of the
67 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
whole society. He was at first denominated the angel
(Revelation, ii. and iii.), but afterward the bishop, a title
of Greek derivation, indicative of his principal business.
It would seem that the Church at Jerusalem, when
grown very numerous after the dispersion of the apostles among foreign nations, was the jfirst to elect such a
president, and that other churches, in process of time,
followed the example.
"But whoever supposes that the bishops of this first
and golden age of the Church  corresponded with the
bishops of the following centuries must blend and confound characters that are very different. For in this
century and the next, a bishop had charge of a single
church, which might ordinarily be contained in a private
house; nor was he its lord, but was, in reality, its minister and servant: he instructed the people, conducted all
parts of public worship, and attended to the sick and
necessitous in person; and what he was unable thus to
perform he committed to the care of the presbyters; but
without power to ordain or determine any thing, except
with the concurrence of the presbyters and the brotherhood.*
".It was not long, however, before the extent of episcopal jurisdiction and power was enlarged; for the bishops who lived in the cities, either by their own labors or
by those of their presbyters, gathered new churches in
the neighboring villages and hamlets; and these churches, continuing under the protection and care of the bishops by whose ministry or procurement they had received
Christianity, ecclesiastical provinces were gradually formed, which the Greeks afterward denominated dioceses.
The persons to whom the city bishops committed the
government and instruction of these villages and rural
* In a note it is added, All that is here stated may be clearly proved from the records of the first centuries, and has been
proved by Joseph Bingham, Origines Ecclesiast.; W. Beverege,
Codex Canon. prignit. ecclesia; and others.
68 
OF CHILDREN.
churches were called rural bishops, or chorepiscopi, (i.e.)
bishops of the suburbs and fields.
"All Christian churches had equal rights;  nor does
there appear in this first century any vestige of that consociation of the churches of the same province which
gave rise to ecclesiastical councils and to metropolitans."
The following, containing more minute details, is
taken from the work of an Episcopal writer, entitled Primitive Christianity, or the Religion of the Ancient Christians in the first Ages of the Gospel. By
Wm. Cave, D.D.  Book I., Chap. viii.:
"As Christianity gained admission into great towns
and cities, so all the believers of that place usually assembled and met together, the Christians of the neighboring villages resorting thither at times of public worship. But religion increasing apace, the public assembly,
especially in the great cities, quickly became too vast
and numerous to b e managed with any order and convenience, and therefore they were forced to divide the
body into particular congregations, who had their pastors
and spiritual guides set over them, but still were under
the superintendence and care of him that was thleir president or bishop of the place."
The following is somewhat abridged from  the
same work:
"The people of each congregation were divided into
classes, which had distinct seats in the church, and gradual admission into the several parts of public worship.
The lowest class were the imperfect catechumens, who were
not allowed to stay to the public worship, but were to
depart as soon as certain lessons were read. Such were
privately instructed at home by persons appointed by the
bishop, till prepared to be admitted to hear the sermons,
but not allowed to be present at the more solemn rites.
69 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
"The next class were the more perfect catechumens.
These might stay, not only to the reading of the Scriptures, but even to the very last part of the service.
"The candidates for baptism, after completing their
instructions as catechumens, were called the competentes, as
sueing for the grace of baptism.
"The highest class, called the faithful, were those who
were baptized and confirmed, and approved by the long
train and course of a virtuous life, and were then admitted to the Lord's Table.
"Besides these three classes there were five classes
called penitents, consisting of those who, either among
catechumens or the higher class of the faithful, had been
guilty of misdemeanors.
"The lowest of these were not allowed to enter the
church, but stood in the porch, clad in squalid dress, with
tears beseeching the prayers of the faithful.
"Next were the penitents who were allowed to enter
the church with the lower class of catechumens, to hear
the lessons and depart with them.
"Next were those penitents, seated near the readingpew, for whom the congregation and elders, kneeling,
prayed, the elders laying hands on their head; these also
departing with the catechumens.
"The fourth class were those allowed to join in prayers and singing, but not in the sacrament.
"The last class were those allowed to come to the
Lord's Table."
Discipline of the Primitive Church.   Dr. Cave, Book
III., Chap. v.:
"The Christian Church, being founded and established by Christ as a society, is, by its very nature, invested
with the inherent power of censuring and punishing its
members who offend against the laws of it.
"The usual crimes and offenses which came under the
discipline of the ancient Church, in the general, was any
70 
OF CHILDREN.
vice or immorality; for the holy and good Christians of
those times were infinitely careful to keep the honor of
their faith unspotted, to stifle every sin in its birth, and,
by bringing offenders to public shame and penalty, to
keep them from propagating the malignant influence of
their bad example. For this reason they watched ovner
one another, told them privately their faults and failures,
and, when that would not do, brought them before the
cognizance of the Church. In those days, by reason of
the violent heats of persecution, the great temptation
which the weaker and most unsettled Christians were
exposed to, was to deny their profession [" denying the
Lord that bought them"], and to offer sacrifices to false
gods, it being that which for some ages mainly exercised the
discipline of the Church.
"As to the penalties inflicted in the first age, especially, the apostles had power to inflict bodily punishment
upon offenders, which they sometimes made use of upon
great occasions, as St. Peter did toward Ananias and
Sapphira; and St. Paul punished Elymas the sorcerer
with blindness; and this doubtless he primarily intends
by his'delivering over persons unto Satan;' for no sooner
were they cut off from the body of the faithful but Satan seized upon them, and either by actual possession,
or some other sign upon their bodies, made it appear
that they were delivered over into his power. This
could not but strike mighty terrors into men, and make
them stand in awe of the censures of the Church; and,
questionless, the main design of Divine Providence in
affording this extraordinary gift was to supply the defect
of civil and coercive power.
"In administering discipline, the first thing in this solemn action was to make reproofs and exhortations, thereby to bring the offender to the sight and acknowledgment of his fault.
"Then the sentence or censure was passed upon him,
whereby he was suspended not only from the communion of the Holy Eucharist, but from all commerce in
71 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
any way, especially in the public duty of religion. During this space of penance, the penitents appeared in all
the formalities of sorrow and mourning, in a sordid and
squalid habit, with a sad countenance and head hung
down, with tears in their eyes, standing without the
church doors, for they were not suffered to enter in.
"All beyond the apostles' age, the common, standing
penalty they made use of was excommunication, or suspension from communion with the Church; the cutting
off and casting out an offending person as a rotten and
infected member, till by repentance and wholesome discipline he was cured and restored; and then he was readmitted into Church society, and to a participation of
the ordinances and privileges of Christianity."
Religion and Morals of the Primitive Church. Dr.
Cave, Book I., Chap. iv.:
"Their religion and way of life was approved of all.
'Who,' says St. Clement to the Corinthians,'did ever
dwell among you that did not approve your excellent
and unshaken faith? that did not wonder at your sober
and moderate piety in Christ? You were forward to
every good work, adorned with a most virtuous and venerable conversation, doing all things in the fear of God,
and having his laws and commandments written upon
the tables of your hearts.' They placed religion, not in
talking, but in living well.
"'Among us,' says Athenagoras,' the meanest and
most mechanic persons, and old women, although not
able to discourse and dispute for the usefulness of their
profession, do yet demonstrate it in their lives and actions.  They don't, indeed, critically weigh their words,
but they manifest virtuous action; while being buffeted
they strike not again, nor sue them at law that spoil and
plunder them, but liberally give to them that ask, and
love their neighbors as themselves.'
"Clement of Alexandria says,' Certainly none were
ever greater enemies to a naked profession and the cov
72 
OF CHILDREN.
ering of a bad life under the title of Christianity.  Do
any live otherwise than as Christ commanded,'tis a
most certain argument they are no Christians.'
"Pliny the Younger, being commanded by the Emperor Trajan to give him an account of the Christians, tells
him that, after the best estimate he could take, and the
strictest inquisition by tortures, he found no worse of
them than this, that they were wont to meet early for
the performance of-their solemn devotions, and to bind
themselves, under the most sacred obligations, to commit
no vice or wickedness.
" Serranus, proconsul of Asia, writes the Emperor
Adrian to represent how unjust it was to put to death
Christians, when no crime was duly laid to their charge,
merely to gratify the tumultuous clamors of the people.
"Origen tells Celsus that the churches of God, which
had taken on them the discipline of Christ, if compared
to the common societies of men, were among them like
lights in the world.'For who,' says he,' but must confess that the worser part of our Church is much better
than the popular assemblies? as, for instance, the Church
of God at Athens is meek and quiet, as endeavoring to
approve itself to the great God.'
"So Minutius Felix:' Should we Christians be compared with you (heathens), we should be found infinitely
to transcend you. You forbid adultery, and then practice it; we keep entirely to our own wives.  You punish wickedness when committed; with us even a wicked
thought is sin.  And, last of all,'tis with your party
that the prison is filled and crowded, and no Christian is
there unless such a one as is either a shame to his religion or an apostate from it.'
"A little while after he tells how much they exceeded the best philosophers, who were filthy and tyrannical,
and only eloquent to declaim against vices of which
themselves were most guilty.
"Lactantius having discoursed of the prodigious debaucheries and wickednesses of the heathen,'but of
D
73 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
which of these,' says he,'can be objected to our people,
whose whole religion is to live without &pot or blemish?'
"Tertullian openly declares that when men depart
from the discipline of the Gospel, they so far cease among
us to be accounted Christians; and that they shunned
the company of such, and did not meet or partake with
them in the offices of religion, and that therefore the
heathens did very ill to call them Christians whom the
Christians did disown."
Mosheim gives this statement on this point:
"Most authors represent the lives and morals of Christians in this early age as patterns of purity and holiness,
worthy of imitation in all subsequent ages. This representation, if it be understood of the greater part of the
professed Christians and not of all, is undoubtedly true.
The visible purity of the churches was much promoted
by that law which deprived of ordinances and excluded
from the community persons of vile character, or who
were known to be vicious, provided they would not reform
on being admonished. Such a law we know was established by the apostles (1 Corinthians, v.) soon after the
churches began to be formed. In the application and
enforcement of this law the teachers and rulers generally
pointed out the persons who seemed to merit exclusion
from the Church, and the people sanctioned or rejected
the proposal."
Children Members of the Primitive Church.
That the children of Christians were members of
the primitive Church is thus stated by Dr. Cave,
Part I., Chap. x.:
"If the constant practice of the Church, and those who
immediately succeeded the apostles, be (as no man can
deny it is) the best interpreter of the laws of Christ, the
dispute, one would think, would be at an end. For that
74
'k 
OF CHILDREN.
it always was the custom to receive the children of Christian parents into the Church by baptism we have sufficient
evidence from the greatest part of the most early writers,
Ireneus, Tertullian, Origen, Cyprian, etc., whose testimonies I do not produce because I find them collected
by others; and the argument is so forcible and conclusive that the most zealous opposers of infant baptism
know not how to evade it; the testimonies being so
clear, and not the least shadow that I know of, in those
times, to make against it. There was, indeed, in Cyprian's
time, a controversy about the baptizing of infants, not
whether they ought to be baptized (for of that there was
no doubt), but concerning the time when it was to be administered.
The following is a condensed view of the various
uses of the word Church.
Visible Church universal: all who profess to believe in Christ. This is unorganized.
Invisible Church universal: all who so believe as
to obey in heart and life. This also is unorganized.
Of the Church as organized there are three uses:
1. The local Primitive Church, consisting of individual believers in Christ statedly meeting in one
place for worship, and organized as one body with
officers.
2. The local Puritan Church, a portion of a local
primitive church united by covenant, and profession of regeneration, and a given creed, also organized with officers.
3. Denominational Church, any number of local
churches organized as one body, with officers, as the
Greek, Roman, Episcopal, or Presbyterian Church.
75 
THIE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
CHAPTER NINTH.
THE PURITAN CHURCH- ITS HISTORY.
IT has been shown that, in the beginning, the unorganized visible Church consisted of all who professedto believe in Christ; and that the only organized church known at that time was the local Church,
consisting of any congregation of professed believers
in Christ organized to sustain his worship and ordinances, the chief officers being the elders (called,
also, bishops or presbyters) and the deacons.
All the elders or bishops, at first, had the care
only of a single local Church.
But as, in large cities, a Church extended not only
in the city, but around in the country, the elders divided these large congregations into smaller ones,
and appointed rural bishops, who in some sort became subordinate to the metropolitan bishops.
The final result was the diocesan bishops, and the
name bishop was then relinquished by the inferior
clergy, and was confined to the diocesan order.
As Christianity increased in power and honor,
the ranks of the clergy, and their claims to authority in faith and practice, multiplied. Councils were
called, and decrees passed as to what the laity must
76 
OF CHILDREN.
and must not believe, and the power more and
more passed from the people to the clergy.
In what follows, it is needful to mark the distinction to be made as to the facts revealed by God, and
the philosophy which men have contrived to account
for these facts.
Afact is a thing done: the philosophy of it is the
mode of explaining the cause or reason of this fact,
or explaining the how and the why it is so.
Christ and his apostles began their teachings
among the poor and unlearned. Such received the
facts of the Gospel without seeking to discover the
philosophy of them. They knew by experience
that they were sinners; they were instructed in the
danger of eternal ruin by sin in the life to come;
they were taught that, on condition of faith in
Christ, pardon for past sin, and redemption from its
penalties, were secured to them through the atoning
sacrifice of Jesus Christ; they understood that faith
in Christ included believing on him intellectually
as Lord of faith and practice, receiving his words
and practically obeying thenm; they received Christ's
instructions as intelligible to all, and set themselves
to obey as a practical and rational service, while he
was deemed the best Christian who most faithfully
obeyed.
After a while the wise and learned of this world
were gathered into the Christian Church, and then
commenced the agitations consequent on philoso
77 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
phizing questions and theories such as these: Why
do all men sin?  How did all men become sinners?
What is the cause of the universal sinfulness of
man?  How was Christ God and how was he man?
How do his sufferings and death avail to save man?
From such questions as these as to the philosophy
of things revealed arose most of the early contentions and sects of the first centuries of Christianity.
The first controversies respected the nature of Christ
as God and man. In the fifth century, the controversy became fierce as to the cause, or origin of evil,
or the why and the how men came to be sinners;
and the leaders were Augustine and Pelagius.
Augustine maintained that this is the cause why
men sin. God ordained that Adam should act for
the whole human race, so that, if he ate the forbidden fruit, his own nature should become depraved,
and -that this depravity should be shared by, or
transmitted to, all his posterity. Adam sinned,
ruined his own nature, begat children with his own
ruined nature, and this depraved nature thus engendered is the cause or the why that all infants suffer and become sinners.
But Pelagius [see Dr. Walsh, as abridged by
Schlegel] taught that men come into life with the
same powers and abilities, and in the same state, as
Adam was created; that human nature was not
changed nor depraved by the fall of Adam; that
his sin is not imputed to his posterity; that men
78 
OF CHILDREN.
have sinful propensities, but these are not sin; that
man has power to discover, to devise, and to perform virtuous deeds; that the grace of God consists
in his giving man a good constitution of mind, the
revelation of his will, light to the understanding by
the aid of the Holy Spirit, the teachings and example of Christ, and forgiveness of past sins through
his atoning sacrifice.
Previous to this period this matter had not been
a subject of ecclesiastical decisions, but only of individual speculation. The first council called on
this subject was at Jerusalem, which decided on
the side of Pelagius, 415. The second was at Diospolis, 415, consisting of fourteen bishops, who also
decided for Pelagius. Pope Zosimus, at Rome,
also pronounced in favor of Pelagius; but, after a
long and fierce controversy, the African bishops,
led by. Augustine, succeeded in turning the tide
against Pelagius. Finally, the councils of the
Church and the edicts of the emperor, by cruel
persecutions, put an end to this doctrine in the
churches. The Augustinian dogma was decreed
to be taught in the Bible, and from the Papal
Church it' has descended into the creeds of the
chief Protestant sects.
This doctrine of man's depraved nature, incapacitating him at once from understanding and interpreting the Bible for himself, and from any true
obedience till remedied by supernatural interfer
79 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
ence, became the chief foundation of ecclesiastical
power. The priesthood claimed to be ordained, at
once to interpret the Bible for the people, and to
administer, by Church rites, the only remedy for
this depravity of nature engendered from Adam.
The final result culminated in the papal hierarchy, in which the people became as nothing, and
thle Church, which decided all questions of faith and
practice, was exclusively the pope and councils of
the clergy.
But in all periods of the papacy there were Protestant reformers who resisted this dominion of the
clergy over the laity. In 1160 the Waldenses were
the most conspicuous.  They denied the supremacy
of the pope, and claimed that every Christian, in a
certain measure, had a right to exhort, instruct, and
confirm.  After them came the Albigenses, who
also-opposed the papal claims.
In 1324 Wickliff appeared in England. He denied that bishops were a different order from priests
in the primitive Church, and claimed that there
were only priests and deacons; that heresy was error, not against clerical decisions, bnt against Holy
Writ; and maintained the right of the laity to interpret the Bible for themselves.  He held that infants dying without baptism could be saved; that
baptism did not confer grace, but':was a sign of
grace already given.
In 1376 Huss appeared in Bohemia, teaching lib
80 
OF CHILDREN.
erty of conscience, and the right of the laity to oppose the decisions of the clergy.
In 1483 Luther appeared, and fought the great
battle for the rights of the laity against the claims
of the Romish hierarchy.
The Reformation spread rapidly in England,
where Wickliff and his Bible had prepared the
way. Henry the Eighth then separated from the
Romish Church, and declared himself the head of
the English Church, and was accepted as such by
the reforming clergy of his kingdom. A Bible was
put in every church, with the implied admission
that the laity were at liberty to interpret it for
themselves. Every decision in the Church was
settled by appeals to the Bible, and not to past
Church decisions or practices.
Thpe first English reformers held to only two orders of the clergy-priests and deacons. This appears in what is called the Bishops' Book, issued in
1535, subscribed and recommended by two archbishops and nineteen bishops. It says there are
"but two orders of the clergy," and "no one bishop has authority over another, according to the
Word of God.'
In 1543 came the "King's Book," which says,
"There is no real distinction between bishops and
priests;" also it says, " Of these two orders onlythat is to say, priests and deacons-Scripture maketh express mention." This was drawn up by a
D 2
81 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
committee of bishops and divines. Of deacons it
says, "Their office in the primitive Church was
partly to minister meat and drink, and other necessaries, to the poor, and partly to minister to the
bishops and priests."
As to the people being the controlling power, the
English reformers held these views, as expressed
by the Archbishop of Canterbury [see Bishop Burnet, vol. ii., p. 326-329]:
"Sometimes the apostles and others, unto whom God
had given abundantly his Spirit, sent or appointed ministers of God's Word; sometimes the people did choose
such as they thought meet thereto; and when any were
appointed or sent by the apostles or others, the people,
of their own voluntary will, with thanks, did accept
them; not for the supremity, empire, or dominion that
the apostles had over them, to command, as their princes
and masters, but as good people ready to obey the advice
of good counselors, and to accept any thing that was
necessary for their edification and benefit."
In the reign of Edward VI., the present English
Prayer-book was compiled by Archbishop Cranmer chiefly from ancient books of devotion.
In the reign of Mary, the claims of the papal
clergy were renewed amid the fires of persecution.
Elizabeth patronized the reformation from popery, but demanded conformity to the English Established Church. The Non-conformists were called
Puritans, as those who favored the entire purification of the national Church from Romish rites and
ceremonies. They opposed the bishops as a supe
82 
OF CHILDREN.
rior order, and their exclusive right to ordain; and
especially the power of the bishop's courts, which inflicted civil pains and penalties for not conforming
to their decisions. Persecution followed; the Nonconforming clergy were expelled from their pulpits,
suspended from the ministry, and otherwise impeded. In 1566, those thus persecuted met and decided
to withdraw from the Church of England.
The Puritans were divided into the two classes
of Non-conformists remaining in the Established
Church, and the Separatists, who withdrew and established independent churches.  Of this last class
was the noble and venerated John Robinson, who
may be properly named the father of the Puritan
Church.
He first was a Non-conformist in the English Establishment; then he became a Separatist, and fled
with inany of his people to Holland to escape persecution. Here he became a leader and a distinguished writer, and first drew up in detail the principles on which the Congregational churches of New
England were afterward established.
John Robinson's definition of the "Church visible" is this:
"The word ecclesia, church, translated to religious use,
denoteth an assembly of persons called out of the state of
cor?upt nature into that of supernatural grace by the publishing of the Gospel."
Another definition is this:
83 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
"The Church is a company of faithful and holy people, with their seed, called by the Word of God into public
covenant with Christ and among themnselves for mutual fellowship in the use of all the means of God's glory and
their salvation."
Again:
"And, for the gathering of a Church, I do tell you
that, in what place soever, by what means soever, whether by preaching the Gospel by a true minister, by a false
minister, by no minister, or by reading, conference, or
other means of publishing it, two or three faithful people
do arise, separating themselves from the fellowship of the
world into the fellowship of the Gospel and covenant of
Abraham, they are a Church truly gathered."
In regard to infants, he says:
"The infants of the faithful are within the limits of
the new covenant."            ~
In replying to opponents, he says:
"Since all children coming naturally from Adam are
conceived and born in sin, and by nature children of
wrath, if these men believe, as they do of all, that their
children so dying shall be saved by Christ, then must
they have part in his testament, or in this new covenant.
There are not two new covenants or testaments established in the blood of Christ, but one.  And since Christ
is propounded unto us as the Savior of' the body,' which
is'his Church,' it is more than strange that these men
will have all infants to be saved, and yet none of them to
be of his body, or the Church."
From these quotations it appears that Robinson
had formed a theory of Church organization which
involved an irretrievable difficulty. It was a
Church to be composed (as by his first definition)
84 
OF CHILDREN.
"of persons called out of the state of corrupt nature
by supernatural grace;" according to his second definition, they are "to separate themselves from the
fellowship of the world into the fellowship of the
Gospel and the covenant of Abraham." This covenant includes the seed or children. But, according
to Robinson, children are at birth unregenerate,
and there is no sure and certain way to secure their
regeneration. Some children of a family, all trained alike, become regenerate, and some do not, and
only the regenerate are members of the Church.
So there is no covenant possible like that of Abraham, which included all circumcised children in the
Jewish Church without respect to character.
Robinson did not seem to see the difficulty of his
Church theory as some of his associates did; for
one Smyth took the ground that if the Church is
to be a separated body of regenerated persons, infants
can not belong to it. So he became the originator
of the Baptist denomination, which consistently excludes all but persons supposed to be regenerated.
The Cambridge Platform, which expresses the
views of the New England clergy in 1648, defines
the visible Church of Christ thus:
" The whole body of men throughout the world
professing the faith of the Gospel and obedience
unto God according unto it, not destroying their
own profession by any errors everting the foundations, or unholiness of conversation, they, and their
85 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
children with them, are and may be called the visible
catholic Chzttrch of Christ; although, as such, it is
not intrusted with any officers to rule and govern
the whole."
Hiere it appears that it is not all who profess to
believe in Christ, with their seed, that constitutes
the visible Church, but those only who profess actual obedience to it, not destroying their profession
by errors in doctrine or unholy living, together with
their children.
The first Pilgrim fathers all joined the Church
by covenant and profession as regenerated persons,
and regarded their children as made members by
baptism.
But when the next generation became parents,
many of them could not belong to the Church as
persons: professing to be regenerate, and so did not
bringk their children to be baptized. And thus Cotton Mather describes the first working of this new
mode:
"The good old generation could not, without uncomfortable apprehensions, behold their offspring excluded
from the baptism of Christianity and from the ecclesiastical inspection which is to accompany baptism."   "It
was the study of these prudent men that the children of
the faithful may be kept, as far as may be, under Church
watch, in expectation that they. may be in a fairer way to
receive the grace of God" (i. e., regeneration of a depraved
nature).
Moreover, he adds, "there was a numerous appearance of sober persons who professed themselves desirous
86 
OF CHILDREN.
to renew their baptismal covenant [made by parents] and
submit to Church discipline, and so have their houses
also marked for the Lord's; but yet they could not come
up to that experimental account of their own regeneration
which would sufficiently embolden their access to the
other sacrament."
In consequence, it was decided by a convocation
of ministers that, "in case they understand the
grounds of religion," and are not scandalous, and
solemnly own the covenant (baptismal) in their
own persons, wherein they give both themselves
and their children unto the Lord, and desire baptism for them, we see not sufficient cause to deny
baptism unto them. Thus arose " the half-way covenant," to enable parents to secure the baptism and
admission of their children to Church watching without professing regeneration or going to the sacrament
themselves.
This'added to the complication. Were these children of parents not professing regeneration made
members of the Church by this half-way covenant
and baptism? and, if so, could they have their children baptized and under the watch of the Church?
If allowed to do so, in process of time nearly every
body would come to be Church members by baptism and the half-way covenant, and the Church
would cease to consist of" persons called out of the
corrupt state of nature by supernatural grace, and
their children," as Robinson's plan demanded.
After this half-way covenant had been tried a
87 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
while, President Edwards met the matter with his
stern logic; and, by his influence, it came to pass
that the New England churches became close corporations, taking in by majority vote only such as,
on examination, gave evidence of regeneration and
belief in a given creed. Still, the children were
by many considered in some sort members of the
Church, but not so as to be allowed any of its peculiar privileges, and not so but that they were ordinarily spoken of as out of the Church, and to be
taken into it by majority vote when they gave evidence of regeneration.
The Baptists never baptized infants, nor regarded them as in any sense members of the Church.
A large portion of the Presbyterian Church, in defiance of their standards, and also the Methodists,
practically took the same course. Thus a majority
of the children of this nation have been shut out of
the Church of Christ.
Dr. Bushnell, in his last work on Christian nurture, endeavors to meet the difficulty on this subject by what he terms an "organic unity" of the
family, which he claims makes children members
of the Puritan Church' with their parents.
But he does not discriminate between organized
bodies founded on individual covenant and promise, such as free-masons or temperance societies,
and those which are constituted offamilies without
individual covenant, such as towns and states.
88 
OF CHILDREN.
The Puritan Church exists by the promise and
covenant of individuals with each other, together
with the profession of regeneration and the belief
of a creed. A child, therefore, no more belongs
to this corporation by a parent's joining it than it
enters a free-masons' lodge when its father joins it.
Dr. Bushnell also attempts to meet another difficulty. If the baptized children of the Church are
members of the corporation, then it ceases to be an
organization of regenerated persons, and becomes
what the primitive Church is claimed to be, (i.e.) a
mixture of persons in all stages of advancement in
Christian knowledge and experience, without any
organization dividing the regenerate and unregenera.te.
To meet this, Dr. Bushnell takes the ground that
regeneration may exist in embryo, as it were, in
children who have been consecrated by baptism
and trained by pious parents, so that the baptized
children of the Church may thus be, in a certain
sense, classed as the regenerate. This is very similar to the High-Church notion of baptismal regeneration, and, to be consistent, all baptized persons
should be recognized as the regenerate, and members of the Church.
In defiance of these explaining theories, when
persons baptized in infancy come to officers of the
Puritan Church wishing to be received as members, they are met as those out of the Church, and
89
A!f 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
are admitted by vote only on giving satisfactory evidence of regeneration and belief of a creed.
Dr. Bushnell's claim that these persons are already members of the Church, either by organic
unity with their parents or as - regenerated, is thus
practically contradicted.
The same contradiction is to be met in the Presbyterian Church; for in their standards the Church
is defined to be a congregation of Christians "with
their children," and yet these children are afterward taken into the Church by a formal vote of
Church officers, as those who are out of it till thus
received. Nor has a baptized child any more advantages or privileges as a member of that Church
than one who is not baptized.
Still another difficulty arose from this new mode
of organizing the local Church of Christ.
The contest of the Puritans with the Church of
England was not so much for individual liberty as
for the freedom of the laity from the authority of
the clergy. Instead of taking the true ground
that no man, or body of men, is to be rabbi or master of our faith, they formed close corporations of
regenerated laity, in which the majority of male
members admitted by vote, and assumed exactly
the authority which the bishops had maintained.
The bishops demanded, "Believe and practice as we
prescribe, or we cut you off from our Church and
its privileges." The Puritan Church majority said,
90 
OF CHILDREN.
"Believe and practice as we prescribe, or we cut
you off from the privileges of our Church."
Both parties certainly had a legal right to form
an association on any terms they pleased, and to
admit or exclude on these terms. The question
which both had to settle was, Do the teachings or
example of Christ and the apostles warrant such
claims?  Is this the New Testament mode  of organizing the local Church?
If the preceding history of the primitive Church
is correct, we must say that the Puritan local Church
is liable to the same objections as the Papal Church.
The chief difference is, that in one case the power
to enforce conformity to doctrines in faith and practice is held by the clergy, and in the other by the
majority of male members of a local Church.
91 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
CHAPTER TENTH.
PRIMITIVE CHURCH TRAINING.
IN regard to the training of children in the primitive churches, the whole question turns on the
meaning of the expression "faith in Christ," and
its equivalent term, "believing in Christ."
It is conceded that these terms mean what mankind intend and understand by these expressions
when they use them in common life. For the Bible was written in the language of common life, and
not in the language of philosophers and metaphysicians.
What, then, do men mean when they say a man
"believes in" or "has faith in" a person?
A man has faith and believes in Mohammed
when he intellectually is convinced that he is the
authoritative teacher of the true religion. He openly acknowledges or professes this belief when he
publicly attends the forms of worship prescribed by
Mohammed; and the degree of his faith is measured by the strictness with which he obeys the lord
of his faith.
So a man "believes in" physicians, and "has
faith" in them, when he is intellectually convinced
that their prescriptions will cure diseases, and his
92 
OF CHILDREN.
degree of faith is measured by the extent and strictness of his obedience to their directions.
Faith or belief in Jesus Christ, then, involves these
particulars: intellectual conviction that he is Lord
of faith and practice; receiving his teachings; a
purpose to obey them; and the carrying out this
purpose in feelings and conduct.
Now there are all degrees of advance in each of
these particulars which constitute true faith in
Christ. Some have a strong and some a feeble conviction that Jesus Christ is Lord of faith and practice; some have a correct knowledge of his teachings, and some have very imperfect understanding
of their true meaning. Some have a strong purpose of universal obedience, and some have a very
feeble one; and some carry out this purpose in feelings and conduct very extensively, and others very
imperfectly. Nor do we find in the New Testament
how much of each ingredient is indispensable, nor
how low one may fall in any one, and yet have saving faith.
We find, in common life, that men use the word
faith sometimes as including the mere intellectual
conviction. At other times the word is used to include also the appropriate feelings, purpose, and
conduct. In the New Testament the same uses of
the word occur.
Thus one apostle, in the first use, says, "Faith
without works is dead;" meaning the intellectual
93 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
part alone. Another apostle teaches that faith saves
us; meaning the faith that includes not only belief,
but appropriate feelings and conduct.
Thus it appears that there are various ingredients
of true saving faith, each being capable of different
degrees, and all also being matters which educational training can secure. The first ingredient every parent can promise that a child shall possess,
and that is, the intellectual belief that Jesus Christ
is Lord of faith and practice. For the distinctive
trait of young children is confiding belief in what
their parents tell them; so that a pagan, a Mohammedan, and a Christian child are sure to believe in
the first point of their parents' creed, viz., who is the
Lord to be obeyed.  The intellectual faith of childhood can be increased by culture as years go on, or
it may pass away.
The second step, receiving the teachings of Christ,
is also a slow and gradual process. So a purpose
to obey, while it may be, and often is, an instantaneous act, is also frequently a matter of slow development and culture, and of various degrees of strength.
Finally, the actual obedience in heart and life to
all Christ's teachings is also a slow and gradual matter, resulting from appropriate culture, and never
perfected in this life.
These things being so, the primitive churches regarded their children as prospective Christians in
name and intellectual belief, and in reference to this
94 
OF CHILDREN.
they baptized them, and thus made them members
of the visible Church tuniversal.
And as each local Church was a portion of the
Church universal, organized to sustain the worship
and ordinances of Christ, the children became members of it when their parents did, just as in a New
England town or parish the children become members when their parents do.
And there is not a sentence or line to be found,
either in the Bible or in primitive history, to show
that the primitive Christians ever attempted, as the
Puritans have done, to organize the invisble Church,
as consisting of persons who have the full amount
of faith which secures eternal life, and of which
Church officers shall be the judges.
The first Christian churches commenced at a
time when there were no persons trained from childhood to believe in Jesus Christ as Lord of faith and
practice. Converts, at first, were made entirely from
adults. The first step was to convince them that
Jesus Christ was the rightful Lord. This frequently was secured by miracles. After this was done,
then followed instruction in Christ's teachings,
which was a slow and gradual process. The purpose to obey, and the carrying out this purpose in
daily life, were also a gradual process.
It often happened, as in the case of Paul and of
many who witnessed miracles, that the intellectual
conviction of Christ's authority, and the purpose to
95 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
obey him, were almost simultaneous.  In other cases
the process was a gradual one. The local churches consisted of persons in all stages of advancement,
and of young children of all ages and all degrees of
training.
We can not have a true idea of the training of
children in the first Christian churches without
bearing in mind that the talents, cultivation, riches,
honors, and civil powers of this world were sustaining pagan temples and worship. At that time,
in the proud Roman empire, including all civilized
nations, it was even more disgraceful to be a Christian, than it now is, in this country, to be a Mormon. Christians were a poor, despised sect of the
Jews, a nation universally hated; their leader was
a man who suffered a death as disgraceful as hanging now is; their numbers were small, and chiefly
of the ignorant lower orders; while the rulers and
rich of their own nation hated and despised them
even more than did the heathen.
Meantime, this despised sect, "every where spoken against," and regarded as the "filth and offscouring of the earth," set up the claim, not that
their religion was as good as that upheld by the
noble and wise, but that it was the only true one,
to which all others must bow, and that a crucified
criminal is the Creator and Lord of all in heaven
and on earth, whom all must love and obey, or perish forever.
96 
OF CHILDREN.
It was as monstrous a claim, to the great and wise,
as it would be to us, at this day, if some negro, escaped from a gallows, should make the same claim,
and be sustained by a few poor and ignorant persons of his own class.
The Jews, also, when this new sect arose, were
required to give up their proud claims as the favored nation, and receive the Gentiles as their equals;
while Abraham and Moses, their pride and boast,
were to be placed below the crucified Galilean, and
even worship him as God.
It is not possible to imagine a religion which
could start under more appalling difficulties.
Amid all this hatred and obloquy, the Christians
were required not only to believe in Christ and to
train their children to do so, but to profess this religion publicly by baptism and by uniting with a
Christian community. They were not to save self
by a secret faith, but to _profess Christ at the risk or
sacrifice of reputation, property, and life itself. And,
the reason of this was, that Christ's religion might
be spread abroad through the whole world by its
glorious truths, and by the harmonious love, pure
lives, and sacrificing suffering of its professors.
And as purity of life was indispensable as the
chief mode of extending the true faith, not only all
who denied Christ's authority as Lord, but all who
were openly immoral, so as to disgrace a Christian
community, were to be not only cast out of it, but
E
97 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
openly shunned; none were to "receive them into
their houses or bid them God speed."
On the contrary, every person, however ignorant
or sinful, who believed that Christ was the Lord of
faith and practice, and wished to be taught his religion, was received into the Christian churches for
training and help. Nothing was required but a
willingness to come and be taught, and to behave
decently and peacefully as a member of a Christian
community. A desire to be a Christian sufficient to
bring into regular attendance at a Christian church,
and decent behavior, constituted membership; and
openly denying Christ as Lord, disgraceful vices,
and refusing to submit to the counsel of the Church
in personal quarrels, were the only grounds of expulsion.
The children were trained from infancy to understand that they were to stand ready to suffer and
die for the salvation of their fellow-men, just as
Christ did. And they were continually witnessing
or hearing of their neighbors, or friends, or fellowChristians in other places suffering the loss of all
things for this end.
St. Paul's vivid description was to them not a tale
of imagination, but a daily reality: "We are troubled on every side, yet not distressed  perplexed,
but not in despair; persecuted, but not forsaken;
cast down, but not destroyed.  For we which live
are always delivered unto death for Jesus' sake.
98 
OF CHILDREN.
Others had trial of cruel mockings and scourgings;
yea, moreover, of bonds and imprisonment. They
were stoned; they were sawn asunder; were tempted; were slain with the sword. They wandered
about in sheepskins and goatskins; being destitute,
afflicted, tormented; of whom the world was not
worthy."
To live lives of purity and harmony-to be examples of every Christian virtue, as the way to extend the faith to which they devoted their reputation, their property, and their lives-this was the
constant training to which all of every age and station were subjected in the congregation and in the
family. In short, to save theirfellow-men from the
dangers of the future life was the chief end and aim
of Church and family training in the primitive
times. The churches were communities, and every
child was born into the Church, just as children
now are born into the communities in which their
parents reside.
These communities knew that in all places they
must be persecuted for professing to be Christ's followers, and by persecutions they "were scattered
abroad, preaching the word." They did not expect
to live to enjoy this life; for the apostle wrote, "If
only in this life we have hope in Christ, we are of
all men most miserable."
Therefore they educated their children to be martyrs. They did not expect nor aim at a portion for
A,
. 99
I 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
them in this life, but rather that they should be prepared to "endure hardness as good soldiers." All
were to stand ready, some in places of comparative
ease, but all prepared to march themselves, or to
send their children, to the forlorn hope, whenever the
command came.
The world now has more darkened and miserable idolaters than it had in the primitive age. It is
far easier now than it was then for the churches to
be "scattered abroad preaching the word." There
is no reason why children now should not be trained "to endure hardness as good soldiers," and to
live, not to enjoy this life, but to save their fellowmen from ignorance and sin, as their great Master
did.
In what follows we may find some reasons why
the churches of Christ at the present day are not
equal to those of the primitive age in these respects.
-- - -
100 
OF CHILDREN.
CHAPTER ELEVENTH.
PURITAN CHURCH TRAINING.
IN the preceding pages it has been seen that the
Puritans, who separated from the Church of England, were the first who attempted to organize
portions of the invisible Church into local churches;
that at first their organizations included the children of these churches; that the Baptist sect comnmenced by being consistent in excluding infant children; and that, under the influence of President
Edwards, the Congregational churches of the country have finally come to the same result in reference to excluding children, as have also the Methodists and a large portion of the Presbyterian
churches.
All this has been the logical result of the doctrine
of a depraved nature transmitted from Adam to all
infants descended from him.
On this theory of a depraved nature, saving faith
in Jesus Christ is never the result of educational
training, but it is the result of an instantaneous new
creation of the nature of a child, without which preliminary act of God no degree of saving faith is
ever attained.
:... *..:.:
,,    ~': ~.:
101 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
In this chapter will be exhibited the mode of religious training of a young child, conducted strictly
according to the Puritan Church theory, as held
and practiced by the Congregational, Baptist, and a
large portion of the Presbyterian churches of this
country.
The author of the work to be quoted was the
daughter of the celebrated Dr. Payson.
She states that "the book is not a fictitious narrative.
It is substantially a record of conversations and incidents
which really occurred. Though it is not pretended that
the precise words of the dialogue or the very circumstances of the narrative are always preserved, it is sufficient to its essential truth that similar incidents and conversations occurred, and that the general progress and
results are correctly described."
That this is a correct exhibition of the usual
mode of religious training pursued in the Congregational, Baptist, and Presbyterian denominations
in this country, and to a great extent in other denominations, can not well be denied. It certainly
is the exact reproduction of the methods which
were adopted with young persons by the leading
clergy of New England, as the writer has heard
them, year after year, from her father and from his
personal friends, such as Dr. Taylor, Dr. Nettleton,
Dr. Hewit, Dr. Tyler, Dr. Payson, Dr. Finney, and
many others, who, both in private and in public,
have taught the young, both in conversation and in
the pulpit, in her hearing.
..
102 
OF CHILDREN.
Moreover, the little work from which extracts
are to follow has been widely circulated, introduced
into Sunday-schools, and extensively recommended
by the religious press, while no intimations have
ever been made that it in any way deviated from
the established theological system of the abovementioned denominations.
It probably was rarely the case that children
were thus instructed at so early an age. It is therefore put under the head of Church training rather
than that of the family.
The following extract indicates some of the earliest methods pursued in this case:
"When Maria was between two and three years old,
she would sit on a little stool at her father's feet, with
tears rolling down her cheeks, while he talked to her of
the sinfulness of her heart, and the impossibility of her
ever being happy till it was changed.
"Beiore Maria was three years old, she was very unwilling to be convinced that she did not love God, and
often wept because her father seemed to doubt this affection. She observed one day that she'wished she could
die, and then her father would see her fly right up to
Heaven like a little angel, and he would know that she
loved God.'"
One day, not long after the preceding,
"Maria suddenly asked,'Ma, how can I be good?'
"Her mother told her she must have a new heart.
"' How can I have a good heart?  I will take out my
naughty heart, and stamp on it, and beat it-will that
make it good?'
"Her father heard the question.'No, my daughter,
103 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
said he,'you can not make your heart good-nobody
but God can make new hearts, and if you want one you
must ask him."'
The following occurred in her fifth year:
"'Pa,' said Maria, suddenly, one day after she had
been thinking some time,'what does heart mean?  When
you talk about my heart, I can not think of any thing
but those gingerbread hearts that we eat.'
"The father replied:'You know there is something
within you which loves and hates; this something is your
heart. So, when God says give me your heart, he means
'Love me.'
"'Pa, it seems as if I wanted to love God, but don't
know how.'"
The father proceeded to describe how we actually love persons whom we never saw, and in beautiful language portrayed the benevolent character of
God, and the multitude of blessings he had bestowed on the child, when she impulsively exclaims,
"  Oh, pa, I will, I do love him!'
But her father then strives to convince her that
she does not, because she often does what God forbids. But the child was unconvinced. Then follows an account of her efforts to be good and struggles to avoid sin; but at length she grew tired of
such constant watchfulness, and relapsed into former habits of childish thoughtlessness.
Soon after, on hearing her father describe the
cruel treatment of Christ by the Jews, all her sympathies were called out, and especially her indigna
104 
OF CHILDREN.
tion against this cruelty. Whereupon her father
took the occasion to teach her that her heart was
like the Jews, and if she had been there she proba
bly would have done the same.
"'Papa, you don't think that I should have helped to
crucify Christ?'
"' How can I disbelieve the Bible, Maria? and this
tells us all hearts are alike.'
"' Oh, papa, I never-never-' but her sobs would not
allow her to go on.
"'My dear, you have had no opportunity to show your
hatred and contempt of Christ as the Jews did, but you
have done it just as plainly in other ways."
These ways which the father pointed out were
the common faults and failings of most little children. Then follows this:
"Maria was much distressed, and wept violently.  She
could not think her heart so bad as her father represented it, and yet she dared not say so when her conduct
was no better.  However, she resolved to' try again.'"
This chapter ends thus:
"We can not describe each of Maria's efforts and its
result, for, as in the former case, they were gradually
relinquished and forgotten. They were not, however,
useless, for she began, after a time, reluctantly to admit
the conviction that there was no love to God in her
heart. As her feelings were ardent and easily excited,
she was generally much affected, and wept abundantly
when listening to her father's conversation, and it was
easy to mistake these natural emotions for love and gratitude. And if she found it difficult to believe that she
did not love God, much less would she be convinced that
she hated him. Her father labored much to convince
E2
105 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
her of the enmity of her heart and the necessity of regeneration."
In the next chapter the child says she thinks it
strange that her father should be so anxious to convince -her of what would make her so unhappy,
without doing her any good, so far as she could
see. Her father states the reason thus:
"'Before you can be happy, before you can go to
Heaven, you must have a new heart; and before you
have a new heart, you must be convinced that you need
it, and that your present heart is unreconciled to God.'
"' I am sure, papa, I am willing to be convinced, if it
is the truth; but I don't see how I could hate a person
without knowing it."'
The following is the father's exposition of the
matter:
"' You think of God, I suppose, as a Being who loves
you, and remember some of the blessings you have received from him.   Now Christ says that sinners love
those that love them. Every person feels a sort of selfish
love or gratitude toward those who confer favors on them,
and this is what you feel toward God. The God whom
you love is not the God of the Bible, but a false deity, a
creature of your own imagination. You leave out the
holiness, justice, and truth of God. You think of a being who is kind and merciful, and who is, moreover, good
to you, and such a being you find it easy to love. Instead of this, we must not only take into view God's holiness and hatred of sin, but we must love him on account
of these very perfections, and feel that we could not love
him without them."'
The next states that
"M Maria did not take as much pleasure as she had done
106 
OF CHILDREN.
in thinking of God. After all, she could not see why the
holiness and justice of his character were so essential to
his glory, or why a being whose requirements were less
strict and difficult would not be entitled to as much reverence and love. But, though she felt that God did not
appear amiable in the light in which he had been now
presented to her, she was far from perceiving that this
implied guilt in herself. It seemed to her that God had
become less lovely instead of her having just learned that
she did not love him. Of the desperate wickedness of
her heart she as yet knew nothing, but was to learn it by
painful experience."
Then follows an account of a succession of trials
"to be good," in which, like all children, she often
failed. After an ebullition of quick temper, her
father said,
"'You promised me to make an effort to govern your
"'Yes, papa,' sobbed Maria,'and I meant to try; and
I thought, when you talked so kindly to me, that I never
should be angry again in my life; and, papa, I did try a
little while, but I forgot it again; and-and-'
"'But, my dear child, how can Iplace any confidence
in your promises or resolutions, you have so often broken
"'I know it, papa; I can not tell what is the reason.
If I am ever so sure of not doing wrong again, the very
next day I forget all, and I do the same things.'
"'I can tell you the reason, Maria; it is that wicked
sin.'
"' I don't see as I can help myself, then, papa.'
"'You must first feel that you are to blame, that it is
your own fault, that you can not do better, and then seek
the assistance of the Holy Spirit.'"
107 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
After various trials to be good, the child said to
herself,
"'Papa was right in saying I could not be good without God's help; but, now that I am convinced of this, I
will pray to him every day.'
"It is not intended that Maria had never been taught
to pray, but she had never, at least since her father's assertion of her inability to do right, sought the assistance of
the Holy Spirit.
"Several days she prayed for this help, and yet she
often failed. She could not conceal her disappointment
and vexation. Bursting into tears, she began:
"'Papa, you said the reason I did not succeed in trying to be good was that I depended on myself; so to-day
and yesterday I prayed to God to help me, and I have
been worse than I was before.'
"Her father could with difficulty repress a smile at
this bitter complaint, that a single prayer, proceeding too
from a selfish and unhumbled heart, had not effected a conquest which would probably require months of prayerful
effort."
The father then instructed her that
"even when prayer is offered aright, and when God intends to answer it, he seldom does so immediately and
at once. He bestows a little grace at a time, and often
not until many weeks or months of prayer.
"Maria was surprised, but not discouraged.  She
thought it would not be difficult to pray for ever so long
a time, if she might receive an answer at last."
But, in the next chapter, the father teaches thus:
"'Now I must tell you that God is not only not
obliged to answer you, but that he has reason to be displeased with you on account of your prayers.'
"Maria was surprised, and looked at her father to see
if she had understood him aright.
108 
OF CHILIDREN.
"'Suppose, Maria, a poor person should come to you
for food or clothing, would you expect him to demand it
as a right or to entreat it as a favor?'
"'As a favor, papa, of course.'
"'Well, now, suppose, farther, that this beggar was a
person who had injured you very much; suppose you
had frequently assisted him before, that he had abused
all your benefits, and then endeavored to prejudice others
against you, what should you think?'
"' I should think he was very impudent to come again,
and should send him away fast enough.'
"'At least, you see you would be under no obligation
to relieve him.'
"' No, indeed, papa.'
"'Well, my dear, your case with regard to God is
just that of this poor beggar. He has been bestowing
blessings upon you all your life long, which you have
abused, and for which you have felt no gratitude. Even
if you had had any claim to his favor, you would have
forfeited it by this conduct.'
"' Papa, I believe I see why God is not obliged to
hear me, but I do not see why he should be displeased
with me for praying.'
"'You thought, it seems, that you should find reason
enough to be displeased with the beggar in the case I
supposed. Suppose you possessed the power of reading
the heart, and that all the time he was talking you could
see that his heart was full of enmity to you; that he was
prompted by mere selfishness to come and ask favors, for
which he felt no gratitude; if, in short, you saw he was
not sincere in one word that he uttered, you would be
displeased and disgusted.'
"'Yes, papa; but I do not see how this applies to my
prayers.  I am sure I am sincere in them.'
"' In one sense you are sincere.  You sincerely wish
to be saved from punishment, but this is mere selfishness. You do not sincerely love God and repent of your
sins."'
109 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
The narrative states that the child was mortified
and distressed by such reflections, and retired to
bed with a half determination "not to try any
longer."
Thus far the leading aim of religious training
has seemed to be, to convince the child that she was
born with a heart so depraved that she not only
did not love God, but that she hated him; that she
could not be good nor go to Heaven till this bad
heart was changed; that she was dependent on the
Spirit of God to change it, and yet that her prayers
for this aid were as displeasing and disgusting to
God as those of the hypocritical beggar; because,
so long as she had this bad heart, her prayers must
all be selfish and hypocritical.
It was not strange that the child felt mortified
and distressed, and half determined not to try any
longer.
110 
OF CHILDREN.
CHAPTER TWELFTH.
PURITAN CHURCH TRAINING, SECOND PART.
SooN after the conversations in the preceding
chapter, the child comes to the root of the whole
difficulty.
"'Papa,' said she,'I don't see how I can help being
wicked. I didn't make my own heart.'
After some  preliminaries, the father  thus in
structs:
"' The faculty of choosing is called the will, and the
will of every human being is depraved or inclined to sin,
and therefore chooses sin instead of holiness.'
"'Well, then, papa, God must have created my will
deprave].'
"'My dear child, I do not suppose it is possible to explain this subject in such a way that you will be satisfied, for no sinner was ever satisfied. It is true that' in
some way, we have sinful natures in consequence of our connection with Adam. Our hearts are, from the beginning,
disposed to sin, and our wills are opposed to God. We
do not understand how this is; it is enough for us to
know that it forms no excuse for us.'
"'I am sure I should think it was an excuse.'
"'Well, let us see how it would apply in all cases.
Here is a man to be tried for murder. He confesses the
crime, but says to the judge, "You certainly will not condemn me for what I could not help.   It was my wicked
heart which made me do this."  Should we not tell him
that this was the very thing he was punished for, because
111 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
he had a heart which disposed him to commit this
crime?"'
The child was puzzled. The father adds:
"'Well, Maria, on this point I have one condition to
make with you. Whenever you are ready to admit this
excuse, in cases of injury offered to yourself, I will allow
that it is a good one in your favor. So, if George should
pull down your baby-house, or break your doll, I shall
expect that, instead of being angry with him, you will
say, "Oh, poor fellow! he couldn't help it; he has such
a bad heart.""'
The child was not convinced. The father says,
"' Only begin to love God, and the difficulty will vanish.'
"'I wish I could; but my heart won't let me.'
"'The same excuse again!  Why, my dear, your
heart is yourself. To say that your heart won't love
God is just the same as to say I]won't love him, which
is your guilt, not your excuse.'
"Xaria sighed; her father sighed too. She thought
the conditions of salvation were so hard that they could
not be complied with; he sighed to see how powerless is
argument where the heart is concerned."
In all this argument the child was defeated by
false and imperfect analogies. She might justly
have replied to her father's illustration of the mur
derer and the judge, that, if the judge had caused
the mind of the criminal to be so depraved on account of some sin of his father, and also had power
both to prevent and to rectify the bad disposition,
it was the judge more than the murderer who was
to blame. The criminal might justly say to his
112 
OF CHILDREN.
judge, "It is what you caused me to do by entailing the bad disposition, and what you could have
prevented by removing it, and so you are more
guilty than I."
This was what the childfelt, though she knew not
how to express herself. That God had made such
a state of things that Adam's "bad heart," consequent on his sin, should be transmitted to her, and
that, when God had the power to change it, he would
not do it, this was the distressful and awful infliction
that made it seem so impossible to love and trust
her Creator. This is shown still farther in the next
extract:
"'Papa, when you talk about going to Christ, how can
I tell what it means, because it is not literally going to
him.'
"  When we use this expression, my dear, we mean the
same act as when we say loving Christ, or believing in
him, or trusting him. They all mean the same thing.
Have you not felt, when you were thinking of some person whom you loved, and who was away from you, as if
your heart went out to that person?'
"' Oh yes, I know what sort of feelings you mean very
well. When you and mamma were gone last summer, I
used to think of you till it almost seemed as if you were
here, and then my heart would almost jump out to meet
you, and the tears came into my eyes when I remembered how far you were away.'
"'On the other hand, when you think of a person
whom you do not like, your heart draws back, as it were,
and retires into itself. Now just tell me, in which of
these ways is it affected when you think of Christ?'
"Maria was silent.
113 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
"'Does your heart ever go out to him in love and confidence?'
"' I -I- No, papa, I never felt toward him as I did
to you. But how can I make my heart love him?'
"' Make your heart love, Maria?  You can not.'
"'That is what I have said a hundred times, papa,
and you always tell me it is no excuse.'
"' And I have told you a hundred times why it is no
excuse. Suppose you had come to me, when I returned,
and said, "Pa, I am not glad to see you at all, and I do
not love you, but I suppose I ought to; and I wish you
would teach me how to make my heart love you." Do
you think I ought to be satisfied?'
"'No, papa.'"
Next he explains "faith" to be implicit confidence in Christ's power and willingness to save her,
and continues thus:
"'And has not Christ given you the fullest proof of
his ability and willingness to save you? Has he not
saved all who trusted in him? You can not offer him a
greater insult than to doubt either his power or his love.'
"' Why doesn't he save me, then?' said she, in a petulant tone, though she felt ashamed and frightened the
moment the words escaped her. Her father paused and
looked at her solemnly, almost sternly, as he said,
"' Because you will not let him, Maria,' and left the
room."
After similar instructions, showing the inability
of man,
"'Father,' Maria exclaims,'I see there is no hope for
me!'
"Then hard thoughts of God and his law began to
rise in her mind.   Why had he' created hel with such a
heart? Why did he require what her utmost efforts
would not enable her to perform? She hardly dared
114 
OF CHILDREN.
again propose these objections to her father, but at length
she ventured to say that, if sinners were so unable to
change their hearts, she could not see why they were to
blame.
"Her father sighed:' They are to blame, because their
very inability, consisting simply in unwillingness, constitutes their guilt. They have all the powers necessary to
doing their duty; there is nothing wanting but a dislposition; and, if a want of a disposition constitutes an excuse, there is no such thing as guilt in the universe, but,
the more a man sins, the less guilty he is. Why will you
offer to your Creator an excuse which you would blush
to present to a fellow-creature?'
"It was now Maria's turn to sigh.
"' I know what you think, my dear,' resumed her father;'you think that you are a poor unfortunate creature, who are to be punished for having a wicked heart,
which you can not help, and for not obeying a law which
it is impossible that you should obey. It seems to you
that you have been doing every thing you possibly could
to obtain salvation, and as if it would be very unjust and
cruel in God to leave you to perish, after all your prayers, and tears, and efforts.  Is it not so'
"Maria hesitated.
"'I do not mean that you have those thoughts distinctly arranged, but you have such feelings.'
"' Yes, papa, it does seem as if I am trying all I can
to be saved.'
"' Well, my dear, all I can say to you is, that, before
you will ever be saved, you must feel that you have never
done any thing toward your salvation, but every thing to prevent it; that it would be perfectly just in God to leave
you to perish; and, in short, that God is all right and
you all wrong; for
"'Christ would sooner abdicate his owns
Than stoop from heaven to give the proud a throne."'
In order to understand clearly the mistaken meth
115 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
od of this good man, we need to notice how mankind use and understand the word love.
In its widest sense, we say we love any thing
when it gives us pleasure by gratifying some desire.
Thus we love fruits, and flowers, and agreeable per
fumes.
But when we love persons, we have a complex
experience. We not only find pleasure in their
agreeable qualities, but we desire to please them in
return, while this desire leads to purposes and acts
that show our affection.
The simple emotion of love, which does not result
in a desire and purpose to please, by action, is of
small value. It is the desire and purpose to please,
by conforming to the will and wishes of the one loved,
that is the chief ingredient of true love. A child
who simply was pleased with a mother's agreeable
qualities, and yet constantly neglected to conform
to her wishes, would never be said truly to love
her; while another child, who made it his chief aim
to find out what his mother wished and then to do
it, would be said to love his mother truly.
Christ uses the word in this last sense when he
declares, " iHe that hath my words and keepeth them,
he it is that loveth me." So the apostle defines true
love toward God: "This is the love of God, that ye
keep his commandments."
It has been shown in the previous pages that true
faith in Christ, also, has for its main ingredient the
116 
OF CHILDREN.
purpose of obedience carried out in feeling and action. If this be so, the father's preceding explanation of faith is very incomplete.
So repentance toward God, which often in the Bible is made the indispensable requisite to salvation,
has as its main feature not the emotion of sorrow for
sin, which may exist without ceasing from it; but
the distinctive ingredient of true repentance is ceasing from sin, or purposing to obey God, and carrying out this purpose in feelings and conduct.
But while, in all these three "terms of salvation,"
it is obedience in purpose and conduct that is the
chief and indispensable thing, it is of the utmost importance that emotions of love toward God be awakened, as the means of leading to easy and cheerful
obedience.
In the chapter on the obedience of love it is shown
that there is no so easy and sure way to secure the
obedience of children to law as to gain their grateful and admiring love. When a child is moved by
an ardent affection, what would otherwise be a hard
duty becomes a pleasure if it will please the beloved
parent. So in regard to the heavenly Parent:' the
more we understand his lovely character, and realize his love and kindness toward us, the easier it is
to try to please him by obedience to his laws. Thus
it is that the lovely character of God exhibited in
Christ, and all he did and suffered for us, tends to
make it easy to obey him.
117 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
In the case of this child the father made two great
mistakes: the first was in representing the emotive
part of love as the chief duty required, and the second was so representing God and Christ as to make
it almost impossible to feel any other emotions than
those of terror and aversion.
In the course-of his religious training, the father
gives the common view of this class of theologians
as to the use of the "means of grace" as follows:
"'Papa, do you suppose a person who reads the Bible
and prays every day is more likely to be converted than
one who does not?'
"'The Bible, Maria, gives no encouragement to those
who read and pray with an impenitent heart.'
"'Then I don't see any use in praying at all.'
"' Of praying insincerely, I suppose you mean. There
is a great deal of use in praying jfrom the heart, though
there is none in praying without it.'
"'Then, papa, I may as well give up at once.'
".'See how unreasonable you are, Maria. Because
heartless prayers are of no avail, you will not pray at all;
and you think hardly of God because he will not accept
hypocritical and selfish services.'
"'But, if I can not do any better, papa, what must I
do?'
"'If you can not do any better, why, then, there is no
help for you. God has said that those who do not repent must perish; and, if you can not repent, why, you
must suffer the consequences.'
"1aria, at these dreadful words, burst into a flood of
tears, and sobbed for some time without being able to
speak. Her heart rose against the demands of God. She
wanted to say,'Then he is unjust to require what can
not be done;' but her father had answered this objection
so often that she was afraid to advance it again. At last
her father said,
118 
OF CHILDREN.
"'Do you not see, Maria, that it is to accuse God of
injustice to say you can not repent? He has commanded you to do it, and threatened to punish you if you do
not; of course, to say that you can not do what he requires is to say he is cruel and unjust.'
"' But, papa, if I really feel that I can not? There is
no arguing against consciousness; and, so long as I am
conscious of being unable, I can not be convinced that I
am able.'
"' If we could not be deceived in our consciousness, this
would be unanswerable. What you are conscious of
is that very strong unwillingness, which, while it exists,
amounts to inability, and which is sometimes called moral, in distinction from natural inability.
"' It would be impossible that an affectionate mother
should kill her child while that affection continues-as
impossible as if it could not be done. The disposition
might be changed, and then the impossibility would be removed.  In this sense, I acknowledge that it would be impossible for you to repent, or, what amounts to the same
thing, it is absolutely certain you never will repent of
yourself.'
"Mario. sighed deeply.
"'You see that it depends on the sovereign grace of
God whether you are ever saved or not. Dr. Doddridge
has remarked that a person who diligently uses the means
of grace is more likely to be favored with the renewing
influences of the Spirit of God than one who neglects
them; not because there is any merit in such services,
but because the fact that a person is inclined to offer
them shows that the Holy Spirit is already striving with
him. This remark, however, is merely the result of his
own observation, and has no warrant in the Bible.'
"'Is there nothing I can do, then?' said Maria, in a
tone of despair.
"'Nothing-if you will not do what God requires.
My dear daughter, I would willingly help you if I could,
but I dare not pretend to be more merciful than God. I
119 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
nmust leave you where his word leaves you, shut up between these truths. You never can be saved without repentance; you can repent if you choose; but it is absolutely certain that you never will choose unless God makes
you.'
"Maria's distress was terrible.  She went up stairs
and threw herself on the floor.
"  Oh, I wish I had never been born!  I wish I had
never been born!' burst from her lips.
"To feel that she was to blame for not repenting, and
yet never would repent of herself-in short, that she was
in the hands of the Almighty, to be dealt with according
to his sovereign will and pleasure, this was distressing indeed.
" While these inward conflicts lasted, Maria could take
no pleasure in any thing; she felt like an outcast, often
envying the beasts and birds their happiness, or wishing
she had never existed. At other times she was generally obliging and good-tempered, having overcome some of
her childish faults; but when under the influence of these
feelings she appeared unkind and morose. One reflec tion which increased her distress was that her guilt was
aggravated by the very privileges which she enjoyed;
and next to the wish that she had never been born was
this —that she had been born a heathen.
" After this, Maria's distress continued for several
weeks with scarcely any abatement. She felt as if the
wrath of God pursued her wherever she went, and gave
her no rest day nor night. When she lay down at night
this reflection would present itself to her mind with irresistible force: God knows whether I shall ever be saved
or not. He looks forward through the ages of eternity,
and perhaps he sees that I shall spend them in hell! This
perhaps had all the force of certainty, and her anguish
hardly could have been deeper had she been assured of
perdition.
120 
OF CHILDREN.
CHAPTER THIRTEENTH.
PURITAN CHURCH TRAINING, THIRD PART.
IN the following chapter will be found the continuation of the preliminary training, and finally the
time and mode in which the regeneration of the child
took place.
"One day, while Maria stood behind her father's chair,
combing his head, with an expression of hopeless misery,
and tears rolling down her cheeks,'Papa,' said she,'I
do not see why Christians are ever unhappy. Oh, it
seems to me that, if I were only sure of being saved, I
should be perfectly happy all the rest of my life.'"
After narrating various reasons for the gloom e+perienced by Christians, he adds:
"'Still, it ought to make them happy that all things
are in the hands of such a God-a God who is their Father and Friend.'
"Maria's tears flowed faster.'He is not my Father
and Friend,' thought she.
"' My dear child,' said her father, tenderly,' if you really wish to be a Christian, what is there to hinder you?
You can not doubt God is willing; if not, why has he
given his only Son to die for you? Why does he allow
the Bible and the Sabbath? Why is he sending his Spirit even now to draw you, if possible, to himself?'
"'I know it, papa,' said Maria, as soon as her tears
would allow her to speak;' but then, what can be the
reason that I am not a Christian? I am sure if I were
required to go a pilgrimage, or to submit to any of the
F
121 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
penances which the Hindoos impose on themselves, I
would not hesitate a moment-no, not a moment.'
"'I believe it, Maria.  I believe you would do any
thing to purchase heaven; but I believe too that, at this
moment, you are refusing to accept it as a free gift, for
the sake of Christ. This is the great stumbling-block in
the way of every sinner's conversion. At first he would
fain owe his salvation entirely to his own merits; and
when he finds, by repeated trials, that this can not be
done, he still tries to patch up a miserable righteousness
of his own, which shall almost entitle him to heaven, and
then the merits of Christ may do the rest.'
"He paused, but, as Maria did not reply, he went on:
"' My dear child, why will you not give up every thing
of this sort, leave off all dependence on every fancied
goodness of your own, and trust simply in Christ. Can
you not fall down at his feet and say, "Lord, I am a
poor, miserable sinner; I do not deserve any favor, but
I pray thee to pardon me for Christ's sake?" Only say
this sincerely, and the work is done.'"
'*Here the child is again driven on to the thorns;
for the father had taught that it is impossible to
pray to God sincerely with an unrenewed heart, and
when God has renewed the heart there is no need
of praying to have it done.
Still farther on we have the following, in reply to
a remark of his child that she "should not think
the Jews would have dared to talk as they did to
God." The father attempts to show that she does
the same sort of thing, thus:
"'You accuse God of placing you in such a situation
as renders obedience impossible, and then of threatening
to punish you for disobedience. I should like to know
when the Jews said any thing worse than this.
122 
OF CHILDREN.
"'Another of your excuses is, that you did not make
your own heart. Now what is the meaning of this, if
fully expressed? Why, it is this: "What an unfortunate creature I am! God has given me a depraved
heart, and then blames me for having it. He has implanted propensities which he blames me for indulging;
and, after making it impossible that I should love him,
threatens me with eternal misery if I do not."
"' Of course, on this ground, all the sin and misery of
the universe must be ascribed to God, and it is his fault
that-all mankind are not virtuous and happy.'
"' Papa, I am sure I should not have thought of saying such horrible things.'
"' No, I dare say, not in words; but to God, who looks
at the heart, and sees all the feelings there, it is the same.
Besides, you can not deny that you have brought forward
all these excuses I have mentioned, and many others.
When you complain of God for not answering your prayers, and assert that "it is of no use to pray or to do any
thing," what is this but saying it is vain to serve God?'
"Maria could not deny this; she therefore remained
silent.
"'The'fact is, Maria,' resumed her father,' that God
and the sinner can not both be right. They are directly
at variance, and one or the other must be wrong. If
God be in the wrong, then he is infinitely wrong, for an
infinite being must be infinite in all his attributes.  He
is infinitely unjust, cruel, and tyrannical; a being deserving, no love, reverence, or obedience. Then you must
give up saying that you are right. You must acknowledge that it is your fault, and not God's, that you do not
love him, and it will be your fault, and not his, if you
perish.'
"Maria sighed. She was unwilling to take the blame
upon herself, and she was afraid to throw it on God.
"At last she said,'Papa, perhaps we might have been
able to obey the laws of God once, but have lost the ability on account of Adam's sin.'
123 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
"' That will not help the case at all; for, if you have
iost the ability to obey God, even though you lost it by
your own fault, yet, if it is lost, God has no right to command you to use it.  God absolutely commands you now
to repent; and, if you can not do it, the command is a
tyrannical and unjust one, whether you ever had the
ability to obey it or not. No, Maria, there is no other
alternative.  Either you are wrong, or God is so; which
will you say?'
"Maria did not reply.
" Did you ever think,' said her father,' that you may,
sometime or other, become an infidel?'
"'An infidel! Oh, papal' said she, with a mixture
of grief and reproach.
"'Just what I say, my dear. I think it extremely
probable that if you should not be converted before many
years, you will be an infidel. And I will tell you why.
A man can never be happy so long as his conscience and
his conduct are at variance. While he believes that
endless misery awaits those who reject the Gospel, and
yet he continues to reject it, hlie can not be at ease. If,
therefore, he is determined not to alter his conduct, he
tries to get rid of this belief; to persuade himself that
he is not in so much danger as he supposed; that all
men will be saved, or that there is no God. When God
sees a man is bent on destruction, and wishes to be deceived, he gives him up to strong delusions, to believe a
lie, and the wretched victim goes on blindfolded to ruin.'
"This conversation alarmed Maria exceedingly. She
was almost distracted at times with doubts and apprehensions, and her mind was, indeed,'like the troubled
sea when it can not rest.' But let it be remembered all
this was her own fault. She would not submit."
The following conversation soon occurred:
"' Papa, if the hearts of all men are alike, and one no
more deserves to be saved than another, why does God
choose to convert some and not others?'
124 
OF CHILDREN.
"'For no reason that we know of, Maria, but his own
good pleasure. Creation - gives the Creator an absolute
sovereignty over his creatures.   "Hath not the potter
power over the clay, to make one vessel to honor and
another to dishonor?" It would have been consistent
with justice if God had left us all to perish in consequence
of the sin of Adam; much more, then, is it just to leave
those to perish now who reject the offered merits of a
Savior, trample his blood under their feet, and do despite to the spirit of grace.'
"' Yes, papa, it would be just if he treated us all so;
but if he saves some-'
"'That does not alter the case at all in regard to
others. The case is just this: God has provided salvation
for all; he offers it to all, but all reject it. He invites
and entreats them to be saved, but they will not. Then,
by the secret constraining influence of his Spirit, he obliges
some to accept his offers, or rather makes them willing in the
day of his power. But why should you object to others
being saved, Maria, even if you should not be? Do you
not see that only a feeling of envy could prompt such a
wish? Are you not content with refusing the offers of
mercy yourself, but do you wish all the world to refuse
them too? What sort of disposition is that which could
be consoled under suffering by the sufferings of others?'
" Mlaria burst into tears.'I see papa hates and despises me,' thought she;' and I do not wonder, if he sulpposed I had such feelings.' This idea put the finishing touch to her misery. I am indeed forsaken of God
and man, was the feeling with which she rose to go to
her own room, there to give vent to her sorrows in tears
and groans.  But her father detained her.'My dear
child,' said he,'I know you do not love to hear these
things, but if they are true, ought you not to hear them?
If you are in the hands of God, is it not better that you
should know it now, when by timely submission you can
make him your friend, than to learn it for the first time
when he becomes your irreconcilable enemy? I must
125 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
tell you, then, my child-my duty to God and to your
soul requires me to tell you-that the power of a giant
over an infant is nothing compared with the entire and
absolute control which God has over you. Escape you
can not. Submit you must. Will you submit voluntarily and be happy, or by constraint and be miserable?'"
The next account of this poor child is this:
"The tumult of her mind increased to such a degree
that she could no longer maintain her resolution (of silence).'Oh, how I wish that I had never been born!'
was the exclamation that broke from her lips after one
of these struggles.
"'That is a very foolish as well as very sinful wish,'
said her father, gravely.' You ought, rather, to be grateful for the blessing of existence.'
"'I am sure I should not think it a blessing,' said
Maria;'we are created without our own choice, and
then we don't know but we shall be eternally miserable,
and we have no way of helping ourselves.'
"' Is that true, MIaria?'
"'I don't see, papa, but it is.  If God has declared
that I shall be saved, I shall be; and if not, I shall perish; I can not alter his decrees.'"
Then follows an argument by her father to show
that she has power to love and obey God, although
she feels that she has not. It concludes thus:
"'Then, papa, I do not see what I am to do.  It is
very plain that love to God does not spring up in my
heart spontaneously; and if [as her father had told her]
it can not be excited by effort, how can I obtain it?'
"'Take care, in the first place, not to feel that, because love can not be awakened by direct effort, you are
therefore not to blame for not exercising it. Recollect
that it ought to be the spontaneous growth of your heart;
and that it is not only proves your depravity. If you
126 
OF CHIILDREN.
can be brought to feel and acknowledge this, one obsta cle in the way of your loving God will be removed. You
are unwilliug to see that he is lovely, because, if he is, you
are unlovely. But only give up the pride of your heart,
be willing to see that you are in the wrong, and you will
be prepared to acknowledge that God is in the right, and
to love him.'
"' But even this, papa, I can not do.'
"'No, not of yourself; and I was going on to tell
you how you might do it.  God says, "Let him (that is,
the sinner) take hold of my strength, that he may be at
peace with me." You will not be punished for not repenting by your own strength, but for rejecting the offered aid of the Holy Spirit. Go and fall down at the feet
of the Savior, and tell him you know he deserves your
love and gratitude; that it is the fault of your own sinful
heart that you do not love him; yet acknowledge that
you do not, and that you never shall of yourself, and beg
him to send his Spirit to aid you. Do this sincerely, and
I can promise you that you shall not come away unblessed, for the Savior saith, "Him that cometh to me I
will in no wise cast out."'
" Maria sobbed out a request that her father would
pray with her, and as he uttered in his prayer the sentiments he had just recommended her to adopt, her heart
seemed almost ready to join; yet still it hung back."
The grand difficulty still remained-she must ask
sincerely. She had been taught that she certainly
never would do this until her heart was renewed
by the Spirit of God: to pray with an unrenewed
heart was to insult God with insincere professions.
If God renewed her heart, the boon of regeneration was already given, and she could not pray for
that already bestowed.  So, on either alternative, no
available prayer was possible.
127 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
The narrative states that
"for many years Maria's history would be only a repetition of similar circumstances and conversations. All this
time she was engaged in constant efforts to recommend
herself to the favor of God, and purchase Heaven by her
own good works. There were, however, weeks, and even
months, when she appeared totally regardless of the subject. After such intervals of carelessness her impressions would return with renewed force. At such times
she was exceedingly distressed at her situation, and began to attend to religious duties, and read the Bible, and
prayed every day with great zeal so long as her impressions lasted. By degrees, however, they were effaced,
her devotions were neglected, and her goodness was as
the morinng cloud and early dew.
"Her external conduct was such as might be expected
from such a state of heart. Sometimes, for a few days,
all went on smoothly; nothing occurred to call forth the
corruptions of her heart, and she fancied they were subdued. But some unexpected temptation sufficed to put
to flight all her good resolutions, and ruin all her selfrighteous projects. Then her distress and mortification
equaled her previous security. She was irritated, impatient, desponding, and this led to new faults in conduct.
On the whole, the principal benefit she derived from all
these years of trial and disappointment was increased
knowledge of the desperate wickedness of her heart, and
a deeper conviction that, of herself, she never couldperform
one holy act."
After having secured this paralyzing conviction,
there succeeded a course of constant appeals to induce her to do what she was convinced she never
should do, of which the following is a specimen:
"'My  dear, you have a woik to perform-a work
which must be done. The longer you delay, the greater
will be the difficulty and the less your strength.'
128 
OF CHILDREN.
"To escape from this, which she knew not how to
answer, Maria proposed another question.
"' But, papa, why will it be harder to repent by-andby than now?'
"' Even if it should not be so, you are not the better
off, for you say you can not possibly repent now.  But the
truth is, you do not believe this.'
"' Do not believe it, papa?'
"'No.  If you believed it, would you be sitting here
so quietly?'
"' Why, if I could not do any thing to help myself, I
might as well be quiet as not.'
"' Might as well be quiet! yet you would not be, any
more than you would be quiet in a burning building, and
knew all efforts to escape would be useless. No, no, it is
not the nature of men who know they are to be forever
miserable to be quiet about it. Is there not a secret feeling that, after all, if you were dying you could repent.'
"'Why, yes, papa; although I think sometimes I have
tried as hard as I possibly could, yet it seems as if I might
do a little more, perhaps, if it should come to the worst.'
"' Yes, that is the way with all sinners.  In regard to
you, Maria, it is absolutely certain that the present moment is the most favorable you will ever have; and if
you do not repent now, there is no reason to hope, so far
as your efforts are concerned, that you ever will.  I pray
God my child may never have occasion to say, "The harvest is past, the summer is ended, and I am not saved."'"
The following is a part of a chapter, the aim of
which is to convince Maria that
"' the law of God requires perfect obedience always; it
requires you to love God with all your heart, and your
fellow-men as yourself, evey mnoment of your life.  It is as
impossible that a man who has committed but one sin in
his whole life should be saved by his good works, as if he
committed a million.'
F2
129 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
"It would be impossible to describe the emotions of
grief, despondency, and anger which filled Maria's heart
as she listened and became convinced that all her goodness was thrown away; that it did not give her the least
claim to the favor of God, and that, in spite of all she
could do, it would be just in him to punish her forever.
The law of God seemed to her unreasonably strict and
impossible to be observed; his character appeared hateful to her, and, since her goodness was of no use, she would
not try to be good any longer. But then came the dreadful thought of eternal misery-of dwelling with everlasting burnings. With a heart full of enmity, hatred, and
despair, she retired to bed."
The preceding is the history of Maria's experience till she was about thirteen, when the period of
her regeneration arrived.
Immediately previous the following experiences
are recorded:
"In compliance with her father's advice, she wrote a
formal resolution to make it her first object to secure the
salvation of her soul.
"In pursuance of this resolution, Maria immediately
commenced a series of religious duties to which she strictly adhered. She prayed night and morning with much
apparent fervor and many tears, read the Bible and other
religious books, prayed with her little brothers and sister,
and, in short, performed all the external duties of religion.
The watchful care of her parents had before corrected
many faults of her childhood, others were naturally abandoned as she grew older, and others still she was able to
subdue under the influence of the powerful motives now
operating. At the end of a short time her interest began to decline gradually, devotional duties became wearisome, were imperceptibly shortened, and finally omitted. She began to attend a day-school, where her atten
130 
OF CHILDREN.
tion was engrossed by her studies and companions, and
her resolutions and hopes forgotten. Still, they had not
been wholly useless. Maria gained by it new experience
of the deceitfulness of her heart, of its inconceivable depravity, of her utter inability to do any thing right of herself.
She became more distrustful of herself, and, in conversation with her father, did not, as usual, attempt self-justification.
"The next summer she read Doddridge's' Rise and
Progress' every Sunday, and, as regularly as the Sabbath returned, Maria would be full of the most pungent
distress, and during the week as careless as if she had no
soul. The Sabbath was spent in weeping, praying, and
forming resolutions; and on Monday morning she rose,
remembered she had lessons to prepare for school, learned them, went to school, and thus spent the day and week
until the next Sabbath renewed her distress.
"The following winter a new change took place in her
feelings. Her distress gave way to a conviction that she
never should be saved-a conviction which was attended with a quiet, almost sullen despair. She supposed
that the Spirit of God had forsaken her, but the thought
did not occasion distress. She listened with silence, and
without shedding tears, to all that was said to her, acknowledged its truth, at least, by her silence, but still
seemed to be without feeling.
"She saw her past services did not entitle her to the
favor of God; that they had been prompted by self-love,
and that she should never be able in any way to entitle
herself to his favor. She wondered she had never seen
this before; but it excited no tumult in her mind, no enmity against God, no desires of self-justification. By degrees, the sort of sullenness which had at first accompanied the conviction that she was lost, gave place to a feeling not less desponding, but more tender. She was not
distressed, but disconsolate, as if nothing on earth could
make her happy.
"She went thus to a meeting. The love of Christ
131 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
was the theme of her father's remarks; it was one on
which he always delighted to expatiate; but on that afternoon he was more than usually eloquent. Maria forgot herself and her despondency; she thought only of
the Savior who was thus presented to her; admiration,
love, gratitude, and penitence filled her heart.
"As soon as her father spoke to her, on going from
the house, her tears burst forth again, and she could only
tell him she was thinking of the love of Christ. This
subject occupied her thoughts continually. Instead of
complaining that she could not'make her heart love
God,' she wondered how she could help loving him. Instead of thinking herself unfortunate in not being able to
obey the commands of God, she perceived that it was entirely her own fault that she had not done so sooner.
"Maria could not but be aware of this change in her
feelings; she could not but see that they were different
at present from any she had ever experienced before;
and she began, though at first with trembling, to cherish
the delightful hope that her sins were forgiven.  This
hope was gradually strengthened, and, three months after, s]e publicly acknowledged the Lord to be her God,
and Jesus Christ her Savior."
This change was, as the father supposed, the recreation of a new heart or a new nature. Without
this remedy of the nature inflicted on this child for
Adam's sin, no prayer could be sincere, and no act
right and acceptable to God. After this change,
though the child still had faults and sins, they did
not, as before, prove, in her -father's view, the utter
depravity of heart and moral inability to please
and obey God, but only her imperfect sanctification.
132 
OF CHILDREN.
CHAPTER FOURTEENTH.
THEOLOGICAL TRAINING RESTRAINED BY COMMON
SENSE.
IN the preceding chapters we have seen a child
trained from three to thirteen in the New England
theological system, which is based on a dogma originated by theologians nearly four hundred years
after the apostles.
According to this system, the child is taught that
it has a "nature" or" heart" so dreadfully depraved
that, until it is regenerated, all feelings and actions
are sinful and offensive to God, so that even prayers to have this heart changed are hypocritical and
insulting; next, that all the blame for this rests on
the child, and not on God; next, that nothing that
the child can do has any promise or encouragement
from God to secure a remedy, but that he regenerates some and does not others, without any reasons
that man can discover, that, though this depravity
is so great that no human being ever will love and
serve God acceptably till God re-creates this depraved nature, yet the longer the child delays to do
so the more hardened in sins he becomes, and the
less likely God is to bestow this mercy.
133 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
Finally, it is taught that eternal misery in hell is
the certain consequence of living and dying without this change of nature, while acceptable prayers
for this boon are impossible, and every kind of effort from unrenewed children has no tendency to
propitiate God to bestow this gift.
At the same time, though the child is taught that
God formed Adam with a perfect nature, and has
power to give perfect minds to every infant, he will
not do it, nor will he regenerate the whole, but only
a portion of our race, all the rest being condemned
to the unutterable, hopeless miseries of an eternal
hell. Nor will he give any reasons for this dreadful state of things.
The question must arise in every mind how it
is possible that children trained under this system
can grow up light-hearted and virtuous, as is the
case-where it most extensively prevails.
One reason is, that this system is so contrary both
to common sense and the Bible that it never isfully
believed. Especially is this the case in reference to
innocent and helpless infants. It therefore is rarely the case that parents ever attempt to instruct
quite young children in the manner pursued by the
father in this case of an unusually precocious child,
as exhibited in the previous pages.
Moreover, all parents, even the most consistent
in their theological training, are forced alike by
their feelings, their common sense, and the Bible,
134 
OF CHILDREN.
to contradict their own system. Even in this work
in hand we shall find examples to illustrate this.
The one selected will show at once the amiable disposition of the child and the common-sense training of the father, and how it led him to contradict
the theological system he had enforced on his child
in the preceding chapters.
"'Well, Maria, how much is the world better for you
to-day?'
"Maria blushed, but did not reply.
"'Have you added any thing to the "heap of happiness?"'
"'I don't know, papa; I-'
"'Do you mean that you have tried to?'
"'Yes, papa; or, at least, I meant to in the morning,
but-'
"'But you found it harder than you expected?'
"' Yes, papa.'
"'But I suppose you have done something to-day for
other people. You have done some things for me; you
know you bathed my head because it ached, and read me
to sleep, and dusted my books.'
"' Oh! but, papa, I love to do any thing for you.'
"' Well, don't you love to do things for other people?'
"' Yes, papa, sometimes; but, papa, I have done some
good to-day, I believe, in helping mamma to take care
of the baby and such things, but I thought I ought not
to count them, because-'
"' Because what, my dear?'
"' Because I am obliged to do them. I mean, I should
have to do them if I did not want to, and, therefore,
there is no goodness in doing them.'
"' Very true; that is, there is not necessarily any goodness in them; but should you not like to help your mother, even if you were not obliged to?'
135 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
"  Sometimes I like it, papa, and sometimes I do notwhen I am tired, or the baby is cross, or I want to
read.'
" Well, at these times you have an opportunity to exercise self-denial. Instead of performing your work reluctantly and impatiently, wishing you were not obliged
to do it, think with yourself, " Now I have an opportunity of doing some good. I can make my mother happy
by assisting her cheerfully; I can make the baby happy
by amusing him, and can please nmy heavenly Father by
quietly and cheerfully performing the duties which lie
has allotted me."'
"' Yes, papa,' said Maria, her eyes filling with tears.
She longed to throw her arms around her father's neck
and tell him how much she loved him, and wanted to do
all that would give him pleasure. But she never found
it easy to express her feelings of affection either by words
or caresses, and she sat perfectly still, looking into the
fire, and trying to keep the tears from her eyes."
In this whole passage the father directly contradicts his theory that an unregenerated heart vitiates
every moral act. Hie speaks of making happiness
for others, practicing self-denial, and pleasing her
heavenly Father "by quietly and cheerfully performing the duties which he has allotted," as what
the child may do just as she is without a preceding
regenerating process.
The first lessons of religious training to little
children, even among the sternest theologians, usually present God as afather; one who loves them,
and is pleased when they try to do right. These
ideas are taken with the perfect faith of childhood,
while the conflicting theological system does not
-136 
OF CHILDREN.
attract their notice till the period when they begin
to reason and inquire as few children in the nursery
ever do.  It has been only at a more mature period
that this theological mode has been adopted and
vigorously enforced. Especially has this been the
case in "revival" periods, when the great aim was
to force the mind to an immediate decision. At
such times, the preceding course with this young
child was exactly the method which that class of
ministers has pursued who were deemed most successful as revival preachers.
It is interesting to trace the struggle of humanity
against this fearful dogma of a depraved nature inflicted on infants for Adam's sin.
This can be noticed chiefly in the history of the
Christian Church. Ever since the introduction of
this dogma, there has been a ceaseless conflict in regard to it; the common sense of humanity on one
side, and theological theories on the other.
Here we need to notice the meaning of the word
common sense.  There are some truths which men
believe from testimony, others from a course of rea soning, and others from the evidence of the senses.
But there is a class of truths, called the principles
of reason or common sense, which all men believe,
not from testimony, or reasoning, or the evidence
of the senses, but because the Creator has implanted
the belief of them as a constitutional part of the
mental organization.
137 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
For example, a man believes he exists, not because he is told so, nor does he reason it out, but he
believes it because his mind is so made he can not
help thus believing. So also he believes that he is
the same person to-day that he was yesterday, and
that the world around him is a reality and not a
dream. These, and many other truths, are intuitively or necessarily believed by all men who are
not insane.
This feature in the constitution of mind is sometimes called reason, as it is the foundation of all
reasoning. It is, also, often called common sense,
because it is common to all intelligent and sane
minds.
The test for distinguishing these truths from all
others is, that all sane persons talk and act as if
they believed them; and whenever they cease to
do so, are regarded as having "lost their reason."
The history of the Christian Church presents a
ceaseless conflict as to the character, condition, and
prospects of young children, resulting from a theory
as to "the origin of evil," and a theological system
founded on this theory which contradicts common
sense, and thus forces theologians to contradict
themselves.
The first Christians were the common people,
who received thefacts of Christ's religion without
attempting any philosophizing as to the mode or
reasons of these facts. That all men are sinful and
138 
OF CHILDREN.
in danger of eternal misery from sinning; that the
only way of escape is by faith in Jesus Christ, which
includes not only intellectual conviction, but a controlling purpose of obedience to his teachings; that
this faith secures pardon for past sin and the aid of
the Holy Spirit, these facts were accepted without
speculations as to the how and the why.
But when philosophers became Christians they
introduced their theories as to the "d origin of evil."'
The Gnostics taught that matter is the cause of all
evil; that Christ came to deliver us from it; and
that, as a pure and perfect being, he was not connected with a natural body, but only appeared to
have one. This introduced long conflicts as to the
nature of God and Christ.
Then came another theory as to the origin of
evil, resulting in long conflicts as to the nature of
young children. One party, led by Augustine, taught
that the origin of all the evil and sin of this world
is the fallen nature of infants consequent on Adam's
sin. The other party, led by Pelagius, denied that
the souls of infants were in any way injured in na ture by Adam's sin, and that this was not the origin
of evil.
After a long and fierce controversy, the Pope and
Emperor decided against Pelagius, and his doctrine
was driven out of the Romish Church by severe
persecution. The doctrine of the Romish Church
on this matter is set forth in the decrees of the
139 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
Council of Trent. In giving a short statement of
Catholic doctrines, the writer has consulted these
decrees in the original Latin and in Percival's translation; also the Star of Bethlehem, authorized by
Archbishop Hughes.  But in her intercourse with
intelligent Catholics, both at the East and West, she
has discovered that their theologians differ as essentially as to the true meaning of "the Church" and
"the Councils" as Protestants do as to the true
meaning of the Bible.
According to the Council of Trent, Adam was
created with a righteous and holy nature, and, by
sinning, lost it for himself and for all infants, who
thus incur not only temporal death and suffering,
"but sin, which is the death of the soul."
In consequence of this, "no one can be righteous
unless the merits of Christ are communicated."
This is done by "baptism, which restores the righteousness lost by Adam"-faith, hope, and charity
being thus infused into the soul.
This is called "grace," or "the grace of justification." It can not be secured except by baptism, so
that all infants not baptized lose eternal life. The
soul being dead before baptism, no one has power
to do works of righteousness except when "grace"
is infused.
When an adult is baptized, all his past sins are
removed, the righteousness lost by Adam is restored-faith, hope, and charity, flowing from Christ,
being infused into his soul.
140 
OF CHILDREN.
There are two kinds of sin, venial and mortal, but
the writer has not been able to find a clear definition of the distinction between the two classes.
If a baptized person commits a mortal sin, all is
lost that was gained by baptism, and his soul is
dead again, so that he can do no works of merit
that are acceptable to God. Repentance, confession to a priest, and absolution secures God's forgiveness and escape from hell, but he is still liable to church penalties and to punishment in Purgatory until God's justice is satisfied.
When any person, in a state of grace, performs
more good works than are needful for his own salvation, or inflicts on himself some suffering not required as a punishment for his own sins, it is merit
or rig7iteousness, which is laid up, and can be transferred to the account of sinners, to lessen church
penalties or the pains of Purgatory. The sufferings
of Christ were very much more than were needful
to save the whole world from hell, as the least drop
of his blood was sufficient for this.  These supera bounding merits of Christ's sufferings also avail to
save from Purgatory and church penalties, and this
treasury is given to the Pope to dispense at his dis cretion. An indulgence is the Pope's remission of
some punishment of the church or of Purgatory.
If a person, after committing a mortal sin, dies
before he is restored to grace, he goes to hell with out any chance of escape. All persons, however
141 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
good, at death go to Purgatory.  The time of their
detention depends on the number and kind of sins
committed, and also on the indulgences received
from the Pope through the merits of Christ and the
saints, or on nasses offered for their relief.
Catholic theologians hold that the above is the
system taught by Christ and his apostles, and transmitted in the New Testament or by tradition.
But in the Roman Catholic Church there have
been fierce controversies, embittered by persecution,
on the main points of man's ruined nature and preventing grace. One party has been led by the Dominicans and Jansenists, and the other by the Jesuits, and both claimed to agree with Augustine and
with the Catholic Church.
The Popes have been much perplexed in deciding the case. Clement VIII. called an assembly
of lehrned theologians, which met seventy-eight times
without settling the conflict.  Paul V. suppressed
the discussion, and decreed liberty of opinion on
these subjects.  In 1640 the work of Jansenius renewed the controversy, and a large party adopted
his views on these points. Urban VIII. condemned
them, and upheld the Jesuit side, which ever since
has prevailed, though many Jansenists have held
to their distinctive views, and still remained in the
Catholic Church.
Thus it appears from history that the theory of
infant punishment for Adam's sin was first estab
142 
OF CHILDREN.
lished by church authority in the Romish Church
amid a severe conflict, which has been perpetuated,
more or less, ever since.
Before noticing farther conflicts on this subject
in the Protestant churches, we will point out several particulars in which the Roman Catholic system conflicts with the principles of common sense.
In the first place, this system contradicts the
common-sense principle of free agency. All men
prove by words and actions that they believe they
have power to choose either that which seems best
as most agreeable to self, or that which seems best
as conformed to the rule of rectitude, demanding
the best good of all concerned. An irrational animal has power to choose only what is most agreeable to itself, without any reference to the rule of
right; but rational beings have the power to choose
either what is most agreeable to self orwhat is right.
And: this is what-is meant by free agency.
But the Catholic system teaches that children
have no power to choose right till grace is infused
at baptism. The Council of Trent distinctly decrees that, without the preventing grace communicated in baptism, "they are not able, by their own
free will, to move themselves unto righteousness."
Also, that it is "not possible for them to believe, to
love, and to repent as they ought to do, so as to receive the grace of justification, without the preventing (i. e., preceding) aid and inspiration of the Hioly
143 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
Spirit." Also, that without this preventing grace
"'their good works would in no wise be grateful to
God and meritorious."
Another principle of common sense in conflict
with the Catholic system is, that it is the motive or
intention which decides an act as meritorious, and
deserving reward, or as sinful, and deserving punishment. If a child chooses what it likes best without regard to rule, all men feel that there is no merit
or desert of reward; but if the motive or intention
is to do what is right, at whatever sacrifice, all men
feel that there is merit and desert of reward.
Here one other distinction must be recognized.
A child may choose right as it respects motive or
intention, and be mistaken as to the rule; for, in
many cases, God alone can judge what is right as
best for all concerned. An act, to be right in both
relations, must be in agreement with the rule of rectitude, and the motive or intention must also be to
act right.
It is the motives and purposes also which decide
the character of men as virtuous or wicked. If a
man's habitual purpose and aim is to act right, he is
believed to be a righteous and virtuous man; but
if he has an habitual purpose to gratify self without
regard to the rule of right, he is believed to be an
unrighteous man. This principle of common sense
is found in all men, in all ages and nations.
The Catholic system contradicts this principle in
144 
making merit or righteousness a physical thing,
which can be poured from one mind into another,
and which can be accumulated in a treasury, so as
to be divided and measured out by the Pope. So,
also, religious character on this system is decided,
not by the voluntary aims and purposes, but by the
nature or condition of the mind as transmitted from
Adam in a fallen state, or as rectified by grace.
Another principle of common sense in conflict
with Catholic theology is, that reward and punishment are just only for voluntary deeds and character.
Here we must notice that men sometimes use the
words reward and punish to signify the natural consequences of right and wrong acts; as when a child
is said to be punished by sickness for eating green
fruit, or rewarded by good health for abstaining.
But more frequently these words are used to signify
voluntary penalties and rewards in addition to the
natural ones, as when a child is whipped for eating
green fruit, or caressed for abstaining. This distinction between natural and voluntary penalties is
very important.
Of the laws of nature established at creation, we,
with our present knowledge, can not decide whether
they were instituted by God's will, or were inherent
in the eternal nature of things independently of his
will.
All must concede that there are some things independent of God's will and power. For example,
G
145
OF CHILDREN. 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
God exists, not by his own volition, but by an eternal necessity in the nature of things. God has not
power to begin to be, nor to change his past experience. All theologians grant that God can not
love selfishness and malignity, nor hate self-denying mercy and love. In regard to the laws of the
material world, how far they are inherent in the
eternal nature of things, and how far dependent on
God's will, man can not judge.
But this distinction is clear, even to the humblest capacity. The natural laws of both matter
and mind are fixed and unchangeable, so far as
we can see or reason. Nor do we judge of them
as we do of the voluntary laws of God and man,
which are designed to influence the character and
conduct of free agents. Instead of this, they seem
to'is not only as fixed principles to which all must
conform, but as what exist by a necessity of things
that no power can change.
The voluntary penalties of the laws of God and
man have this distinctive peculiarity, that their express aim is to induce free agents to act in agreement with law, either natural or statute. And they
are deemed wise and just only so far as they tena to
secure obedience to the laws of nature or to the voluntary laws of society.
With this distinction in view, we find it a principle of common sense that voluntary penalties are
just only when inflicted for voluntary acts. If a
146 
OF CHILDREN.
child eats green fruit and sickness follows, men say
it is punished for violating a natural law. Whether
this punishment is just or not is put out of the reach
of human decision. But if a child is punished for
blind'eyes by additional voluntary penalties, all
men feel that it is unjust.
Catholic theology contradicts this principle of
common sense in teaching that infants are punished
with "a fallen nature," or original sin, for an act of
our first parents in which they had no voluntary
agency. God, it is said, made a voluntary rule.
Adam and Eve disobeyed, not a law of nature, but
a voluntary precept, and for this all infants are punished by a ruined nature, from which results their
sin and suffering.
Theologians teach that if Adam and Eve had not
eaten the forbidden fruit, a holy nature would have
been transmitted to all infants; so that the ruined
nature of infants was a voluntary penalty, originating in the will of the'Creator, and not a fixed necessity in the nature of things.
This all men feel to be unjust. Yet Catholic theology teaches that it is just, and that God can do
such things, and yet be a perfectly just being.
That the constitutional traits of parents, both mental and bodily, are transmitted to their children, and
that the vices of parents often deteriorate these traits,
both for themselves and their offspring, is seen to
be a law of nature, either established by God, or ex
147 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
isting by a necessity in the nature of things. But
this is a diverse case from that of Adam and Eve;
for the command not to eat the fruit was not a law
of nature fixed for all, but a voluntary law for a
single case, and its penalty was a voluntary penalty.
Another principle of common sense in conflict
with Catholic theology is, that voluntary penalties,
in order to be just, must be inflicted on the wrongdoer, and not on the innocent.
If a parent should make it a family rule that
whenever a lie was told, or an article stolen or destroyed, some one of the family should be punished
who was innocent, all men would say such punishment was unjust; or if, in the state, laws were enacted with penalties to be inflicted on the innocent
instead of the guilty, all men would say such penalties were unjust and absurd.
The Catholic theory conflicts with this principle
in supposing a treasury of righteousness or merit
gained by penalties inflicted, not on the guilty, but
on the generous and good, thus enabling the wicked to sin and escape punishment. The principle
thus assumed is that every sin must be followed by
some voluntary penalty in addition to the natural
penalties of wrong-doing, and that it isjust that this
punishment should be inflicted on the innocent and
benevolent instead of the selfish and guilty.
This system of physical righteousness, which can
be accumulated by the penances and self-inflictions
148 
OF CHILDREN.
of the good, and then employed to remit the penalties due to the wicked, resulted in various excesses
of asceticism and penance among the generous and
conscientious, and in the abuse of papal indulgences
by the selfish and wicked. From these excesses
arose the first Protestant contest led by Luther.
This great conflict all centred around the question of justification. The question was, How is the
infant, born with a fallen nature, to become righteous or just, and how are sinful men to become
righteous? The Catholic theory is that baptism restores the child to the condition from which Adam
fell by infusing Christ's righteousness into its soul,
after which works of righteousness can be performed. In the case of adults, repentance and faith in
the teachings of the Catholic Church are required,
and then baptism makes a sinner just or righteous,
as Adam was at first.
But Luther and his followers, rejecting this, went
to another extreme, and taught that children and
adults are so ruined and corrupt in nature that they
can do no good works at all, or have any merit of
their own. The only remedy possible is to have
Christ's righteousness imputed instead of being infused.
Thus the doctrine is expressed by Luther. Speaking of the purity and righteousness of a christian,
he says, "This purity is not ours, but extraneous
purity; for the Lord Jesus Christ clothes -us with
149 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
his purity and righteousness. If you regard a
christian aside from the purity and righteousness
of Jesus Christ, as he is in himself, you would simply see, however holy he might be, no purity at all
in him; you would see him as black and ugly as
the Devil himself almost."  "God can see no sins
in us, even though we were nothing but sin. He
sees only the dear costly blood of our Lord Jesus
Christ with which we are sprinkled. Wherefore
he can not and will not see us other than were we
his beloved Son himself, full of justice, holiness, and
innocence."
Thus commenced the theory still found in the
creeds of most of the Protestant sects, by which all
men are represented as utterly incapable of any
righteousness of their own. All children can sin,
be guilty, and be justly punished for sinning. But
all Are utterly unable to have any righteousness of
their own.
On this Protestant theory, justification consists in
God's "accounting and accepting their persons as
righteous, not for any thing wrought in them or
done by them, but by imputing the obedience and
satisfaction of Christ unto them, they receiving and
resting on him and his righteousness by faith, which
faith they have, not of themselves, it is the gift of
God."  Thisfaith consists in "receiving and resting
on Christ and his righteousness," which none can
or will- do till God re-creates the depraved nature
150 
OF CHILDREN.
transmitted from Adam. [See Presbyterian Confession of Faith and Catechisms.]
It thus appears that the Protestant theory of the
ruin wrought by Adam's sin and its remedy is as
much in conflict with common sense as the Catholic.
Common sense says that righteousness is the voluntary obedience to God's laws by rational beings;
and whoever has a controlling purpose thus to obey
is a righteous person in character, although there
will always be shortcomings by the rule of perfect
obedience.
But the Catholic says that righteousness is something infused from Christ at baptism, while the Protestant says we can have no righteousness at all of
our own, only Christ's imputed to us.
Common sense teaches that faith is believing in
Christ as Lord of faith and practice, with a controlling purpose to obey him.
But the Catholic says faith is belief in the teachings of the Romish popes and councils, while the
Protestant says it is resting on Christ's righteousness, as having none of our own.
Common sense teaches that we are justified-that
is, made righteous, and treated as such, when we
believe in Christ as Lord, and maintain a controlling purpose to obey him.
But the Catholic says we are justified or made
righteous by having Christ's righteousness infused
at baptism, while the Protestant says we have none
151 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
at all, but only have Christ's righteousness imputed
when we trust to his righteousness, as having none
of our own.
Common sense teaches that the infant must be
trained to believe in Christ and obey his word in
order to besaved.
But the Catholic says infants must have their nature new created by baptism in order to salvation,
while the Protestant says infants must be regenerated by faith imparted only to " the elect."
Thus the whole system, both of Catholic and
Protestant theology, turns on the theory of infant
depravity.
The Protestants, after forsaking the Romish
Church, soon came into conflict among themselves
over this same theory of transmitted infant depravity. Having given up the doctrine of justification
by the infused righteousness of Christ imparted at
baptism, every parental heart yearned over each
new-born infant with anxious questionings, especially at the approach of death. For this reason it
was impossible entirely to root out the hope of
some mysterious efficacy in baptism. This accounts for the language used in the baptismal form
of the Episcopal Liturgy, which was arranged by
Archbishop Cranmer, with the aim of violating
popular feelings as little as possible in breaking
from the Romish Church.
Soon after, commenced the Arminian theory.
152 
OF CHILDREN.
The Episcopalians and Methodists, who are the
chief Arminian sects, in their Articles of Religion,
both of them hold that a child, owing to its fallen
nature received from Adam, "can not turn and prepare himself, by his own natural strength and good
works, to faith and calling upon Gods" yet both
sects teach, also, that Christ's death has purchased
a remedy for this, so that all children have some
power or a "gracious ability" to turn to God and
work righteousness. That is to say, God creates
them without any power to workrighteousness, and
at birth, for Christ's sake, gives them some power
to do so.*
The Calvinists, in opposition, maintained that
children are born without any kind of power to
work righteousness, and that God bestows some
power on "the elect," and that all the rest perish.
It is this which ever has been the point of conflict
between the Calvinists and Arminians.
* The following passages were sent to the writer as a correct
statement of the Arminian doctrine by a learned professor in the
chief Methodist Theological Seminary:
"In regard to the moral nature of children, the Arminian theory recognizes the fact of their fall in Adam, and their not partial,
but ample restoration in Christ."
"It would be correct to say that Arminians teach that God,
owing to the sin of Adam, creates infants without natural ability
to serve him acceptably, but that, through Christ, he gives them
ample gracious ability thus to serve him."
"The atonement is not available to any till after birth."
G2
153 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAININ'G
But the Calvinists, again, have had a conflict
among themselves on this same doctrine. The
High Calvinists, or Old School, maintain that the
child has no power of any kind to work righteousness, or even to prepare to do so, until its depraved
nature is re-created. The New School Calvinist,
on the contrary, teaches that the child, before regeneration, has full power to obey God's laws, but, owing to this transmitted depravity, never will use this
power till regenerated. This last system is illustrated in the foregoing narrative of Dr. Payson's
child. This conflict between the Old and New
School Calvinists has greatly agitated the Congregational churches, and divided the Presbyterian
Church into two distinct denominations.
The New Haven Calvinistic School is another
division, whose main peculiarity is, that there is no
sin except the voluntary act of an intelligent being.
This is regarded by all other Calvinists as the entire relinquishment of the doctrine of transmitted
infant depravity, and a return to the doctrine of
Pelagius, that infants are born free from any sin or
sinful nature.
As an illustration of these theories, a father sets
an enticing but dangerous mixture before his wife,
and tells her if she drinks of it all her children
will be blind. She takes it, and all her infants are
blind.
They are then placed in a dangerous morass, full
154 
OF CHILDREN.
of pitfalls, and their only chance of escape to their
home is by an intricate path that none can find
without sight.
The Catholic theory restores sight by baptism,
which is lost again at any great mistake in the way
home.
The Arminian theory restores some sight, but
imperfect.
The Old School Calvinist restores some sight to
elect infants.
The New School Calvinist supposes a power to
open the eyes, when the child would see; but such
a baleful stupor has been caused by the deadly potion as makes it certain that no child ever will open
its eyes.
Common sense rejects the whole thing, and says
children are born with perfect eyes, and all they
need is light and guidance from educators, and the
aid Christ affords to all who seek it.
Still farther divisions and conflicts of Protestants
may all be traced to this same dogma of transmitted infant depravity.
Thus the Baptists separated from other Calvinists on the ground that infants, being depraved in
nature and unregenerate, are not to be baptized or
admitted to Christ's church as lambs of his fold.
The Methodists separated from the Episcopal
Church when, as a state religion, it was prostituted
to irreligious ends.  To avoid these evils, they es
155 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
tablished a church of regenerated persons, from
which children and all unregenerate persons are
excluded, till church officers are satisfied that regeneration has taken place.
The conflict between Unitarians and other sects
has resulted mainly from the doctrine of transmitted infant depravity. They deny any such depravity, and consequently they deny any necessity of
the atoning sacrifice of Christ to purchase a remedy. The denial of the Trinity not improbably resulted from denying any need of Christ's intervention to purchase the regeneration of a depraved na
ture.
The conflict of the Universalists with the other
sects also resulted from this same doctrine of infant
depravity; for they hold that God, as a perfectly
benevolent being, having inflicted such a dreadful
evil.on innocent infants, insuring their sin and misery, and having full power to remedy it, will do so;
and, to prove it, they use the very passages  employed to prove infant depravity. "As by one
man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by
the obedience of one shall many be made righteous."
"As, by the offense of one, judgment came upon all
men to condemnation, even so, by the righteousness
of one, the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life."
These passages affirm that the evil done to all
men by Adam is remedied to all men by Christ;
156 
OF CHILDREN.
and if this evil is not the death of the body alone
(as the first Christians understood it), but the additional infliction of a fallen nature and all the sin
and suffering caused by it, then Christ will remedy
this evil done by Adam to all whom Adam has injured. Thus comes the doctrine of universal salvation to the whole race.
This brief outline of Church Hiistory shows that
the conflict which separated the Catholics and Protestants, and then the subsequent conflicts and divisions of the Protestants, resulted mainly from this
doctrine of transmitted infant depravity. It has
been the CONFLICT OF AGES, in which common
sense has been struggling against this theological
dogma and the systems resulting from it.
In studying the conflict of the various Christian
sects in regard to transmitted infant depravity, it
will be found that they all have done just what Dr.
Payson did in administering the New England Calvinistic system to his child. They all contradict
their own system just where this system con.adicts
common sense.  And the reason is clear.  Every
theologian necessarily believes the principles of
common sense by the very nature or structure of
his mind; and when his theological system contradicts them, he either argues on both sides, or he reasons in defense of his system, and acts in all practical
matters so as to contradict it.
Moreover, each sect, while blind to its own con
157 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
tradictions of common sense, perceives them in its
opponents. Thus the Catholic theologian will deny
that his system contradicts free agency, but charges
it on the Protestant. The Arminian Protestant denies it as to his own theology, and charges it on the
Calvinist. The Calvinist denies that his system contradicts free agency, but the New School charges it
on the Old School. And all are correct thus far;
they all hold to free agency in practical matters and
in certain portions of their creeds, and the systems
they uphold, all of them, contradict free agency.
And then the mistiness and perplexity thus caused
they call "a mystery" revealed by God, to which
our reason must submit in silence. This will be farther illustrated in succeeding pages.
We will next notice the advances that have been
made in this long struggle of theology with common. sense.
In the beginning we find Augustine writing thus:
"We are obliged to confess that the souls of the
little ones are condemned if they die unbaptized."
Andhis antagonist Julian says to Augustine, "God
himself, say you, consigns to eternal fire for an evil
will the children who, as he knows, can have neither a good nor an evil will."
It was the monstrous cruelty of thus punishing
infants for Adam's sin through all eternity in hell
fire which probably led to the theory of baptismal
regeneration, and also to the decree of the Romish
158 
OF CHILDREN.
Church that this rite is valid, so as to save the dying child, if administered by man, woman, or child
when no priest can be obtained. This was to soften
the rigor of the infliction by making it possible, at
least to every christian parent, to deliver an infant
from inherited sin and its awful penalty by a rite so
easily administered in all possible circumstances.
But at this day, in most of our largest Protestant
sects, no infants are baptized except those whose
parents profess to be regenerated; so that, in these
sects, probably a majority of infants who die are
unbaptized. What, then, are the teachings of theologians in the different sects as to the character and
future state of infants?
In the Roman Catholic sect, where the doctrine
of the transmitted ruin of infants first was established, there still is taught a penalty for Adam's
sin oil all unbaptized infants in the eternal world.
Thus we find in the Star of Bethlehem, published
with the sanction of Archbishop Hughes, of New
York, the following: " Baptism is so necessary to salvation that any person may administer it. Take
care, then, to be instructed in the manner of doing
it."  "What becomes of children who die unbaptized? It has not been revealed where they go, but
they certainly are excluded fi-om heaven."  This is
some advance on the doctrine of Augustine, that
unbaptized infants are " consigned to eternal fire"'
for Adam's sin.
159 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
In addition to this, we find that the Romish clergy, although they are bound to believe the decree
of the Council of Trent that all infants receive from
Adam, as a penalty for his sin, not only natural
death and temporal sufferings, but "sin which is
the death of the soul," and, if unbaptized, exclusion
from heaven, yet feel at liberty to explain this last
as only being deprived of the "beatific vision,"
which "consists in gazing upon God's essence," and
as consistent with their being happy. Thus, though
the principle remains of a voluntary penalty inflicted on infants for a sin they never committed, they
lessen the worst part of the penalty by an unintelligible expression; for most parents will not conceive
of it as any great loss to an infant not to "gaze upon
God's essence."
Still more, we find some of the most learned and
popu'lar ministers of that Church teaching in their
quarterlies* that the nature of infants is good, and
only good; that when Adam sinned his nature was
changed, not to an evil one, but only to a lower
grade of being, perfect of its kind and good only.
This lower nature was transmitted to infants; but,
if they are baptized, they recover the nature which
Adam lost for himself and his race.
Unbaptized infants lose the  "beatific vision,"
and, though sent to a hell, are made to suffer there
but very little, if at all.
*See Bronson's Quarterly for July, 1863.
160 
OF CHILDREN.
Moreover, hell is not a place of penal torment,
but only a world of undeveloped creatures of a
lower scale of being, but perfect in kind, and tending to endless progress in goodness and happiness.
In the Episcopal Church, many teach a mysterious spiritual influence imparted by God at baptism,
by which the fallen nature of an infant is in some
degree remedied, or a "seed" of grace implanted,
which confirmation and the Eucharist nourish till
it is developed into true piety and virtue. Yet those
who are most earnest in this doctrine never teach
that infants will lose heaven for want of these
church ordinances.
Another class, who reject the above view as involving a physical kind of virtue like that taught
by the Romish Church, hold that baptism is the rite
of admission to the Church of Christ, in which are
secured ordinances and instruction that are attended by some special influence of God's Spirit, not bestowed except in connection with this rite.
Still, these, also, never teach that an infant will
be excluded from heaven because it is not baptized.
Such regard baptism as the seal of a covenant between the parents and God. On the part of the
parents, it is a promise to train the child in the belief and practice of Christ's religion. On God's part,
it supposes a promise of the influences of the Holy
Spirit to aid both parent and child in exact proportion to their fidelity- In this view, the religious
161 
THiE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
education of a child is a gradual process of government, training, and prayer for Divine aid, with the
assurance that such aid will thus be bestowed.
But there is still another class, who hold that
Christ's death availed to purchase restoring grace
for all the race, so that infants come into life as
lambs of Christ's fold, entitled to all the privileges
of his flock, and, even when unbaptized, have power to do works pleasing and acceptable to God.
Such regard baptism as the outward sign of the
child's relationship to Christ as his child, just as
matriculation is the outward sign of membership in
a college, or as coronation is a sign or rite that does
not make a sovereign, but gives outward expression
to the fact of actual sovereignty.
It is probable that the larger portion of the clergy
of the Episcopal denomination would regard all infants as lambs of Christ's fold, even if many parents
so little regard the rite as never to have their children baptized.
But the most marked point of advance in the
Episcopal Church is the agreement of the wisest
and best of their clergy and laity to cease contention as to the theory of transmitted infant depravity
and the remedy, and unite practically in training
all children on the assumption that they are lambs
of Christ's fold, and that the "grace" needful to
their successful training for heaven will be bestowed in exact proportion to the faithfulness of parents
162 
OF CHILDREN.
and children in striving to understand and obey
the teachings of Christ.
The Episcopal local church embraces the whole
parish; for it is assumed that all the children of
the parish will be baptized, and thus recognized as
members of Christ's Church.
Every Episcopal Church offers its baptismal font
to every parent who desires for a child this sacrament. There is no division in the Episcopal Church
into parish and church, each having its own officers.
Nor does the Sunday-school consist of "the children of the church," who have been baptized, and
the children not of the church, who are unbaptized.
All children who belong to the parish or the Sunday-school are received and treated as lambs of
Christ's fold.
In the Methodist denomination will be found a
recent'and very remarkable development in throwing off the doctrine of infant depravity.
According to their creed, children by nature have
no power to "do good works pleasant and acceptable to God without preventing grace." Children
also, by their rules and practice, are excluded from
the local church until they give satisfactory evidenc. of regeneration.
But, recently, their leading theologians and periodicals are teaching thus: "Children belong to the
kingdom of God as legitimate heirs and subjects,
and if so, according to the universal law of that
163 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
kingdom, it is because they are made fit for it;
and both the fitness and the consequent membership are the free gift and fruit of redeeming love.
That children are in a state of grace, in favor with
God through the atonement, is incontestibly taught
in Scripture.
"That the fruit of the atonement, as conveyed to
them, is not a mere negative justification, not a mere
acquittal from liability to punishment, but a positive
moral good, a principle of spiritual life, is equally
clear.
"This is not the fruit of baptism by any order of
God, as the Church of England authors have erroneously assumed, but is by the direct grace of God
in Christ. It is prior to baptism and the moral
ground of fitness on which the baptism of children
rests. And this grace, emanating directly from
Christ to the infant, is not conditioned on its dying
in infancy (this is a mere invention of theologians),
but comes to all, without distinction, who are involved in the consequences of Adam's fall."
"The idea that the Church is made up only of
believers is as rational and scriptural as that a family or commonwealth is made up only of adults. It
is not the personal act of faith, apart and by itself,
that is to be considered, but the spiritual relation to
Christ. If an infant without faith can belong to
Christ, who is the Head, an infant without faith can
belong to the Church, which is the bodv or community."
164 
OF CHILDREN.
According to this view, all infants have "a principle of spiritual life," that is, "the fruit of the atonement," which makes them "legitimate heirs and
subjects of the kingdom of heaven." This is "the
moral ground of fitness on which baptism rests."
This being so, the whole human race, when infants, are fitted for the kingdom of heaven, and entitled to be members of Christ's Church; and the
present Puritan mode of organizing the local Methodist Church, which shuts out all children till they
give evidence of regeneration, can not long be maintained. Soon, in that large and useful denomination, the lambs of Christ will be taken into his fold,
and never turned out till they prove the loss of
their "moral fitness."
The great advance of these Arminian theologians
on former opinions will be still more evident by
comparing the preceding extracts with the following, taken from the writings of Arminius himself:
"Adam, by sinning, corrupted himself and all his posterity, and so made them obnoxious to God's wrath.  Infants have rejected the grace of the Gospel in their parents, by which act they deserve to be deserted by God;
for there..is a permanent principle in the covenant of
God that children should be comprehended and adjudged
in their parents." " For I would like to have proof adduced how all posterity could sin in Adam against law,
and yet infants, to whom the Gospel is offered in theirparents and rejected, have not sinned against the grace
of the Gospel."
It is probable that there is now not a minister or
165 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
layman in those denominations that bear the name
of Arminian who would not reject the above as
false and absurd.
In the Congregational and Presbyterian denominations, in which the Calvinistic system prevails,
the advance on this subject can be discerned in private conversation with individuals who stand high
as leaders of opinion, rather than in theological
schools and periodicals.
The Confessions of Faith in both these large sects
still allow the implication that, on account of Adam's
sin, none but the "elect infants" escape a miserable
eternity in hell. But the writer has never seen or
heard of an individual in either of those denominations who believed so monstrous a doctrine.
About ten years ago was published "The Conflict
of Ages,"* which had a large sale, and was read by
more laymen than any other strictly theological
work ever issued from the American press.
In this work, the author, while still maintaining
the depraved nature of the infant soul, insisted that
there are implanted principles of honor and right in
all mankind; and that, according to these principles, all attempts of theologians to justify God for
causing a depraved nature to be transmitted to infants for Adam's sin are failures.
The chief aim of the work is to show that, infant
* "The Conflict of Ages, by Edward Beecher, D.D."  Crosby
& Nichols, Boston.
166 
OF CHILDREN.
depravity being true, the doctrine of a pre-existent
state, in which, after God had created every human
soul perfect, each one ruined his own nature by sinning, and that this world is a place of probation
designed to restore ruined minds to their original
perfection of nature, is the only theory ever invented
which does not implicate the Creator as violating
the principles of honor and right.
The same- author also maintains that the doctrine
of transmitted infant depravity for Adam's sin is not
taught in Romans v., the chief passage used to prove
it, and that during the first three centuries it was
never so interpreted in the Christian churches.
He also maintains that there is no other passage
in the Bible which teaches transmitted infant depravity for Adam's sin.
This work was criticised in the leading religious
periodicals of all the largest denominations, and in
not a single instance was the fact questioned that
Romans v. was never interpreted during the first
three centuries to teach transmitted infant depravity as the penalty for Adam's sin.  Nor was the
author's argument to prove that the only penalty
for Adam's sin taught in that chapter is natural
death, and not a transmitted, ruined nature, ever controverted.
It was this work of her brother, and its treatment
by theologians, which first settled the conviction in
the mind of the writer that the doctrine of any in
167 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
fant depravity, either transmitted by God's constitutional arrangement, or originated in a pre-existent state, is not taught either by reason or in the
Bible.
With this also came the conviction that the existence of a universal depravity of all infant minds,
as the cause of all sin and suffering, would destroy
all possibility of proving a benevolent Creator, or
of reliable revelations from him.
Under this conviction, the writer published a volume entitled Common k&nse applied to Religon; or,
The Bible and the People. In this work the principles of common sense were defined and illustrated,
and also the test by which they can be identified.
These principles were then employed to prove that
all infant minds are perfect in constitutional powers, and enter this life as God made them, and not
depraved in nature.
A second volume followed, entitled An Appeal to
the People,* in which these same principles of common sense were employed to educe the system of
natural religon, hereafter to be shown coincident
with that of the Bible as interpreted by the same
principles of common sense.
The argument of the APPEAL TO THE PEOPLE is
based entirely on the perfect constitution or nature
of the infant mind; and in it, it is asserted that the
* "An Appeal to the People in behalf of their Rights as the authorized Interpreters of the Bible." Harper & Brothers, New York.
168 
OF CHILDREN.
existence of universal infant depravity as the cause
of sin and suffering, would destroy all possibility
of proving a benevolent Creator, or of any reiable
revelations from him.
For the grand difficulty on all theological theories is this: Whatever the supposed depravity of
nature is, all theologians who teach it agree that it
is the cause of human sin and misery, and that God
has power to prevent and to remedy it.
Now our only idea of a malignant being is that,
having power to will virtue and happiness, he does
not, but allows sin and misery instead.
The mode of doing this is not the difficulty, but
the fact; all infants, on this theory, come into this
life with a depraved nature, when their Creator has
power to create them perfect, and thus to save them
from the sin and misery consequent on a ruined
nature. *'On their theory, God proves himself by
his works to be a malevolent being, from whom no
reliable revelation is possible.
This is the fatal difficulty of every system having
the depravity of infants as a part.
The theory of a pre-existent state, in the Conflict
ofAges, does not escape, for it starts with an assumption without proof, that God can create minds with
a nature tending to holiness and not to sin, and
that, having power to do this, and also to re-create
every infant mind, thus preventing resulting sin and
misery, he wills not to do so. This proves him a
H
169 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
malignant being, from whom no reliable revelation
is possible.
No attempt has yet been made by any theologian, of any sect or school, to meet the arguments of
these two volumes; not because, as some editors
claim, these arguments have already been met, for
this attempt of the writer is entirely original, no
other of the kind being extant in the English language, nor in any other, so far as the writer can
discover. Neither was it because these works were
not extensively known and read, for they were noticed in most of the leading periodicals, both secular
and religious; while the one paper most extensively read commended the first work as "a remarkable
specimen of intellectual masonry," and great curiosity was expressed by this and other periodicals as
to how theologians would treat the argument.
The result has been that every theologian, in regard to the argument, has yielded a respectful silence.
Some minor matters have been criticised, but to
controvert the argument has never been attempted
in a single case known to the writer.
It is this implied acknowledgment that has convinced others besides the writer that the doctrine
of transmitted infant depravity is not taught either
by reason or by the Bible.
The character of the persons to whose notice
these volumes have been presented, in public and
in private, forbids the idea that, either as gentlemen
170 
OF CHILDREN.
or as Christians, they would leave such arguments
unanswered if it were in their power to point out
fallacies in a course of reasoning which removes
the very foundation of the theological system they
are upholding.
But great changes in systems, and in habits of
thought and reasoning connected with them, are always slow; nor does silence, in such a case as this,
in any way implicate the intelligence or motives
of the persons to whom reference is made. It is
often the case that men perceive great difficulties in
the system they are defending, and yet do not publicly relinquish it, because they have not yet found
another which they are ready to offer in its place.
Add to this many practical embarrassments that
interfere with any sudden or open changes in theological systems long imbedded in the public mind
and connected with established church organizations.
On the other hand, the slow but steadily upward
progress of humanity, the strong instincts of personal interests and of parental tenderness, all combining with common sense and the Bible, are slowly but surely driving away the cruel dogmas of
past ages, which have shrouded the teachings of
Christ in mystery and gloom.
The grand question, now to be settled as a practical one by every educator, minister, and parent, is
briefly this:
171 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
When our Lord and Savior took infants in his
arms, blessed them, and said, "Suffer the little children to come unto me, for of such is the kingdom of
heaven," did he intend us to understand that all
children have such fallen and ruined minds that
they never do good works pleasing and acceptable
to God till their nature is changed by baptism, or
by a supernatural new -creation wrought only on
elect infants? Or did he intend to teach us that
every infant can be trained, by right instruction, example, prayers, and the aid of his ever-ready Spirit,
to christian life and eternal safety? And did he
intend us to understand that all children are to be
taken into his church as lambs of his fold, or are
they to be kept out till they can prove to church
officers that their nature is changed from that of a
young wolf to that of a lamb?
172 
OF CHILDREN.
CHAPTER FIFTEENTH.
THE BIBLE ON INFANT CHARACTER AND PROS                    PECTS.
THE grand difficulty in relieving parents and
teachers from the system of theological training
which has been exhibited in previous chapters is,
that there are a few passages in the Bible which
have been so long employed as proof-texts to establish it, and thus incorporated into religious literature and the popular mind, that to question the
theological system seems like disputing the Bible.
This difficulty is relieved by noticing again the
distinction betweenfacts revealed in the Bible and
the theories contrived by men to explain these facts.
We may give up these theories, and have none at
all, or we may adopt other theories, and still hold
the revealed facts.
In attempting to gain the teachings of the Bible
on infant character, these preliminaries will be assumed as conceded.
Firstly, that our English version is sufficiently
correct for all the practical wants of the common
people, and that this is the standard to settle the
question.
173 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
Secondly, that the words used are to have the
common ordinary meaning.
The whole question turns on the words death,
justify, and faith, each of these words having two
meanings. Thus the word death signifies the death
of the body only, and also "to be carnally minded," which is death to the soul, or spiritual death.
The word justify, in its literal sense, means to make
righteous; in its secondary sense it signifies to regard or treat as righteous. The expression having
faith, in its primary sense, means believing in or
trusting in the claims of any person; in its wider
sense it means not only intellectual conviction, but
practical obedience to the teachings of that person.
The first is a "dead," and the second a "living
faith."
All men know by experience that breaking just
rules in the family causes anger and a desire to
punish.  All men perceive that a just ruler is angry when his laws are broken, and that punishment
is the only way to sustain human laws.
As soon, then, as men are led to believe in a God
who is both good and just, comes the anxious inquiries, "How shall man be just [righteous] with
God? How can a good and just God love sinners,
and how can he pardon for past sin without destroying law? And how can man, with all his bad
habits, his ignorance, and his guilt, ever be made
righteous in character and conduct?"
174 
OF CHILDREN.
In the Bible we are taught that Jesus Christ, by
his example, his teachings, his death, and his resurrection, has overcome all difficulties, so that now
God can be just, and yet love such sinful beings as
we are, even as a tender parent loves an erring child.
His heart and home are still open, just as much as
if we had not sinned; and, owing to what Christ has
done and suffered, nothing is needful for acceptance
as righteous but to repent of the past and begin a
life of obedience. In respect to God's feelings toward our whole race, his tender love for us, and his
readiness to receive us without punishment, we are
just as if we had not sinned at all. In this respect
the whole race is justified.
This is illustrated in the parable where an earthly parent, when he saw the repentant prodigal a
great way off, ran to meet him with an overflowing
love, even more tender than was felt toward the
son who had never been in such sin and suffering.
So the angels in heaven rejoice. So, in the parable
of the Good Shepherd, he rejoices more over the lost
one restored than over the ninety and nine that
went not astray.
The grand aim of all this is to teach the most
guilty and despairing that a pure and just God loves
them even as sinners, will receive them tenderly,
and pardon all their past sin when repented of and
forsaken. The Gospel says, only return to your
heavenly Father, and become obedient children, and
175 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
all your past sinfulness shall be forgiven, and you
shall be received as if you had never sinned. And
this can be done, and yet God be just, owing to
Christ's atoning sacrifice.
Moreover, the obedience demanded as the indispensable element of justifying faith is not perfect
obedience, but only the abiding, controlling purpose
to obey, which will frequently be attended by failures and shortcomings. For none but God can decide, in all cases, what is right as best for all concerned. Man will often fail to do right from mistakes, ignorance, and forgetfulness, even when his
great desire and purpose is to obey in all things.
But the Gospel brings comfort for this also. It
says: "Do not be discouraged by failures in duty;
repent, and go forward again in your purpose and
efforts to obey, and all the past is forgiven, and you
are accounted as dear and obedient children, and
all for Christ's sake." What he has done and suffered enables God to be just, and yet thus to justify,
or love and accept as just persons, all who believe
in and strive to obey his dear Son.
This, it will be noticed, is not the Catholic theory,
that a man is made righteous by Christ's righteousness flowing into him; nor is it the theory of Luther, that man can have no righteousness at all, but
only have Christ's righteousness "imputed" to him.
It is the common-sense doctrine that a weak,
ignorant, and sinful child is loved in spite of his
176 
OF CHILDREN.
faults; and when he is trying earnestly to do right,
his failures are forgiven, and he is accepted as a dear
child; and all he does that really is right is so valued and received as a precious offering.
What really is good as to motive and act is accepted as our righteousness, and we are to be rewarded for it. What is deficient or wrong is for.
given for Christ's sake, as soon as it is confessed
and repented of, with a sincere purpose to avoid the
sin in future.
We will now examine the Epistle to the Romans
with reference to the celebrated passage from which
originated the theory of transmitted depravity for
Adam's sin.
In the first chapters of this epistle we find it
taught that both Jews and Gentiles know enough
of God and his laws to deserve punishment for disobedience to known law; and that no one, not even
Abraham, can be regarded and treated as righteous
(justified) on the ground of sinless obedience to all
the laws of God, natural and revealed.
Then follows the Gospel plan of salvation, both
from sin and its punishment, through the atoning
sacrifice of Jesus Christ and by faith in him. The
first part of chapter v. exhibits some of the benefits
to those justified by faith; then, at verse 12, comes
the celebrated passage in which Adam and Christ
are compared.
In much of what precedes this passage the apos                       H 2
177 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
tle has reference to those who are justified in the
widest sense, being believers. But this comparison
has relation to the whole race.
Christ, in a certain respect, has caused the whole
race to be regarded and treated as if they were not
sinners, just as Adam, by introducing sin and consequent temporal death, caused all, even infants,
who have not sinned against known law, to be
treated as if sinners.
To a world of perfect beings just beginning existence, the direction would be, obey the laws of
your Creator and be forever happy.
To all our race, after they are sinful, the same
offer is made, and thus they are treated as if righteous. To them it is said, begin to obey the laws
of your Creator, and you are as if you had never
sinned. All that is required for your eternal happinoss is that you have a controlling purpose to
obey the laws of Christ your Lord and Creator, and
then all your past and your future shortcomings
are as if they had never been.
It is as if a family were relieved from a bill of
attainder; their privileges are restored, and all they
have to do is to receive the gift. Thus it is with
mankind. They are relieved from the necessity of
being punished for past sins whenever they choose
to accept the gift by repentance.
In the most limited sense of justify, the whole
race are justified by Christ's mediation. In a more
178 
OF CHILDREN.
extended sense, those who have true faith are justified; they not only have the bill of attainder removed, but they have accepted the terms, so as to
receive the gift of their paternal home and privileges.
Moreover, it is taught that Christ's mediation not
only saves from the penalties of past sins, but is the
real influencing cause of that righteousness of character and conduct which eventually will secure eternal life to all who have true faith in Christ. His
character, example, teachings, and the motives he
has revealed, secure that love and gratitude which
lead to final perfect obedience. In this sense Christ
makes those who believe in him righteous in character.
In this, which may be termed the common sense
interpretation, it will be seen that Christ does more
good to all men than Adam did evil to all.
But in the interpretations given by both Catholic and Protestant theologians the passage is made
self-contradictory.
According to both, an awful evil by Adam was
done to all men; the good done by Christ was only
to the very small part regenerated.
Thus, in exact contradiction to the text, Adam
did far more evil to the race than Christ has done
good.
The reader now is requested to take this passage
(Romans, v., 12, to the end), and notice the facts
179 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
stated, and also to observe that there are no theories
to explain or account for these facts.
Thus verse 12 states the fact that sin entered by
one man, and death by sin. But whether Adam
caused sin and death simply as any father, in causing the existence of a family, causes all the events
that are consequent, we are not told. The how is
not explained. Theologians have invented the theory of a transmitted depraved nature, which has no
warrant in this or any other part of the Bible.
Verse 13 states that sin entered before revealed
law, but that it is not imputed to those who sin
against unknown law.
Verse 14 states that the consequences of sin come
on all, even infants who have not sinned as Adam
did against known law.
Verse 15 states that the good done by Christ exceeds the evil done by Adam.
Verse 16 states that the evil was by one offense,
but the good done is a remedy for many offenses.
Verse 17 states that by one man's offense death
(temporal) reigned over all men, and that much
more good comes by Christ, especially to those who
receive the gift provided for all.
Verse 18 re-states the fact that by the offense of
one condemnation to death [temporal] came on all
men, and that justification unto life came upon all
men.
Verse 19 states that many were macde sinners by
180 
OF CHILDREN.
one man's offense, and that many shall be made
righteous by the obedience of one. But it does not
state how they were made so.
Verse 20 states that grace has done more good
than the offense did evil.
Vqrse 21 states that as sin reigns causing death,
grace reigns causing righteousness and eternal life.
The reader will now judge whether the death
spoken of in this passage is to be interpreted as
what the common people mean by this word-that
is, death of the body, or, as theologians teach, (i.e.)
death of the soul by a change in Adam's constitution of mind transmitted to all infants, to be partially remedied only by re-creation at baptism or
by elective grace.
In presenting this interpretation of this famous
passage, the writer aims not to establish a new philosophy to account for man's sinful character, but
to escape the pernicious one established by theologians of past ages. The Bible gives no philosophy
at all on this point, but simply states the facts of
man's universal sinfulness, and the full remedy offered for it by Christ's life, teaching, death, resurrection, and the gift of the Holy Spirit.  This is all
that the writer deems important. But if men, in
order to the giving up an old theory, must have
some other, here is one that does not violate Scripture, and that does not oppose the moral sense and
common sense of all men as does the one now
taught by theologians.
181 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
In the Conflict of Ages, p. 372, it is stated that
for four centuries after Christ, the Greek Church
interpreted the death introduced by Adam to be
only the death of the body, and not a depraved nature. Also that, before Augustine and Tertullian,
this was the view of the Latin Church. Irenoeus,
the great opposer of heretics, so interpreted this
passage. In favor of this view the Greek fathers
are uniform. Muenscher gives passages in proof
of this from Justin Martyr, Athenagoras, Tatian,
Theophilus Antiochus, Clemens Alexandrinus, Origen, Athanasius, Chrysostom, Cyril Hierosol., Titus
of Bostra, Basil the Great, Gregory Nazianzen, Gregory Nyssenus, Nemesius, and Epiphanius.
This statement has never been disputed; and
thus it appears that the earliest Greek fathers, who
best understood their own language, in which this
passage was first written, never have sanctioned the
interpretation of theologians.
The following, from Neander's History, shows
that this theological theory very probably started
from a mistake in translating this passage in Romans v. into Latin. He says:
"In considering the scheme of doctrine which
prevailed among the Latins, it is important to notice that in their ancient translation of the New
Testament (the Vulgate), the words in Romans, v.,
12, correctly translated in the English Bible'for
that all have sinned,' was incorrectly rendered in
182 
OF CHILDREN.
the Vulgate'in quo peccaverunt,' (i.e.)'i n whom
all have sinned.' This furnished some apparent
ground for the representation that all mankind sinned in Adam, as taught by Augustine, and adopted
by the Romish Church."
The question is not whether all men are depraved
in character and conduct. This all agree in. The
dispute is in regard solely to the cause of this depravity-whether it is caused by a depraved constitution of the mind or by something else. Theologians teach that it is caused by a disordered mental constitution. In denying this theory we do not
deny depravity of man, and we are not required to
point out the causes of it. But if this is insisted
upon (as it usually is), then there is another mode
of accounting for it which does not implicate God
as a being who prefers sin and misery to virtue and
happiness.
One of the most important principles of common
sense is that nothing is to be practically assumed as
true without evidence. Any man who sent his ships
or wares where there was no evidence that he could
find a market would be deemed insane.
But in supporting a theological theory resting
mainly on a false interpretation of Rom. v., its defenders have been obliged to assume several very
important facts without any evidence, and thus to
contradict common sense.
One assumption is that God can and has created
183 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
the minds of angels and our first parents on a more
perfect pattern than that of infants. No proof of
this can be found in the Bible or out of it.
Another assumption without proof is that the infliction of pain and death on infants is evidence of
their ill desert. This is not so, inasmuch as Christ
suffered pain and death, though perfect in all respects.
Another assumption without proof is that God
never did or can suffer. We have no knowledge
of God's nature on this point but from analogy and
from revelation. Analogy teaches that God's mind
is like our own, with susceptibilities of suffering
such as we have. The Bible uses every form of
language to assure us that God suffers with and for
his creatures. In the face of this evidence, and without any proof, theologians teach that God never has
suffered.
If God is a sympathizing and "long-suffering"
being, the susceptibilities of suffering are a part of
his eternal nature which he did not cause. And all
created in his image must have the same. Christ,
the only perfect being who dwelt on earth, had
these susceptibilities, and "was made perfect by
suffering."
Liability to suffer, then, is a part of the eternal
nature of God, and all free agents in this respect
are made ill his image.
In the preceding we have given an analysis of
184 
OF CHILDREN.
Paul's teachings in an epistle of which the chief
aim is to set forth the Gospel, or good news that
he was called to preach to the Gentiles. The following is added for the purpose of settling the
question as to what the words "righteousness" and
"the righteous" mean, as used in the Bible.
The revelations of God are made in the language
of common life, and words mean what the people
understand them to signify when they use them.
Right, in its widest sense in common use, means according to some rule for securing any design.
God's design in creating his vast family is to secure their highest happiness or best good. To accomplish this, all his children must obey the grand
law that each shall choose what is best for all concerned, instead of what each one desires most for
self. And, in forming this estimate, the interests
of eternity are to be regarded of first account. None
but the Infinite mind can judge on this infinite scale.
And so man needs a revelation from God of the
rules of right action.  These rules are to be accepted with a practical faith (i.e.), a controlling purpose of obedience.
While the Bible contains the chief rules of right
action, many specific rules can be gained only by
experience, and by a correct application of the revealed laws of God to specific cases. For example:
when God commands honesty, man has still to decide in multitudes of varying cases what action is
185 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
honest; and the correctness of such decisions depends on the mental development, experience, and
correct reasoning of our race as it advances in
knowledge and civilization.
This being so, all men in all ages will continually misjudge as to what is right, even where there
is a full purpose of obedience to all God's laws.
"The righteous," then, in the Bible use of the
term, are not those who are perfectly obedient to all
God's laws, for none are and none can be. But
those are counted righteous who maintain a controlling purpose of obedience to the laws of the Creator.
And, on account of what Christ has done and suffered, God can be just in justifying those who are
sinners by transgression of law, but righteous as possessing this controlling purpose of obedience.
Besides the difficulty as to how God can be just,
and'save from punishment for past sin, Paul discusses another difficulty.  We  all perceive thefact
that children are born with diverse mental constitutions, and some of them apparently much better
than others, while these peculiarities are transmitted from parent to child. Thus some have a nature
or constitution in which conscience seems to predominate, while a desire to please others, or to make
others happy, is small.  Others have the benevolent impulse very strong, but have little conscience
in regulating it. Some have the sense of justice
very strong, with little of the element of mercy;
186 
OF CHILDREN.
while others are tender and merciful, and have little of the element of justice. Some also are very
high in intellectual gifts, and some are very low.
Why-some are formed so much superior to others St. Paul in part informs us when he teaches
that we all are designed to be parts of "one glorious body," each one so perfectly benevolent as to
rejoice in the gifts of another as much as if they
were his own; that the best good of this great body
demands that there should be diversities of grades,
a foot as well as a head, and that all the humbler
parts rejoice in the glory and honor given to the
higher, and are equally benefited as parts of the
great whole.
In this epistle the apostle recognizes the fact that
some, also, are placed by God in more favorable
circumstances than others, as was Jacob and his descendantsin comparison with Esau and his descendants; and that this arrangement of advantages is
made on principles which are not revealed to us,
and so are "a mystery," to which we must all bow
in humble trust in the Great Creator, who declares
that he is not willing that any should perish, and
that he is doing all things in perfect wisdom, and
love, and mercy.
The mistake made in the theological system
based on a depraved nature inherited from Adam
is, that these manifest diversities in mental constitution transmitted from parent to child, which all
187 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
may be good if properly developed and controlled
as parts of a great system of social and intelligent
beings, are confounded with a supposed depraved
nature, in which all infants are alike, instead of being different from each other.
According to the theological dogma, all children
are just alike in a depraved nature transmitted from
Adam, preventing them from loving and serving
God acceptably till it is re-created.
And theologians fail in not noting the difference
between diversities of constitutional endowments,
all of which are good when regulated aright, and a
uniformity of nature in all so bad that it can not be
regulated aright, but must be changed in order to
right action.
One other point will give light on this subject.
Theologians have decided that "concupiscence (i.e.,
desire) is of the nature of sin." This is a fundamental mistake; for the higher and nobler a mind
is, the more strong desires and impulses it has to
control; and the sinning of such a mind is not in
having the strong desires, but in failing to control
them aright. Stupid and phlegmatic persons have
not half the temptations of desire that agitate those
of noble intellect, quick perceptions, and vivid imagination; and, as a general rule, it may be stated
that the nobler are the natural endowments of a
person the more "concupiscence" exists to be controlled.
188 
OF CHILDRETN.
The Lord of Glory, when he put himself in the
condition of a man, in that hour of agony when the
powers of darkness were allowed to bewilder and
affright, prayed earnestly, and, as it were, with great
drops of blood,
"0 my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from
me; nevertheless, not my will, but thine be done."
Here was the perfect man and the Almighty Creator earnestly desiring to escape suffering, and yet
choosing to undergo it, if necessary to that great
good of his creatures which he came to accomplish.
This is the sublime proof that a perfect mind may
desire what it would not be right to choose, and
that the height of virtue is to choose, not what we
most desire for self, but what the Omniscient Mind
sees to be best for all concerned, often involving the
greatest self-sacrifice.
We now notice the texts in which the word nature is used in reference to sinful character. Before referring to them, we need to mark the meaning which mankind give this word in common use.
The nature of a thing, as understood by the common people, as well as philosophers, signifies the
powers created by God which are the cause or reason of its qualities or actions. Thus the power
which the eye has to see is created by God, and
this is the cause or reason why the eye sees. This
power to see is the nature which God created.
But the eye has no power to see when it is in
189 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
darkness, though it has the power of seeing given
by construction. The constitutional power of seeing is given by God in creating the eye, while the
power of seeing by having light may be given or
withheld by man as well as by God. Thus it is the
nature of the eye to see when there is light, and not
to see when there is no light. This illustrates the
two modes in which the word nature may be used
in reference to the infant mind.
The question is, are young children so made that
the cause or reason of their sinning is that their
minds are depraved in constitution, or do they sin
for want of proper development, training, and advantages? Is the mind made wrong, as an eye
would be when it could not see, light being present; or is it perfectly made, and does not act right
forwant of the light of knowledge and appropriate
training?
Men also use the word nature sometimes to include all circumstances and events, as well as the
constitution of things.  Thus we say that any thing
acts according to its nature when it acts as it usually
does according to past observation and experience.
If, according to universal experience, all children
sin, we say it is the nature of children to sin, or they
have a sinful nature —a nature that insures sin.
But such language does not decide the question
whether this universal sinfulness in children is owing to a wrong constitution of their minds, or to
190 
OF CHILDREN.
their want of knowledge, development, and training.
We now are ready to examine the only two texts
in which the word nature is used in reference to
men as sinners. The first is this:
"For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do
by nature the things contained in the law, these, having
not the law, are a law unto themselves: which show the
work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience
also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while
accusing or else excusing one another."-Romans, ii.,
14, 15.
This, it is plain, refers to the constitution of the
mind as made by God. And here it is said that
"the Gentiles do by nature" the things required by
law - "the work of the law is written in their
hearts." Surely this is not a text that can be employed to prove that the minds of young children
are made'wrong as to constitution, but rather the
contrary; for it says the Gentiles, as heathen, by
nature obey God's law, and that it is written in
their hearts.
The only remaining text in which the word nature is used in reference to the sinfulness of man is
Ephesians, ii., 3: "And were by nature children
of wrath, even as others."
Here the second use of the word nature is appropriate. The apostle says that those he addressed
were all living in that course of sinning which is
according to the common experience of man, as all
191 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
men naturally do when they have not the light of
the Gospel. This text shows that, according to the
nature of things, as the world is and ever has been,
men sin; but it does not teach that the reason or
cause of this sin is that their minds are made wrong,
but rather that it is for want of "the light of the
knowledge of the glory of God as it is revealed in
Jesus Christ."
One other text is usually quoted to prove a depraved nature transmitted from Adam, viz.:
"Lie not one to another, seeing that ye have put off
the old man with his deeds, and have put on the new
man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of
him that created him."-Colossians, iii., 9, 10.
Alford, a Greek scholar and commentator of the
highest reputation, thus translates and explains this
text: "Lie not toward one another, having put off
the old man with his deeds, and having put on
the new, who is continually being renewed toward
perfect knowledge, according to the image of him
that created him" (i.e.), being renewed, not by full
knowledge, but toward it, so as eventually to attain
a full acquaintance with the Divine will, the result
being the image of God in man.
Hie adds this emphatic condemnation of the common theological use of this text:
"New creation of the spirit unto fullness of
knowledge and truth, the highest form of which
would be the perfect knowledge of God, is regarded
192 
OF CHILDREN.
by the apostle as analogous to man's first creation.
As he was then made in the image of God naturally, so now spiritually. Restoring the image of God
as in the first creation is an idea foreign to Scripture.
It is not to restore the old, but to create the new,
that redemption has been brought about. Whatever may have been God's image in which the first
Adam was created, it is certain that the image of
God in which Christ's Spirit re-creates us, will be as
much more glorious than that, as the second man is
more glorious than the first."
In this text, the mode in which men are new created is expressly stated: they are "continually being renewed toward perfect knowledge," the final result being the image of God; that is, we are to be
spiritually re-created by knowledge of God and his
will, not by a physical reconstruction of our minds,
making us like Adam when he was first created.
Alford says that this last idea of restoring God's
image as it was at first in Adam, which is now the
common theological one attached to this text, "is
an idea foreign to Scripture."
We are now led to inquire what Bible proof
there is that Adam, or the angels, or any finite
minds were created with any better minds or with
any different minds from those of infants.
As it respects the angels, only two texts are employed to prove that they were created with diverse
minds from infants. These are:
I
193 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
"And the angels which kept not their first estate, but
left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting
chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great
day."-Jude 6.
"For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but
cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of
darkness, to be reserved unto judgment."-2 Peter, ii., 4.
The application of these texts to this question all
depends on the word "sinned.",
In the Bible "sin" is used in three senses. In
the first it signifies transgression of law, either known
or unknown; in the second it signifies transgression of known law; and in the third it means a habit
of sinning, or a sinful character. It is in the first
use that it is said,
"If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves."
-1 John, i., 8.
It is in the third sense that it is said,
"Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; he
can not sin, because he is born of God."-1 John, iii., 9.
Now the question is, did the "holy" angels never
sin in the first sense?  "Holy men of old" all sinned in that sense, and yet they are called holy as
much as the holy angels. There is nothing that
requires us to give the first sense to the word "sinned." There is nothing that forbids us to give the
third sense.
The argument of analogy would lead us to suppose that God may have created all angels with
just such minds as infants, and that, after ages of
194 
OF CHILDREN.
training, the result was the same as in the human
race (i.e.), two classes, the holy angels and the sinful
angels; just as the Bible speaks of holy men and
sinners.  Let the word "sinned" have the third
sense, and all that these texts teach is simply the
facts that there is a class of holy angels as there is
of holy men, and another class of sinful angels who
have not "kept their first habitation," but are "cast
down to hell," just as the Bible says sinful men
will be.
This being so, the assumption that the angels were
created with any better nature than that of infants
is without any evidence, while the evidence of analogy is against it.
The evidence offered that Adam's nature was
created better or in any way diverse from that of
his descendants is the following:
"And God said, Let us make man in our image, after
our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish
of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing
that creepeth upon the earth. So God created man in
his own image, in the image of God created he him; male
and female created he them."-Genesis, i., 26, 27.
"Lo, this only have I found, that God hath made man
upright; but they have sought out many inventions."Ecclesiastes, vii., 29.
That Adam was made in God's image signifies
that his constitutional powers and faculties were
like those of his Maker, so that all that was needful
195 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
to perfect virtue and holiness was the right use of
these faculties.
The short history of Adam and Eve in Genesis
gives no evidence of any superiority to their posterity, in character or conduct, resulting from a supposed holy nature.
If any infant boy and girl, placed in a genial
clime and safe garden, should grow to adults, and
become parents, their history, probably, would be
a reproduction of that of our first parents. The
first intellectual effort stated is the ordinary one of
young children in trying to give names to the animals around them. The first moral development
recorded is their eating what they were commanded not to touch, as most young children do. Next
came a false excuse; and then Adam cast the blame
on Eve, and she turned it on to the serpent. Then
God'made clothing for them of skins, their infantile
skill reaching only to aprons of fig-leaves.
And this is all there is recorded on which to
found the splendid intellectual and moral endowments supposed by theologians to have been given
our first parents at their creation.
As to the consequences of their disobedience, all
that we find threatened in Genesis is expulsion
from Paradise, the subordination of woman, pain in
child-bearing, toil in supporting a family to man,
and physical death to both.
When it is said, in the one other text quoted to
196 
OF CHILDREN.
prove man's original righteousness, that God created
man upright, it includes the whole species, and, if it
proves any thing on the subject, it proves that inrants were created as perfect as Adam was.
As to all the texts usually quoted to prove the extreme sinfulness of all men, they establish this fact,
but do not set forth the philosophy of it. Not one
of them teaches that the cause or reason of this sinfulness was a depraved nature inherited from Adam.
This is a theory established in the age of Augustine,
and not stated any where in the Bible.
In regard to the texts quoted to show that, owing
to this depravity of nature, all that a child feels and
does is sin, and only sin, till regeneration ensues, the
Bible is written not for and about infants, but for
and about those who have knowledge enough to
sin against known law, either natural or revealed.
That Men go astray from the womb, "speaking
lies," all allow to be Oriental figurative exaggeration, meaning that men begin to lie about as soon
as they can, as a general fact. "Shapen in iniquity
and conceived in sin" is a similar Oriental expression not to be taken literally.
So when mankind before the flood are spoken of
as having "every imagination evil and only evil,"
it can not be taken literally as referring to all men,
for then it would include Noah.
When the carnal mind is described as one that is
full of evil and can not please God, it signifies that
197 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
while men are in the class of habitual sinners, living
only to please themselves, they do not and can not
please God in the same sense in which it is said
that he "that is born of God can not sin." But
these texts do not teach that every moral action of
unregenerate men is sinful and displeasing to God.
In the Bible the heart often signifies the chief aim
or ruling interest and purpose. When this is simply to gratify self, it is a carnal heart-a heart of
flesh; when the chief aim or purpose is to please
and obey God, it is a spiritual heart.
We are born again when we give up self-gratification as our main end, and to do right and thus to
please and obey God become our chief concern.
The carnal mind, set to please self, is enmity with
God-is not subject to law-can not be; for when
it isthus subjected it ceases to be carnal.
In 1 Corinthians, iii., 14, it is written, "The natural man receiveth not the things of the spirit of
God, for they are foolishness unto him; neither can
he know them, because they are spiritually discerned."
This passage, which is usually employed to prove
that men, before they are regenerated, can not understand the truths of Christ's religion, was addressed to those brought up amid the vices and ignorance of heathenism; and it simply teaches that
all men, while in this state of darkness and sin, can
not rightly appreciate the pure and self-denying re
198 
OF CHILDREN.
ligion of Christ. It says that man as he naturally
is, and by the light of nature, without any Christian
instruction and training, " receiveth not the things
of the Spirit of God."
These are the passages of the Bible which are
chiefly used to prove transmitted depravity of nature in young children, and a nature so entirely depraved that, previous to its re-creation, all that they
do "is of the nature of sin."
The aid of some of the most learned commentators and professors in Biblical criticism has been
sought by the writer, and, as yet, no case has been
pointed out where the meaning here given to these
proof-texts is not warranted by the correct rules of
interpretation, and authorized by some of the most
learned critics.
A great difficulty on this subject results from the
fact that the theory of transmitted infant depravity
has been so connected with theories invented to explain the philosophy of the Atonement, that it is
imagined, by those trained in these theories, that to
deny them involves the denial of Christ's atoning
sacrifice.
The distinction between facts and philosophy removes this difficulty also.
The fact that God loves us; that he is not willing
that any of his creatures should perish forever; that
he has made a sacrifice to the extremest amount we
can conceive to save us, is proved when God so
199 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
loved the world that he gave his well-beloved and
only-begotten Son to suffer and die for us.
We can not conceive of any thing more painful,
any thing that requires more bitter sacrifices of feeling, than for a parent to give up an only and wellbeloved child to undeserved shame, suffering, and
death. And the history of the humiliation, sorrow,
and painful death of God's only and well-beloved
Son is set forth as the proof that God loves us even
while we are sinners, and is not willing that we
should perish.
There have been various theories invented to explain why it was necessary for Christ thus to suffer,
and how his death avails to save us. Some of these
theories are very childish and absurd, and all of
them might be given up, without at all lessening
the influence of the great central truth of the Gospel, that God tenderly loves us, even as sinners, and
has proved it, in that he gave up his only-begotten
and well-beloved Son to suffer such dishonor, sorrow, and death to save us. That he has done this
is proof also that there was some impossibility in
saving us any other way. The very prayer of the
suffering Savior proves it: "0 my Father, if it be
possible, let this cup pass!" The cup did not pass,
and so it was not possible to save us any other way.
There is no need of any explanation of the causes
of this impossibility. It may be that with our present measure of development and knowledge we
200 
OF CHILDREN.
could not understand all the causes of this "great'
mystery" of God manifest in the flesh.
To illustrate the foregoing, suppose, in an awful
tempest, a ship is driven among terrific breakers
on to a rock-bound, inaccessible coast, where, surrounded by rocks and whirlpools, no passage for escape can be discovered.
Soon a man is discerned toiling down the jagged
cliffs. Bleeding and exhausted, he reaches the deck,
presents a chart to guide, and dies.
They examine the chart, and find their own position exactly drawn, and also "a strait and narrow way" set down as the sure and only chance of
escape.
In such a case, common sense would discern these
facts: that the messenger knew that there was such
danger as warranted the risk of his life to save;
that he wvas very benevolent in character, and that
he loved them with that best love which suffers to
save from harm. Moreover, his chart, as the only
chance offered for their escape, should be followed.
The sufferings and death of this messenger, then,
proves his benevolent character, his love to those
he came to save, the reality of great danger, and the
duty of following his instructions.
Suppose, also, that on his person are found evidences that he is the beloved and only son of a
powerful king who knew all the risks of this mission of mercy. Then this transaction would prove
I 2
201 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
that the father also was benevolent, loved the sufferers, and earnestly desired their escape.
Now suppose the officers of the ship, instead of
following the chart, began to speculate as to whether
this was really the son of the king, and how it came
to pass that a king so benevolent allowed them to
get into such a dangerous place on his shores, and
what was "the origin" of this evil. Would not the
sailors resent this folly? Would they not insist
that all this philosophizing should be deferred until
they had found "the strait and narrow way," and
escaped from their dangers and sufferings?
And does not this illustration fairly exhibit the
great mistakes of theologians in giving so much
time, thought, and effort to propagate and defend
their various theories as to the philosophy of man's
sinfulness and danger?
Do not both Old and New Testament alike teach,
"Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts, and turn to the Lord, who
will have mercy upon him, and to our God, who
will abundantly pardon?"
So again in the Gospel we are assured that "in
every nation, he that feareth God and worketh righteousness is accepted of him;" while, for Christ's
sake, all past sins can be forgiven as soon as true
repentance is found.
202 
OF CHILDREN.
CHAPTER SIXTEENTH.
THE TRUE CHURCH TRAINING.
THE true Church, in its widest sense, consists of
all, in every age and in every world, who are, in aim
and purpose, united with God in training his vast
family to obey the laws of virtue and happiness.
The Bible contains the early history of the true
Church in this world.
The antediluvian period was the infancy of this
Church, when the race, with inexperienced educators, was struggling to gain the physical knowledge
necessary for its earliest development. Long life
was given that the experience of ages might be
treasured in the teachers of mankind, and yet this
resulted in such monstrous wickedness that the
whole race was destroyed except the family of
Noah.
While ages rolled on, his descendants became nations, of which Egypt and Assyria took the lead in
the developments of civilization. In this long period we find first the family of Shem, and then of
Abraham, alone constituting the true Church of
God, while all the nations around were sunk in degrading idolatries.
Next to the patriarchal period came Israel as the
203 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
first organized nation that worshiped the true God,
and became teachers of righteousness to other nations.
Preparatory to this, they were instructed in the
arts and wisdom of Egypt, then the most civilized
nation.
Next, they were removed, amid the pomp of astounding miracles, and placed in the centre of the
civilized world, the great thoroughfare between the
East and West.
Here they were organized as confederate republics, under a central government in many points resembling our own.  Each male was a landholder in
fee-simple, and unable to alienate his property from
his family. Every sale of land was for a period
ending with the Jubilee, when, amid blowing of
trumpets and general rejoicing, every man regained
his inheritance. A tribe was set apart as ministers
of religion and teachers of the young, and supported by tithes from the other tribes.
This was the only nation on earth whose civil
and religious laws required that all widows, orphans, and strangers should be supported by their
neighbors; the only nation required by its laws to
educate their servants as they did their childrento give them weekly periods of rest, and frequent
festivals and holidays, and, if discontented, to protect them when escaping, give them support, and
not to allow them to be forced back into unwill
204 
OF CHILDREN.
ing servitude. - The beasts of burden, and even the
birds, were protected from cruelty by law.
There, in the centre of the known world; this nation held forth the oracles of God, and received to
citizenship all who would become his true worshipers. So far as one nation could be made the educators of other nations, the Israelites held this office.
While other nations excelled in many of the arts
of commerce and civilization, they were sunk in degrading vices and the most debasing religions. The
nation of Israel stood in their midst a solitary witness of the true God, teachers of righteousness to
the surrounding world.
This mission related solely to the duties of this
life, without reference to the risks and dangers of
the future state. Although, by tradition, the belief
in a future life, in which the good would be happy
and the wicked miserable, was preserved, yet all the
sanctions of the Jewish laws were temporal, as more
effective in that stage of development. Temporal
prosperity was the reward of obedience to God's
laws, and temporal miseries were the penalties for
disobedience.
This period corresponded with that of schooltraining in childhood, before our duties resulting
from the risks of the spiritual world are made practical in efforts to save others. Thus the Jewish dispensation is called "a schoolmaster to bring us to
Christ."
205 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
But, " when the fullness oftime had come," in preparing mankind for another advance, Jesus Christ
came and "brought life and immortality to light."
Then, for the first time in this world, the true
Church was instructed in its highest mission as the
co-laborer with God to save our race from the dangers of the future life; and these so dreadful, that
every earthly plan and hope, in comparison, are to
be of no account.
This enlarged plane of duty was not revealed to
those who were training men in the preparatory
stages. They walked by faith in some future Messiah, whose aim and mission they dimly foresaw.
It was this to which Christ referred when he said,
"I call you not servants, for a servant knoweth not
what his Lord doeth, but I have called you friends."
This is to say, now my Church are to understand
the great end for which they are to labor-the great
principle to govern all individuals, all nations, and
all worlds- the great law of sacrifice, demanding
that each shall make the best good of the whole, and,
in reference to the eternal state, the first concern,
and be ready to suffer even to the death to save, as
far as possible, the whole family of God.
The Lord of Glory came to teach this great law,
not only by word, but by his blessed example,
while he endured poverty, shame, sorrow, and death
to save the whole world from the awful dangers of
the life to come. And when his mission was com
206 
OF CHILDREN.
pleted, his parting injunction to his Church was,
"Go ye into all the world, and preach the Gospel to
every creature."
At this period the world was filled with "gods
many and lords many," as contending deities, and
the grand question was,Which is the supreme Lord
whom all must obey?
A few poor, uneducated men, of a despised nation
under the proud Roman empire, came forth and proclaimed a crucified Jew to be the supreme Lord of
all the earth, of all gods and of all worlds, the Creator of heaven and earth, the only Lord of faith and
practice.
The first effort of the Christian Church was to establish this chief doctrine of religion. To confess
Christ as Lord involved the loss of character, livelihood, and comfort, and often brought the cruelest
persecution and a violent death.  And yet it was
made imperative on all, not only to believe on
Christ, but to profess his name by baptism and by
joining a Christian community; and whenever the
parents of a household joined the Church, their children became members, and were liable to the same
disabilities and sufferings.
In this state of things, persecution secured the
elevation and purification of these communities as
nothing else could have done. Few would profess
to believe Christ as only Lord except on strong
conviction, while the weak and wavering would
207 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
soon fall away. Thus the earnest and faithful, beset with danger, despised and afflicted, gave up this
world as their chief good, and lived as seeing things
invisible.
But when the Christian Church gained wealth,
honor, and power, it decayed in spiritual life; even
as in succeeding ages, while the periods of trial and
persecution have been marked with strong Christian growth, ease and prosperity have brought spiritual debility and decay.
The persecutions under the Roman emperors, the
suffering periods of the Reformation in Germany,
in France, and in Scotland, and the Puritan struggles in Old and New England, evolved a vigorous
piety and heroism never developed in prosperity.
At such times men are forced to give up their
faith and hope of heaven, or resign earthly comforts
and plans; and, having made the great sacrifice,
the temptations of ease and worldly good are supplanted by the invigorating influence of the world
unseen.
But the higher and more difficult development
of Christian growth is to advance with increasing
civilization and refinement, receiving the best gifts
of this life, and yet carrying the self-denying and
self-controlling principles of Christ's religion into
the minutest details of every-day life.  The Christian Church has yet to learn its highest lesson-to
receive prosperity, riches, and honor with the same
208 
OF CHILDREN.
spirit and the same views as the primitive Church
when accepting persecution, shame, sorrow, and
death.
To live for the salvation of the world and not for
self, to use every art and every means of refinement
and culture, not for self-enjoyment as the chief end,
but as the means of raising our fellow-men to the
highest social, intellectual, and moral development,
this is the noblest and most difficult achievement
reserved for the Church of the future.
But, in order to this, there must be a basis of religious motive, which, as yet, never has had its true
and appropriate presentation. This basis is danger
in the future life-danger, not to self chiefly, but to
the whole family of man. To this must be added
clear views as to the mode of escape, and as to the
agency of every one in aiding to save others.
In all practical matters it is danger which decides
all questions of right and wrong, wisdom and folly.
Thus, if a company are on a journey of pleasure
in a land of law and order, in a season of calm and
sunshine, when all are in health and with abundant
means, all questions of wisdom and rectitude would
be settled without reference to any danger.
But suppose this party in a hostile country, beset
with cruel and artful savages, surrounded with dangerous morasses, traveling unknown woods, and
bearing with them young children, feeble women,
and wounded and weary companions.
209 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
In such circumstances, what would be proper and
right for the party of pleasure would be folly and
wickedness for the endangered travelers. Each decision would cease to be, not as to how the most
pleasure could be found, but how surrounding dangers can be best escaped. Wakeful nights, exhausting toil, ceaseless care, in one case, would be folly
and sin; in the other, wisdom and virtue.
And the measure of motive and duty would be
proportioned to the danger and to the ability of
each to aid in saving others. If there were no danger at all, then one course would be wise and right.
If there were a little danger, still another course
would be right. If the danger were immediate and
awful, still another standard of duty would occur;
and the motives and obligations would be strong
or weak, just in proportion to the degree of danger.
Again, if nothing could be done to escape, no motives or obligations for exertion would exist. If
there were a little chance of escape, there would be
some obligation and motive for exertion. If the
way of escape were sure to all who would make the
required efforts, both for self and for others, then
the motives and obligations would be at the highest
point.
Suppose, moreover, that a portion of the endangered party were instructed in a sure but difficult
path of escape, and made the guardians of the rest;
that they knew that some must be irretrievably lost,
210
I 
OF CHILDREN.
and suffer a dreadful death; and that the number
who escaped would depend on the watchfulness,
toil, and care of those who knew the true mode of
escape; then it is clear that the measure of wisdom
or folly, right and wrong, in the conduct of these
guides would be not only diverse from those who
were in no danger, but diverse from those of their
companions who -had no such knowledge and responsibilities.
Again, suppose a diversity in belief of these
guides both as to the degree of danger and as to
the paths of escape, this would materially increase
the danger and the difficulties.
This example enables us to estimate the position
of the Church of the past and the present in reference to the dangers of the eternal world.
Some have taught that there was no danger at all
in the future life; some that there was some danger of temporary evils, they knew not exactly what.
Some have taught a danger the most awful conceivable, even an eternal existence of torment.
Again, as to the way of escape, some have taught
that baptism and Church rites were indispensable;
others that they are of little or no avail. Some
have taught that faith is the indispensable requisite,
but have differed as to what it is. Some have
taught that a new created nature is the indispensable way of escape, but that men can do little or
nothing to secure it, all being decided by elective
.211 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
grace.  Some have taught that the "means of grace"
are available to secure regeneration; others that
there is little efficacy in their use.
Meantime the great world, that is to be trained
and saved by the instrumentality of the Church,
has been growing more and more skeptical as to the
dangers thus proclaimed, and more and more doubtful as to the assumed claims of the contending
Church organizations.
The great principle of Protestantism, that every
man is to be his own interpreter of the Bible, is becoming more and more a practical power, not with
the learned and great chiefly, but rather with the
people. Especially is this the case in this nation,
where every minister of religion, every editor of a
periodical, every professor in any college or school,
is dependent on the people for support, and thus is
to be judged by the people as to the theological
opinions that shall be supported by their earnings.
As liberty and intelligence have increased, the
people have more and more revolted against theological dogmas that contradict common sense and
wound the tenderest sensibilities of the soul. In
Europe, the whole French nation, at one time, rose
against the Catholic Church, and banished it from
the land. In Germany, Rationalism has extended
widely over both the Catholic and Protestant
churches.
In England we now find not only learned pro
212 
OF CHILDREN.
fessors and doctors in the highest places of the
national Church, but even ministers and mission ary bishops, assailing either the Bible itself, or the
doctrine of man's future dangers as revealed in
it. And, after passing through the lower ecclesias tical courts, the question has been appealed from
the Court of Arches to the Queen in Council, wheth er "justification by faithl," in the churches of her
vast realms, "on which the sun never sets," shall
be accepted in the Catholic, or the Protestant, or the
common-sense meaning. And this grand question
of eternal life and death is not to be decided by the
clergy, but by a woman and a mother, assisted, not
by ecclesiastics, but by her legal and lay councilors.
In this country, the institution of the Puritan
Church, which divides religious assemblies into professed saints and sinners, the one allowed to have
children baptized, and the other shut out from what
the majority of Christendom in all centuries has regarded as more or less essential to right training
through life and to safety at death, has been a constant cause of disquiet and skeptical debate.
At the same time, the Unitarians, led by such men
as Channing; the Transcendental school, led by such
as Emerson; the semi -Infidel school, led by such
as Theodore Parker; the Humanitarian school, led
by such as Garrison; the Universalists, led by such
as Chapin and Greeley, have all been attacking "the
Church," and the theological system on which it
213 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
rests. They are either openly assailing the Bible,
as sustaining a system at war with common sense,
or are so interpreting it as to lessen the sense of
danger in a future life.
In consequence of all this, there is a subtle, undefined skepticism spreading through every grade
of society, and especially in the class who really are
the leaders of thought and opinion. The claims
of the Church and the claims of the Bible are questioned now as they never were before, by some of
the best as well as the most learned and wisest of
ankind.
The most fearful aspect of all is the influence of
the writings of the outspoken, and the whispered
mistrust of the more cautious, on the young, who
are now in a course of training.  The extent of secret or open infidelity in our colleges and schools is
probably beyond any thing ever conjectured by the
religious world. 
The result is an evident diminution, both in the
churches and without- their pale, of a sense of danger in a future life, on which is based the distinctive
feature of the Church of Christ in distinction from
the Jewish Church. The great masses of intelligent and benevolent men are saying aloud, or in
their secret thoughts, "We can know little or nothing of the future state; let us learn to live aright
for this world as the best way to prepare for another."
q
214 
OF CHILDREN.
Thus the new standard of duty introduced by
Christ when he "brought life and immortality to
light," is set aside for that of Moses and the proph ets, who were training the Church in its stage of
childhood for its limited sphere. The great doctrine of Christ, that men are to live to save our race
from the danger of the future world as the business
of life, to which all else is to be subordinate-that
they are to train their children to be self-denying
martyrs in this great labor-is fast passing away,
both in the churches and the ministry.
Suppose that the example and teachings of Christ
were suddenly to be followed by the majority of
those who profess to be his followers, and that obedience to his parting command to "Go into all the
world, and preach the Gospel to every creature," became the chief object and interest of life-suppose,
still more, that all their children were anxiously and
diligently trained to this as their future business in
ife, to which all else must be subordinate, and that
sacrifice to the death for the world's salvation was the
great motto to regulate all the thoughts and plans
of their educators, what inconceivably great and
various changes in all the hopes, fears, plans, and
daily pursuits of the Christian churches would appear, and how they would instantly be transformed
into "a holy nation, a peculiar people." And the
grand motive power that would effect this great
change would be the dangers of the future life, and
215 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
the ability of each one to save others from these
dangers.
This view of the great principles that are to regulate the true Church training of the future will
give but an imperfect view of their workings when
carried into details. A brief indication of some of
these particulars is all that can here be attempted.
It will be assumed that the chief end of the Creator is not to make happiness or enjoyment for his
creatures without reference to quality or amount,
but that it is to make the most possible happiness
and of the best kinds.
Jesus Christ came to teach the right way to do
this; the great comprehensive rule being that each
one deny himself daily by living for the best good
of the great whole; not in reference chiefly to the
enjoyments of this life, but mainly in reference to
the dangers of the future life.
In aiming at this, all will be regulated by this
principle of common sense, that where there is any
great impending danger, we are to choose the path
which offers the most evidence of safety, whatever
may be the attending doubts and difficulties.
Inasmuch, then, as Jesus Christ is the only human being of reliable character returned after death
to this life to teach us what is to be encountered in
the invisible world, and inasmuch as we can see
that following his teaching tends to the best good of
all even in this life, on the lowest ground ever taken
216 
OF CHILDREN.
by those who dispute his divine character and authority, guided by this principle of common sense,
children will be trained to obey his teachings as the
path which offers the most evidence of escape from
the awful dangers he has disclosed.
Inasmuch, also, as happiness-making for the whole
of our race, and of the best and highest kind, is to
be the aim of all, every mode of enjoyment that
adds to individual happiness will become a duty,
unless it can be shown to interfere with the best
good of the whole for time and eternity. As the
converse of this, every mode of individual enjoyment that tends to diminish the best good of the
whole will be banished as a sin against God and
man.
Guided by these general principles, all the pursuits and even the amusements of life will be regarded as religious duties, as much so as acts of worship.  Working and playing, eating and drinking,
dress and all kinds of expenditures, theatres, operas,
cards, dancing, wine, tobacco, every thing that gives
health, comfort, or any kind of enjoyment, will be
brought to tle test of these principles.  Does this
pursuit, as now practiced, tend to the best good of
all concerned, or does it involve temptations and injuries that do more harm than good to the whole?
Does this pursuit, when regulated as it can be and
will be, give pleasure to the individual without injury to the best good of the whole?
K
217 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
These questions will be applied in the family, in
the school, and in the pulpit, till eventually children
will be trained to regulate themselves by the great
law of sef-sacrifce, while yet they are permitted to
enjoy in the highest measure the gratification of all
the desires and propensities of their nature, in due
measure and at proper seasons.
There will be no such division between morality
and religion as has often been stringently enforced.
The teachings of Christ as to this life will be regarded as a part of religion as much as those special duties owed to God and his worship. Training
children to be truthful, honest, kind, obedient, and
self-sacrificing, will be' deemed a part of the religious education as much as those portions now regarded as distinctively so.
Every thing that tends to make men happy will
be enjoined as a duty when it does not interfere
with the best good of others.
Works of taste, music, painting, architecture, floriculture, poetry, the drama, the dance, the opera, all
that tends to promote enjoyment, will become duties, and be regulated by rules that secure the enjoyment without injury to the good of the whole;
and the churches will take the lead in the discussions and influences that eventually will write "holiness to the Lord" on all long-perverted sources of
enjoyment.
And in this course it will be found that more
218 
OF CHILDREN.
difficult self-denial and self-sacrifice will be demanded than ever was practiced even in seasons of persecution and martyrdom. At such periods, one act
of renunciation of the world placed a man out of
the range of its temptations. But to live in the
world, to receive prosperity, wealth, and all their
involved temptations, and yet maintain the highest
standard of self-sacrifice for the spiritual and eternal welfare of the whole world, this will be found a
far higher elevation of moral and religious excellence.
The experience of our nation the last three years
is a most striking illustration of what the change
will be when the Church understands and assumes
its high mission, founded on the dangers of the future life.
Our country has been enjoying freedom, ease, and
prosperity for fifty years, and the sense of danger
has had no part in the motives that were influencing national character and pursuits.
Meantime the Church has joined with the world
in the passionate rush after wealth, honor, and pleasure.  The last twenty-five years has exhibited a
career of prosperity. and self-indulgence that has
alarmed every reflecting mind; and the question
has often been pressed in private and in public, Are
we too, like Greece and Rome, to be debilitated and
demoralized by civilization and prosperity, and be
supplanted by races less civilized but more vigorous?,
219. 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
The Church of the present offers little in its history the last thirty years to warrant much hope
from its agency. Its past action, through its organized bodies as well as individual agencies, on one
matter alone-slavery, has been a sure index of its
weakness in resisting the influence of wealth and
selfish interests. Can any man say that the majority of the Christian Church organizations have, for
the last thirty years, been teaching by example the
doctrine of Christ, that every man is to practice selfdenial and self-sacrifice, even to the death, in order
to raise our whole race, including the African, to
the highest degree of intelligence and virtue?
But suddenly a sense of danger has shaken the
nation like an earthquake. Not only liberty, but
the very life of our nation has been threatened. In
this grand emergency, what deeds of self-sacrifice,
what developments of heroic devotion have been
evolved! Hundreds and thousands have given up
ease, and home, and money-making, and been enrolled to offer life itself to save from these merely
earthly dangers.
Enrolled in ranks, each with its subordinate and
superior officers, who exact unquestioning, unfailing
faith and obedience, till at last the whole vast body
is moved by one controlling mind as its head-one
who decides for all and each which shall have the
post of comparative ease and honor, and on which,
as unknown privates, shall fall the forlorn hope and
220 
OF CHILDREN.
certain death-all are animated by tho same one
idea to save our country at any and every hazard.
In the family circle, too, the needle and all the
outdoor implements of labor are enlisted in the
same effort to raise the funds and supply the needs
of this vast array who are to accomplish this great
salvation.
What an exact emblem of the true ideal of the
Christian Church! Soldiers of the Cross-that is,
soldiers to be marched to the bitterest self-sacrifice,
and to certain death, if need be- soldiers who are
to give up ease, and honor, and friends, and life
itself- soldiers marshaled under various leaders,
with the Lord of All as the Great Captain, all enrolled to save, not our country alone, but the whole
world, not from temporal, but from eternal dangers.
221 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
CHAPTER SEVENTEENTH.
BIBLE BASIS OF TRUE CHURCH TRAINING.
IT having been shown that danger in the future
life is the basis of the true Church training, a brief
view of this danger, and of the mode of escape, will
be presented, as exhibited in the teachings of Jesus
Christ and his apostles.
These instructions were given in the language of
the common people, and the words mean what the
people understood them to mean when Christ used
them.
This language of the Jewish people has, in our
New Testament, been correctly translated into the
corresponding language of our own common people. In deciding on the true sense of every passage, we are to use the same rules that the people em_ploy in common life.
Most words have more than one meaning; for
example, the word judgment sometimes signifies a
faculty of the mind, sometimes the decision of a
judge, and sometimes a punishment inflicted for
crime.
Words often are used figuratively; as when anger
is called a fire, or an artful man a fox.
222 
OF CHILDREN.
The rule of common life for deciding when a
word is figurative or literal is this: Every word is
literal except when that meaning contradicts the known
nature of things or the expressed opinions of the writer,
in which cases it is figurative.
Thus, when anger is called a fire that burns the
soul, the literal meaning contradicts the known nature of the things spoken of, for the soul can not
burn, and so the expression is figurative.
The words eternal and everlasting, in their literal
sense, mean time without end, but in their figurative use they mean only time without known or
specified end. When these words are applied to
God and the soul, the literal sense is the true one,
because it does not contradict the nature of the
things spoken of; but when applied to the hills or
to man's anger, the figurative sense is the true one,
because the literal sense contradicts either the nature of the things spoken of, or other declarations
of the Bible.
The same word is used sometimes in a wide and
sometimes in a limited sense. Thus punishment, in
the wide sense, signifies all the evils that follow
wrong-doing, either natural or statute. In the limited sense it means only the voluntary statute penalties added to the natural ones.
In such cases, the rule of common life is this:
The widest sense is the true one, except when the limited
sense is indicated.
223 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
Thus punishment, in the New Testament, in reference to a future life, always is used in its widest
sense, signifying all the evils, both natural and statute, that follow wrong-doing, because the limited
sense is not specified.
These are the rules, made, not by learned men,
but by the common people. These are the rules to
guide in learning the dangers of the future state
from Christ and his apostles.
But the spiritual state is one of which men have
had no knowledge, and so have no words to express
its diverse experiences. In such a case, all that can
be done is to employ pictures and illustrations that
will convey the truth as nearly as possible.
A parent, to keep young children from playing
in a place infected with destructive miasma, might
set up a horrid figure and call it miasma, and tell
the children if they went into the forbidden place
Miasma would kill them. This would convey the
truth as nearly as it is possible to a young child.
Thus, in regard to the spiritual world, all revelations must be by figures and illustrations not to be
taken as literal. Thus, " the worm that dieth not,"
and "the fire that is not quenched," convey the
idea of great suffering that has no end. But the
figures used are not to be taken in the literal sense,
because it would contradict the nature of things,
for a spirit can not be burned or gnawed by a worm.
Before applying these rules to the New Testa
224 
OF CHILDREN.
ment, we need to notice a singular mistake made in
the English translation.
In the Old Testament there is no reference made
to a place of punishment in the future life. The
Hebrew word Sheol signifies the place of departed
spirts. The words Heaven, Paradise, and Hell never
are used in reference to the dead in the Old Testament.
In the New Testament the Greek word Hades is
used for the place of departed spirits, being synonymous with the Hebrew word Sheol.
The Greek word Gehenna, in the New Testament,
means the place of future punishment of the wicked. It occurs seven times in Matthew, three times
in Mark, once in Luke, and once in James.
The word Hades (meaning only the place of departed spirits) occurs twice in Matthew, twice in
Luke, twice in Acts, once in Corinthians, and four
times in Revelation; and in all cases it means the
same as Sheol in the Old Testament.  It never means
the place of punishment of the wicked; and yet
the English translators (perhaps from fear of the
Romish doctrine of Purgatory) used the word Hell
both for Hades and for Gehenna, thus making many
texts appear to speak of Gehenna when they do not.
At the time of our Savior, the Jews held that in
Hades the good dwelt in Paradise, and the wicked
were separated from them and confined in a place
called Tartarus. They held, also, that there is to
K2
225 
THE RELIGIOUS. TRAINING
be a final day of judgment, when the good will go
from the paradise of Hades to heaven, and the wicked from the Tartarus of Hades to eternal punishment in Gehenna.
When Christ spoke the parable of the rich man
and Lazarus, his object was not to teach the doctrine of future eternal punishment in Gehenna, for,
if it had been, he would have used the word Gehenna. Instead of this, he taught that in Hades,
the place of departed spirits, one so low and miserable as Lazarus was in this life, was happy, while
t-he rich man was miserable. He implied, also, that
at least some who do not repent in this life will be
miserable in Hades, as was the rich man; but nothing is said in this parable as to what transpires between the hour of death and the day of judgment.
In 1 Peter, ii., 19, 20, it is said that Christ went
and* preached to the imprisoned spirits in Hades,
and we may infer that he would not do this unless
some were to be benefited by it. But what the effect of this preaching was we are not told.
When Christ said to the thief on the cross, " Today shalt thou be with me in Paradise," he knew
that the Jews understood the word Paradise to mean,
not heaven, but that portion of Hades where the
good are.
No Hebrew and Greek scholar will question these
statements.
With these preliminaries, we are prepared to ex
226 
OF CHILDREN.
amine the teachings of Christ and his apostles as to
the dangers of the world to come and the mode of
escape.
When the forerunner of Christ appeared it was
to "prepare the way of the Lord," whom he announced as one coming "thoroughly to purge his
floor and gather his wheat into the garner," and
"to burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire."
In Christ's opening Sermon on the Mount he declared that those possessing certain virtues will gain
"the kingdom of heaven," "see God," and be "called the children of God."
On the contrary, he described others who "shall
be in danger of hell fire" (Gehenna fire), and he exhorts to the most severe sacrifices lest we "be cast
into hell" (Gehenna).
Then follows instructions as to what man must
do to secure heaven. These requisitions are the
most elevated and most difficult. For example:
"Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do
good to them that hate you, and pray for them which
despitefully use you."
"Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which
is in heaven is perfect."
"Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men
should do to you, do ye even so to them; for this is the
law and the prophets."
"Enter ye in at the strait gate; for wide is the gate,
and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and
many there be which go in thereat; because strait is the
gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and
few there be that find it."
227 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
"Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall
enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the
will of my Father which is in heaven."
"Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have
we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have
cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful
works?
"And then will I profess unto them, I never knew
you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."
Next follow exhortations not to lay up treasures
on earth, but rather treasures in heaven, and to
"seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness." This sermon concludes with a picture of
utter ruin to those who hear and do not according
to these teachings.
Next after the Sermon on the Mount we find in
chapter viii.:
"Many shall come from the east and west, and shall
sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the
kingdom of heaven.
"But the children of the kingdom shall be cast out
into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth."
In chapter x. Christ again teaches of those who
refuse the words of his disciples, "it shall be more
tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah, in
the day of judgment, than for that city."
Again, verse 28:
"Fear not them which kill the body, but are not able
to kill the soul; but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell (Gehenna)."
228 
OF CHILDREN.
In Matthew xiii. we have the parable of the sower thus interpreted, verses 3743:
" He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man.
The field is the world; the good seed are the children
of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the
wicked one. The enemy that sowed them is the devil;
the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are
the angels. As therefore the tares are gathered and
burned in the fire, so shall it be in the end of this world.
The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they
shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend,
and them which do iniquity; and shall cast them into a
furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of
teeth. Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in
the kingdom of their Father."
Again, verses 49, 50:
"So shall it be at the end of the world. The angels
shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the
just, and shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there
shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth."
Again, in chapter xvi., we find, verse 27:
" For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his
Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every
man according to his works."
In chapter xxiii. we find heavy woes denounced
on the Scribes and Pharisees, concluding thus, verse
33:
"Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell (Gehenna)?"
In chapter xxv. of Matthew are parables teaching the great fact that there are to be hereafter two
classes, represented by wise virgins taken into the
229 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
feast, and foolish ones shut out-the faithful serv ant who entered the joy of his Lord, and the un profitable servant cast "into outer darkness: there
shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth."
This chapter ends with a solemn description of
the great consummation, verse 31:
"When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and
all the holy angels with him-and before him shall be
gathered all nations."
Then is described a separation into two classes
according to their deeds. One class is adjudged,
"Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire
prepared for the devil and his angels," and the other is commanded, "Come, ye blessed of my Father,
inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the
foundation of the world."
And it is concluded with these awful words from
the savior himself:
"And these shall go away into everlasting punishment,
but the righteous into life eternal."
These teachings of Christ, as recorded by Matthew, are repeated by Mark and Luke with more
or less distinctness.
In John, v., 28, 29, the Savior again instructs
thus:
"Marvel not; for the hour is coming in which all
that are in the graves shall hear his voice, and shall come
forth; they that have done good unto the resurrection of
life, and they that have done evil unto the resurrection of
damnation."
230 
OF CHILDREN.
These are the teachings of the Lord himself. HIis
apostles repeat the same solemn doctrine. In Acts,
xxiv., 15, we read,
"There shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the
just and unjust."
In Romans, ii., 16, Paul speaks of the day when
God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ.
And again, 2 Corinthians, v., 10:
"For we must all appear before the judgment-seat of
Christ, that every one may receive the things done in
the body according to that he hath done, whether it be
good or bad."
Again, in 2 Thessalonians, i., 6-11:
"Seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompense them that trouble you; and to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed
from heaven with his mighty angels, in flaming fire taking
vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey
not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: who shall be
punished with everlasting destruction from the presence
of the Lord when he shall come to be glorified in his
saints, and to be admired in all them that believe."
Again, in 1 Thessalonians, iv., 16:
"For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with
a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the
trump of God; and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up
together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in
the air; and so we shall ever be with the Lord."
The Apostle Peter teaches thus: 2 Peter, iii., 7,
10,11,12:
231 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
"But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by
the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against
the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men. But
the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night;
in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great
noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the
earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned
up. Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved,
what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness, looking for and hasting unto the
coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on
fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt withl
fervent heat,?"
The Apostle John concludes with these pictures of the final consummation. Revelation, xx.,
11-15:
"And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat
on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled
away. And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before
God; and the books were opened; and another book
was opened, which is the book of life; and the dead were
judged out of those things which were written in the
books, according to their works. And the sea gave up
the dead which were in it; and death and Hades delivered up the dead which were in them; and they were
judged every man according to their works. And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast
into the lake of fire."
Revelation, xxi., 5,7, 8:
" And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make
all things new. He that overcometh shall inherit all
things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son.
But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and
murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which
232
t
-1 
OF CHILDREN.
burneth with fire and brimstone, which is the second
death."
Revelation, xxi., 23:
"And the city had no need of sun, neither of the moon
to shine in it; for the glory of God did lighten it, and
the Lamb is the light thereof. And the nations of them
that are saved shall walk in the light of it. And there
shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination or maketh a lie,
but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life."
Revelation, xxii., 14:
"Blessed are they that do his commandments, that
they may have a right to the tree of life, and enter in
through the gates into the city. For without are dogs,
and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie."
In view of this solemn array of declarations from
the Lord himself and from his apostles, it is one of
the many evidences of the influence of feeling aind
wishes in-the interpretation of the Bible, that there
is such a variety of opinions as to the revealed dangers of the future life.
As before stated, in the face of such declarations,
some maintain that there is no danger at all; that
all men, however wicked, at death go directly to
eternal blessedness in heaven. Others, not quite so
bold, teach that there is some danger of some sort
of punishment to some of the worst kind of mep,
but that all the rest go to heaven. Others hold that
it is a very uncertain matter; and that, as we can
know little or nothing of what is to befall us in the
233 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
eternal state, it is of small practical importance.
Others hold that the whole race of Adam at death
go directly to hell, and suffer eternal torments for
sins committed in this life, with the exception of a
comparatively few regenerated persons in Christian
lands.
The diverse modes of interpretation by which
these various opinions are maintained are all dependent on the sense given to the words sin and
punishment.
In previous pages it is shown that the common
people use the word punishment to mean not only
the voluntary statute penalties of God and man, but
the natural consequences of violating the laws of
nature, which are fixed and eternal, either by the
will of God or the eternal nature of things.
So the word sin, in common use, means transgression of any of the laws of God, either ofnature
or statute.
The whole system of the Catholic Church is based
on the assumption that the government of God is
like that of the civil state, which punishes all crimes
with a given voluntary penalty, and not that of a
parent, who punishes only as the best good of the
child requires.
. On this Catholic theory, it is taught that God's
justice requires that a statute penalty be inflicted
for every transgression of God's laws, either natural
or statute, in addition to the natural penalties of
234
k\ 
OF CHILDREN.
sinning. This punishment is to be inflicted on
some one, either innocent or guilty. If the innocent is willing to bear it, then the guilty may escape; but so much pain must be inflicted somewhere
for every sin committed, in order to satisfy God's
justice.
The final state of those guilty of mortal sins unrepented and unforgiven is settled at death, and
they- go to suffer everlasting torments for the sins
committed in this short life.
Those who escape mortal sins, or have had them
remitted, go to Purgatory, and are punished by statute penalties till God's justice is satisfied, either by
their sufferings, or by the sufferings of Christ and
the saints placed to their account.
The most common Protestant interpretation has
been that for all those whose ruined nature has not
been re-created by God, their final state is decided
at death, and they go to eternal torments, as a punishment for the sins of this short life.
Revolting from both these theories, some of the
Universalists have taught that there is to be no punishment at all for sins of this life, but all at death
go to perfect blessedness. Others of this sect teach
that there is to be a period of purgatorial punishment for the wicked, and then all our race are made
holy and happy forever.
Another class hold that the good go to eternal
blessedness, and the wicked are annihilated, and
235 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
these are saved from all evil or punishment of every
sort in a future life.
Still another view, founded on the common-sense
interpretation of these and other passages, is, that
God and all free agents made in his image are sub ject to pain and evil by the eternal nature of things
which God did not create; that the only way to
escape endless pain and sorrow is to obey the laws
of virtue and benevolence as God himself obeys
them; that Jesus Christ came to save from the natural penalties of law only by saving men from sinning; that the natural penalties of the eternal laws
of mind reach to the innocent as well as the guilty,
God himself sorrowing for the sins and sufferings
of his children; that Christ, in this world, bore the
punishment for the sins of men by suffering the natural consequences of their wickedness, reaching both
to the innocent and guilty; that Christ came, not
to interrupt the natural penalties of sinning to the
innocent as well as guilty, but to submit to them as
a sufferer from the sins of those he came to save;
that he suffered in no other way, though perhaps
in greater degree, than his followers often have
done, when disgraced, tortured, and slain; that "the
hour of darkness," when he prayed in fear and
agony, was like what his followers often have endured when God's ways seemed dark, and they
were overwhelmed with doubts and fears, as well as
with physical suffering; and that Christ's followers
236
i 
OF CHILDREN.
are punished for the sins of those they strive to save,
amid self-denials and rebuke, as Christ was-not by
voluntary penalties inflicted by God, but by the natural penalties of the laws of the material and spiritual life, involving the good as well as the evil in
consequent suffering.
No attempt will be made to controvert either of
these views; but the reader is requested to ponder
these questions:
Have we any reliable information as to the invisible world and the future destiny of man except the
teachings of Christ?
Is there not some evidence that he died and returned from the place of the dead, and that his
character as a reliable witness is equal to that of
any human being of whom we have any knowledge?
Do not.his teachings, interpreted by the rules
used by the common people, declare the following
facts:
That, at some future period (it may be thousands
of ages hence), all mankind are to be judged by Jesus Christ, and be separated into two classes, according to their character and condut-the one class to
dwell with God and good angels, and the other to
be confined in the world of sin and suffering with
bad angels?
On the other hand, is there any evidence to be
found, in these or other passages of the Bible, that
237 
THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING
the hour of death is the time when the final character and destiny of all men is decided, so that, at that
time, all go either to heaven or to hell? Are there
not some passages that forbid this idea?
Are there not some passages that indicate that
some bad men, such as Judas, and some good men,
such as Paul, decide their eternal destiny in this
life?
Is it taught that, when Christ preached in Hiades
to those who lived before the flood, either that he
had or had not any success?
Is it taught that, after death, men either will or
will not have any farther chances to secure eternal
life? Is not the matter left in entire darkness, with
only the assurance that, to those who hear the Gospel, now is an accepted time and day of salvation,
without any promise for the after life?
Is it not taught that there are diverse degrees of
faith, and that there is danger even to those who
have some measure of faith, of perishing for want
of the requisite amount? Are we any where told
how far we may fall short and yet escape? Are
not those who are Christians exhorted to fear and
to strive as if in great danger, and to make it their
chief concern to save themselves and their fellowmen? 
Is it taught in these passages or elsewhere that
the punishments of the future life will be any other
than the natural results of conduct and character in
238
,_
4 
OF CHILDREN.
a world from which all the good are withdrawn and
where all the wicked are confined?
Is there any rule of language that justifies the
idea that everlasting punishment means the end of all
trouble and pain, as would be the result of annihilation?
Is it possible to find any language that will more
clearly express the idea that a portion of our race
will existjforever sinful and consequently miserable,
than is presented in these selected passages?
Is not the way of escape from this awful danger
the faith which includes not only an intellectual
belief in the true God, but also a controlling purpose of obedience to. his laws, both natural and revealed?
Do not the " love7" and " repentance" required as
the terms of salvation also include as their chief element the controlling purpose to please God by forsaking sin?
In other words, is it not clearly and repeatedly
taught that man can be saved from future eternal
dangers only by an inner principle or purpose of
obedience to God's laws, exhibited by "deeds" or
"good works" as the chief element?
Is it not plainly taught in the Bible that the number of those who will escape the dangers of the future life depends on the exertions and faithfulness
of the followers of Christ?
Should not these momentous questions be an
239 
240  THE RELIGIOUS TRAINING OF CHILDREN.
swered only after a diligent examination of the
New Testament, with all solemnity and faithfulness,
as deciding the issues of eternity for self and all
that are dear?
I
I
I
I 
CORRESPONDENCE.
THE author, having occasion to state the theolog ical doctrines held by the chief religious denomi nations in this country, has been very desirous to
secure perfect fairness and correctness in such state ments.
For this end, proofs of the preceding portion of
the work were sent to persons who, for influence
and discrimination, rank among the leading minds
in each of these denominations, most of them being personal friends. After receiving their criticisms, the fourteenth and fifteenth chapters were
rewritten, and the two following were added.
A considerable portion of the resulting correspondence is inserted in the following pages as farther exhibitions of the topics discussed, and in a
form more interesting than the didactic.
All indices that might identify the writers have
been suppressed, so that it will be optional with all
whose communications have been inserted how far
such identification shall be permitted.
L
li 
CORRESPONDENCE.
From Rt. Rev. Bishop ---, of the Episcopal
Church.
"MY DEAR MADAM,-I return your article as you
desire, and acknowledge gratefully the regard which,
in revising it, you have shown to the suggestions of
Bishop         and to my own.
"Practically, your position is of the greatest interest; and no one can have seen how deeply settled in
the New England mind, in thousands of instances, is
the doubt whether God really has any purpose of love,
except toward a chosen company, without being prepared to sympathize with your past struggles and your
present desires.
"Theoretically, I think that the more you allow
your convictions to take their mould from the language of Holy Scripture, and of the experience of all
Christians, the more will you be inclined, without diminishing the paramount importance of religious training, to ascribe its efficacy emphatically to the grace
of the Holy Spirit; not arbitrarily bestowed, but in
answer to prayer, and in fulfillment of a promise and
covenant.
"I do not uphold all the doctrines of St. Augustine;
but all that deplorable history of Dr. Payson's treatment of his daughter was based on a doctrine no older than the last century, and unknown to any extent
out of New England. 
"The corruption of man's nature lies not in the
original construction of mind, nor yet in the absence
of means and motives,but in the loss of moral power
and the perversion of the affections, which all experience shows to result in the individual from indulgence
in sin, and, even in individual peculiarities, to some
extent hereditary.
"The Church teaches that we inherit this from
Adam, and do not simply imitate him and follow his
example.  To suppose this is a merely negative thing,
(
242
l
I
I
II
iI
i 
CORRESPONDENCE.
arising from the want of knowledge, training, and motives, is the Pelagian theory, and, as such, is distinctly condemned in our Articles.
"One higher than the highest says that we must be
born again-born of the Spirit. The Puritan mistake
is not in insisting on this, but in making it an empirical thing at a certain time in mature years, with distinct consciousness and with certain phenomenal circumstances or infallible results, to be judged by a
purely experimental standard; and a thing, too, which
is bestowed on some and withheld from others, without reference to the Sacrament of Baptism as a means
and symbol to the Church as the family of God, nor
to the universal redemption as securing a grant of
grace to all.
"The basis of our hope firom Christian nurture is
in this grant of regenerating grace to all who will but
receive it, of which the baptism of infants is to each
the sign and pledge, and one of the great means; and
not the idea of merely surrounding the soul with
knowledge and motives, which can not of themselves
call forth the moral power which it has lost.
"I wish the last two sentences on page 101 were
qualified.  These are not'logical results' of that simple doctrine. Through the redemption of Christ, God
can counteract and remove this inherited evil, whether through or without baptism. Let me commend to
you those golden words of Thomas Fuller,' If we can
not perceive the manner of things, no wonder we can
not conceive the methods of grace in infant souls.'
"Is it not quite as merciful, and much more philosophical, to suppose a depraved nature and a counteracting grace, both of which we all see in their fruits,
as to suppose no depravity of nature, and yet no single case of innocence preserved?
"And now, my dear madam, will you permit me to
ask your attention to one point, which must, I think,
prove that there is in youi system a most grave defi
243 
CORRESPONDENCE.
ciency. From first to last, hardly any mention occurs
of the Holy Spirit. Your own views, I believe, are
stated uniformly without any allusion to that blessed
name. Admit Him, and His power, office, and work
into your system, and the change will be effected
which I desire.
"You have thought too much as a mere educator,
and in antagonism to a metaphysical distortion with
which we are all but too familiar.  There is something beyond education and closer to the heart than
knowledge. Veni Creator Spiritus.
" You will not, I trust, think me too frank in this
expression of my opinion. It is uttered with the most
cordial respect and esteem, and with such sentiments
I beg you to believe me,
"Yours very sincerely,."
From the Author in reply to the foregoing.
RT. REV. AND DEAR SIR,-Your criticisms on the
communication and proofs were most gratefully received, both in respect to the matter and the manner.
I have long regarded myself as an inquirer rather than a teacher on the great subjects which have
been presented to your attention, and my  chief
hope of success has been based on the very doctrine
you so earnestly recommend to my attention-the
aid of the blessed Spirit, the help and comforter of
all who are seeking for the truth. But I expect
this aid only while using the means He has indicated, seeking with a humble and teachable spirit
assistance not only from God, but from my fellowmen.
i
i
I 
CORRESPONDENCE.
If you will recur to page 48, you will notice what,
perhaps, you did not observe, that I distinctly recognize the aid a child will receive from the Hioly
Spirit in all efforts to become a true follower of
Christ.
My idea on this subject is that the Spirit of
Truth, in moral culture, is like the sun in the natural
world, an ever-warming and vivifying agency, never withheld from faithful labor, while without it we
should be as helpless and hopeless as would be the
gardener without the sun. The grand difficulty I
am striving to meet is the doctrine that the soul of
a child, when given to its parents and teachers, is a
ruined seed, from which no training or culture can
educe any thing but poisonous fruit until its "nature" is changed through a physical rite or a new
creating process of God's Spirit.
Instead of this, I believe that the heavenly Father, and the blessed Savior, and the gracious Comforter have done, and are doing, all that needs to
be done on their part, so that nothing is now wanting but for parents, the Church, and the children to
do theirs.
In the Bible the Church is represented as the
bride of Christ, who is to train his children for
heaven; and the closing words of our Savior in
the Apocalypse expresses this consoling and blessed truth as his last and best blessing:
"I, Jesus, have sent mine angel to testify unto
245 
CORRESPONDENCE.
you these things in the churches. The Spirit and
the Bride say come; and let him that heareth say
come; and let him that is athirst come; and whosoever will, let him take of the water of life freely."
You speak of admitting an opinion into my "system," as if I were a theologian constructing a theological system. Instead of this, I am more like the
poor negro in the story of Uncle Tiff, when asked
by his young mistress what part of the New Testament she should read to him.
"Well, now," said he, "I wants to find out de
shortest way I ken how dese yer chil'ens to be got
to heaven."
I have taken the Bible as an educator for a practical end. I have prayed for the aid of the blessed
Comforter, and then sought its meaning by applying the same rules of language as are used by the
common people in daily life; and, finally, I have
asked those who are counted the wisest and best to
point out wherein I have made mistakes, and after
this course I have come to the results which you
have seen.
I am constructing a theological system in no
other fashion than the poorest and humblest is
bound to do, who has access to the written Word
of the Lord.
It is true that I have published two volumes that
may, in one sense, be said to contain a system; but
what I was aiming at was to show that doctrines
246
t
t
I
kR 
CORRESPONDENCE.
have been fastened on the Bible contrary to cornmmon sense, and destructive to the eternal interests
of little children.
In all this I was not attempting to make a system, or to account for the "origin of evil."  All
these efforts are to escape from the "presumptuous" attempt of theologians to do so, and from the
"system" of theology which has resulted.
If we may but banish this "presumptuous" theory, and all the "systems" founded on it, I and all
others of "the people" can return to the place
where Christ and his apostles left the matter.
But this most cruel method is always taken by
the defenders of the Augustinian theory. They
assume that God has taught it instead of Augustine, and that all such reasoning is against God, presumptuous, and irreverent.
You say again, "One higher than the highest
says that we must be born again-born of the
Spirit."
I think, my dear sir, that I hold the sacred truth
conveyed in these words as really as any Calvinist
of the straitest sect. The infant is born into a
strictly animal life. Its intellect, as well as its moral powers, are all dormant. It is as impossible for
it to know and obey God as if it were destitute of
an intellectual and moral nature. These powers
are to be developed and trained utnder parental
care; the knowledge of God, and of the numerous
247 
CORRESPONDENCE.
laws of the physical, intellectual, and moral world
into which the infant is introduced, are to be communicated by a slow and gradual process.
The child is first to learn its earthly parents, and
then be trained to obey them, as the indispensable
preliminary to love and obedience to the heavenly
Parent. This inability of the child is not owing to
its "evil nature," but to its ignorance and imperfect
development.
The child first must learn to take care of self before it can learn to take care of others, and its first
period of existence includes this as the only possible exercise of its powers. Gradually it learns that
other beings suffer and enjoy, and, by a slow process, it can be trained to know its neighbors, and
then to know God, and to submit to those laws that
involve painful self-denial for the good of others.
When  a child has arrived at that point in its
training in the family that its will is lovingly subject to its parents, it is "born again" spiritually, as
much as is possible in that imperfect state of development. Its life is now as different from what it
was when a mere sport of infant impulses and desires, and entirely uncontrolled by reason and conscience, as the infant period is diverse from that
before birth.
Christ's declaration, "ye must be born again,"
was addressed to adults, and not to infants.  To
those Christ was addressing, a sudden change from
248
I 
CORRESPONDENCE.
a life of disregard to God and his laws to one of
love and obedience was possible, and was correctly
represented by the figurative language of a new
birth. In regard to infants, the change from ignorance and disobedience must necessarily be a
slow and gradual progressive one, and dependent
not merely on divine influence, but greatly on educational training.
It is just at this point where I find the Calvinistic system, and the Puritan churches founded on
that system, involve influences so unfavorable to
the right training of young children, that I turn to
the Episcopal Church; not because it is entirely
free from the doctrine of the transmitted depravity
of young children, but because, in both its theory
and administration, this doctrine is divested of some
of its dangerous tendencies. In this-Church, practically, every infant is received as a lamb of Christ's
fold to be trained to mature Christian life.
But in the Calvinistic sects, practically, every
young child grows up with the feeling that he is
out of the fold, and not to be taken in till God
chooses to re-create his soul, and thus remedy the
evil done by Adam.
In what you say of the': corruption of nature"
in infants, there is the same difficulty as I pointed
out in my Appeal to the People, Chapter XXXII.,
where I claim that all theologians holding this dogma contradict themselves, in one place affirming
L2
249 
CORRESPONDENCE.
depravity of the constitution of infant minds, and
in another place denying it.
Does not your letter present another instance of
this kind?  For you say, firstly, that "the corruption of man's nature lies not in the original construction of the mind."  This is just what I say, and
for which I am called Pelagian; that the original
construction of an infant mind is, as God made it,
perfect, and notcorrupt or depraved.
Next you say what seems a contradiction, viz.,
that- the depravity of infant nature "consists in the
loss of moral power."
Now "moral power" is the power of being influenced by motives. The only conceivable way of
losing this power is by losing'all those outward ob
jects that excite our susceptibilities, or else by losing some of these susceptibilities.  For example: a
mans may lose moral power by the removal of all
those outward influences that excite to virtuous fefort, or he may lose it by having the susceptibilities that are excitedl by such motives altered or destroyed.  In scientific language, the "objective motives" may be removed, or the "subjective motives"
may be altered or destroyed.
Now you say that this loss of moral power is
"not the absence of means and motives." That is
to say, it is not the want of the objective or outward influences to virtuous action. If this be so,
is there any thing left but the susceptibilities which,
as "moral power," can be lost?
ts
250
I 
CORRESPONDENCE.
That you really mean this appears when you say
that the corruption of infant nature consists in " the
perversion of the affections."  What can this mean
except that the susceptibilities of the infant mind
are perverted and depraved, and thus "moral power" is lost?
I think, if you will candidly examine this statement which you sent me as to what infant depravity does and does not consist in, you will perceive it
to involve a direct contradiction.
This same kind of contradiction, I think, you will
find in all theologians, Catholic and Protestant, who
attempt to state first in what infant depravity does
not, and then in what it does consist.
I have tried, again and again, the most acute
Calvinistic and Arminian metaphysicians I could
find, to obtain a statement of what the depravity
of infant nature does and does not consist in, which
does not involve an exact contradiction.
The only mode of avoiding the acknowledgment
of this has been, either to refuse to prepare such a
statement, or else a refusal to define the terms used.
And so uniform has been this course of evasion,
that I feel quite sure that there is no theologian of
any school, Catholic or Protestant, who will publicly offer such a statement, and agree to define the
terms used as sanctioned by proper authorities.
In saying this, I imply nothing which is disrespectful or disparaging. I believe that theologians
*         *.*
251 
CORRESPONDENCE.
of all schools, who think the most clearly, are most
embarrassed by the difficulties involved in this doctrine of transmitted depravity, and that they avoid
any public acknowledgment because they are not
yet suitably prepared to take the practical course
that may be involved in such a public development
as would thus be hastened.
I am at a loss to know your meaning in what
you have written in regard to the baptism of infants. You seem to agree with the Thirty-nine Articles that God, having power to create a perfect
nature for infants, chooses not to do so, and thus
they come into life, not with the constitution of
mind which God gave to Adam, but with one so
depraved that a child has no power "to do good
works" pleasant and acceptable to God till "grace"
is imparted by the Holy Spirit.
You say " the basis of our hope in Christian nurture is in the grant of regenerating grace to all who
will but receive it, of which the baptism of infants
is to each the sign and pledge, and one of the great
means." 
Now it is impossible for any infant to be " willing to receive" this gift, for it knows nothing of
the matter. The only hope, then, is from baptism,
which is secured only to a small portion of infants
in most Protestant churches in this nation, where
only the children of those professing to be regenerate are baptized. All infants out of Christian lands,
252
i
I
i
4. 4.-. -.....
I!.1 1..,.  -
-1 I....  -
,..,. 6 
CORRESPONDENCE.
and all in Christian lands not baptized, in your
view, as I understand it, have not this gift of regenerating grace, and, as the consequence, most of them
live a life of sin, and then go to eternal perdition.
Furthermore, you state that God can counteract
and remove this inherited evil either through or
without baptism, and you quote Fuller with approval as saying, "If we can not perceive the manner
of sins, no wonder we can not conceive the methods of grace in infant souls."
You add, "Is it not as merciful, and much more
philosophical, to suppose a depraved nature and
counteracting grace, both of which we see in their
fruits, as to suppose no depravity of nature, and yet
no sign of innocence preserved?"
Here, at least by implication, you teach that sinful actions flow from a depraved nature, as a polluted stream from a polluted fountain, or a poisonous plant from a poisonous seed, while all virtuous
actions spring from an implanted principle called
regenerating grace; and that the mode of this loss
or bestowal is what we can not perceive or understand. You allow that God can bestow this on all
infants either "with or without baptism," and you
concede that all sin flows from the want of this,
which God can and yet does not bestow on all in
fants.
Here comes up the grand difficulty.  Where is
the' goodness or justice of a Creator who for ages
I*
!
253 
CORRESPONDENCE.
has been continuing this awful evil on infants for
Adam's sin, when he has power to give them as perfect a nature as he gave to Adam, and withholds it
when he knows that the consequence, in most cases,
will be ruin to the child in this life and forever?
Is this as any human father would treat his newborn infants? And did not Christ come to reveal
God to us as afather-one who loves us all, in spite
of our sins, as a tender parent loves a child?
What father would withhold the rectifying grace
from a helpless babe, knowing all the dreadful risks,
and certain sin and misery consequent on this denial?
The Episcopal Church is the only large Protestant denomination in this nation that by- its practice
assumes that all the little children of the parish are
lambs in Christ's fold, entitled to baptism as those
who can be trained to virtue and piety.  Still, the
larger part of its clergy teach that baptism is an indispensable prerequisite to some spiritual gift that
remedies some injury to the child's mind, and increases its chances of escaping eternal ruin.
Both Catholics and Episcopalians gain some proselytes by this theory. They say, " Come into our
parish, and you need join no Church as regenerate
persons in order to secure a remedy for this dreadful evil done to your infants." But many a mother
and teacher must reply, "I can not.  The father of
these children believes no such doctrine-regards
-W
I
I
i
254
t
I 
CORRESPONDENCE.
it as a superstition derogatory to God's character as
a loving and tender heavenly Father-and he will
not let his children be trained to believe it."
While this doctrine does draw some into the
Catholic and Episcopal churches, do you not fear
that it is exerting a silent, steady influence in drawimg the highest as well as humbler classes away
from all churches and to latent infidelity?  Alas!
I know many of the best and noblest who are thus
repelled.
*    *    *    *
255 
CORRESPONDENCE.
_From   t. Rev. Bishop, of the Episcopal
Church.
"DEAR MADAM,-I have read the two volumes you
had the kindness to send to me- Commnon Sense applied to Religion, and An Appeal to the People.
"It was impossible to read them without admiration of the mental vigor and the honorable frankness
by which they are distinguished, or without sympathy with the many struggles of the heart which they
reveal.
"To give any extended opinion on the contents of
two such books would require, not a letter, but days
of oral, or volumes of written discussion. With your
repugnance toward the hard-hearted system which has
predominated in New England I quite coincide; but
you will find it easier, as usual, to destroy than to
build.
"Without entering into any discussion, and without presuming to hope that any suggestions of mine
would modify your deliberate conclusions, I will but
state a few of the points that have been uppermost in
my thoughts while I read and after I had finished the
volumes.
"Is it really any satisfaction to the mind to be told
that Omnipotence could not prevent all the evil that
is in the world? If Omnipotence could not prevent
it, in whole or in part-if this is absolutely the best
which could have been-what is this but a sort of predestination, only of blind necessity, not of a wise will?
"Is it not the fact of the existence of evil and the
prospect of its eternal existence that forms the real
difficulty, never yet solved but by the appeal to our
own consciousness of ignorance and our reverential
submission?  Have not all discussions of this kind a
somewhat presumptuous character?
"Has not the Augutstinian system, in the respects
in which it is painful to you, been almost always held,
256
'i
II 
CORRESPONDENCE.
except here in New England, as if it were not held at
all? Is not this a legitimate way of holding doctrines
so mysterious and abstract, if they are to be held at
all-that is, if believed to be true-just as the theory
of predestination, apart from all scriptural authority,
should not at all affect the conduct of any person of
common sense?
"Have all your arguments any force whatever
against a system which does not ascribe to man, in his
natural state, any other inability than that of turning
to God and rendering him acceptable service-religious, spiritual, pure service? Does not all experience
establish the certainty that man is naturally under precisely this inability?
"Is it of any importance, as to this question, whether the impulse through which the inability is rectified
come, as you suggest, from training human and divine, working as if from without, or, as the Christian
Church with one voice declares, from within, from the
SpI,;'it of God?  Is not the latter a much more inspiring, ennobling view, and does it not correspond with
the literal statements of Scripture?
"If the Spirit be supposed to be freely, widely, generally bestowed on the youngest as well as afterward,
and this to be expressed, and pledged, and made sure
by baptism, do not your objections fall to the ground?
"If our Lord sent apostles, and thus instituted a
ministry, can it be quite right to treat that ministry
with so little regard, and to forget that'they watch
for souls' and' have rule over their brethren?' And is
it altogether best to appeal to'the people and the secular press' as safely and more to be trusted?
"Is it not possible that a mind accustomed to distinct analysis, and to the development of great principles, and to the practical work of instruction, rather
than to the laborious investigation of details or to
learned study of language and of history, may, for that
very reason, be sometimes and somewhat disqualified
for looking on all sides of subjects like these?
257 
CORRESPONDENCE.
"In a little while we shall know, and in the mean
while can we too carefully or too prayerfully stem the
danger of inciting in others, especially in the young,
a habit of daring and self-sufficient speculation on
themes so mysterious as the depths of the human nature and the divine?
"These, my dear madam, are the thoughts which
occurred to me while I read and reviewed your arguments. I do not present them as arguments on the
other side.'Augustinianism' I do not undertake to
defend.  But I should be sorry that you should find
no more honored or more scriptural alternative than
Pelagianism.'
"' Not of ourselves, it is the gift of God; not of
works, lest any man should boast.' In some form let
us hold this fast. I am, with very great respect, yours
sincerely,.1
Letterfrom the Author in Reply to the foregoing.
RT. REV. SIR, -I thank you for the attention
you have bestowed on the volumes I sent, and still
more for the kind and Christian manner in which,
by your criticisms and queries, you have endeavored to aid me in the search after truth.
In reply to these queries, I would say that " the
existence of evil, and the prospect of its eternal existence," is "the real difficulty," and the one we encounter as much without revelation as with it. It
is one which, on any theory, should lead us to our
Creator with a humble "consciousness of ignorance,
and with reverential submission." And in all I
have written, my aim has been not to construct a
theory or "system" that removes this difficulty,
258 
CORRESPONDENCE.
but mainly to escape a presumptuous theory and
system invented by man which increases it a thousand fold.
I find, out of the Bible as well as in it, that awful evil exists; that in this short and painful life I
and all I love are involved in it, while there are
dreadful forebodings of the future. What are we
to do? is the agonizing cry of humanity in every
age and nation as this awful fact is felt in every
aching heart.
We look into the Bible and read, not a theory
of the origin of evil, but a way of escape from sin
and its penalties. Christ, the Creator, the Lord of
Glory, comes to his suffering creatures, and tells us
that by his life, teachings, death, and resurrection,
he has secured a sure way of escape both from
punishment for past sin and from its continued dominion..This way of escape is, so to believe on
him as only Lord of faith and practice, as to become
obedient to his teachings.
At the same time, with awful and decided language, he assures us that whoever has this faith
will be happy forever, and whoever has not will be
miserable forever. And his great command is,
"Go into all the world, and preach the Gospel to
every creature."
But Augustine and his followers arise and inquire, What is the origin or cause of all this sin and
suffering? And so they frame this theory. God
!
259 
i
CORRESPONDENCE.
made angels and Adam with perfect minds. Adam
sinned and ruined his nature, and then God made
such "a constitution of things" that Adam transmitted to all infants his ruined instead of his original nature. Christ came to be punished for the
sins of those who have this ruined nature new created, and also to purchase the influence of the Holy
Spirit to do it. Those thus re-created are to be forever happy in heaven, and all the rest are to be
consigned to endless suffering and despair in hell.
Now, reverend sir, my aim has been, not so much
to construct another theory of the origin of evil as
to escape this one, which was formed by fallible
men in a dark and cruel age, and forced upon the
Bible by Romish popes and councils.
I claim that the Bible does not teach that angels
or Adam had any more perfect minds than infants,
nor-does it teach that Adam ruined his nature by
sinning, nor that he transmitted a ruined nature to
his posterity.
I show, in the volume Common Sense applied to
Religion, that by reason alone we can prove the
mind of man to be perfect in constitution, and that,
if the Bible does teach the Augustinian theory, it
nullifies its claims to respect as a revelation from
God, and man ought to give it up and revert to the
teachings of reason, as exhibiting a wiser and more
reliable Creator, and a better system of religion.
You ask, "Have not all discussions of this kind a
260
.t 
CORRESPONDENCE.
presumptuous character?" I reply, The presumption is in those who have manufactured a system so
contrary to our moral nature and common sense,
and not in discussions to overthrow it.
You say it is easier to destroy than to build.
This would be to me a sorrowful conviction were
I expecting to build any thing. All I ask is the
Bible, free from that false and mournful system
that so long has obscured its tender and consoling
truths.
You ask "if it is any satisfaction to be told that
Omnipotence could not prevent all the evil that is
in the world," and, if this system "is absolutely the
best that could have been, what is this but a sort of
predestination, only of blind necessity, and not of a
wise will?"
In reply, I claim that all theologians, of every
age and stet, are alike in this, they limit the power
of God by a necessity in the nature of things. They
differ from me only in the points where they are
forced to concede such limitation.
For example, all are obliged to concede that
God's power is limited thus much. He can not
begin to be.  He has no power to annihilate his
nature or his past experience.  All say God can
not lie or love sin. Thus all limit God's power
somewhere.
All theologians also limit God's power in this
wise: They affirm that he is perfect in benevolence
261 
CORRESPONDENCE.
and wisdom.  This is saying, in another form of
words, that God has not the power to make a system wiser or better than the one he has'created.
It is also saying, in still another form (meaning the
same), that a system in which sin and suffering are
a part, and in which there is just such and so much
as we find, is the best that God had power to make;
so that, if it were altered any way by him, it would
be to make it worse.
When we say, then, that God "had no power"
to prevent the sin'and suffering that exist and have
existed, without making still greater evil in changing the best possible system to one that is worse,
we say what all Catholics, as well as all Protestants, say themselves, in one place or another; and
therefore they are barred from objecting.
Again: there are some things ascribed to God
by theologians which are direct contradictions, impossible, and absurd- what no mind can conceive
of as true, much less can believe.
Of this class is the affirmation that God does all
things for the best; that is to say, for the best and
highest good of all.  This is one side of the contradiction. Then they say that God (by a constitutional arrangement) caused all infants to receive a nature that inevitably leads them to do wrong, and
thus to destroy happiness, when he could have created them so that their nature,:i lead them to
makle happiness.
I
262
I 
CORRESPONDENCE.
That is to say, God, having power to make all
minds so that it would be easy and natural for
them to choose right in all cases, and thus make
the greatest- possible happiness for all, has created all
infants with a nature that inevitably leads them to
choose the wrong, and thus to destroy happiness.
What is this but saying that creating infants so
that they will destroy happiness is for the best, and
will secure more happiness on the whole than creating them so that they will make happiness? Is
it not saying, in other words, that destroying happiness makes more of it than increasing it, or that
less is greater than more? And is not this a direct
contradiction?
The proof that a being has not power to do a
thing is, that he wills it to be done, and it is not done.
If, then, God is not willing that any sinners shall
perish, anc still they do perish, it is proof that God
has no power to prevent it. The best possible system, then, involves the utter ruin and loss of some
who sin. The Bible teaches that God is not willing that any should perish, and yet that some will
perish forever.
Again: the highest proof that a being is not
willing that a thing should be, is that he suffers to
prevent it. No sane person will suffer to prevent
a thing that he can prevent by simply willing. To
suffer to save is the highest proof of the fact that
the sufferer could not save by willing
ffi
it
263 
CORRESPONDENCE.
To illustrate: A company of ignorant, disobedient rebels leave a good king, and go to an island
where it is certain they will be shipwrecked.  The
king knows it, and sends his son to save them.
The young prince goes, toils, suffers, weeps, and
dies to save them.  This proves that the king and
his son love them, and were not willing that they
should perish. It proves, too, that they could not
save them by simply willing it.
This sacrifice might so affect the rebels as to win
them back as loving and obedient subjects, as nothing else would have done. In that case, it would
be properly said that nothing but the sufferings
and death of the son could save them; that he was
a "vicarious sacrifice," "suffered in their stead,"
made his father and the rebels one again (i. e., made
an "ato?ement" or "atoning sacrifice"), and that
"by his stripes they were healed."  Thus, too, the
sacrifice of this son would "sustain law" by bringing rebels back to obedience.
Now suppose a document was found on the dead
prince, with the royal sign and signature, stating
that this whole thing was planned by the king to
secure the shipwreck and also the death of the
prince, in order to show forth his own justice, goodness, and mercy? Would not all who were thus
rescued throw it aside as an absurd forgery?
Would they not say that any person planning such
a thing for such a purpose was fit for nothing but
a mad-house?
264
i 
CORRESPONDENCE.
A rational mind can not choose suffering (sacrifice) without compensating good. Such choosing
is proof of insanity. God only knows the infinite,
endless results of all acts of choice. Hie sees that
pure, uncompensated evil would be the result of his
choosing wrong, and so it is impossible for him to
be tempted to any wrong (i.e., excited by desire).
But finite minds can not measure future results
-are "in darkness," believing evil to be good, and
are thus excited to desire it; and they learn only by
experience and by faith, that often what they desire
as good, in the end is evil.
Christ had power to so connect himself with a
human body (thus becoming a man) that his infinite faculties were, for the time being, limited, not
in their nature, but their exercise. His hour of agony was the " hour of darkness," when, for the time
being, he did not foresee all things, and thus was
tempted in all points as we are.
The great thing taught in the incarnation and
sufferings of Jesus Christ is, that sin and suffering
are so inevitable in the eternal nature of things, that
God has not the power to prevent them, and that
sacrifice on the part of the pure, the good, and the
innocent, to save the sinful, is inevitable; that God
himself is subject to this law, and that to be a true
follower of Christ involves suffering and sacrifice to
save the ignorant and guilty.
You ask, "If this system is absolutely the best that
M
265 
i
CORRESPONDENCE.
could have been, what is this but a sort of predestination, only of blind necessity, and not of a wise
will?"
In reply I would say, that the chief point in
which we are created "in the image of God" and
above the beasts that perish is our rational free
agency.  The brutes have a power of choosing, but
only those things which excites the strongest desire,
thus making them subject to a blind necessity.
But man has the power of regulating his choices
according to rule, the great rule demanding all to
choose the best good of all concerned in view of an
eternal existence. It is this power to choose contrary to the strongest desire or motive (i.e., as it
respects self-gratification), which is our only idea of
rational free agency.
We thus, by our own nature, can understand that
Goa also is a free agent, choosing according to rule,
and not, as the brutes do, according to excited desires as stronger or weaker.
To conceive of God as having all the susceptibilities that man has, and that he regulates them, as
man is required to do, by the great law of rectitude,
so as always to choose what is for the best for all
concerned, does no more destroy our idea of free
agency in God than it does in man.  Instead of
this, it is a necessary part of our idea of a rational
free agent.
You ask, in regard to the "inability" of the young
266
i
i
I 
CORRESPONDENCE.
child of " turning to God and rendering him accept able service," "if all experience does not establish
its certainty," and "if it is of any importance whether the impulse through which the inability is rectified, come from training human and divine, working as if from without, or, as the Christian Church
with one voice declares, from within, from the Spirit
of God?"
I reply that, practically, there is a very great difference between a view that supposes the mind of a
child able to turn to God whenever the appropriate
knowledge, motive, and training are furnished, and
one that supposes a preliminary new creating process indispensable, without which all motives and
training are of little or no avail. What farmer
would cultivate a plant that he was assured would
yield only poisonous fruit unless its nature was
changed by. a new creation of God, till he had evidence of this change?
I regard the mind of the child as a perfect seed,
needing only the good soil and careful training
which man can provide, united with the warm sun
of divine influence that is ever shed on all faithful
labor. Thus there is both the outer and inner impulse, God and man working together to rear up
plants of righteousness, both being indispensable to
success.
You ask if my objections do not fail " if the Spirit be supposed to be freely, widely, generally bestow
267 
CORRESPONDENCE.
ed on the youngest as well as afterward, and this
to be expressed, and pledged, and made sure by baptism?" This will be some relief for those whose
children are baptized; but more than half of the infants, even in Christian lands, are not baptized, so
that remedy, whatever it may be, fails them.
If, as you intimate, the Spirit is "generally bestowed on the youngest," I should like to know
whether you would teach, as the Methodist divines
now are seeming to teach, that all the injury done to
a child by Adam's sin is remedied by Christ? If
so, then we are agreed that the infant mind is perfect as God first made it, and the name of Pelagian
belongs to us both alike.
If you say you do not hold to a depravity of constitution, you agree with me. That is all that I
deny.
If you say there is some cause for the universal
sin of man, I grant it; but this does not oblige me
to have a theory to show what the cause is. What
I aim at is to get rid of a theory, not to prove mine
the true one. I state mine, not so much to prove it
as to show that we are not shut up to that of Augustine.
If it is urged that we see the fact, and must allow that at least some minds are badly constituted,
and that this is transmitted from parent to child, I
deny the fact, and say no one can prove it. Minds
are parts of a vast system requiring diversity in or
268,
I
i 
CORRESPONDENCE.
ders and kinds. What is called a badly constituted
mind can be regulated by the will, and when so regulated the person is higher in virtue than if not
tempted by such propensities.
No man has a right to say that any child's mind
is badly constituted as a part of God's infinite system of minds and worlds till he can so comprehend
that system as to prove what he asserts. A: man
who builds a theological system on a theory for
which he has no proof, acts as contrary to common
sense as the man who sends merchandise to a port
where he has no evidence that it is wanted.
In regard to the entire "inability" of man "to turn
and prepare himself by his own natural strength
and good works to faith and calling upon God," and
that we have "no power to do good works pleasant
and acceptable to God without his grace," no rational person ever denied it, in the only sense in
which, as I suppose, the Bible teaches it.
An infant has no power to love and obey God,
not because its mind is made wrong, but because
the knowledge, training, and motives are wanting;
just as the child has no power to see in a dark
room, not because his eyes are made wrong, but because the light — is not there.
Jesus Christ, the Creator of all things in heaven
and on earth, formed us with capacities of knowing, loving, and obeying him, revealed his perfect
laws, came to set us the example of perfect obe
I
269 
CORRESPONDENCE.
dience, suffered to the death to save us, and ever
lives to help and guide us by his Holy Spirit given
freely to all.
This is "the grace" of Jesus Christ given for all;
and those who have access to the light of this knowledge of the glory of God, know and can walk in the
way of salvation.
How far those are benefited who do not learn
this Gospel in this world, and what may be their
chance in another state of being, is not revealed to
man.
You ask if the Augustinian system has not been
held almost always, except in New England, as if
it were not held at all? I reply that all the Papal
and Episcopal churches have held it a practical
thing, inasmuch as they have intervened a theory
of baptismal regeneration, or some other method
supposed to restore to children and to the unregenerate some power to do works pleasing to God,
and having some efficacy in securing regenerating
grace.
But the Calvinistic sects have denied this power
in their creeds and teachings, and left to most parents nothing but unconditional "election" as the
basis of hope. The "covenant of grace," by which
"the promise is to you and to your children," is
usually taught to be a point of some hope for the
infants of Church members, but for all other infants
there is no way of escape from a life of sin, and
i
270
I
I 
CORRESPONDENCE.
eternal death as the consequence, but what rests on
unconditional election.
You ask if it is not a legitimate way of holding
doctrines so mysterious and abstract, as if not held
at all, and so as not to affect the conduct of persons
of common sense?
Is it not a strong evidence against such doctrines
that persons of common sense are expected to act as
if they were false?
On any theory, I can not perceive the wisdom or
goodness of a Creator who, having the power to
make all infant minds perfect, has constituted them
so imperfect in nature that they must be re-created
before they can turn to God and render acceptable
service. It seems more inspiring, ennobling, and
in agreement with Scripture that God creates all
his children with perfect minds; not all equal and
alike in endowments, but all perfectly fitted for a
station of happiness in a perfect system, and needing only the knowledge, motives, training, and development which can not be created, but to secure
which both God and man must act conjointly.
In the Bible God always speaks of man's agency
in saving our race as what is as indispensable as his
own. And he grieves and mourns over guilty creatures as ruined, not for want of what he had power
to bestow, but for want of what man can provide
and does not.
Your question as to my own personal disqualifi
271 
CORRESPONDENCE.
cations for looking on all sides of subjects like these
introduces a point which is of great practical importance.
In our search after truth, as it seems to me, all
that God requires is, first, a humble and teachable
spirit-it is "the meek" whom he promises to
"guide in judgment;" next, the use of the means
in our reach; then prayer for guidance of the Holy
Spirit; and, lastly, a decision according to the best
judgment, not of other minds, but of our own.
When on all practical questions we have thus
decided, we have done all that God requires. On
many practical questions none but God can certainly decide what is right abstractly (i.e., the best for
all concerned in relation to time and eternity). He
has given general rules to guide our decisions, and
we are to apply these rules by the above method.
When we have done this our responsibility ends.
We have decided right so far as we are obligated so
to do, and the results belong to God.
This subject in hand is a practical one to me, as
it is to every teacher and parent.  "Can these children, with the nature they possess at birth, be trained
to true virtue and piety, or is nothing accomplished
till God re-creates their depraved natures?" Are
we to train infants as young Christians, to be developed into mature Christians, or are we to train
them as depraved creatures, with the hope that
some day God will regenerate them, previous to
I
272
i
i 
CORRESPONDENCE.
which there is no true virtue and piety to be ex
pected?
I was not by natural taste a metaphysician or a
theologian, but quite the reverse. All through my
youth, however, I was accustomed to hear discussions, and my father's social nature sought my sympathy in all his theological debates. Then sorrow
came and cut off the hopes of this life, and drove
me to seek for religious consolation amid the stern
teachings of New England theology, where it could
not be found by me.
Then I became an educator, striving only to qualify myself for its sacred duties, and studying nothing but with this as the chief end. Thus I have
been led to these investigations simply as a practical matter, bearing on my daily duties as an educator.
When I come to questions demanding learned
research far beyond my reach, or when I find the
knowledge needed hid in the Greek and Hebrew,
am I then helpless, and obliged to take opinions on
human authority? Not at all. On the contrary,
I think I am better situated than any learned men,
or metaphysicians, or theologians, who make these
sciences their chief pursuit.
Do I want to know any thing in Greek, Hebrew,
Chaldee, or Arabic? I have a brother-in-law under the same roof, who is learned in these, and is
pleased to give his aid. In a very short time, I
M2
273 
CORRESPONDENCE.
learn from him what are the diverse interpretations,
and what are the arguments for each, and I then
do not take his opinion, but judge for myself.
So, on questions of mental science, I have another
brother who has made this his-speciality, and who
in a short time can point out the books, or give me
an outline furnishing the arguments pro and con
on any disputed question. In theology, also, I have
for forty years been hearing and reading with my
father and brothers, and all with a practical aim.
Now it is clear that, having the ordinary common
sense of mankind, I have a better chance than any
learned men, any metaphysicians, any theologians,
to come to correct conclusions, and for these reasons:
I belong to no party; I have no restraints of synods, presbyteries; no parish, no theological school,
no college, no newspaper, no magazine, that would
be njured by my change of opinions. Where are
the learned theologians and metaphysicians, the editors, or the clergymen who are as free from such
biasing influences as I am?   Would  not almost
every learned man in the nation lose his character,
his professional position, and his daily bread, if he
should fairly, as I have done, take the name of a
Pelagian?
Not that I voluntarily assumed this name. Those
who do not, or can not answer arguments, often call
hard names, and it is to such that I was first indebted for it. Nor do I repel it. If Pelagius really
i
274 
CORRESPONDENCE.
did hold that infants are born with just such a nature as God created for them, and that this, like all
his works, is perfect, and if agreeing with him in
this is being a Pelagian, then I am content so to be
called. The question of the propriety of the name
belongs to those who have given it, not to me.
Your query as it respects the deference owed to
the ministers of Jesus Christ, perhaps implies what
is not correct as to the true impress of my words.
I believe that the ministry have claims of deference
and respect in all those matters in which Christ appointed them "to rule."  In the interpretation of
Christ's teachings they are not appointed to rule, but
to teach all that knowledge which the people need
to qualify them to judge for themselves. And when
I appeal from the ministry to the people, it is only
to urge this important distinction, that the ministry
are to rule in conducting church affairs as presiding
officers, but not in matters of opinion.
Every minister has a right to set forth his opinions and his interpretations of the Bible, and his
reasons for them, and then the people are to be his
judges as to whether he is right, so far as to be allowed to continue to teach thus. And if they judge
him to be erroneous and dangerous, they, by their
votes, can and ought to dismiss him from their pulpit.
There is not a pulpit, or a religious paper, or a
magazine, or even a denomination that is not thus
275 
CORRESPONDENCE.
dependent on the people as their judges. Even in
the Catholic Church in this nation, if all, or even a
very large majority of the people, decide that their
clergy are in the wrong, the clergy must yield, or
lose character, and pulpit, and income.
And, although the ministry is and ought to be
more learned and qualified to teach than the people
in all that is needed for the true understanding of
the Bible, I have already indicated the respects in
which the laity have an advantage in the probabilities of forming correct judgments as to the true
meaning of the Bible, f they will only make the
proper exertion.
All I have written on the subject, in this view,
I think, implies no want of respect to Christ's ministers. And my appeals to the people and secular press were aimed, not to lower this respect, but
rather to lead those thus addressed wisely and humbly to use the power conferred on them by Him
who has commanded all to "call no man master"
but Christ, the Lord of all.
276
4
i 
CORRESPONDENCE.
-rom Rev. Dr., of the Episcopal Church.
"DEAR MADAM,-Your work strikes me as a careful and ingenious treatment of one of the most momentous of all subjects. For the most part I sympathize with its doctrines, and wholly with its spirit.
"There are some suggestions which, at your request, I will offer.
"i 1. It seems undesirable to make so formal a recognition of the vague and artificial distinction between
High and Low Church.  The tendencies which these
names represent are real, but the existence of the parties is an evil which the best friends of the Church
deplore, and are earnestly trying to remove. The actual lines of difference are so vague, and cross and recross in such confusion, that to attempt a two-fold
classification under these names is both injurious and
unjust. The work of our Church in this country is
too important to be compromised by such pernicious
partisanship.
"2. It will be painful to members of our Church,
who have a knowledge of its history and relations, to
hear it spgken of as a' sect'-' an Arminian sect.' It
is not a sect at all.
"3. I do not see that you make baptism an essential even to the visible Church; yet Christ makes it
so, and St. Peter, to say the least. Suppose all baptized parents were suddenly cut off, and only their unbaptized children were left in the world, would there
be a visible Church?
"You appear to think that the Episcopal Church,
and Christians generally, would do well to root out
the hope of some mysterious efficacy in baptism. But
how is it possible to read and receive all the several
passages of the New Testament which touch on this
subject in their plain,' common-sense' interpretation,
without admitting that there is some'mysterious efficacy' in it, and that Christ and his apostles teach that
there is?
277 
CORRESPONDENCE.
"'Except a man be born of water and the Holy
Ghost.'' He that believeth and is baptized shall be
saved.'
"'The figure whereunto even baptism dot*  now
save us.''The washing of regeneration.' 
"Do not these expressions warrant our baptismal
service in referring to the water as'sanctified to a
mystical washing away of sin?'
" I cordially agree with you that the Bible gives us
no theory as to the mode, nor does it define the degree
of the'efficacy;' but its language is a strange delusiou if it does not assert the fact. I adopt your own
valuable distinction between the fact and the mode of
the fact. The lowest Churchman, I believe, if he would
not impugn the Gospel, admits some' mysterious efficacy' in baptism.
"4. You seem to reject the idea that' children are
utterly unable to have any righteousness of their own.'
I had supposed that all Bible Christians agree that no
human being has any power, faculty, virtue, or grace,
or even existence' of his own,' or otherwise than by
the gift of his Creator.
"On the whole question of the fact of depravity I
am tempted to say more than you will care to readmore than you have asked for-more than I have time
to write; but is it the part of' common sense' to deny
facts? And the fact is, that children are born uniformly selfish and prone to sin. Common sense and
the Bible agree in that.
"You may refer the mischief to education, to which
there are two answers. 1. Where did the bad educators and education come from?  2. If sin begins to
come as soon as education begins, it must have been
in before.* The world is full of hereditary transmitted
evil. It is vain to say that this evil is not of a kind
* Here is a specimen of the Romish theory, that sin and righteousness are physical things to be put in and taken out, instead
of the voluntary acts of rational minds.
I
278
i 
CORRESPONDENCE.
to bring sufferingeal suffering.  It does bring it,
moral as well as physical damage and loss. To make
this inconsistent with God's goodness proves too much.
"5. More than once it has occurred to me whether
there is not a grand fallacy underlying your whole argument as making'common sense' a supreme arbiter
and proper test of spiritual truth, thus ignoring the
spiritual faculty-the faith organ-to which divine
mysteries are addressed.
"What we call common sense is one noble power
among other co-ordinate powers. All must work in
harmony. But this one is not the highest, and revelation often makes its wisdom to be foolishness.
"6. In supporting your opinion that the Bible does
not teach that men are depraved in their nature by or
from Adam, you dispose of a whole set of texts by
observing that they are an'Oriental mode of expression, not to be taken literally.' This is an assertion
only. And by the same rule of interpretation might
not one expel almost any doctrine firom the Bible?
"You will understand the freedom and conciseness
of my comments. They are made only at your request, and rather with a desire to discharge my own
conscience than with a hope to change your convictions. Pray take them in good part, and believe me
cordially and faithfully your friend."
Reply to theforegoing by the Author.
REV. AND DEAR SIR, -Thanking you for the
kind attention you have given to the pages I sent
for your criticism, I proceed to notice the several
points presented, which, to save repetition, I have
numbered in your letter with corresponding num
bers in my reply.
1. As to recognizing the distinctions of High
279 
CORRESPONDENCE.
Church and Low, while it is impossible, as you suggest, to draw any clear line of demarcation so as to
make a two-fold classification of persons, you allow
that the tendencies represented by these names are
real, and you must perceive also that they all result
from this theory of transmitted infant depravity.
The clergy and laity of the Episcopal Church are
not trained to metaphysical speculations, or to framing philosophical theories. Their creed in the Liturgy is one of facts, not including a single item of
philosophy to account for these facts. But in the
Articles and in some of the ritual has been added
some things as facts which are not so, and from this
combination results the tendency to Rome on the
one hand, and to Calvinism on the other.
The assumed facts, warranted neither by the Bible
or common sense, are that God has created minds
in nature diverse from those of infants, being so
perfect that holy actions naturally result; that he
created Adam with such a mind; that Adam ruined it by sinning, and, in consequence of this, God
caused such a constitution of things that Adam
transmitted, not the holy nature God made, but his
own ruined nature depraved by sinning.
This falsely is called a fact, and accepted as a
"mystery" revealed by God.
Every parent feels that if God has done a deed
which in any human parent would be called monstrous and cruel in the highest degree, he must
I
I
I
280
I, 
CORRESPONDENCE.
somehow have provided some compensating remedy.  The Romish Church and the High-Church
Episcopal divines say it is done, and the mysterious
remedy is baptism, and other rites and forms for
this end. The laity, not trained to reason, only feel
that if their infants are so injured, they wish to go
where there is the best chance of a remedy. This
makes the constant pressure and "tendency" to
High-Churchism and to Rome.
In resisting this tendency, the opposing party
teach that baptism and other rites do not regenerate the soul of the child, but only admit to certain
advantages in the Church, and that real spiritual
regeneration comes only by the new creating influence of the iHoly Spirit, in connection with means
and influences possible only to a certain degree of
intellectual development, and also dependent, more
or less, o4 "elective grace."  Thus comes the tendency to Calvinistic views and training.
This struggle, and the parties resulting from it,
can never cease till that false doctrine, originated
in the Romish Church, and contrary both to the
Bible and common sense, is relinquished as a fact,
and treated as a pernicious philosophical theory
having no claims to respect.
2. You object to my speaking of the Episcopal
Church as a "sect." This word is defined in the
dictionaries as a "religious denomination."  Our
Liturgy defines the Church in its widest use as
281 
CORRESPONDENCE.
"the blessed company of all faithful people."  The
local Church, in the Articles, is defined as "a congregation of faithful men in which the pure Word
of God is preached, and the sacraments be duly
ministered."
Besides these uses, the word church is employed
to express an organization of several local churches
into one body. Thus the English National Church
is one body composed of local churches; the American Episcopal Church is another distinct body of
local churches, united as one by their constitution
and General Convention. So the American Presbyterian Church is another body of local churches
organized as one body. Each of these is a denominational Church, in distinction from the Church universal and the local Church. And, in common
parlance, the words " sect" and " denomination" are
use; as synonyms. I think, after this exposition,
no candid person in our communion will be pained
that I have used the word "sect" as applicable to
the Episcopal denominational Church, or deny that
it is as properly applied to that as to any other denomination of Christians.
3. On the subject of baptism, I find nothing said
distinctly in the New Testament in reference to infants. We see in the history that, for adults, it was
the appointed mode ofprofessing to believe in Christ
as Lord, and thus of becoming members of a Christian community.  Christ's saying," He that believ
iI
282 
CORRESPONDENCE.
eth and is baptized shall be saved," is equivalent to
saying that believing and professing this belief are
what is demanded of all his followers. But, as often it might be the case that baptism was necessarily
delayed or omitted, it is not said he that is not baptized shall be damned.
In the history of the first century, it appears that
baptism soon was withheld till the young convert
or young children had received proper instruction,
and yet they were members of the local Church. It
seems, in the age of Augustine, that he was not baptized in early life, though his mother was a very
devout Christian woman.  From all I can glean on
this subject, I should infer that, in regard to infants,
the early Christians had diverse views and practices,
just as we have now.
If we recur to the Episcopal standards, we find
that a church is defined, not as an assembly of baptized persons, but as a "congregation of faithful
men," using the word men in its widest sense, including women and children. According to this
definition, any congregation of faithful persons, in
which "the pure Word of God is preached, and the
sacraments be duly ministered according to Christ's
ordinance," is a local Church.
This definition does not state how much faith
each of the congregation must have to be counted
a "faithful" person. But as in all cases baptized
infant children are counted as in the Church, and
283 
CORRESPONDENCE.
it is supposed that all are baptized in infancy in the
Episcopal denomination, the whole parish are supposed to be the Church. And the actual amount
of faith practically demanded is only so much as
secures attendance as a part of "a congregation."
According to this definition, all that is required
to form a local Church of Christ is for a number of
believers in his religion to unite as a congregation,
in which the pure Word of God shall be preached
and the sacraments be duly administered.
But who is to decide whether the Word preached
is "pure," and whether the sacraments be "duly"
administered?  Certainly, on the Protestant principle that every man is to be his own interpreter
of God's Word, it is the congreyation who are to be
the deciding power. The Word must be preached
and the sacraments administered according to the
convictions of the congregation, and not according
to the dictum of pope or ecclesiastical councils.
Thus a local Church of Christ on the Episcopal
theory, as set forth in the Articles, consists of men,
women, and children who have enough faith in
Christ to join a Christian congregation, in which
the Word of God is preached, and the sacraments
be administered according to the convictions of the
worshipers. It becomes a local Episcopal Church
only by adopting the forms and usages of that denomination.  But it is a Christian Church when the
congregation believes in Christ, and has the pure
I
284
.,
I
i 
CORRESPONDENCE.
Word preached, and the sacrament duly administered according to the judgment and convictions of
the worshipers.
I suppose that our Savior laid such apparent
stress upon baptism, not as a mysterious remedy for
injury done by Adam to infant minds, but because,
in human language, the sign and the thing signified
are often expressed by the same term.
Baptism was the appointed sign or form ofprofessing Christ which was demanded of all. A man
must be "born of the Spirit" by a true and living
faith, and he thus enters the spiritual family of God.
He must also be "born by water," and thus enter
the company of professed followers of Christ, and
share their labors and sufferings; and whoever was
unwilling to take this cross of a public profession
was declared to be no true disciple.  Thus we understand the declaration, "Except a man be born
of water and the Holy Ghost he can not enter the
kingdom of heaven." This seems to me the true
meaning of this and similar passages, and I think
the Liturgy and Articles of our Church warrant it.
Still, there are some passages left in the baptismal
service by Archbishop Cranmer that retain some of
the Romish idea of a " mystical spiritual regeneration by water."
4. I do not reject the idea that "children are utterly unable to have any righteousness of their
own," in the sense you seem to receive it. God
285 
CORRESPONDENCE.
gives us existence, all our faculties, and all those
surroundings which enable us to use them. In this
widest sense, God is the author of every thingevery act of sin and every act of holiness in all his
creatures. It is in this widest sense he himself says,
"I create evil."
But this is very different from the doctrine that
God, having power to make all infant minds perfect, has caused them to be made depraved by a
constitutional transmission which he instituted. It
is this, and not your statement, that I deny.
You ask if it is the part of common sense "to
deny facts," as if I denied the fact of the dreadful
depravity of man as exhibited in this world's history. I maintain this as fully as any one. The
only thing I dispute is the theory which attempts
to show the " cause and origin of this evil."
When you say that the cause of this depravity is
the depraved nature of infants transmitted from
Adam, and I deny that this is taught in the Bible,
and that it is contrary to common sense, you seem
to think I deny the fact of man's depravity.  You
are not the first that has made this mistake. I rarely know any person speak or write on this subject
without exactly this confusion of ideas.
The Bible was written for men who are sinners
by their own voluntary transgressions, and has
nothing to do with the nature of infants. The Gospel comes to help sinful men, not to teach the "or
II
286 
CORRESPONDENCE.
igin of evil," much less to teach that infants have a
depraved nature, from which comes all their after
sin and suffering, and that, too, when God could
have given another and better nature, such as it is
claimed he gave Adam, and such as would have
saved infants from all the sin and suffering resulting from a depraved nature. It is this theory I
deny, not the fact of man's depravity.
5. Your remarks as to "the spiritual faculty"
need some explanation. I conjecture that you
mean by this term a power or faculty that takes
cognizance of things not of this world-the spiritual things of the world unseen.
All our knowledge on these subjects we gain solely by revelations, made in human language for the
common people, which are to be interpreted by the
common-sense rules employed in every-day life. I
never supposed any special faculty was given to enable us to understand the language of the Bible, or
to have "faith" in its revelations, on one subject
more than on another. Perhaps, on more reflection, you will come to the same conclusion.
6. In regard to your remarks on the texts which
I have claimed to be " Oriental modes of expression,
not to be taken literally," I refer you to what I have
addressed to my brother on that subject in pages
following.
*      *       *       *
287 
m L
CORRESPONDENCE.
Extractsfrom a Letter of an Eiscopal Clergyman to
the Author.
"I venture to direct your attention to a few points
which strike my mind unfavorably.
"One is your representing theologians as teaching
that the natural depravity of infants is an'infliction'
visited on the innocent descendants of Adam as a
' punishment' or' penalty' for Adam's sin. Your treatise implies that God directly creates every infant
mind, or soul, with a depraved nature arbitrarily inflicted as the punishment for Adam's sin. In this I
think you do injustice to all theologians with whose
writings I have any acquaintance.
"I suppose that the sin of Adam can not but affect
his posterity, unless God, by an omnipotent act, should
change the whole law of propagation which he at first
impressed on the nature of man.' Who can bring a
clean thing out of an unclean?'
"Another point is your representing the Lutheran
theory of justification as teaching that man can have
no righteousness at all, but only have Christ's righteousness imputed to him.
"If you mean by this that no righteousness which
a sinner supposes himself to have before his conversion is the ground on which God justifies him when he
repents and believes, you are right, as I understand
the matter.
"But if you mean that the Lutheran theory teaches
that a manl can have no righteousness at all other than
Christ's imputed righteousness, you misrepresent that
theory, as I'understand it.
"In your remarks on' concupiscence,' you seem to
mistake both the theological and lexicographical sense
of the term. Where do theologians teach that our
natural' desires' are in themselves sinful?
"One other point is that you represent the Gospel
way of salvation as no more than this: Repent ofpast
1. 
288 
CORRESPONDENCE.
sin, have a controlling purpose of obedience for the future, and, for Christ's sake, God will receive and treat
you as if you had not sinned.
"Your phrase of'a controlling purpose of obedience,' as a substitute for the scriptural phrase'believe
on the Lord Jesus Christ,' does not satisfy mne, although, perhaps, you might so explain it as to bring
it into harmony with what the Bible teaches."
Beply of the Author to the preceding Letter.
The points to which you direct my attention involve simply a question of fact, to settle which we
must turn to historic and theological writings.
One fact to be decided is not what you, as an individual, hold and teach, nor how you may explain
and interpret texts and creeds. The question is,
Do Protestant theologians teach that the depravity
of infants is an " infliction," " punishment," and
"penalty" for Adam's sin, as the people use and
understand these terms as shown by our dictionaries?
You say yourself, "I suppose the sin of Adam
can not but affect his posterity, unless God, by an
omnipotent act, should change the whole law of
propagation which he at first impressed on the nature of man.'Who can bring a clean thing out of
an unclean?'"
Hiere you clearly imply that God had power to
make and to change "the law of propagation" by
which Adam's depraved nature passes to infants,
and causes the sin and misery of this world. You
N
289 
CORRESPONDENCE.
imply, also, that he had power to make the law of
propagation such that Adam would have transmitted his original nature, as God formed it, instead of
the one ruined by himself.
Now you have only to go to standard Catholic
and Protestant writers to find that they teach that,
if Adam had not eaten the forbidden fruit, the law
of propagation would have been the transmission
of Adam's nature as God first created it; that Adam
acted for the whole race, either in him, or as their
representative; and that when he sinned, then, and
for this act, God impressed "the law of propagatiofin"
by which Adam's nature which he had ruined, and
not the perfect nature God first created, was impressed on all infants, from which results their sin
and misery. Now this was, as the people use the
term, " an infliction," " a punishment," and " a penalty*' for Adam's sin. All men say that attainder
reaching to children is a punishment or penalty on
these children. All say that the children of a
drunkard suffer with him the penalty or punishment of his sins. I therefore claim that I use these
words in their true sense as the common people understand them, and am sustained by all lexicographers in this use.
Now suppose God had made a "covenant with
Adam," as theologians express it, in this wise:
"Eat not of that tree, and youl and all your posterity shall have perfect eyes and limbs; but eat of it,
290
I
i 
CORRESPONDENCE.
and you and all infants shall have blind eyes and
dislocated joints."
Suppose, in consequence of Adam's eating, God
established this cruel law, and all little children
were crawling about in darkness, screaming, tortured, and helpless with dislocated joints, while all
parents and nurses were in the same darkness and
helpless misery. How then could you prove a benevolent Creator, or prevent the conviction that he
is malevolent-especially so when you knew that
by a word he could restore to all these sufferers
perfect eyes and limbs, and, in spite of tears and
prayers, he refuses the boon?
But what a trifle this would be compared to the
temporal and the eternal misery which you yourself allow has been caused by "a law of propagation," established by the Creator, impressing on infants a depraved nature, from which comes all their
sin and misery in this life, and eternal ruin in hell
to all except the few regenerate; and that, too, when
he has power to create every infant mind perfect in
nature.
Will you, reverend sir, furnish any evidence, from
the Bible or from any other source, that Adam's
mind became depraved in nature by eating the forbidden fruit, or that God established any "law of
propagation" of such a depraved nature to infants?
So far as I can discover, this is a mere theological
theory, without any evidence of any kind.
291 
CORRESPONDENCE.
The fact that children have diverse constitutional
traits, some involving more temptation than others,
none will deny. None will deny that these are
transmitted from parent to child, and that the sins
of a parent often increase the constitutional temptations and difficulties of a child. But if these increased temptations are regulated by reason and
conscience, the child becomes nobler in character
and virtuous self-control than if no such difficulties
were to be overcome.
These varieties in mental constitution, and the
changes made by sinful parents in them, are to be
judged of as a part of a vast system of rational free
agents, in which whatever is best for the whole is
best for each part.
No finite mind is qualified to pronounce any infant mind badly constituted in reference to an infinita system and eternal results which the Infinite
and Eternal Mind alone can behold.
The question of the Lutheran theory of justification is also one of fact. The Romish Church taught
that by baptism and penance the soul is actually
nade righteous, Christ's righteousness thus being
poured into it.
The Protestant said no, it is not made righteous;
it is only regarded and treated as righteous by having Christ's righteousness imputed when faith is imparted at regeneration. If there is any thing taught
in human language, the Protestant standards do
292
,Jr 
CORRESPONDENCE.
teach that we can have no righteousness of our
own.
Your statement that a sinner has no righteousness which "is the ground  on which God justifies
him when he repents and believes," you may give
as your opinion; but I see not how you can maintain that Luther and his followers did not teach that
a man can have no righteousness at all except
Christ's imputed righteousness. It is a question of
fact, to be settled by appeal to authorities.
In regard to the words "desires" and "concupiscence," we are also at issue on a matter offact,
to be decided by an appeal to dictionaries.
On examining a standard English dictionary
[Richardson], I find the following:
" Concupiscence; to wish for, or to desire ardently.
"Lust; generally, to wish; to desire; to like; to
love."    ~
I think you will find in all English lexicographers that these words, in their original and widest
use, include all desires and wishes for any and all
kinds of enjoyment, and for escape from all kinds
of discomfort and pain.
Besides this general comprehensive sense, these
words have had a more limited use, confining them
to a certain class of desires on which the family
state is based. And here is the place where confusion of ideas has existed from want of a clear distinction between " natural desires" and the uncontrolled and sinful indulgence of such desires.
293 
CORRESPONDENCE.
For example, a young man is betrothed to a
maiden, and loves her with the pure affection appropriate to that relation. But suddenly he discovers that she is his own sister. In this change of
circumstances, his past love for his betrothed was
not sin.  On the contrary, if he controls and regulates his natural desires by the rules of rectitude and
religion, he rises higher in virtue and piety than if
no such temptations had occurred to be overcome.
I now can reply to your question, "Where do
theologians teach that our natural desires are in
themselves sinful?" I reply, that not only the
Thirty-nine Articles, but most of the standard theologians of the Protestant sects, teach that "concupiscence and lust hath of itself the nature of sin."
It is also equally true that the same persons contradict themselves, and say, as you imply, that "our
natural desires are not in themselves sinful."*
I suppose all these contradictions would be removed by a clear discrimination between "natural
desires" and the "uncontrolled indulgence" of these
desires, when such indulgence would violate the
*  The Presbyterian Confession teaches that "works done by
unregenerate men, although they may be things God commands,
are sinful and can not please God, or make a man meet to receive grace; and yet the neglect of them is more sinful and displeasing to God." Thus it appears that we displease God by not
doing works that are sinful. The eighth article of the Episcopal
Church also teaches that "works before justification have the
nature of sin."
294 
CORRESPONDENCE.
laws of God. I hold that our nature is such that
our natural desires are none of them sinful, and that
sin is never any thing but the voluntary transgression of law by the uncontrolled indulgence of our
desires, when the laws of God demand that they be
denied and suppressed as they can be by the will.
Your remarks on "the Gospel way of salvation"
again involve a question of fact. You no doubt
concede that the meaning of the word "faith" is
that which the common people understand when
they use it.. The first pages of Chapter X. set forth
this matter: at large.  More briefly, "faith" sometimes means. mere intellectual conviction, without
including appropriate feelings and conduct; and
this is called a "dead faith." Ill a wider use, it signifies intellectual conviction and the appropriate feelings and conduct; and this is called a "living faith."
Now the question between us is this: when a
man repents of past sin, and forms a controlling purpose of obedience to Christ in all things (that is, a
purpose which actually controls his feelings and conduct), is this the Gospel way of salvation? If you
say it is, then wherein does it differ from the Bible
meaning of true and saving faith in Jesus Christ?
When the doctrine of the transmitted depravity
of infants was established as the foundation of both
the Catholic and Protestant theology, every part of
this system was made to conform.  Thus faith, repentance, and love, each of which is presented as in
295 
CORRESPONDENCE.
dispensable to the Gospel way of salvation, were all
made by theologians to include as their chief ele.
ment, the regeneration or new creation of a depraved
nature. This is not any part of the meaning of
these words as used and understood by the people
in common life.
But infant depravity being relinquished, then
these words will assume their ordinary and true
meaning, as understood by the common people.
True repentance is not only sorrow for past sin,
but a controlling purpose to forsake it.
Love is not only pleasurable emotions toward
God, but a controlling purpose to please Him by
obedience to Hiis laws.
Faith is a belief in God or in Jesus Christ, involving a controlling purpose of obedience.
In all three it is the controlli~?g purpose of obedience to God and Christ that is the distinctive feature of "the Gospel way of salvation." If a man
has this purpose, and it actually controls his feeling
and conduct, is he not a true Christian? Can he
be one without such a controlling purpose?
If Christ and God are one, is not every man a
true Christian who maintains a controlling purpose
to obey the will or laws of God? And is not faith
in God and faith in Christ the same thing? Are
not the laws of God and the laws of rectitude one
and the same? If so, is not every child or adult,
who habitually is aiming to do right and avoid wrong,
296 
CORRESPONDENCE.
~ in both feeling and conduct, a righteous person and
a true Christian?
Is not this way of interpreting the Bible in agreement with the common-sense rules that the common
people employ, for whom especially the Bible was
written?
297
N 2 
CORRESPONDENCE.
From Rev. Dr., of the Episcopal Church.
"MY  DEAR MADAM, -I have been profoundly interested in the pages of your book sent in proofs,
though I have not been able to give the attention
which a production so striking and original demands.
"Those chapters in which you develop the moral
training of the household as in the same line, though
on a lower plane, as that of the Church, I read with
an assenting mind.
"Your exhibition of mental torture in the history
of Miss Payson, to which ingenuous souls are subjected, is mournful indeed. This agony produced in willing minds, plastic to the influence of the Spirit, by the
denial that the all-loving Father and the all-sacrificing
Son do not utter their assurances in good faith, is perfectly heart-rending. My inmost soul rejects this imputation against that infinite love which exhausts all
language to prove sincerity.
"There is one point that has often impressed me as
a father and a pastor in reference to those brought up
to feel that they are children of God, with the privileges and responsibilities belonging to that character.
I think it will be found that when such, at confirmation, are called to renew the vows made for them at
baptism, that their exercises, when brought to this decisive act, are very similar to those of persons trained
to regard themselves as out of Christ's family, and
only children of wrath.
"In children preparing for confirmation, I have found
as deep a sense of sinfulness, as solemn self-inspection,
as true repentance, and as deep a sense of the solemnity of this publicly entering into covenant with God,
as ever exists in those brought up under a different
system. At such a crisis, the soul of the child brought
up to regard itself as a young and imperfect Christian gathers itself up to examine whether it has the
true penitence for the past, and living faith and pur
298
i 
CORRESPONDENCE.
pose for the future, that such a public and solemn enrollment demands.
"I think this an important point to develop with a
view to satisfy those who believe, and justly, that none
should assume their baptismal vows with any thing
less than as a very solemn, soul-consecrating act, and
as a momentous era in the history of the soul.
"So much for the book up to Chapter XIV. While
entirely revolting from Calvinism, I have always accepted our ninth Article on original sin. I take the liberty of saying that I do not feel the force of your observation that the doctrine of transmitted depravity is
a philosophy constructed fiom the facts of the Bible.
It does not seem to me even an inference or a philosophy of facts so much as a truth wrapped up in or
underlying them.
"If I say that all lions have manes, and roar, and
have an appetite for flesh, I construct no6 philosophy
in saying that these peculiarities are transmitted from
lion to lion, and that this is the nature of a lion transmitted from parent to offspring.  It is a law running
through all nature that like begets like.' Whose seed
is in itsqlf after its kind.' If this is implied, why
should we not express it? These are my first thoughts
on that point."
.*      *        *        *       *
REV. AND DEAR SIR,-Your very kind and sympathetic letter was gratefully received, and its valuable suggestions duly considered.
I will first notice your remarks on transmitted
depravity.
Your illustration of the nature of lions does not
meet the case, inasmuch as we are discussing the
questioir of the character of free agents, who have
the power (which lions have not) of choosing either
299 
CORRESPONDENCE.
according to reason and conscience, or according to
the impulses of desire.
There is no such uniformity of choice as you seem
to imply. Sometimes a young child chooses right
and sometimes wrong. It does not uniformly choose
wrong, as the lion uniformly roars and eats meat.
Great confusion of ideas exists in all directions
from want of this distinction between the rational
free agency of man and the instinctive choices of
animals. The infant begins life with the mere animal development first, but in due time comes the
great moral element that makes him a child of God,
created in his image an immortal free agent.
Your remarks on the subject of confirmation are
most excellent, very practical, and therefore calculated to be very useful. And yet it seems to me
that the churches of Christ at the present day have
but C faint idea of what was the real original meaning of the Eucharist, or of the preliminary rites of
baptism and confirmation.
Both baptism and the Eucharist were instituted
when the Christian churches were adults, gathered
from ignorant heathens or from bigoted Jews. It
was at a time of fierce and cruel persecution, when
professing to be a Christian risked the loss of all
things valued in this life.
At the Eucharist the disciples understood the
command to "show forth the Lord's death till he
come," and "this do in remembrance of me," to sig
300 
CORRESPONDENCE.
nify that what he their Lord had done to save them
they were to be ready to do to save others, even to
suffer to the death.
The true meaning of these rites can never return
to the churches of Christ until they have a clearer
realization of their true mission as suffering soldiers
of the Cross. When their infants are baptized as
those to be trained for the service of martyrs, then
baptism, confirmation, and the Eucharist will come
before them with a high and solemn import such
as now is unknown.
How children are to be trained at once to receive
and enjoy all the blessings of this life, as I have
supposed they are to do in the future, and yet to
enter the career of suffering martyrs-this is the
practical question that must meet every minister
and every educator.
In this aspect permit a few suggestive questions.
Do you not suppose it would cost as much self-denial to some of our clergy to deny certain lusts of
the flesh-such, for example, as the use of tobacco
-as it often cost the earlier Christians to give up
their daily comfort and enjoyments? Not the
same in kind, but one as difficult to meet?
Do you not suppose that the use of this poisonous stimulant is leading thousands of our young
boys and young men to intemperance, to debility,
to shattered nerves, to irritable tempers, and to an
early grave? Do you suppose it possible to stem
301 
CORRESPONDENCE.
this dangerous self-indulgence in the young, in cases
where their spiritual guides can not bring themselves to deny this lust of the flesh, and so can not
preach this self-denial to others?
If all children were trained to indulge their
wishes and desires only when their own best good
and the best good of society were secured, would
there not be constant and stringent rules of selfsacrifice and self-denial now unknown or unrecognized?
If children were trained to use all property and
all talents for the best good of the world around
them, instead of for the gratification of self and
friends, would there not be a system of constant
self-denial introduced that would equal any practiced in any martyr age? Not in kind, but in the
difficulties involved?
Suppose it were proved to the consciences of
many Christian men of wealth that they could do
more to promote the best good of the world to unite
and plant complete Christian communities in Tartary or the interior of Africa than to live as they
do now, would not these Christians soon be "scattered abroad preaching the Word," with a measure
of self-denial equal to or exceeding that of the first
Christians?
302
i 
CORRESPONDENCE.
-Forn a Roman Catholic Priest to the Author.
" DEAR MADAM,-Yours of the 1st instant, with the
proofs, were duly received.
"With this I send'Aspirations of Nature,' by
J. T. Hecker; also an Italian pamphlet published in
Rome, first in the' Civita Catholica,' by the advice of
Cardinal Barnabo, with the approbation of the censor
of the press; and it has been read by the Pope himself. [In this work was a notice of the author's work
Comrnmon Sense Applied to Reliygion, and also of her
brother's work The Conflict of Ages.]
"The chapter on'Original Sin,' in the Aspirations
of Nature, was read in proof to Archbishop Kendrick,
of Baltimore, the most learned theologian in this country, and pronounced by him to be perfectly orthodox.
"I am not going to deny that there are different
schools of theology in the Catholic Church. Still, to
your question,'Do you not suppose that I can find
quires of quotations from the decrees of popes and
councils that will contradict the statement that the
Catholic Church does not teach the depravity of man's
nature?' *
"I answer, emphatically, no!  You can not bring
one such quotation.  I dare say most candid men, i.e.,
those not conversant with Catholic theology, and conversant with the theological language of Protestants,
would misapprehend some phraseology employed in
some Catholic documents.
"But the words have a fixed meaning in Catholic
theology, which is a science. The boundaries of faith
are clearly laid down. All that the Church has decided can be clearly ascertained; and outside of that
we are at perfect liberty to reason as much as we like.
"I assure you there can be no question that all the
explanations I give you are derived from the most approved Catholic theologians, and have passed the censorship of Rome.
303 
CORRESPONDENCE.
"You ask, If there are not several views of original sin and baptism in the Catholic Church, as in the
Episcopal?
"To this I answer, as to the substance of the doctrine, no.  The views of different schools of Episcopalians are usually contradictory. In the Catholic
Church it is of faith that by Adam's sin the whole human race lost grace and the right to heaven, and that
we are naturally incapable of any act in order to our
restoration. It is of faith that baptism effaces original sin, regenerates, sanctifies, makes one the child of
God and an heir of heaven.  In a word, baptism is a
complete remedy for original sin and for actual sin in
adults.
"But the idea of an essential corruption or change
of nature is perfectly foreign to St. Augustine and to
every other Catholic theologian.
"The Calvinistic doctrine of total depravity is condemned by the Council of Trent.
"The best Catholic theologians state the matter in
this way. God destined man for super-natural grace
and beatitude, which are far above his natural condition. and capacity. He made Adam the representative
and federal head of his race, and made the continuance of these gifts (super-natural) to the race contingent on his obedience. He lost them; and hence it
is said that the human race sinned and fell with him.
Although an infant is personally innocent, he is born
in sin in this sense that he is born out of the order,
lacking in perfection, and unable to attain the end for
which God originally designed him.
"But because God has only deprived him of special
favors above his natural condition, and to which he
had no right, and has left him all his natural rights, he
has done him no injustice. If he die in original sin,
Catholic theologians teach that he will never attain
the beatific vision, but will nevertheless be happy by
a natural union with God; some say by enjoying the
creatures of God.
304 
CORRESPONDENCE.
"This is what I mean by the' stain' of Adam's sin,
in Latin'culpa,' which, like the stain of illegitimacy
or attainder, involve no actual sin.
"Your whole difficulty lies in your not understanding the Catholic idea of the two orders, natural and
super-natural. If you can grasp that, you can see into
the whole matter. You have not had the slightest
idea of what Catholic doctrine really is. The decrees
of the Council of Trent and Moehler's Symbolism will
be a good beginning.
"Meanwhile, with my best wishes and kindest regards, I am truly your obedient servant,
C                9)
Reply of the Author to the foregoing.
REv. AND DEAR SIR,-I feel very grateful for the
aid you have afforded me in regard to the views of
Catholic theologians, especially for the work pronounced "orthodox" by such competent authority.
I have examined the chapter on "Original Sin,"
and find that, in the first place, it agrees with Protestant theology in teaching the perfect constitution
of Adam's mind. Thus:
"His soul was endowed with reason and free will.
At the same time was added the gift of integrity.
This adorned the soul with all the natural knowledge
of which man was capable; no dangerous ignorance
or defect of judgment; the will, in possession of perfect liberty, was upright and tended to good, without
any inclination to evil. Adam was master of the sensitive appetites; with an equable temperament, always
tranquil, with no tendency to excess."
"All these rich gifts were held by Adam on condition of not losing sanctifying grace.   Sanctifying
grace elevated man's nature to a new principle of lifb
305 
CORRESPONDENCE.
and action. It infiused into his mind and heart a science and virtue which transcended the order of nature.
Man became a participator of the divine nature, and
fitted one day to enjoy the beatific vision, which consists in gazing upon God's own essence."
"The effect of Adam's transgression was the immediate loss of the holiness and righteousness wherein
he was constituted, which consisted in the gifts of integrity and sanctifying grace."-See pages 195, 196,
Asp. of XVature.
The Council of Trent declares thus: "If any one
asserts that Adam's sin injured himself alone, and
not his posterity, and that the holiness and righteousness acceptable to God which he lost, he lost
for himself alone, and not also for us; or that he,
being stained by the sin of disobedience, transmitted death and corporal penalties only upon all the
human race, and not sin which is the death of the soul,
let him be accursed."- Council of Trent, Sess. v.
flow is it, then, that, with these passages before
you from your own infallible Church authorities,
so honest a man as you are, can affirm that Catholic theologians do not teach the depravity of infant
minds?
You say the infant "is born out of the order, lacking in perfection, and unable to attain the end for
which God originally designed him." What is this
but saying that God, who gave to Adam the gifts
of integrity and sanctifying grace, making Adam's
mind perfect in constitution, withheld these rich
gifts from all infants, thus insuring their future sin
306 
CORRESPONDENCE.
and misery in this and a future life, and all because
Adam disobeyed.
The author of the Aspirations of Nature thus comments, and his comments are approved by your
highest theologian:
"What the fall did was to despoil man (i.e., infants)
of the gifts and graces which were not necessary to his
nature, which he had no right to claim."
You say also:
"Because God has only deprived him (each infant)
of special favors above his natural condition, and to
which he had no righyt, he has done him no injustice."
Here is the place where Catholic theology is at
war with the common sense and moral sense of
humanity. If there is any thing which a new-created being, brought into such terrific dangers as
meet every new-born child, has a right to, it is all
the helps and chances which a perfect constitution
of mind would give, and which the Creator has, by
your own concession, power to bestow.
What human parent could have the heart to deprive each of his new-born infants of "the gifts of
integrity and sanctifying grace," and for no better
reason than because Adam disobeyed a command
thousands of years ago? And is the all-bounteous
Father less tender of little children than we?
I am not helped at all by your mere verbal disguise of the natural and the super-natural. The
common-sense difficulty still remains unrelieved.
307 
CORRESPONDENCE.
None but a malignant being could inflict a nature
on infants, no matter by what name, insuring sin
and misery in this life and through eternity to most
of our race, when he has power to give a "supernatural" nature that would increase their chances
of escape from sin and its everlasting consequences.
The chief difficulty is not in regard to infants
that die unbaptized, and thus lose heaven and "the
beatific vision." It is for infants that live with a
despoiled and ruined nature, as they do by millions,
without even the poor supposed help of baptism to
aid in keeping them from a life of sinning and consequent eternal ruin.
808 
CORRESPONDENCE.
From a Romana  Catholic Priest to the Author.
"DEAR MADAM,-I have read your proofs with a
view of complying with your request, if possible; and
the result is, I do not see any way of doing it.
"Your real object seems to be to write against the
Calvinistic doctrine of native and total depravity, and
in doing this you have constructed a theory of the origin of this doctrine which lays it at the door of St.
Augustine and the Catholic Church. A correct statement of Catholic doctrine would be incompatible with
this theory, and require the reconstruction of the whole
book.
"I do not see any other way except for you to follow your own judgment, and let your theory stand or
fall by its own merits.
"I think your doctrine is Pelagian, so far as I understand Pelagius's system, and the same with that of
Dr. Taylor and Dr. Fitch. You are, however, far more
candid than they are in coming out openly against Calvinism.
"In spite of my criticism of your theories, I have a
great respect and sympathy for your honest and independent spirit, and for your desire to represent Christianity in such a light that the goodness and love of
God toward all men, and especially toward little children, may be made evident.
"The history of Miss Payson is very touching and
very true. I have no doubt that child loved God with
all her heart at the very time her amiable but mistaken father was tormenting her so cruelly.
"I can not wonder that you are attracted by the
doctrine of the Episcopal Church in regard to the
lambs of the flock, and that you have thought you
could work more happily in your sphere as a teacher
of youth under that system. I think you will find,
however, a great deal of mere theory never carried
out.
309 
CORRESPONDENCE.
"I wish you could see how admirable is the system
of the Catholic Church in this respect. All the children, rich and poor, are taught to consider themselves
Christians from the cradle.  Every child is confirmed,
and goes to confession and communion.
"Last Sunday, in our church, sixty children, between
eight and fourteen, made their first communion; and
more than sixty others received the communion with
them.
"Besides these things required by the Church, there
are many religious exercises and ceremnonies adapted
to their taste which a pastor can make use of. These
children will cry bitterly if they are put away from
communion, and they love their religion, their church,
a,id their pastors above every thing else.
"I wish you could know as well as I do the innocence, piety, and grace with which some of these little
souls are adorned. My paper is out and I must close.
"With great esteem and regard, I am yours very
truly,."
Reply of the Author to the foregoing.
REV. AND DEAR SIR,-I can scarcely express the
wonder and perplexity that followed the reading of
your letter, and the articles you sent soon after.
And so you maintain that Augustinle, claimed by
all Calvinists and the Jansenists as the father of
their systems, does not teach the doctrine of the depravity of man's nature?
I went to the Encyclopedias, to the Church histories, to my brother's book, and found all against
you. My brother says Augustine teaches that
"men enter this world with deranged constitutions
and disorganized powers of soul and body, their in
310
i 
CORRESPONDENCE.
tellect darkened by sin, and blind to the true beauty of God and spiritual things; their wills in a state
of moral impotence as to that which is holy and
good, their propensities and passions deeply corrupt."- Conflict of Ages, p. 297.
I deny that this is the condition of infant minds,
and then learn from an article written at Rome,
read by the Pope, and approved by the censor of
the press, that my position on this subject is approved. And now I learn from you that Augustine also agrees with me that the minds of infants
are.not depraved in nature.
But I think I have found the key which unlocks
the apparent difficulty without injury to the honesty of the parties concerned.
If you will read Neander's history of Augustine,
you will find quotations in the original from his
voluminous works, showing that at the first period
of his theological career he held opinions which he
disowned and retracted at the last period. For
once you will find a distinguished theologian owning his mistakes, and writing "Retractions" of his
opinions. Thus it is that Augustine is and is not
a Calvinist-does and does not teach the depravity
of man's nature.
In thus contradicting himself, he does what all
theologians have done, from Augustine to Dr. Taylor, in attempting to make transmitted infant de
311 
CORRESPONDENCE.
pravity consistent with common-sense views of
God's justice and benevolence.
Augustine's method of reconciling God's dealings
with depraved infants as just is, that all the race existed in Adam, and sinned in him.  This imaginary
pre-existence and action of millions of infants, thousands of years before they were born, is a theory
originated by Augustine, and transmitted to the
present age.
According to this theory, God's Spirit, and thus
his sanctifying grace, departs from every infant soul
because of this sinning in Adam. Christ died to
purchase the return of sanctifying grace, which, in
the Catholic theory, is gained at or by baptism, also
by penance and the Eucharist.
In Protestant sects we still hear imploring prayers for this lost "grace," without which the soul is
dead to all spiritual life. The Episcopalian prays
in one form and theory for this gift, the Methodist
in another form and theory. The Calvinist Presbyterian hopes for it as an act of sovereign electing
grace.
Common  sense, rejecting all the theories, takes
the little ones to Christ as a loving parent, who has
given, in creation, all needed powers, and will give
all needed aid in every effort to use these powers
aright. In training the infant child to learn the
laws of God and to obey them, the parent is as sure
of the "sanctifying grace" needed, as the gardener
312 
CORRESPONDI)ENCE.
is of the natural sun, given for all, and not alone
for a few that are baptized. " In every nation, he
that feareth God and worketh righteousness is accepted of Him."
What you have written of the little children under your care and the little Catechism which came
with your letter, I have read with the deepest interest. I am truly thankful that there is so much
that is good in both; and when I see in them what
seem mistakes and evil tendencies, I remember how
much of the same is to be found in the common
Protestant methods with young children. Both
sides have something to learn.
Christ's "little ones" are not alone the little children in stature, but all that great class of ignorant,
undeveloped mind, which in this nation comes so
extensively,to the care of the Catholic priesthood.
In the kitchens of my numerous friends in different
parts of the land, and often in my chamber, I meet
these wanderers from country and home; and as I
seek their confidence and try to aid them in spiritual life, I find, with real thankfulness, that often
they have faithful priests to care for them. Their
books of devotion, their catechisms, and their instructions at confessional as to daily practical duties, I wish could be as faithfully urged on the same
class by the Protestant clergy.*
* The author asks the attention of all who have Catholic servants to a little volume entitled Guide to Catholic Young Women,
0
313 
CORRESPONDENCE.
In my sojourns with the just and the good of all
sects in this nation, I feel more and more the sad
effects of these fences in the garden of our common
Lord, where each stands to point out the weeds in
his neighbor's inclosure, instead of searching to remove them from his own. If these barriers could
be so lessened that each could enter the other's field
to search for the good instead of the evil, how much
might be found to reward the search, and improve
the humble seekers!
All such would probably find that they had more
weeds in their own premises than they well knew
how to dispose of.
It seems to me this conviction is more and more
gaining ground among the most intelligent Catholic clergy, especially those of them who, like the
author of Aspi?-irations of Nature, have passed from
cultivated Protestantism to your Church. The effort of this author to hide or remove all that is contrary to reason and common sense in his own communion, even though attended with some injustice
toward others and some blindness to his own difficulties, must in the end lead to improvement. I re
especially for those whoEarn their ownLiving. A Protestant might
think it wise to cut out two or three pages, in reference to employers, that could not be conscientiously offered to servants; but, with
this exception, the work might prove a blessing to all of every sect
in this condition of life. Any bookseller can procure it for any
one by sending to D. & J. Sadlier, 31 Barclay Street, New York,
through the Post-office.
314
k 
CORRESPONDENCE.
gard such men as are writing for Bronson's Review
and laboring in the Pauline missionary establishment in New York, as fellow-laborers in efforts to
bring the Christianity of all sects to a more rational
and common-sense standard.
315 
CORRESPONDENCE.
Letter from a Roman Catholic Priest to the Author.
"MY DEAR MADAM,-Yours of the 16th, with the
inclosure, I received only yesterday. I am glad to
learn that the work I sent has reached you, for you
must know that two years ago I made efforts to obtain your address and send a copy, but was unsuccessful.
"I send by this mail the translation you request of
the article published in Rome noticing your work and
your brother's.
"Your Common Sense applied to Religion and your
Appeal to the People, as well as your brother's Conflict of Ages, I have read with singular interest, because the solution of the problems before your minds
was one of the principal causes which led me into the
Catholic Church.
"What surprised me in reading your brother's Conflict of Ages was the misstatement of the Catholic
doctrine on the point in question. It was with great
regret I found also that in your two volumes you assumed the correctness of your brother's statements.
Had he known the Catholic doctrine concerning the
fall, there would have been no necessity to have had
recourse to the old condemned hypothesis ofpre-existence in order to reconcile Christianity with the implanted principles of common sense. Had you known
them, you would not have made the Catholic Church
responsible for an error which she repudiated as
strongly as you yourself have done.
"Your views concerning reason and the constitution of man will be found in every current Catholic
treatise on philosophy. They are in accordance with
the common opinion of Catholic theologians, and agree
with the doctrines which the Church has taught, not
only in the first three centuries, but in every subsequent century to the present time.
"The contest of the Church with the errors of
316 
CORRESPONDENCE.
Protestantism and Jansenism was based upon these
principles, which you regard as entirely original with
yourself, and as having never before been enunciated
in any age or language.
"That your own reflections should have led you so
near to the Catholic doctrines, is only another proof
of the harmony of those doctrines with the human
mind.
"You will find it a difficult task, if not an impossible one, to show, as you speak of aiming to do, the
identity of natural religion with revealed religion. It
will be hard to prove that such a thing as a purely
natural religion ever existed. Revealed religion not
only reasserts those truths which are commonly classed as the doctrines of natural religion, but also makes
known others which are entirely beyond the discovery of human reason.
"Be assured, dear madam, that I have a warm sympathy with your aims, and take a lively interest in
your endeavors to reconcile the doctrines of Christianity with the dictates of common sense.
"Yours faithfully in Christ,."
Reply of the Author to the foregoi?z.
REV. AND DEAR SIR,-Your letter and the accompanying document reached me safely. In reply, I would waive the question as to how far my
brother and myself have been mistaken in stating
the Catholic doctrine concerning the fall. That
the Catholic Church has repudiated this doctrine,
in the sense usually conveyed by Protestant formularies, I do not deny. That the decrees of the
Council of Trent, deemed infallible by you, give us
any better theory, can be decided by those who may
317 
CORRESPONDENCE.
take the pains to read the extracts I have made
from them at the close of this volume.
I am more interested in the remarks you make
on the subject of "reason," and the supposed accordance of my views, in my published volumes,
with "every current Catholic treatise," and with
"the common opinion of Catholic theologians."
I wish, in the first place, to rectify the impression that I suppose that I have made a new discovery in enunciating the principles of common sense,
and the test by which they are to be identified.
This is not what I claim. I only say that a belief
in certain truths exists in all sane minds, and that
these truths are to be identified by observing the
words and actions of all sane men in the practical
affairs of life.
Taking this test, I have drawn up, in short and
popular language, certain of these truths as thus
identified, and by their aid in the two volumes, Common Sense applied to Religion and An Appeal to the
People, I have proved, as it appears to me, that all
infants come into life with perfect constitutional
powers of mind, as God made them, and not depraved.  I can not learn that such an argument exists any where else.
Again: in the second volume, a system of natural
religion is drawn out by aid of the principles of
common sense, which is based entirely on the perfect constitution of the infant mind. I can not dis
318 
CORRESPONDENCE.
cover that such a course of argument has ever before been attempted, though I have sought for it
of those who have access to the wisdom of Rome,
as well as of Germany and Britain.
I did not aim to attempt, as you seem to suppose, to show that "such a purely natural religion
ever existed," or ever would have been thus reasoned out without a revelation. I only attempt to
show that, now that revelation has helped us, we
can reason out such a system, and that it is coincident with that of the Bible, just as by the system
of Newton, now that he has set forth the principles
of gravitation, and shown us how to employ them,
any bright young boy can demonstrate problems
that he never could have proved without such aid.
In claiming to have done, in metaphysics and
theology, something similar to this work of Newton
in physics, I only am meeting the supercilious criticisms of certain editors, who have asserted that
these arguments of mine are left unanswered only
because they have long ago been demolished. No
person, as yet, has ever pointed out any work in
any language in which this course of argument has
been either attempted or controverted. Paley's
Natural Theology and Butler's Analogy are specimens of the same kind of argument; but neither of
these writers have attempted to prove the perfect
constitution of the infant mind, or based a system of
natural religion on that as a fundamental position.
319 
CORRESPONDENCE.
In saying this, I do not ignore the fact that al most all standard works on mental science recog nize the fact of the existence of these principles of
reason and common sense as a part of the constitu tion of the human mind. Nor do I forget that va rious writers have given various tests for identify ing these principles, many of them very abstruse
and impracticable, as you will see in the work of
Sir William Hamilton'on this subject.
I was led to this attempt thus: In all theological
discussions there is a constant appeal to reason as
the umpire. The Unitarian denies the Trinity, because he says it is contrary to reason.* The Protestant denies transubstantiation because contrary to
reason. Miracles and angelic agencies are denied
as contrary to reason, and so of many other dogmas
of contending sects. This led me to inquire what
is this "reason" to which all are appealing. Reid
and Stewart shed the first clear light on the question, and proceeding forward thus guided, I have
come out where I am.
And now will you allow me to tell you, without
danger of your displeasure, that I can not find, in
any of the volumes you have sent me, any thing
that verifies your assumption in your letters to me
that Protestantism denmies the authority of reason
* On p. 100 of the Appeal to the People, it is shown that this
doctrine, instead of being contrary to reason, is a fair deduction
firom one of its first principles.
320 
CORRESPONDENCE.
any more than the Catholic Church? I concede
that in the quotations in the Aspirations of Nature from Luther, Wesley, and Calvin, are stout denials of the authority of reason, and much that
is a real denial of free-will. But, on the other
hand, in all these same writers you will find contradictory statements affirming the supreme authority of reason and maintaining the doctrine of freewill. In the Old School Confession of Faith, which
is the strongest of all Calvinism, in maintaining
man's inability to do works of righteousness before
regeneration, you find this:
"God hath endued the will of man with that natural liberty that it is not forced, nor by any necessity
of nature determined to good or evil."
Also this, which seems contradictory:
"Man, by his fall into a state of sin, has lost all ability of will to any spiritual good accomnpanying salvation; so, as a natural man, being altogether averse
from good and dead in sin, he is not able, by his own
strength, to convert himself, or to prepare himself
thereunto."
The Council of Trent says:
"Man, by the sin of Adam, though he has power
'to reject the illumination of the Holy Spirit,' yet he
is unable, by his own free will, to move himself unto
righteousness."
Now wherein is the Roman Catholic decree on
free-will very diverse from the Protestant forms?
It seems to me both Protestant and Catholic the                       0 2
321 
CORRESPONDENCE.
ologians are alike in contradicting themselves in
their standard formularies, affirming free-will and
the authority of reason in one place, and denying it
in another.
In the extract you send me from Balmes's Fundamental Philosophy I find this recognition of one
of the principles of common sense:
"Suppose some one to say that all we see is nothing-that there is no natural world. Whoever hears
such madness knows not what to answer, but he repels it by a natural impulse; the mind feels that it is
nonsense, without stopping to examine."
This is a recognition of a principle of reason and
common sense similar to that which in my first
volume, Common Sense applied to Religion, is expressed thus, page 23: "The evidence of our senses
is reliable;" that is, we and all sane persons must
act on the assumption that what we see and feel is
what it appears to be. The moment a man loses
reliance on his senses he is insane, and is so esteemed.
Now the Council of Trent, that you claim is infallible, has decreed thus:
"Canon 1, Sess. 13. —If any shall deny that in the
sacrament of the most holy Eucharist there is contained truly, really, and substantially the body and
blood, together with the soul and divinity of our Lord
Jesus Christ, and so whole Christ, let him be accursed.
If any shall deny that the whole Christ is contained in
the venerable sacrament of the Eucharist, under each
appearance and when they are divided, under every
particle of each appearance, let him be accursed."
I
322 
CORRESPONDENCE.
Now, as a true Catholic, how do you meet this?
How can you hold that bread and wine are flesh
and blood, without denying the principle of reason
and common sense that our senses are to be trusted? Do you say that Christ commands us to believe thus? And is not this saying that Christ
commands us to violate those principles of reason he
implanted to guide us to truth and duty? And if
we violate and deny them in this case, how are we
to prove the authority of revelation, or that Christ
has taught thus? Do not all miraculous revelations rest on the evidence of the senses, and how
are you to prove Christ's authority by his miracles
without this faith in our senses?
I have stated this argument, not with any expectation that it will cause any change of opinion
in you or any other Catholic. There is a most singular hallucination as to the doctrine of self-infallibility that obscures the vision of most intellectual
combatants on the field of theology.
I give your case as the illustration.  You, at one
time, constituted yourself a judge of the doctrines
of the sect in which you were educated. You decide against it, as not in agreement with reason and
revelation, as you interpret their teachings. You
examine the claims of other churches, and finally
select the Church of Rome as the only true Church.
In this process you make yourself the judge of
faith and practice, and the interpreter of the Bible
323 
CORRESPONDENCE.
and creeds, and you finally come to this decisionthe true Church is the one that agrees with you. Then,
by a singular self-deception, you imagine that you
submit your judgment in faith and practice to the
decisions of the Church that you have yourself selected because it agrees with you.
And Protestant theologians sometimes do the
same thing. I once inquired the reasons of a certain opinion held by a learned theologian in a leading Presbyterian theological school, and in the reply I received, this friend remarked that "he was
a man under authority, and that he should not dare
to set up his individual opinion against the judgment of the Church of God in all ages." I showed
this to a shrewd lawyer, and he quietly remarked
that "the Church of God in all ages" to which he
submitted was doubtless the Church that agreed with
him. 
Thus it is that, in spite of all their creeds and
theories, even theologians of all sects, are obliged to
resort to the great principles of reason and common sense in their own minds, and thus to carry
out in practice the great Protestant principle that
every man is to be his own interpreter of the Bible.
We are placed as free agents in a vast system
where truth and duty are to be discoveredby our
own diligence, faithfulness, and honesty. All are
liable to great mistakes; but he has the best chance
who is the most humble and most honest seeker.
324 
CORRESPONDENCE.
True humility does not imply a distrust of our natural capacity of judging, but rather a distrust of the
biases of education, and self-interest, and intellectual
pride.
If a man is more afraid of being convinced he
is wrong than of being wrong, or is ashamed to
own his mistakes when he finds them, he is under
a bias that is fatal to the discovery of truth. If to
this is added strong personal interests and prejudices entwined with long-established habits of
thought and feeling, we can see how it is that theologians are rarely found to own themselves in the
wrong, or to make any great or sudden changes in
their systems; not that they are less honest than
other men, but on that principle of civil law which
forbids the most honest of men to testify, even under oath, where their own personal character and
interests are involved.
It is on this ground that I have made an Appeal
to the People; not as wiser or better than theologians, but as freer from embarrassing biases.
325 
CORRESPONDENCE.
To the Author of the Conflict of Ages.
MY  DEAR BROTIER,-On the subject of infant
character there are but two positions possible; i.e.,
the infant mind is perfect in constitutional faculties,
or it is not, but is depraved in constitution. There
is no third supposition possible. I regard you as
the most able defender of the latter position, and as
honest and fair as you are able. I therefore submit the following to you, and to all who hold the
same view:
The doctrine of infant depravity necessarily involves a system of mental philosophy.  Augustine,
its church father, teaches that the faculties of all rational minds are organs to receive and appropriate
what is gained by a mystical union and communion
with God. What is thus received is called "grace,"
ana without it the mind, even in its normal state,
is incomplete and dead. Without this "grace" no
holy desires and emotions will arise, and the "free
will" is active 6nly to sin.
Adam's mind was created perfect, and was filled
with this "grace."  IHe, by his "free-,-will," sinned,
and lost, it. All infants were in him and sinned in
him, and lost grace. Thus it is that all infants are
born with minds dead as it respects all holy emotions, while their "free will" is alive only to sin.
On this theory, regeneration is the return of that
"grace" into the souls of infants which they lost in
326 
CORRESPONDENCE.
Adam. The whole Catholic system rests on this
theory, which has also been transmitted to most of
the large Protestant sects.
For example, we find Dr. Iodge, the leading
theologian of the 0. S. Presbyterian denomination,
states it thus:
"God regards and treats all men,fromn thefirst moment of existence, as out of fellowship with himself;
as having forfeited his favor. Instead of entering into
communion with them the moment they begin to exist (as he did with Adam), and forming them by his
Spirit in his own moral image, he regards them as out
of his favor, and withholds the influences of his Spirit.
Why is this? Paul tells us why it is. It is because
we fell in Adam. In other words, Adam having been
placed on trial, not for himself alone, but also for his
race, his act was, in virtue of this relation, REGARDED
AS OUR ACT. God withdrew from us as he did from
him; in consequence of this withdrawal, wie begin to
exist in moral darkness, destitute of a disposition to
delight in God."
In the Conflict of Ages, page 90 and onward, it
seems to me you have exhibited the same view.
You say,
"There is a life of the mind.  It involves an original and designed correlation to God, and such a state
of the affections, passions, emotions, intellect, and will,
that communion with God shall be natural, habitual,
and the life of the soul.  He who  has been so far
healed by divine grace as to reach this state, has a
true ideal of the normal and healthy state of the soul."
Then, of the state of the mind of the whole hu
man race, you say,
"The whole  nind appears to be a wonderful system in ruins."
32-7 
CORRESPONDENCE.
The main difference between you and other theologians is not as to the fact of the depraved condition of the infant mind as diverse from what God
first made it, but as to the when and the how. Augustine says in Adam, Dr. Hodge says by Adam,
and you say before Adam. All seem to agree in the
pre-existence and sinful action of infants before birth,
resulting in the loss of a union or communion with
God, and thus in the ruin of each infant soul.*
Regeneration, on this view, is the partial reunion
of the soul with God, which, as you express it, is
thus "healed by divine grace;" and after this healing you say a man can have "a true ideal of the
normal and healthy state of the soul."
That God has not power thus to "heal" all infant
souls none can suppose, for he who can create a
perfect mind can recreate it. And yet you teach
that. all infants come into this life unhealed, while
sin and suffering here, and eternal misery in the future life, are the inevitable result to millions of infants, consequent on this neglect to heal.
In regard to this system of mental philosophy
and theology, the whole, as it seems to me, rests on
assumptions without proof
* Dr. Park anal others teach that God established a system of
constitutional transmission, so that parents transmit the depraved
mental constitution which Adam caused in himself by sinning,
instead of transmitting the perfect one God created. On this theory, infants never sinned before birth, and yet are punished with
depraved minds, when God has power to create them perfect.
328 
CORRESPONDENCE.
In the first place, it is asserted that the minds of
all rational free agents are made on such a pattern
that a mystical union with God is indispensable to
their normal state and perfect action-an assertion
without any proof, so that it would contradict common sense to adopt it.
All revelations from God are necessarily in the
words of men, in the sense men use them. We
have no other idea of a union of one mind with
another except a unity of desire, emotions, will, and
action. Of course, we can have no words to express any other kind of unity, and no revelation
of any other kind.
O1 page 82 of the Appeal to the People, it is shown
how the thoughts, desires, and emotions are controlled by the will; so that the only way to bring
all the desires, emotions, and actions of minds into
harmony or unity with God is, that each shall choose
to be perfectly subject to his will and laws. Now
God creates our faculties of mind by his omnipotent natural power, but he can create choices only
by motives presented to the understanding and susceptibilities-that is, by his moral power.
But this theological system teaches such a unity
with God at the beginning of existence, that holy
emotions, desires, and affections flow out as the result of the created constitution, not as the result of
a voluntary self-control in conforming to God's will
and laws. It seems to me there is no evidence to
329 
CORRESPONDENCE.
sustain this theory, and no attempt to produce
any.
Having assumed, without proof, that God created
all minds on a pattern diverse from any known to
us, theologians next assume that the minds of all
infants have a depraved constitution, from which
inevitably results sinful desires, emotions, and affections; and that no holy acts will occur till this
depravity is remedied.
There is no evidence of this assertion; for, in order to decide whether a mind is perfect or depraved,
it must first set forth what is a perfect mind as
to constitutional powers, and then show that the
mind of man is lacking in some point of this perfection. This has never been done.
In my two volumes is an argument, as yet unanswered, proving that the mind of man is perfect in
constitution; so that, independent of revelation, we
have evidence of the perfect constitution of the infant mind.
Those who resort to the Bible for proof of infant
depravity employ the texts that speak of man (not
infants) as "carnal," "fleshly," the "natural man,"
etc. But they only assume what ought to be proved,
i.e., that these texts refer to the created susceptibilities of infants injured in or by Adam, and not,
as I claim, to the voluntary character formed by
man in this life. All such texts prove depravity in
330 
CORRESPONDENCE.
man, both in character and conduct, and no one ever
disputed this fact.  The question is, not the fact, but
its philosophy, or the causes of this depravity.
On the common theory, the cause is the state of
the constitutional powers injured by sinning in or
by Adam, or, as you say, before Adam. I claim that,
so long as I accept the fact of man's sinfulness of
character and the remedy provided by Jesus Christ,
I am not bound to assign any cause. But if it is
insisted that causes for this sinfulness be assigned,
I think there are far more rational ones than this
to be found in Chapter XXV. in Common  Sense
applied to Religion.
All the texts ever presented to prove that the
cause of human sinfulness is a depraved mental constitution, are fitted to sustain my theory of causes as
much as the common one, and, as it seems to me,
far more ~o.
On the common theory, God, in regeneration, recreates or renews the constitutional faculties injured
in or by Adam, and no true and holy love to God
or man will exist till this is done. In my view,
God regenerates or "sanctifies by'the truth" communicated by parents, educators, and church ministries, aided by his Holy Spirit, who acts through
these means. In the case of adults, this new creation often seems instantaneous.  In the case of infants, young children, and most ignorant adults, it
is a slow and gradual process.
331 
CORRESPONDENCE.
Now all the texts usually quoted on this point
are as applicable to my view as to the other. "We
must be born again —born of the Spirit," expresses
the regeneration of a human soul in a voluntary
sely-consecration to the service of God by obedience
to his laws, as truly as it does a change of depraved
constitutional powers.
An infant is born without any "heart" or "purpose" to love and obey its parents; but it has a
good nature, which insures a heart of love and obedience, first to its earthly and then to its heavenly
Father, as soon as the earthly educator performs his
part of the new creation, for God is sure to do his
part.
If a child is educated wrong, it grows up with a
"carnal" heart.  If it is educated aright, it grows
up with a spiritual heart. The "natural heart," and
the N fleshly or carnal heart," in my view, signify
not depraved constitutional faculties of mind, but
the state of every intelligent free agent destitute of
knowledge, and love, and obedience to God, which
God, educators, and selfmust equally unite to secure.
On the common theory, until a child's mind is
new created, or " healed," in its constitutional powers, no true love and obedience to God will occur.
But I claim that every thing in the child's mind is
right, and ready for that training vhich, by a gradual process, will secure a knowledge of God and his
laws, and a loving obedience to them.
332 
CORRESPONDENCE.
On one view, every thing a child does till new
created "is of the nature of sin."  On the other,
every act of intelligent obedience to God's laws is
right in relation to the rule; and if the motive or
intention is to do right, the act is good and virtuous in every relation.
On my view, an infant child begins to be a Christian as soon as it begins to act intelligently in conforming to the laws of God, with the intention to
act right; and it grows in Christian life just as. fast
as its impulses and desires are controlled by a voluntary submission to the laws of true rectitude,
which are none other than the laws of God. And
an infant begins its Christian life long before it has
any knowledge of God, while it is forming habits
of loving obedience to its earthly parents, who are
the agents, and should be the representatives, to the
child, of its heavenly Father.
The important distinction between the inability
from a lacking of constitutional powers and the inability for want of appropriate circumstances, needs
to be constantly recognized. A child with perfect
eyes is entirely without power to see so long as
light is withheld, and yet he is perfectly able to see
as it respects constitutional powers. So a child, at
birth, has perfect ability to obey all God's laws in
reference to its constitutional pow.ers, while, as it
respects knowledge, motives, and training, it is entirely without power to do so.
333 
CORRESPONDENCE.
On the common view, the child's inability is owing, at least in a great degree, to the ruined state
of its constitutional powers. In my view, it is owing to the want of "the light of the knowledge of
God," of his lovely character and perfect laws, of
their glorious rewards and fearful penalties, and,
owing to this want as the chief cause, the child is
estranged from God, and lives a life of ruinous selfindulgence and selfishness.
On one view, God creates man anew by an operation on his mental faculties, thus remedying the
injury done by previous sinning in or by Adam.
On the other, God creates man anew by knowledge,
training, and motives, presented by educators, aided
by his Holy Spirit; the grand motive of all being
the knowledge of his character as a loving and
long-suffering parent, exhibited by Christ as God
manifest in the flesh.
On one view, holy love is an emotion flowing from
the normal constitution of mind.  On the other, it
is a voluntary state of the mind, its chief element
being the purpose to do right, which is the same
thing as choosing to please and obey God.
This purpose may exist in a mind so bewildered
by false teachings as to God's real character, that
emotions of complacency and affection toward him
are impossible.   This was  my  own experience
through all those sorrowful years when I was
struggling with the theological system of New En
334 
CORRESPONDENCE.
gland. Escape from this system relieved all the
difficulty, and I found it as easy to feel the delightful emotions that attend perfected love as to perform the actions that flow from the purpose to
obey.  Thousands of suffering minds, truly devoted to the will and service of God, have toiled,
wounded and bruised, to call forth emotions that
the very nature of the mind renders impossible, so
long as the intellect is clouded by false views of
God and his ways.
My chief difficulty in regard to your system is
this-your only possible mode of proving that any
minds were created more perfect than infants, or
that infants are depraved, or their pre-existence, is
by the aid of revelations from God; for by the light
of nature alone you can prove neither of these points.
But I claim that, the depravity of all infant minds
being assumed, and also God's power to make them
perfect in nature, you are deprived of all evidence
by which you can prove a benevolent creator, or a
reliable revelation from him, and so are cut off from
your only mode of proving infant depravity and
pre-existence.  For we can not prove a reliable revelation from God till we have first proved a benevolent Creator, inasmuch as a malevolent being would
make revelations only for mischief and deception.
The works of God are the only.proofs we have
of his existence and character without a revelation.
If, in attempting to prove his character and designs
335 
CORRESPONDENCE.
by his works, we should find all contrivances and
designs fitted to give pain instead of pleasure; if
light distressed the eye, and food and perfumes disgusted the taste and smell; if all children loved to
inflict pain, and never enjoyed giving pleasure to
others; if every arrangement of both matter and
mind was calculated to inflict suffering, we should
inevitably infer that it was the design of the Creator
to cause pain to his creatures, and that his character was malevolent.
Now, on your theory, we come into existence surrounded by minds that are to live and act forever,
and every one of them is so constituted that by a
depraved nature they do evil rather than good.  This
being so, and these being the chief works of the
Creator's hands-the only existences that can enjoy
and suffer forever-how is it possible to avoid the
conviction that the Creator, having power to make
all perfect, is malevolent? and how could a relable
revelation to teach the way to truth and happiness
be obtained from such a Creator?
In your Concord of Ages, I find a definition of
logic as "the science of the laws of the faculty of
systematic comprehension." You mean by this, I
suppose, that mind has the faculty of so comprehending the various parts that can form a system
as to arrange them into that system; that this faculty acts by certain laws, and that the knowledge
to be gained of these laws is the science of logic.
336 
CORRESPONDENCE.
I deny that this is the meaning of the word logic,
as ordinarily used by mankind. All definitions of
this word, in all dictionaries of all languages, teach
that logic is the art or science of reasoning. This
meaning is given in a variety of forms, but they all
have the same signification. Sometimes the idea is
expressed in this form: Logic, or reasoning, is the
process by which one proposition is proved to be
true by means of another already granted.
The reasoning in the Conflict and Concord of Ages
is as truly a process of this kind as any other speci mens. Let this be an illustration:
Suppose a traveler in a newly-discovered, uninhabited island, discovers a well stoned up, a wellsweep and pole, and a bucket complete all but the
bottom. By an act of reasoning, he infers that the
intention or design of the author of these contrivances was'to draw water.
But suppose every thing is complete which will
secure the drawing of water except the bottom of
the bucket. By still another act of reasoning, it
would be inferred that the author of the contrivance
either had put in a bottom or intended to do so.
This will serve to illustrate your argument in the
Conflict and Concord of Ages. You have shown that
all previous systems of theology have failed in combining the works and word of God into a system, so
as to avoid the necessary inference that the Creator
is unjust and malevolent from the nature of his works.
P
337 
CORRESPONDENCE.
You attempt a new theory of arrangement, combining the facts in the nature and action of matter
and mind with the facts of the Bible into a system
that does relieve God from this awful implication.
The point, which is as indispensable to your system
as the bottom of the bucket in the previous illustration, is the perfect nature of infant minds in a preexistent state, that they ruined their own nature,
and that this life is a new and merciful probation.
You claim that this is the only possible theory embracing infant depravity which is consistent with a
God of benevolence and justice.
But the assumption that God can create perfect
minds and that all infants are depraved, renders a
reliable revelation impossible, and thus breaks up
your whole system by removing all that-the Bible
furnishes. For all minds known to us as the chief
works of God, being ruined or depraved, he having
power to make them perfect, prove him malignant,
and thus one who will deceive by his revelations.
If this be so, your system all fails, both for want
of evidence and as opposed by contradictory evidence.
As I regard the matter, all new created beings,
angels or infants, begin existence ignorant of God
and his multitudinous laws, all of which are first to
be learned in order to be obeyed. Meantime, by
the family, the church, and the Spirit of Truth, God
is training all, and this world is the infant-school of
338 
CORRESPONDENCE.
our race. That the period of training to each human mind ends at the hour of death, is a doctrine
made up by theologians, and not in the Bible. What
transpires between death and the day of judgment,
when the good and the bad are to be finally separated, is left in perfect darkness. The horrible doctrine concocted in the darkest ages, that every child
and adult whose mind (depraved by or in Adam) is
not new created, goes to eternal misery at death, is
not in the Bible, and is soon to pass away by the
use of that common sense in interpreting the Bible
which God gave us for this very purpose.
I now come to the great practical difficulty involved in your system as much as in the common
one, and which meets me especially as an educator,
and that is the doctrine of the regenerating power
of the Holy Spirit.
To me this doctrine is the most dreadful part of
the system based on infant depravity, and one that
brought the most conflict and dismay in my own
past experience. To think that my Creator had
brought me into such awful perils, with a mind that
never would act aright till re-created; that eternal
separation from my parents and dearest friends, and
eternal sinning and misery in hell, was the alternative; and yet, with all my prayers and tears for a
"new heart," he, having the power, would not bestow
it-this bore upon my soul like a fatal incubus, impeding the outflow of any loving or grateful emo
339 
CORRESPONDENCE.
tions. And when I had some hope that he had
done the favor to me, the same dreadful implication followed for the sufferings and dangers of my
friends. How can God be benevolent and refuse
such a boon, which he has full power to bestow? It
was the belief in his power that was the chief cause
of distrust and dismay.
If a person should see a strong man watching
little children who were sick and lame, and whenever one of them fell down from weakness he should
plunge a pitchfork into it and throw it into a burning caldron, no possible representations as to his
wisdom, power, and goodness could prevent the observer from regarding such a man with horror and
disgust. And yet this is a trifle in comparison with
that awful system which represents the Father of
All sending into this world millions of infants who
he foresees will grow up to suffer "the miseries of
this life and the pains of hell forever," for want of
a new-created nature which he can bestow and yet
withholds.
My brother, we are before the public under solemn'and painful responsibilities.  Our father's biography is now before the world, in which he appears as a prominent defender of the New England
system of theology and of the Puritan Church based
on that system. And he earnestly trained all his
children in that system.
And now you, his first educated son, even before
340
i 
CORRESPONDENCE.
his death, have issued two volumes to prove that
this system is contrary to "the principles of honor
and right," unless the theory of infant pre-existence
is added to it-a theory which he and all other
theologians, after reading your arguments, have rejected.
Next, his oldest child has published two volumes
to prove that all systems of theology based on the
theory of infant depravity are contrary both to common sense and to the Bible.
Then our younger brother, both as minister and
editor, has rejected the theory of infant depravity,
and the whole system based on it.
Still another brother has issued a volume repudiating the New England theory of the atonement
held by our father, and also maintaining infant preexistence as indispensable to sustain the theology
of most of the Protestant world.
And now, in the biography of our father, is exhibited not only his arguments in defense of the
New England system, but its results in his own
personal history and in his family religious training. In it we find that he was not baptized in
childhood because his excellent and conscientious
foster-parents did not secure that experience required to join the church, while through childhood
he lived a prayerless life, without God and without
hope. In manhood came agonizing religious struggles that destroyed health, and nearly exiled him
from the ministry he sought.
341 
CORRESPONDENCE.
Then we read the distress of our gentle mother,
not trained in that hard system, when it was pressed on her conscience so as nearly to unsettle her
reason.
Finally, we have the record of our father's experience in training a family. And was there ever a
parent who, in the first period of family training,
more perfectly exhibited the happy combination of
strong and steady government with the tenderest
love and sympathy, or whose children were better
prepared to transfer the love and obedience of an
earthly father to a Hieavenly One?
And yet what a record of vain attempts for twenty years, not in a single case rewarded with success!
What anxiety, perplexity, disappointment, and agonizing fear are there recorded on the part of the father, and what sufferings and vain efforts on the
part of the children! And has not this experience
been thus preserved to aid in the rescue of other
such sufferers?
I can now show why I thus publicly address you.
It is not to secure a public theological debate, for
which I have neither taste nor ambition. It is in
behalf of suffering parents and suffering little children that I make this plea. Thousands and thousands of Christian mothers, year after year, wake
from the first happiness of maternal love to the awful fear that they are bringing into existence those
dearer than life, who are " under the wrath and
342 
CORRESPONDENCE.
curse of God, and so made liable to the miseries of
this life and the pains of hell forever." And this
short, uncertain life given as their only chance! a
fall, a mistake in food, a thousand daily accidents
may end this precious life at any moment, and then
all is over! The child, no one knows at what age,
if not new-created in nature, goes to hell to spend
eternity in hopeless misery!
No wonder that mothers often have declared to
me that they would have gladly rescued every child
they bore from such perils in the promised safety
of an infant grave. Most dreadful of all is the common doctrine that there is no sure and certain mode
of securing safety for a child. Even ceaseless prayers and faithful tbors avail not, as is seen in many
who, trained by most conscientious and prayerful
parents, end life in infidelity or vice.
This it is that shakes the soul and drains the lifeblood of mother hearts all over the land; this it is
that terrifies and tortures young children in the
family, in the church, in the Sunday-school, and in
the reading of children's books. The mournful example introduced into these pages, except the early
age, is but one of a thousand such.
This it is that is leading not only the young and
ignorant, but multitudes of the mature, the wise,
and the good to reject the Bible as supposed to
teach a system so cruel and unreasonable; this it is
which converts to infidelity in Christian lands far
343 
CORRESPONDENCE.
more than all our missionaries turn from heathenism.
My aim in all this is not to establish a system or
a theory. What I seek is that the common people
like me shall not be driven by theological and metaphysical reasoning and by church organizations
to adopt such baneful theories in the religious training of the young. And when I present what seem
better theories, it is not because they are deemed
indispensable, but rather to cover escape from what
has caused so much needless bewilderment and misery.
I address you, also, because I regard you as the
most able defender of the doctrine of infant depravity, and at the same time so lnest a man and
good a Christian, that if you find that the assumed
facts on which this theory is based can not be sustained by proper evidence, you will publicly relinquish the doctrine, and thus lend your aid to remedy the evils-it has engendered.
The assumed facts to be proved are, 1. That the
first created minds were diverse from those of infants in constitutional powers and condition, and
on the normal and perfect pattern. 2. That infant
minds are diverse from this pattern, and diverse
from what God first created them.
If there is evidence of these two propositions,
you, of all the men I know, are best able to find
and present it.
344 
CORRESPONDENCE.
If there is no proper evidence, you, of all the
men I know, are most favorably situated, and most
likely honestly to say so.
In conclusion, I deem it but justice to my father's
memory to state that, although he never changed
his system, his mode of administering it, as shown
in his Autobiography, was greatly modified in later
life; and he often told me that his earlier method
with his own family was not the best.
In my own case, he sought an emotional experience that never came till his theological system
ceased to be believed; and at last he relinquished
the effort, and taught me and others that an earnest and long-continued purpose and effort to obey
God's requirements warranted the suffering inquirer
to assume the public profession of a Christian as one
way to secure the emotional part of Christian experience. It was by such counsel that I became a member of his church, with no more evidence of Christian character than had existed in that long year of
struggle and sorrow exhibited in his correspondence.
This is offered as an important appendage to that
history, lest those younger ministers who may look
to our father for an example as a parent and spiritual guide should take this part of his history as
their model.
NOTE.-That there may be no injustice done to the system of
mental philosophy held by the author of the Confltict of Ages, Note
B, at the end of the volume, is appended.
P2
345 
CORRESPONDENCE.
To the Wife of a Professor in a Methodist Theological
Seminary.
MY DEAR FRIEND,-I have made my application
to your husband and his associates through you,
because I believe a special mission is resting on our
sex in this emergency, and that you are "a representative woman" of that class by whom this mission is to be accomplished.
When our blessed Lord took the little children
in his arms, it was the mothers who urged their
rights, even against the rebukes of disciples and
apostles.  It is the mothers, especially such intelligent and influential mothers as you, who, I believe,
are, in this day, to reproduce a similar beautiful and
peaceful conquest.
When I had written the preface to my volume,
Common Sense, etc., I consulted a very fastidious
friend as to inserting that part including a sorrowful portion of my personal experience.  His reply
was, "Put it in; it will do more toward accomplishing your object than all your arguments." And so
I have found it. And, in this volume, the history
of one poor child will probably accomplish more
than all my reasonings. Theologians, happily, are
most of them parents, and have as tender hearts as
any class of men; and we must use the policy of
peaceful as well as cruel war, and assail them at the
weakest point.
346 
CORRESPONDENCE.
In my last communication from your husband,
in his criticism on the proofs of Chapter XIV. of
this work, he proposed an alteration that would imply that, in the Methodist denomination, infant children are members of the local church, though "not
in full membership." The same thing is often
claimed by many of the Congregational clergy at
the present day, and was so assumed by the Puri.
tan fathers, who first instituted the local church
consisting of regenerated persons united by covenant and profession of faith. It was the logical in:
consistency of this claim in regard to infants that
originated the Baptist churches, and by which, also,
President Edwards ended the practice of the baptismal "half-way covenant," and thus exiled most
young children in this land from Christ's family.
Your husband states that the Methodist denomination, like the Episcopal, "administers baptism
freely to all children offered at its altars irrespective of the church membership of parents." This
is consistent with the doctrine now urged by your
leading theologians, that all infants are members of
Christ's church, as seen in the extracts pp. 163,
164 of this work.  In this respect your denomination are and ever have been diverse from the Congregational churches.
But here is the inconsistency of the matter. If
all infants are at birth members of.Christ's church
through his atonement, which has remedied the evil
347 
CORRESPONDENCE.
done by Adam to the nature of the child, then baptism is simply the outward form of acknowledging
the fact, that every human being, even among heathen, is born into the church of Christ, and begins
life a true Christian and fitted for heaven.
This is carrying the church membership of infants too far. No infant can be called a Christian
child, as member of a Christian local church, except by the membership of its parents. The only
sense in which an infant can properly be called a
Christian, when its parents are in no way connected
with a Christian worshiping assembly, is that of its
birth in a Christian family and nation, in contrast
with those born in pagan or Mohammedan lands.
I regard the Methodist Church, in its origin and
system, pre-eminently the offspring of common sense.
Wesley, its noble founder, was distinguished for
that quality in all his career. When the National
church was ruled by venal politicians and a worldly ministry, and he saw no other remedy, he broke
away and formed a "society" of those who lived not
for this world as the chief good. When he could get
no ordination from the national bishops for his ministry, he took the common-sense ground that the
members of a profession are the best qualified to
decide who shall enter it, and to give license, and
so he appointed ministers, and ordained them himself. When educated ministers were too few, he
took the best he could get. When a settled minis
348 
CORRESPONDENCE.
try would not reach the poor and the dispersed, he
established an itinerating ministry. Then he instituted the admirable class system, by which the
humbler members are taught and watched over by
the more advanced.
But Wesley was not infallible any more than the
pope, and failed to foresee the operation of his system on the religious position and training of the
young. And now, after experience has exhibited
the defect, can not the good men who stand as leaders in his place, acknowledge, as he did, the mistakes of the church in which they were born, and
as openly and decidedly break up all that is false
or injurious?
If all infants are members of Christ's real invisible church at birth, should not all, when grown to
a congregation who have enough faith in Christ to
assemble to be taught his Word, be counted as
members of his visible church so long as they have
this faith?  And are not all their infant children
members with their parents?  Why should that
inner organization exist, called "the church," in
distinction from "the congregation," from which
all the lambs of Christ are shut out till certain officers pronounce them regenerated?
If a man finds his house untenable, there are two
ways of remedying it: one is to insist publicly that
it is perfect, and then stealthily each night change
a beam or a room, till, all unobserved and uncon
349 
CORRESPONDENCE.
fessed, he has a new and different house; the other
way is honestly to say it is wrong, take it down,
and rebuild it aright. Which would all just men
say was the most honorable and Christian method?
I leave you to make the application.
It seems to me that the Methodist and Episcopal
churches will ere long be alike in assuming that
all children are born into the church where their
parents worship; that baptism is giving them the
name of Christ, and thus acknowledging their rights
to all'the privileges of his church;'that the communicants are the more advanced class, or elder childreln, who, in the nursery, or younger class, have
learned to behave well enough to be allowed to sit
at table with their parents. When this is done,
then every part of parental, school, and church
training, from infancy to maturity, will be one and
the same course-all regarded as the religious training of a child of God-each part as important in its
place as every other.
I now wish to indicate more distinctively one
portion which I think Providence has assigned to
our sex, and especially to such women as you, in
this reformatory mission.
The employments of man are those that provide
chiefly for the physical wants of the family, and the
public wants of civil society and country. The profession of woman rightfully centres in the. family
state. She is the chief educator of mind, the nurse
350 
CORRESPONDENCE.
of the body in infancy and in sickness, and the administrator of the comforts and domestic economy
of home.
Men have elevated their professions to sciences,
demanding endowed institutions, abundant apparatus, and liberal salaries to secure the highest talents
for training in these several duties. Woman, as
yet, has not been thus favored.
And yet how much science is demanded for the
right training of mind, the most difficult of all earthly duties! And what skill, and sagacity, and knowledge is needed in the charge of the delicate body of
an infant, and the ever-varying responsibilities of a
nurse of the sick.
If all infants were in the charge of highly-educated, conscientious nurses, instead of ignorant, unprincipled servants, how different the fate of thousands that meet an early death or a life of suffering.
If all the sick were committed to nurses properly
trained for their profession, how many would be restored to life and usefulness that now perish or live
as burdens to themselves and their friends.
And so in domestic economy, what waste of food
by ignorance and neglect, and what ruin of health
by wrong selection and bad cooking! It is said,
by those who know, that $10,000,000 annually is
wasted in New York by want of economical care
and cooking. Paris is fed better than New York
on three fourths of the raw food, owing wholly to
351 
CORRESPONDENCE.
modes of economy and the style of cookery. And
the reason is, that in Paris this art is made a liber al profession, securing the best scientific skill by
honorable position and high salaries. But with us,
cooking, like the care of infants, is committed to
the poorly paid, ignorant, and vulgar, thus disgra cing woman's profession.
And now thousands and thousands of well-edu cated, refined, and virtuous women are living as
paupers on earnings that scarcely support life, while
philanthropists are seeking still farther to widen the
mischief by thrusting women into the professions
of men.
But the only and true remedy for the " wrongs
of woman" is to raise her profession to a science, to
train her properly for it, and to ma/ke it honorable and
remunerative like those of men.
The chief department of woman's profession is
the religious training of the young. The past theories of theology, that make this prime duty of woman so nearly a hopeless undertaking, and which
place the chief ministries for regenerating the human soul in the pulpit, have, more than any other
influence, lowered the dignity and estimation of her
profession.
So long as the infant soul is regarded as ruined
and helpless by a transmitted depravity of nature
that no training can remedy; so long as the system
of mental philosophy resulting from this doctrine
352 
CORRESPONDENCE.
prevails, which makes emotive experiences, flowing
from "a return of God's Spirit," or from a "new
created nature," the distinctive feature of the "new
birth," and the chief evidence of Christian character, the noblest part of woman's profession must be
undervalued. It is from this comes the disparagement of that part of religious training which consists in securing prompt and cheerful obedience to
the laws of God in the early periods of childhood,
and that separation of morality and religion so frequent in the pulpit. From this comes the great
contrast in the neglect of all the liberal institutions
and endowments for woman's distinctive professions, which are bestowed with such excess of profusion on man.
When the ministers of religion shall teach that
obedience to the laws of health in eating, drinking,
and sleeping is a part of religion as much as going
to church and private prayer; when they teach that
amusement, properly regulated, is a religious duty for
both old and young, instead of a sinful waste of
time; when they teach that a woman who is training
a child or servant to be an intelligent and healthful cook, is giving her a part of her religious education; when they teach parents that by a strong and
steady government, combined with tender love and
sympathy, they are workers together with the Hioly
Spirit in regenerating a child, when multitudes of
other duties, now scarcely alluded to in many pul
353
t 
CORRESPONDENCE.
pits, are placed on an equality with prayer-meetings
and missionary operations, then we shall find woman's professions made as scientific, honorable, and
lucrative as law, medicine, and divinity; and when
this ensues, woman will no longer need to seek the
professions of men, because she will be in such great
demand, and receive such liberal honor and emolument in her own.
To aid in hastening such a happy change, the
American Woman's Educational Association some ten
years ago was formed, of which I think you have
been a manager, and to which I have devoted
my life and time. Its aim is to secure institutions
for women, in which endowed departments shall
be established for woman's distinctive professional
training, to correspond with the three professional
schools of men-law, medicine, and divinity-and
thus elevate woman's employment as a science, and
also secure to her honorable and lucrative employment, such as men secure in their professions.
One institution on this plan was commenced at
Milwaukee and endowed; but, before the experiment
was completed, in a business crisis the endowment
failed. This occurred about the time that this discussion was commenced by the publication of Common Sense, etc., and ill consequence, during the past
six years, so far as my agency is concerned, the enterprise has been intermitted. But the completion
of this volume, and the restoration of such health as
354
0 
CORRESPONDENCE.
has not been known for many years, enables me
once more to seek the co-operation of women of
talent and influence in this enterprise for the relief
of our suffering sex, by the elevation of our profession to a science and practice both honorable and
lucrative.
One of the most effective modes of promoting this
object is to aid in ending the false system of religious training based on the depravity and inability
of the infant mind as consequent on the sin of the
first human pair.
But you may ask, What can we of the Methodist
Church do, when our teachers of theology, our ministers, our Sunday-school teachers, and our religious
books, both for adults and children, all are based on
this doctrine of a native helplessness consequent on
the departure of God's Spirit for Adam's sin?
I think the difficulty is not to be remedied by
attacking these things as all wrong and to be given
up, but rather by a method of accommodation based
on the distinction made in these pages between an
inability from constitutional malformation, and an
inability for want of knowledge, motives, and training.
While we can maintain that the nature of a child
is perfect as to all those powers and faculties formed
by its Creator, yet, so long as it is ignorant, ungoverned, and untrained, it is weak and helpless, and,
so soon as intelligent free agency commences, is
355 
CORRESPONDENCE.
necessarily depraved and sinful both in character
and action.
There is a helplessness in all minds that makes
us dependent on God for aid, first in an ignorant and
untrained nature, then in the mistakes and bad ex amples of educators, and then in the wrong-doings
of the child, thus forming bad habits to be overcome.
This helplessness, it can be carefully taught, is pitied and provided for by God, not only in all the
"means of grace" supplied, but in the ever-present
influence of the blessed Spirit, never withdrawn till
all efforts and influences are seen to be useless, and
then with real grief. And all the expressions from
the pulpit, in the Bible, and in religious books on
this point, can be explained to conform to this view
as easily as to the old Augustinian theory, and with
much more truth.
L urge this course on all mothers and teachers
with such deep anxiety and earnest desire as mournful memories of the past sometimes make almost
overwhelming. The records in my father's Autobiography have recalled so vividly the sufferings
of his children under the soul-withering system he
was so conscientiously administering, that I seem
to feel that his disenthralled spirit must be urging
my hand as I write.
I remember, in the period of great revivals under
his ministry, through which all his older children'
had passed to maturity unchanged in spiritual life,
356
l
-iI 
CORRESPONDENCE.
his sixth child, now in heaven, came home from
Yale College during a revival there, to see if his father's labors and prayers could not secure what he
sought in vain elsewhere. He was an earnest, enthusiastic, conscientious youth, and his whole soul
was absorbed in the desire to be "regenerated."
For three days and nights, from his room in the
centre of the house, we heard such wails and impassioned pleadings as made our home as solemn as the
grave, while not one of us knew what to say or do
for his relief; nor could we understand why a merciful God should thus withhold such a reasonable
boon.
It must be that you have often witnessed similar
mental agony, for I myself have seen the system
under which you have been trained administered
by similar methods.  Only a short time ago I was
in a large health establishment,'where the excellent
physician of your church labored as earnestly for
the souls as for the bodies of his patients. I often
observed there a pale and serious youth, conscientious, exemplary, and the son of a missionary. At
one time I was told there was more than ordinary
religious interest, and that this young man was
among "the seekers."  One day the physician was
detained from an appointment with me nearly two
hours, and when he came he told me he had spent
most of this time in prayer and converse with this
poor youth, who, he said, "was trying to get relig
357 
CORRESPONDENCE.
ion." Such occurrences as these, and such prayers
as I heard in Methodist prayer-meetings there, used
to wring my heart with vain regrets and longings.*
In both these cases, all this bitter sorrow would
have turned to peace and joy had it been said by
a spiritual guide in whom they confided, "Do not
afflict your soul by such false views of your heavenly Father; for, so long as you really seek and desire
to obey his will, you are a Christian, and his HIoly
Spirit has done and is doingall that you need. Go
in peace; strive to sin no more, for all the past is forgiven, and you are an accepted and beloved child."
Will not you, and such as you, in your large and
useful denomination, practically act on the admission of your theologians, that the young are lambs
of Christ, already in his fold to be trained, not as
"born under the wrath and curse" of their Savior,
but as his dear children?
* Where do we find in the Bible any warrant for such impassioned prayers for God's Spirit to convert sinners as are often heard
in periods of religious excitement? David prayed for himself,
when a saint, "Create in me a clean heart, and take not away thy
Holy Spirit;" and adds, "then will Iteach transgressors, and sinners shall be converted."
Our Lord says, "After this manner pray ye;" and in this model prayer is a petition for daily bread, and none for the Holy Spirit
to convert unregenerate men. Nor can we find any precept or example for such a prayer. The Bible represents the Holy Spirit as
the Comforter, Guide, and Helper of all who seek his aid, and God
as more ready to bestow the gift on all his creatures than parents
to give bread to their children.
358 
CORRESPONDENCE.
Extract of a Letter to the Author from a Female
Friend.
"As to addressing my uncle on the subject of religion, I thank you, dear friend, for your kind interest,
but I feel that one must be very adroit not to offend.
He knows so many men in the church who are such
arrant rascals in business transactions, that I think he
feels that going into the church does not make men
any better, and that he can be a good Christian quite
as well out of it as in it. I know this is his opinion,
though he rarely speaks it.
"Moreover, I feel myself so far behind him in all
the graces which ought to adorn the Christian character, that I have not the face to say,'Come where
you can be made better.' He has received the same
religious instruction that I have, and but for the observance of some of the mere externals of religion, I
see no difference between him and those of us who
are enrolled as church members. How much he loves
his Savior is known only to Him who seeth in secret,
but I really think he loves his neighbor better than
himself.".
Rleply of the Author to the foregoing.
MY DEAR FRIEND,-I certainly did not propose
to address your uncle on the subject of religion in
reference to his own personal duties and relations.
My wish was to ascertain how the views I hold
would strike a man of so much intellect, common
sense, and high moral feeling, educated in a Calvinistic denomination, and yet avoidihg all the outward forms of religious faith. You can not understand, till you know more of my inner life and past
359 
CORRESPONDENCE.
history, how strong an interest I feel in that class
of men represented by your uncle, some of them
called infidels, some Unitarians, and some simply
"unconverted moral men."
My wish in regard to your uncle was, without
any personal appeal, to give him the views I have
since presented to you in my proof-sheets, and then
to have you make the private personal application
to induce him to take a different practical course as
to his influence and example in the externals of religion, where, in your view, is his only failure, so
far as is seen by men.
I would address such a man as your uncle as a
Christian; because, in the first place, he has the intellectual belief that Christ is Lord of faith and practice, which is the first part of true faith. Still more
would I so address him thus on the ground that
while "he that hath not the spirit of Christ is none
of his," he that hath the spirit of Christ is his. And
who in this world, by the only true test given by
Christ himself, thefruits, or deeds, has the spirit of
Christ, if not one whose life leads those that know
him most intimately to say, as you do, "I believe
he loves his neighbor better than himself?"
I should not ask such a man to "join the church,
in the sense you understand it in the Congregational denominfation, but I should try to secure his
joining the Episcopal Church by simply becoming
a stated worshiper. And I should urge this, not
360 
CORRESPdNDENCE.
alone with the plea you suggest, "Come where you
can be made better," but by another, which would
be far more influential with one who so lives as
to seem to love his neighbor better than himself.
A man of such intellect, cultivation, and practical
good sense, who in no form recognizes the Christian
religion, throws the whole weight of his influence
against it, and thus tempts the weak and erring,
who need what perhaps he can do without, to
courses that may end in ruin in this world as well
as to increased risks for eternity. This is a motive
that would have great and increasing weight the
more it is considered by a man so sensible and benevolent.
But you will say he does not attend church, does
not join in any outward forms of worship; nor can
you say, from any certain evidence, that he prays,
or has anyform of acknowledging God; how, then,
can he be a Christian? There may be reasons
which, though they do not fully justify his course,
may be not at all indices of a want of true Christian feeling and character.
I too have had a dear friend who had the high
moral principles and exemplary life of a Christian,
with these same deficiencies which you find in yours.
The minister of the church he attended was a Calvinist, and preached total depravity and its connected doctrines according to the Westminster Confession. When he ceased going to church, he told me
Q
361 
CORRESPONDENCE.
the reason was that the preaching there always tended to make him a bad man; that, after hearing it,
he always felt unamiable, indignant, and especially
repelled from his Creator as an unreasonable, hateful, and foolish Being, and he could not help it. So
the least evil of the two was to stay away.
He was a man of clear intellect, with a tender,
sympathetic nature, a keen sense of justice, and a
natural abhorrence of all subterfuge and meanness.  To him the doctrine of the ruin of all infants in Adam was shocking, and the various theories by which, as he said, God contrived to cast
all the blame on Adam, seemed to him as mean
subterfuges. The theory of the atonement, by
which a human soul was joined to God the Son,
and then made to suffer the punishment for sins
committed by others, to his mind seemed, as he
saiid, "clumsy, irrational, and childish."
And yet his was not the kind of mind that could
go into theological and metaphysical dialectics.
The clergy and theologians around him interpreted
the Bible as teaching these views, to his mind so
derogatory to his Creator, and so, taking their interpretations, he lost faith in the Bible as of any divine
authority, though he admired and reverenced the
character of Jesus Christ, and accepted his teachings as wise and good. His good common sense
taught him that some kind of religion was needed
by all, and that, of all others, that taught by Christ,
362 
CORRESPONDENCE.
whatever its imperfections, is the best there is. Therefore he gave his support to it, and wished his family
to attend its ministries if they could gain any moral
benefit from them. And thus he lived, and finally
passed away, uncheered by any brighter hope than
that which the wise and good of all ages may cherish from the'night of nature.
These, our beloved friends, I regard as "representative men" of that great and increasing class
who openly or secretly have become followers of
Theodore Parker, or, as silent sufferers, have withdrawn from all outward forms of faith, and, like
your uncle, conceal their secret thoughts to save
their Christian friends from pain. This is the class
of noble men who I believe such women as you are
may, by the right kind of influences, lead into the
Episcopal Church, and thus, in the end, to an open
and happy Christian experience and profession.
And for this end I wish to remove some of the
many misconceptions in regard to this church.
It has been a matter of surprise to me to find
not only how ignorant I have been of the true
character of this church, but the extent of the misconceptions, not alone of others out of its communion, but of Episcopalians themselves.
I will mention, then, that, in the first place, it is
a church which any quiet, modest, and virtuous
man can join, and secure all its privileges, without
being questioned or interfered with in any way by
any person whatsoever.
363 
CORRESPONDENCE.
For "joining the church," in the Episcopal
sense, is simply becoming a stated worshiper in a
congregation of that denomination. Whoever does
this is entitled to all the privileges of that church,
unquestioned and perfectly free as to both opinions
and practice, so long as he is not guilty of "evil
living"-that is, of acknowledged immoralities.
As this statement will be questioned both by
those without and those within this church, I appeal to the Liturgy, Constitution, and Canons as
what will sustain the affirmation.
The starting-point of these rules is, that all infants are entitled to church membership, and that
all that is requisite to secure it for them is Christian sponsors to promise that they shall be educated to be Christians. If there are no parents or
guardians, any Christian person can be sponsor.
Baptism, to the infant, is the outward rite or form
of publicly acknowledging its rights as those of all
infants. It gives the name of a Christian, and the
seal or credential of its claim, existing from the
moment of birth, to be numbered as a child of God
and an heir of heaven. According to this, every
infant in the world has a right to be baptized as a
child of God, and fails only for want of Christian
sponsors.
According to the regulations of the Episcopal
Liturgy,
"So soon as children are come to a competent age,
364 
CORRESPONDENCE.
and can say the Creed, the Lord's Prayer, and the Ten
Commandments, and can answer to the other questions of the Short Catechism, they shall be brought to
the bishop."
Also:
"The minister of every parish shall either bring, or
send in writing, the names of all such persons within
his parish as he shall think fit to be presented to the
bishop to be confirmed."
These rules leave a large liberty to the minister.
But, to protect from any abuse of this liberty, the
congregation, and not the communicants, are those
who choose, not only the minister, but also all the
lay delegates who make the canons, and regulate
all the administration of the whole denomination
in General Convention. Nor is it allowed to limit
delegates to the communicants.
A portion of the clerical body have used this
liberty so' as to constitute themselves judges of the
opinions and religious experience of their parishioners, and in those cases confirmation and access
to the Lord's Table has often been regulated by the
conscience of the priest instead of the parishioner.
But this is contrary to the spirit of the whole ritual
and constitution of the church, and in violation of
the rule that no person shall be excluded from the
Lord's Table except for " evil living."
But it will be urged that adopting the forms prescribed in the rites of baptism and confirmation,
which must precede access to the table of the Lord,
365 
CORRESPONDENCE.
does in fact amount to the same thing as joining
the Puritan Church, by professing to be regenerate
and to believe a certain creed. Here the mistake is
owing to not noticing the difference between joining a church and using the forms of one of its ordinances. Every regular worshiper in a local Episcopal Church is already a member of the church.
The forms and rules of baptism and confirmation, which are to precede access to the Eucharist,
amount to no more than this, that the minister must
find out and notify the bishop that those desiring confirmation are proper persons according to
the rules of the church; and those rules exclude
none but those guilty of "evil living," provided
they can say the Creed, the Commandments, the
Lord's Prayer, and the Short Catechism.
It is the duty of every minister to give instructions preliminary to confirmation, and here he can
urge his own peculiar views and use his personal
influence. But no one is bound to accept his interpretation of the Bible or of the forms of the church.
Each person is free to put his own meaning to these
forms, and no bishop, priest, or deacon has a right
to interfere in any other way than by instruction
and advice; and, if it is attempted, on complaint, the
bishop is bound to interfere.
And here I would urge your attention, and,
through you, that of your uncle, to what I regard
as the distinctive excellence of the Episcopal forms.
366 
CORRESPONDENCE.
They are all based on the assumption that the
local church is the school of Christ, the great Master; that the ministry are subordinate teachers, and
that the whole congregation are learners in different stages of advancement.
The forms of worship for the whole congregation
express the highest style of Christian experience;
not on the assumption that all who use them have
reached this height, but rather that this is the model at which they are aiming. It is assumed that
each worshiper, in using these forms, is trying to
rise to a communion with the all-loving Father,
and to a conformity to all his laws.
It is not professing to have attained any particular elevation of Christian character, but rather the
use of the heaven-appointed mode of seeking the
very highest attainments.
This is, as true of the rites of baptism, confirmation, and the Eucharist as it is of the ordinary Sabbath forms. All these forms express the actual
existence of the deepest Christian experience and
highest Christian virtues; and yet it is probable
that not a single one who uses them would dare to
say that the experience thus expressed was fully
attained, but only that it is desired and aimed after
by the use of these forms, and by help from the
blessed Comforter, who aids our weaknesses by
these ministries.
Every man who attends the Episcopal Church
367 
CORRESPONDENCED.
by that act acknowledges himself a believer in
Christ as the teacher of the true religion, and thus
is one of" a congregation of faithful persons," just
as the worshipers in a mosque or heathen temple
acknowledge their faith by this act of attendance
on its public rites.
But whether a man interprets the Bible, or the
Articles, or the Liturgy as any other man or body
of men do, is a matter between himself and his
Maker, and one in which no other person has a
right to examine or interfere in any way. If he
wishes to have access to the Lord's Table, and is
ready to use the prescribed forms, the minister can
present his own views and instructions; but, whether they are accepted or not, he can not exclude from
any Church rites and ordinances except for "evil
living."
This being so, it is the office of the minister to
teach, but not to judge; to hold up the obligations
of Christ's religion, but to leave the question of attainment to the inspection of God and the conscience of each worshiper. This it is that makes
the Episcopal local Church a teaching or educating
church, in contrast to the local churches of those
sects which organize an inner association of persons
supposed to be regenerated by a new creation of a
depraved nature, and whose spiritual state is to be
inspected and then decided by lay vote or by clerical judgment.
368 
CORRESPONDENCE.
This Puritan method operates as it would in a
school where a model class was organized called
good scholars, while all the rest were classed as bad
scholars, and no graded classes between. Every
teacher can see how pernicious would be this method, especially so if the model class included some
who were very poor and unruly pupils, and the bad
class contained some of the most exemplary.
Thus it is in those churches that profess to exclude all but the regenerate, so far as church officers can judge or decide. The regenerate church
often includes some of the most unworthy members
of society, while some men, like your uncle, who
show most of the spirit of Christ in their deeds, are
ranked with those who are the unregenerate, and
not Christians.
The attempt to introduce the same method into
the Episcopal Church in this country, by calling
the communicants "the church," in distinction from
the rest of the parish, is as contrary to the spirit
and rules of that church as it is to the example and
teachings of the New Testament.
Nothing of this kind has ever been attempted in
the English Church. In that communion all infants are baptized, and confirmation usually is administered in childhood. Thus the division between the truly pious and those who are not is
decided, not by outward professions, but by deeds.
Those who live a worldly, irreligious life are taught
Q2
869 
CORRESPONDENCE.
that they are children in God's family living in ungrateful rebellion, and all the congregation alike
are exhorted to live up to the model exhibited in
all the sacred forms of their church.
The history of Dr. Arnold and his Rugby school,
and his sermons to young boys, are a most interesting illustration of the system of the English Church
educational training.
Those sects which organize within the worshiping congregation an inner church, to which none
are admitted till, after due inspection, sonme church
officer decides that there is proper evidence of regeneration, present a painful alternative to that class
of men represented by your uncle. Either they
must submit to this personal inspection, and be publicly pronounced as regenerated saints, or they must
be classed among the unregenerated sinners, who
are spoken of as not Christians.  All this may be
escaped in the Episcopal Church.
I am aware of the repellances that such a man
will encounter in a communion whose forms are
not familiar. Moreover, if he goes to hear one class
of ministers of the Episcopal Church, the Calvinistic system will repel; and if he goes to another class,
the rites and forms of the church will be so dwelt
upon and magnified in importance as to annoy.
But, ere long, with a very little aid and influence
from a loving friend, the forms will become familiar,
and soon their noble, simple, and elevated spirit will
370 
CORRESPONDENCE.
gradually and quietly secure a heart and intellect
so fitted to appreciate and enjoy the beautiful, good,
and true. And as to the preaching, a sensible and
benevolent man, who enters the church with the
right spirit, soon learns to take what is good and
pass over easily what, to a captious spirit, would be
offensive. There are many ministers in the Episcopal Church who go to neither of the above extremes; and in every denomination there are some
ministers who tax the patience of their hearers by
violations of good taste, or by doctrines which offend common sense.
In regard to the claims of some on the debated
matter of apostolic succession and diocesan authority, it is a topic of little practical moment to the
laity. The common-sense practice, adopted in all
professions, of excluding unworthy pretenders by
some kind of examination and license, all sects
adopt and approve as it respects their clergy. The
chief difference is as to modes of doing this thing,
and the importance of these diverse modes.
In the English Episcopal churches there is a diversity of opinions on this matter, some holding
that the diocesan form results from apostolic authority, and is obligatory; others holding that it is
only, in their opinion, the best way as the general
rule, but not obligatory. This latter view was the
opinion of most of the first founders of the English
Church, and is that also of a large portion of its
-i::
371 
CORRESPONDENCE.
highest dignitaries at the present time. In this
country, also, there is a similar diversity of opinion,
and an increasing tendency to drop the discussion
of the subject. As to the laity, they are not required to adopt the Thirty-nine Articles, or any
particular views on any disputed points.
As to "the Creed," which all are expected to believe, it is a simple statement of the great " facts"
of the Christian religion, which all sects hold in
common, without any of the theories which have
caused their divisions.
There is not a sentence in it which a Catholic, a
Unitarian, a Swedenborgian, a Quaker, and all our
larger sects could not adopt in perfect good faith.
The aim of this creed is to bring together all who
believe in the Christian religion into worshiping
assemblies as learners to be taught, not as accomplished Christians.
That the views of the author in this letter might
be duly authenticated, proofs of it were sent to several of the bishops and other influential clergy of
the Episcopal Church. To one of them the following letter was sent with the proofs, and his reply is
appended.
.-tl
372 
CORRESPONDENCE.
Letter from the Author to Dr.
REV. AND DEAR SIR,-Suppose the two gentle men referred to in this letter had come to you with
this statement:
We believe in Jesus Christ as the Lord of faith
and practice, and feel obligated to obey his teachings. One of his commands is that we acknowledge our belief and obligations by the rites of baptism and the Eucharist.
But in most churches we can not thus obey
Christ, except by professing to believe certain doctrines that we do not believe, and also by professing to be regenerate in a sense we can not accept
as true of ourselves.
On examining the forms to be used for Baptism,
Confirmation, and the Eucharist in the Episcopal
Church,we find we can with good conscience adopt
them, and we wish to obey Christ in these ordinances.
Upon this you inquire if they put the same interpretation on these forms that you do, and they
reply, "We find no authority in the Liturgy, or
constitution, or canons of the Episcopal Church for
any church officer thus to interfere in this matter,
and we deem it a question between God and our
own consciences alone. We are ready to hearyour
opinions on the matter, and to receive your instruction in public and private; but on several points
373 
CORRESPONDENCE.
of faith we are not ready to set forth our creed to
any person."
Would you feel justified in excluding from
church ordinances such men, with such characters
and such views?
Suppose, again, that one of them should say, as
some dear friends of mine of the highest moral
worth might do, "The Bible, as interpreted by you
and most Christian ministers, I can not accept as the
authoritative guide in faith and practice. I do not
believe in the Trinity, or the Atonement, or infant
depravity, as you and the clergy interpret the Bible.
"But I can accept the Creed used in the Episcopal Church, for I find no such doctrines there. I
wish to obey Christ by professing faith in him as
my Lord and Master, by the appointed rites of baptism and the Eucharist, and can use the required
forms in good faith. I am ready to hear all your
instructions, and do not expect to controvert your
opinions, or lessen your influence by disseminating
mine."
Would you be justified in excluding from baptism and the Eucharist for such statements?
Extract fromn the Reply to the foregoing.
"As to the first supposed case, I should not feel
justified in excluding such men from the ordinances
of our church, though I should feel bound to set before them very distinctly my view of the position they
would assume before the woi-ld, as being supposed to
374 
CORRESPONDENCE.
accept the well-known Trinitarian faith of the church
which they propose Ito enter.
"As to the second case, also, I should not feel justified in excluding even such a man, proposing, as he
is supposed to do, not to enter our church for the
purpose of holding, defending, and disseminating antiTrinitarian views, but for that of conforming to the
usages of our church, with a willingness to hear and
consider her teachings. As in the other case, I should
feel bound to impress on him my views of the position he would assume before the world.
"If, with a full understanding of my views, such a
man were still willing to enter our church, holding
these and connected points as matters of conscience
between himself and God, I should not feel bound,
nor even justified, in excluding him from church ordinances. Moreover, if I saw, from conversation and
acquaintance with him, that he was really and truly
seeking after fuller light, and desirous of finding rest
in the real verities of Christianity, instead of being a
prejudiced and captious fault-finder with old forms of
faith, I certainly should receive and treat him with
great tenderness and affection, and be particularly
careful rtot to put any needless obstacles or stumblingblocks in his way."
The following is from an Episcopal bishop, who
criticised the proofs of the above letter:
"I like the drift of this letter so much that I wish
you could make it more unexceptionable in its phraseology. You say' every regular worshiper in a local
Episcopal Church is already a member of that church.'
This statement will be strongly objected to by almost
every Episcopalian, inasmuch as the prevalent, or, I
may say, the universal opinion is that we become members of the outward church in baptism, as we do of
the spiritual church, by becoming partakers of Christ's
spirit.
375 
CORRESPONDENCE.
" It is, indeed, a singular anomaly that one may be
an officer in this church, in one sense of the word-that
is, a warden or vestry-man, and also a representative
in Convention, in many dioceses, without being baptized or ever receiving the communion. How to reconcile all this I do not pretend to know.
"I feel that you are doing a grand work, and one
that touches the centre of things."
I would ask this respected friend and my fellowChristians of the Episcopal Church to consider these
definitions, sanctioned by universal use, as shown in
our dictionaries:
-"A Christian-1. One who believes in Christ's religion; 2. One who professes to believe it; 3. One who
by family and country is supposed to believe it; 4.
One who so believes it as to obey its precepts."
Thus there is an intellectual faith, a professed faith,
a supposed faith, and a living or true faith.
Now what I claim is that the Puritan Church is
an attempt to organize the invisible church as those
having true faith, so as to make men judges of Christian character, and that no such attempted organization exists in the Episcopal denomination. This
all must acknowledge.
The question then is, Does the local Episcopal
Church consist only of those who have professed
faith by baptism, or does it also include all who
profess faith by a stated attendance in a worshiping
congregation?
I do not regard the question as one of muchpractical consequence, inasmuch as all the parish are
376 
CORRESPONDENCE.
supposed to be baptized in infancy. It is conceded
that it is not required of a man to be baptized, confirmed, or to receive the Eucharist in order to be
either a voter or an officer in a local Episcopal
Church. Nor is there any such body in that denomination as corresponds with "the church" in
distinction from "the parish" in the Congregational, Baptist, and Methodist denominations.
The same may be said of the local Presbyterian
churches, if they obeyed their rules and standards,
which always assume that the whole "congregation" is the church, and recognize no other church.
The attempt to organize the invisible church, now
so common, never was made till the time of the Puritans.
In regard to what is said on the subject of the
Creed and Trinitarian views, the following is offered for consideration:
Dr. Beecher taught that there are three Divine
Persons, each having all the attributes of the Supreme Divinity-all three as distinct from each
other as Peter, James, and John, yet mysteriously
united as one God.
Dr. Bushnell teaches that there is one Divine
Mind, and that the Trinity consists in the diverse
relations and manifestations of this one mind.
Dr. Channing teaches that the Father alone has
377 
CORRESPONDENCE.
all the attributes of Supreme Divinity; that Christ
is God in another sense; and that the Holy Spirit
is not a distinct divine person.
The Swedenborgian teaches that Christ is the
Supreme Divinity, and that the Father and Holy
Spirit are names of the same person in diverse relations and manifestations.
But the Creed required in the Episcopal Church
at baptism and confirmation expresses belief only
in these facts-in  the Creator as " the Father;"
in Christ as "our Lord;" in the New Testament
history of his birth, death, resurrection, and his future judgment of the living and the dead; in the
Holy Ghost; in the universal church; in the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and the life everlasting.
Here, it will be seen, there is no attempt to settle
the Trinitarian question, but each one is left free to
accept either of the above theories; nor is there a
single article of this Creed which is not held in common by all Christian sects.
Supposing, then, a minister should set forth his
particular view of the Trinity, and state that this is
the view usually taught in the Episcopal Church,
and that it will be inferred that all who are communicants will be supposed to hold this view, this
surely imposes no special obligation, except, it may
be, to state a contrary view, or to say that no definite opinion has been formed on the subject. A
378 
CORRESPONDENCE.
great excellence of the Episcopal Church is the perfect liberty of conscience afforded to all the laity, and
the greater liberty afforded to its clergy than is permitted in any other Christian denomination whose
local churches are organized as one body.
Any one unacquainted with the Constitution and
Canons of this church will be surprised to find how
strict are the constitutional rules that restrain bishops from abuse of power, and how much less power
a bishop has than the unregulated majorities in many
other denominations.
379 
CORRESPONDENCE.
From the Author to a Mother.
MY DEAR FRIEND,-YOU ask why I have joineli
the Episcopal Church, and also why, in doing so,
I was confirmed. The first question you will find
answered in the proof-sheets I send with this. As
to the rite of confirmation, I regard it, in reference
to one of my character and circumstances, simply
as a courteous compliance with the religious rules
of the Christian family I enter, which there is no
proper cause for refusing. On the same principle,
were I a minister of another denomination, on entering, I should comply with the rules of this church
as to ordination; not because I do, but because I
do not deem any particular form very important,
and so could conscientiously yield to the customs
of the Christian community I should enter.
Irt reflecting on my own course in this matter,
and also on the religious condition of your dear
children, I am led to present, for your and their
consideration, some reasons for their following my
example.
Your children now are in a false position; one
which does them injustice, and makes a false impression on them and on others, which is injurious
to their feelings and to their character.
In your religious community they have been
trained to feel that those who profess religion by
"joining a church" are Christians, and those who
380 
CORRESPONDENCE.
do not are not Christians. In the Congregational
churches the assumption is that young children are
not lambs in Christ's fold, but those out of it, whose
natures must be new created before they can be
taken in.
It is true, your family training has not been after
this pattern; but the pulpit ministries, the Sundayschool, the religious books for children, the religious conversation of most with whom they associate,
all assume this view. Moreover, no one can be acknowledged as a Christian by access to the Lord's
Table till church officers have examined as to evidence of regeneration and of belief in the creed of
the church. Now your children do not believe in
some important parts of the creed of your church,
nor do they regard themselves as "regenerated" in
the sense demanded by youir church rules and customs. 
Meantime, they see among their associates who
are members of the church persons with all sorts
of faults, from many of which they themselves are
free.  These are regarded as "regenerated," fitted
for heaven, "lights of the world," the "salt of the
earth," looking on others out of the church as sinners, destitute of religious principle, and on the way
to hell.
The influence of all this is to throw them into an
unconscious and almost resentful antagonism with
their Christian friends, which has a repelling influ
381 
CORRESPONDENCE.
ence on both sides.  No friend who is "a professor" can address them on the subject without an
implied assumption of superiority, or as a reprover
or adviser.
Now, in the Episcopal Church, all children are
assumed to be young Christians-lambs of the fold
to be trained to a higher Christian life. All regular
worshipers and their children are in the church,
and entitled to all its privileges on using the appointed forms.
What, then, is confirmation in this church? It
is the child assuming the obligations taken by sponsors in its behalf at baptism.
And what is promised at baptism? Not that the
sponsors will positively make the child a true spiritual Christian, but that they will see that it is
trained to believe the Christian religion, and use
other appointed means for the purpose of securing
this end by the help of God. At confirmation, the
children assume the same obligations; that is, that
they will use the appointed means for becoming
true spiritual Christians, with the hope and purpose
of securing this end by God's help.
Thus "joining the church" in the Congregational denomination is being examined and voted
into a close corporation as already true Christians
and fitted for heaven. In the Episcopal form all
children are in the church, and confirmation is a
public acknowledgment of their obligations, and
382 
CORRESPONDENCE.
their desire and purpose to fulfill them in future
by God's help.
True faith in Christ, or to be "a true Christian,"
involves, in the first place, the educational belief
in Jesus Christ as Lord of our faith and practice,
which sponsors can properly promise to secure.
Whoever has this faith has begun to be a true
Christian, or taken the first step. Next comes the
receiving and understanding of Christ's teachings.
This also may be secured by educational training.
Lastly, and chiefly, is obedience to Christ's teachings
in purpose, feelings, and conduct. The union of all
these makes a true spiritual Christian.
But to "feel and act right" and to "obey Christ"
are the same thing, so that whoever is habitually
trying to feel and act right is really trying to obey
Christ, though the purpose may not be conceived
of in that form of expression.
Your children are in the position that thousands
of the best Christians are now in, who read the Bible, and hear religious teachings concealed in theological theories that veil the character of God and
Christ in darkness, or present it in hideous distortions. Owing to this, all that emotive part of religious experience, which is usually sought as the chief
evidence of piety, is chilled or destroyed. This was
my experience for years, and would have continued
so through life, had not these false and cruel theories been thrust aside.
383 
CORRESPONDENCE.
Your children are habitually trying to feel and
act right, as much so as most of those who are counted good Christians in every sense.  Had they been
brought up in the English Church, under such train.
ing as you have given, they would have grown up
consistent and happy Christians from infancy. I
know large families in the Episcopal Church where
the parents will tell you that they never knew a
time from the cradle when each child, according to
its measure of mental development, was not a loving and obedient follower of Christ.
What I now would urge is that you influence
your children to join the Episcopal Church, not as
converted, regenerated saints, as understood in the
Congregational sense, but as persons desiring to be
good, and seeking the ministries of Christ's religion
for this end.
Let them commence the outward acknowledgment of their religious obligations, and their wish
and purpose to fulfill them, by the rite of confirmation, and they will feel relieved from all those fretting repellancies that now surround them, and, under more favorable influences, will come out into
"the glorious light and liberty of the children of
God."
One other point I offer for consideration. To
complete a happy Christian character, veneration,
devotion, and personal love to the Savior need to be
developed, and these also are the result, more or
384 
CORRESPONDENCE.
less, of training.  In the Episcopal Church these
elements are systematically cultivated. When our
Savior gave the Lord's Prayer-for all ages and
conditions —he knew that the ignorant and the
young could neither understand nor feel half of the
sublime and comprehensive truths included in it.
We are obliged to begin with forms adapted to a
higher life than we possess, and by their aid we
gradually rise to the spirit which should fill them.
The Episcopal Liturgy is based on this principle.
It is adapted to the highest stages of Christian life.
The young and ignorant are trained to use it when
they can neither understand nor feel much that their
lips utter. But as years pass, the spiritual element
is developed by this and other culture, till, in due
time, the heart feels what the lips utter.
When we take those ancient forms, hallowed by
so many' beautiful and venerable associations -
when we ourselves speak in our own ears such glorious words of love, devotion, penitence, and thanksgiving, we are taking the surest mode of calling
forth and cultivating these beautiful and happifying elements of Christian character.
Through my past life, among my maternal relatives, I have been a frequent attendant on the Episcopal form of worship, but never joined in it except
as Congregationalists ordinarily do. The effect of
the change, when I began to take part in the responsive service, Was very delightful and elevating,
R
385 
CORRESPONDENCE.
and I became a worshiper at church as I never was
before. How singular that those sects which demand an emotive experience as the chief evidence
of regeneration should have relinquished all the ritual forms most calculated to develop such an experience!
But you may say, "My husband's feelings and
his connection with the Congregational denomination are such that I see not how I can go myself, or
send my children to the Episcopal Church."
If this is an insurmountable difficulty, I would
urge another course. Your minister is a truly good
man, and the chief desire of his heart is for the salvation of his flock. Go to him with your difficulties, and ask him if he can not contrive some way
to take your lambs into the fold. I have known
several mothers in the Congregational denomination who have made this plea to their pastor: "Several of my children are as dutiful and conscientious
as most adult'professors.' They wish to be true
Christians, and to obey all Christ's teachings, and
yet they dare not come out before the' examining
committee' of the church, nor stand up in public
profession, to be gazed at as among the converted
saints. Can you not so arrange it that they may
come into your church privately as those who wish
to become true spiritual Christians, and are willing
to use all the appropriate means of religious training? And if any of them feel that Christ's corn
386 
CORRESPONDENCE.
mand,'This do in remembrance of me,' is obligatory, can not this ordinance be allowed to my children without forsaking your ministry?"
The preceding letter, in modified forms, has been
sent to several friends. The following is a specimen of some of the happy results of the course suggested:
"What a comfort it is to have all my children
united in religious sympathy! I have never ceased
to bless the day when they were confirmed in the
Episcopal Church. It has been to them that gradual
education and progression which they and I hoped
for; and I see, every year, how the services and prayers gain on them more and more.  One of them said
to me the other day, that whatever care or trouble
she might have when she entered the church, all fell
away from her there, and she always came away happy.  Thecomfort of it is every thing to her, and I see
a steady progress in them all. I know not how to be
thankful enough. All cares are light now these heavier cares are lifted."
The author disclaims any invidious comparison
as to the general results of religious training in the
Episcopal Church. The theory of infant depravity has developed its evil tendencies in this as well
as in other denominations, especially in undue reliance on church ordinances, perhaps as injurious as
undue reliance in other churches on sudden conversions and "revivals."
The distinctive advantage of the Episcopal Church
0
387 
CORRESPONDENCE.
is that young children are regarded as young Christians already in the church, and in a course of gradual training to a higher spiritual life. Whenever,
therefore, a parent pursues the methods of early
training indicated in this work, all the influences of
the church are adapted to encourage and aid.
But churches that exclude children as aliens, or
enemies of God, till re-created, exert an influence
disastrous and discouraging to both parents and
children.
388 
CORRESPONDENCE.
From the Author to some young Friends after their
Confirmation.
MY DEAR CHILDREN,-I fear I shall not be able
to join you on Easter Sunday, not from want of interest, but from fear of an excess of it beyond my
physical strength. Let me comfort myself for the
disappointment by sending you some words of encouragement and sympathy that I hope will aid
you in "the ways of pleasantness" which you have
entered.
Our blessed Lord describes his service as "a
yoke" and "a burden," and yet declares it to be
"easy" and "light," and what will give "rest to the
soul." There is nothing more important to your
success than a clear understanding of this, not only
in its general form, but in specific applications.
In its. most general sense, the yoke and burden
of Christ is a daily effort to cease to live for selfgratification, and to take happiness-making* for others as the chief aim, guided not by our own estimates, but by the teachings of Jesus Christ. Hle,
our Great Exemplar, lived "not to please himself,"
but to instruct, comfort, and save others. This is
the easy yoke and the light burden that brings rest
to the soul.
* "Blessed are the peace-makers" would be more accurately
translated "Blessed are the happiness-makers, for they are the children of God."
389 
CORRESPONDENCE.
We are to do this, not by any great act of selfsacrifice, not by any sudden transformation of our
"nature" by some mysterious new creating process,
but by a daily, patient, persevering "bearing of the
cross"-the crossing of our own desires for mere
selfish good, and the sacrificing of them for the higher good of others. This is the general statement.
Now for some of the specifics.
We are to follow Christ, not by stepping into
some new sphere, but by first learning to bear our
cross in the position we are in at the present time.
We are to deny self, and make happiness for others in the eve6ry-day life around us. We are not to
try to please every body in any way and every
way we can devise, but we are to do it in the best
and right way, and for this we need a higher wisdom than our own, even that which cometh from
above.
What, then, are some of the daily crosses and
self-denials we are to bear? Of course not what
we like to do, but those things which are contrary
to our tastes. When a person pleases us by agreeable qualities, or by kindness or favors of any kind,
we have no chance to follow our Lord. " If ye do
good to them that do good to you, what thank have
ye, for sinners also do even the same. Do good
and lend, hoping for nothing again, and ye shall be
the children of the Hiighest." We follow Christ in
bearing the cross, then, when we do not the things
390 
CORRESPONDENCE.
which we like, as pleasing to self alone, but things
we do not like that do good to others.
God has placed us in the family state for this 
very end, that we may begin on a small scale, andf
learn by degrees this difficult lesson.  We are to 
live for the best good of a small family, as Christ
lived for the large family of this whole world.
Let us, then, take each member of the family
where you are, and inquire wherein you can deny
self and take up the cross; and in so doing we
shall find that the Bible supplies us with rules for
every case.
To begin with the eldest, we have one command
that meets this case exactly: "Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ." The
burdens of the aged are many, and God preserves
them alive when often they wish to die, for the very
purpose of cultivating the Christian graces of those
around them. They are weak in body, and we
must lend our strength to do for them what they
cease to be able to do for themselves. Their eyes
fail, and we must read for them.  Their hearing
fails, and cuts them off from social enjoyments, unless we talk with them, not for our own gratification, but for theirs. Their body fails from disease
or decay; their mind becomes weak, and perhaps
gloomy and suspicious; their resources for enjoyment fail, and this tends to make them peevish and
discontented.
391 
CORRESPONDENCE.
All this is seen by the Good Shepherd, who cares
most for the feeble of his flock. And so the Bible
abounds with directions for securing honor, tenderness, and care for the hoary head. It would be a
good exercise, if your patience should fail in such
duties, to collect all the texts in the Bible on this
subject.
I can not, in so small a space, enter on the specific
duties of each family relation, but I must not omit,
what is so often forgotten, our obligations to those
often the humblest and weakest members of the
household, the denizens of the kitchen. How often,
especially in our great cities, do we find those who,
as to mental development, are Christ's " little ones,"
in dark and comfortless mooms by day and night,
while the chief aim of employers seems to be to get
as much work out of them with as little pay as possible.*
If you had a dear little sister stolen from you in
early childhood, and heard that, neglected and ignorant, she was toiling in such a family, what would
* The Catholic clergy are commanded to instruct their people
not to join in Protestant worship in families, or to receive the Protestant Bible or books; but, as a compensation, they provide the
Catholic Bible, and have prepared some most excellent reading
for family servants. I wish all Protestant ministers and heads of
families would examine the little work " Guide to Catholic Young
Women," published by D. & J. Sadlier,. New York, and give it to
their Catholic servants, and then try to find one as good for Protestants.
392 
CORRESPONDENCE.
be your feelings and conduct should she be returned
to her home? But are not all in your household
Christ's children, and does he not feel most tenderly and most anxiously for those who have been
most neglected? Remember this when you go to
your kitchen; seek the confidence and good-will of
those who have no home, and no parental tenderness and care. Give them kind sympathy; try
what you can do by furnishing suitable readingby kind instruction, by patient forbearance; and
daily seek to raise these children of God to a higher life. And remember those encouraging words
of our Lord: "Inasmuch as ye did it unto the least
of one of these, ye have done it unto me."
To you, my dear, I must be very brief.
The question you propose seems to amount to
this: Shall you go to Europe, and seek enjoyment
for self, or shall you go to, and find happiness in imparting good to others. I will not now
advise as to this specific case, but rather give you
some general views as principles to guide.
We are to live through eternal ages in a system in
which the only true way for each one to find happiness is to make happiness for others as the chief end.
God is training us in this life for this career. Our
first lesson is to learn by experience what makes
self happiest, in order to learn what will make oth                      R2
~
393 
CORRESPONDENCE.
ers so; then, in the family, we learn to make happiness for those we love, and in many ways to sacrifice self for the best good of the family. Some go
through this family training petted and indulged,
growing more and more devoted to self-happiness,
and yet getting less and less. Others, by this training, are so prepared that they can advance another
step, so as to be made happy in seeking the best
good of those they do not love-the ignorant-the
disagreeable the neglected out of the family.
It is here that we begin to rise more entirely
from the earthly to the heavenly; to become fellowlaborers with our Lord, who came "not to please
himself," but to do good to " the evil and unthankful."
To make sacrifices for one's children, for family
friends, for those we love, for those who pleaseus
by agreeable qualities —this is what even the heathen'will do. It is only the followers of Christ who
have learned "to do good hoping for nothing again,"
except that highest "joy" for which our Lord "endured the cross"-the joy of blessing and saving
the poor, and miserable, and lost.
The highest sphere of all is for those who have
not only a given development of natural and cultivated benevolence, but who also have a compass of
intellect and an executive power that enables them
to work on general principles, and on a larger scale
than the family or neighborhood.
394 
CORRESPONDENCE.
It is such who are to stand highest in the scale
of being and of happiness, often even in this lifestill more in the world to come. Such are to be
" kings and priests."
Knowing your private history, your high position, and your grade of talent, I have often thought
that Providence may be training you for such a
sphere-a training that almost always includesprevious suffering.
Still, as I see no immediate call to any other position than the one you now occupy, it is very probable that a visit to Europe, f it does not injure you,
will prepare you for higher ministries. A year
spent in a round of mere self-qualification is a dangerous preliminary to a career of self-sacrificing benevolence; but some can meet it safely, and, if so,
it is a preparation for a higher sphere.
Do not think I would in all this assume that you
will not marry, or advise you not to do so; that is
the lot in which most women will be both the happiest and most useful. It is the lot most women
would desire and prefer; for the happiness of the
higher sphere none can understand or appreciate
till they have been developed for it. But it is as
much higher and nobler as wedded bliss excels the
tiny joys of childhood; for the nearer we approach
to God in character and action, the happier we are.
395 
CORRESPONDENCE.
To a Congregational Clergyman.
MY DEAR SIR,-YOU say that you agree with the
published views of my brother, as set forth in his
sermons in the In2dependent.
This being true, you do not hold to a depraved
nature of infants transmitted from Adam,* nor to
the theories of atonement, divine influence, and regeneration that are based upon this doctrine.
But "the Puritan Church," which is founded on
these theories, and must stand or fall with them,
you appear before men to uphold, when in conviction you have relinquished it. You invite to the
Lord's Table as fellow-Christians all who love our
Lord Jesus Christ, and purpose to obey his teachings. This takes in not only Unitarians, Swedenborgians, Catholics, and Quakers, but many who are
connected with no religious sect.
Yet still you shut out the lambs of your flock
from the Church of Christ, and, so far as example
* " Each faculty, in its proper place, exercising its proper function, is right and good.  God neither created nor preserved in
man a single original faculty whose natural function is wrong.
Man's conduct is wrong enough; but man's faculties, in their nature, all of them are right. Man is sinful enough; but it is the use
he makes of his faculties, and not the faculties themselves, that
make him so. A thief's nature is as good as an honest man's nature," etc.-Sermon in Independent, Jan. 7, 1864.  See also the-Sermon on the Atonement and Justizfication, of July 4, 1861.
396 
CORRESPONDENCE.
goes, you influence others to do the same. It is for
these I enter my plea.
My first reason for taking children into the
Church is, that the exclusion which turns them
away every communion season, and also many of
their parents, as not members of Christ's family,
revives and perpetuates pernicious impressions and
associations which contradict your pulpit teaching.
I will give as illustration a case of one I knew in
early childhood and in after life.
As a child, this friend was generous, tender, and
sympathizing, and possessed keen moral sensibilities. When only four or five years old, I narrated
to her the tale of the Babes in the Wood, which
threw her into an agony of indignation at the cruel
uncle, and of sorrow for the suffering babes. Afterward, if I proposed to tell this, or any similar tale
of wrong and suffering, she would always make her
escape,'and never listen.
When about eight years old, she resided some
months with a cousin of the same age, where, in
the street, were seen neglected and ignorant young
children. She influenced her cousin to join her in
teaching them in a daily school of an hour or two,
and in after years she told me that every day she
prayed to Jesus Christ to aid her, with the fullest
confidence that her prayers were heard and answered.
Soon after this, a Methodist servant told the child
397 
CORRESPONDENCE.
that her parents were Calvinists, who believed that
all children were born "under God's wrath and
curse," and, unless they were elected and converted, would go to hell, and be burning in a fire forever. To verify this, the Westminster Catechism
was shown which was taught in her father's church.
She shrank from this horrible tale as she did
from the story of the Babes in the Wood, and, for
fear it was true, never told her parents what she
suffered. From that time her religious faith and
trust failed. The only thing that ever helped her,
through after years of spiritual distress, was the
feeling that f one so kind and good as Jesus Christ
was God, he would somehow make all these dreadful things come right.
This is only one of many cases that have come
to my knowledge of the mournful ponderings of
young children over such terrible theories, while
often they dare not reveal their distress, nor show
the causes of changes in feeling and character that
reach through life. Are not such sufferers those
of whom their kind Savior said,
"Take heed that ye despise not these little ones;
whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone
were hanged about his neck, and he were drowned in
the depths of the sea?"
Now what I urge is that the division of your
parish into church and congregation, which on every communion season openly exiles children from
398 
CORRESPONDENCE.
the family of Christ, is based on this very theory,
that children are born "under God's wrath and
curse"-depraved creatures, that must be new-created before they can be lambs in Christ's fold. You
may yourself oppose and controvert this opinion,
but, so long as you continue the very organization
made to sustain this doctrine, your acts nullify your
words.
It is true, you openly and often declare, when
you urge men to join your church, that it is not to
profess to be better than other men, but rather that
it is a profession of weakness and sinfulness that
seeks the sustaining influences of church associations, and brotherly watch and care. But, if this
be the ground of admission to your church, why
exclude children, the weakest of all, and those most
needing this watch and care? And why claim to
be a church in the present Congregational sense
when the distinctive thing on which that whole
system rests is forsaken? And how are you to
meet the charge of evasion and pretense in keeping a name and form, when you have forsaken the
thing for which they stand?
When our Savior so strongly remonstrates against
all that tends to weaken or injure his "little ones,"
it is not alone for children in stature that he cared.
Many children in families and schools of high culture are more developed in mental powers than
most adults in the ignorant and neglected classes.
399 
CORRESPONDENCE.
These neglected ones are those for whose interests
the Savior watches with more tenderness than for
those more favored. The poor servant-girl in the
cold garret and dark kitchen; the toiling unrequited seamstress; the young apprentice; the daylaborer-such are those whom Christ bore on his
heart when in his parting message, as the chief evidence of love to him, he enjoined, "Feed my lambs."
It is in this relation that I ask you to look at another cause of "offense" to Christ's little ones. It
is impossible for you to eradicate the long-established impression that your "church," in distinction
from your "congregation," are persons whom God
has regenerated by a new creation of their nature.
The special duty of Congregational Church officers
is to examine and decide who give proper evidence of regeneration and of belief in a given mode
of interpreting the Bible, called a creed. All the
texts of the Bible addressed to Christians are considered as belonging to church members, and not
to those out of the church. The minister also addresses his church as a holy nation, a peculiar people on the road to heaven, while those out of it are
regarded as impenitent, and not fitted for heaven.
Thus it is that "the church" stand before these
weaker children of Christ as true Christians.
In my office as an educator I often had under
my training many commencing a new religious life,
while my aim was to give them the highest stand
400
I 
CORRESPONDENCE.
ard, even that of Christ and his apostles.  I endeavored to train them to a life of self-sacrificing
devotion to the salvation of their fellow-men as the
chief concern and thefutu?re business of life. But they
"joined the Church," some in one place and some
in another, and soon they found church and church
officers living by a very different standard. And
yet minister and all assumed themselves to be the
peculiar people of God, and on the way to heaven.
How, then, could these "little ones" lift up a standard higher than minister and church? It was vain
to hope it, and so my labor was mostly in vain.
HIad there been no organized church of persons examined and pronounced regenerate, then the Bible
would have been the only standard, and this would
have drawn them upward instead of downward.
But there is still another heavier cause of offense
against Christ's little ones. It is the rule and duty
of the Congregational Church to cut off from its
body those who cease to give evidence of regeneration, and of belief in the given creed. In your own
church, if a man is openly a drunkard, your church
officers, I suppose, would have him excommunicated.
But if a man is penurious, selfish, hard in dealings with his dependents; or if a man is proud, ambitious, and unscrupulous in his aims, no such discipline can be practiced. If a woman of high position is a gossip and tale-bearer, or one whose ve
401 
CORRESPONDENCE.
racity no one trusts, no church discipline reaches
her. if a man of wealth and influence is unjust
and overbearing;  if he fails dishonorably, runs
down his own paper in the market, and then buys
it up himself; if a man lives in wealth and splendor while his debts are unpaid, no church action
can touch him.  For I have heard you say from
the pulpit that it is impossible to bring the business
matters of the mercantile world into church investigations.
And so it is that children, and servants, and the
humbler classes hear church members discussed as
exhibiting all these disgraceful traits and actions,
and yet ministers and church officers are vouchers
that they are "the regenerate."  And when the failings of church members are discovered, it is very
common to say that we must judge charitably, and
hopbe, in spite of all this, that they are still of those
who are born again, and this, too, when no repentance, confession, and reformation are perceived.
All this directly tends not only to perplex and
confuse, but to lower the Christian standard; nay,
more, it tends to direct immorality, especially in the
weak and unreflecting.  " If Christians can do such
things and be fit to go to heaven, where is the great
harm in others doing the same things?  It may
be, some time, God will regenerate us also, and then
it will be as easy to repent of a good many sins
as of a few." I have repeatedly been told by my
402 
CORRESPONDENCE.
friends that those often were the early reasonings
of childhood.
These things being so, is it strange that we find
in the Independent a respected Calvinistic minister
say that, in his observation, the majority of young
children who undertake to live a religious life make
a failure? So Dr. A. Alexander, of Princeton, says:
I can not remember one solitary instance of decided piety in childhood, when the child lived to
adult age, to prove the genuineness of the change."
I present these considerations to you, not to induce you to find refuge, as I have done, in the Episcopal Church-not but that I think you would find
more true religious liberty in that church than in
any other-not that I do not believe you would
find it easier and pleasanter to work in that communion-but there is a harder service opening before you; one that, I trust, will tax your highest
mental powers and wisest practical skill.
The system of slavery is drawing to a close in
our nation, and you have been one of the foremost
champions in working its overthrow. And now
there is another more fatal slavery to be assailedentwined in the consciences of good men, and upheld by the chief religious organizations of the
Christian world.
It was to escape this slavery that the noble John
Robinson led his flock to Holland, and then sent
them forth to lay the first foundations of this na
403 
CORRESPONDENCE.
tion. And this is recorded as his parting counsel:
" He charged us before God and his blessed angels
to follow him no farther than he followed Christ; for
he was very confident the Lord had more light and
truth to break forth from his holy Word."
Thus he instructed every man to interplret thie Bible for himself, and not be held in bondage by minister or creeds. Furthermore,
"He bewailed the state and condition of the Reformed Churches, who would go no farther than the
instruments of their reformation. As, for example,
the Lutherans could not be drawn to go beyond what
Luther saw; for, whatever part of God's will He had
farther imparted to Calvin, they will rather die than
embrace it.  So also the Calvinists, they stick where
he left them."-" For it is not possible that the Christian world should come so lately out of such thick
anti-Christian darkness, and that full perfection of
knowledge should break forth at once."
This slavery, which our fathers came to this land
to escape, is now upon us. The 2000 non-conformist ministers driven from their homes and pulpits
in Old England were no more enslaved by king and
bishops than are the clergy of this nation by creeds
and confessions of faith. What minister, professor,
president of a college, or editor of a religious periodical would not be instantly ejected from his home
and profession should he openly interpret the Bible
contrary to the creed of the sect to which he belongs?
In our theological seminaries, if a young man at
404 
CORRESPONDENCE.
tempts freedom of discussion, he is marked as dangerous, advised to desist or to leave; and if he does
leave, it is with a mark of suspicion impeding license and settlement.
Albert Barnes sat silenced under his pulpit a
whole year, till he could prove to a majority that
he agreed with the Westminster Confession of
Faith. My father was tried three times, at the peril
of reputation, profession, and livelihood, till he could
satisfy an ecclesiastical majority that he agreed
with that creed.
One of my brothers was forced to resign a Western college, founded and flourishing under his presidency, because he held that infants sinned before
Adam instead of in Adam.
Another brother, for the same shade of deviation, was tortured and tried, till his "parish," resenting the persecution of a faithful and successful pastor, took the case from " the Church" into their own
hands, making salary and profession safe in spite
of clerical interferences.
And my editorial brother is saved from the same
experience only by the conviction that his parish
could and would sustain him by the same method.
You, like these my brothers, are surrounded by
an intelligent and liberty-loving parish, and to you
and them, and especially to your people, I desire to
present these inquiries:
Is it not the first principle of Congregationalism,
405 
CORRESPONDENCE.
as established by our Puritan ancestors, that it is
the people who are to be the interpreters of the Bible, each man for himself, responsible to none but
God and his own conscience?
Was it not the grand aim of the first Pilgrim fathers to establish churches in which the people, aided by their minister, should study the true meaning of the Bible as their only creed, and not be conscience-bound by the interpretations of any man or
body of men whatever?
Were not all the children of the Pilgrim fathers,
at whatever age, regarded as in the church with
their parents?
Has not the attempt to divide congregations of
believers in the Christian religion into two separate
organizations, as "regenerate and unregenerate,'
proved a failure, so that "the churches" thus orgaized out of parishes are confessedly made up of
both "chaff and wheat" as really as those parishes
where no such organization exists?
In the Episcopal Church, and originally in the
Presbyterian Church, there has been no such separate organizations. The church and the congregation are the same, all entitled to have their children baptized, and the children entitled to church
privileges after a given age and amount of instruction, provided there is no "evil living." On this
plan, every person in the parish is responsible to no
one but God and his own conscience as to inter
406 
CORRESPOiNDENCE.
preting the Bible, and as to obedience to its teachings. Can there be perfect religious liberty on any
other plan than this?
Is the "professing religion" and "confessing
Christ before men" at the present day at all what it
was originally?  To confess that Christ was Lord
in the primitive times involved shame and the loss
of all things, but now to believe in Christ is honorable, and to be an infidel is a disgrace; and yet
men  are led to suppose that joining a Puritan
church is "professing Christ" as the early Christians were required to do.
Instead of this, history teaches that the grand
point of contest between the Roman government
and the Christians was assernbling to worship. It
was not being a Christian in private that subjected
to bonds, imprisonment, and death, but it was the
joining a' Christian congregation as a worshiper.
Suppose your whole congregation were to meet
you once a week to discuss this topic, and also the
solemn questions proposed in Chapter xvii. of this
volume, each one searching the Scriptures for himself, and then all discussing all with their minister
as guide and moderator, would not this method
come nearer to accomplishing the great ends for
which our Pilgrim fathers established this nation
than any of the religious meetings now maintained?
Were you and the young ministers in your vicinity to take this coarse with your congregations,
407 
CORRESPONDENCE.
and publish the results, would it not be the opening of a new era in religious liberty?
The Christian world, as it seems to me, are now
at a dead stand, very much like a ship under full
sail suddenly becalmed.
Two generations ago, President Edwards attacked the dead torpidity induced by the doctrine of
man's depravity of nature so " total" that there is
no power of any kind to turn to God and work
righteousness, or even "to prepare himself thereto."  With his theory of "moral ability" by which
man can (though, owing to his depraved nature, he
never wzil) turn to God, a new mode of preaching
obligation and danger arose, attended by revivals,
by the first enthusiasm of foreign missions, and by
faith in the near advent of the Millennium, to be
secured by increasing revivals in heathen as well
as Christian lands.
But that glow of hope and enthusiasm has gone.
Revivals do not increase as was predicted, and missions do not succeed so as even to meet the increase,
of. heathen population; and the "doctrinal preaching" which prevailed in my father's day has ceased
because the people will not hear it; and our young
ministers, though they go through theological seminaries, are obliged to reject the systems taught
there as what they can not use with their people,
while they are all afloat as to any other.
It seems to me this emergency is to be met by
408 
CORRESPONDENCE.
a return to faith in the Bible as our only creed, and
faith in the people as its authorized interpreters.
Moreover, there have been claims made for the
Bible that can not be sustained, and there are better and stronger claims for its authority yet to be
developed that will give this blessed Word new
power and dignity.*
And the people, aided by their ministers, are to
learn to study the true claims of the Bible, and to
interpret it for themselves, ill bondage neither to
creed, minister, or ecclesiastical authority of any
kind.
That the world is advancing in intellectual and
moral development; that all sects are to cast off the
shackles of past errors; that infallibility belongs to
no man or body of men; that one generation is to
learn wisdom by the mistakes of their predecessors;
that every man is in error and ignorance somewhere,
and is to learn wisdom by past mistakes, and that
we are to forsake and protest against error and
wrong- these are current and commonplace truisms.
And yet practically to recognize these truths in
our own individual case is a difficult matter, and
often involves the heaviest sacrifices. Luther felt
this when he faced the powers and wisdom of the
* A work soon to be issued, entitled " The Bible: what it is,
and how to use it; by Prof. C. E. Stowe," will more fuljy illustrate
thle views of the writer on this point.
S
409 
CORRESPONDENCE.
whole Christian world. John Robinson and John
Wesley felt it when they set themselves against the
Church in which they were born, and most of the
wisest and best men of their age.
A similar career is open before you, and with advantages such as none of those noble confessors enjoyed. You have a wealthy, intelligent congregation, who will sustain you in all your righteous
aims. You have the spirit of the age to sustain
you. You have the opening day of our new-born
national career, when, delivered from the chains of
a hateful system of wrong, our country is to illustrate to all the people of the earth that "righteousness exalteth a nation."
In what way you are to work out the grand problem before you can be foreshown only by ilim who
is leading us all by paths we can not understand.
The terrible earthquake that has shaken our nation has evolved benevolent energies that, when
peace comes, are to seek new fields of moral conquest.  A revival of religion is before us on a glorious scale; not in mysterious interpositions to newcreate minds ruined in Adam, but to secure selfsacrificing educators, to train myriads of the ignorant and neglected "little ones" scattered all over
the earth, whom the Great Shepherd is seeking, by
the instrumentality of his followers, to gather into
his heavenly fold.
410 
N O T E S.
Note A, page 49.
This example exhibits the difficulty that meets every educator
who assumes that young children, taught to believe in Christ as
Lord, and in a course of training to understand and obey his teachings, are young Christians.  If the writer, in this case, had told the
child she was already a Christian, the parents would have felt that
there was an improper intrusion upon their family religious training. It was necessary, therefore, to accommodate to the circumstances, and teach the child how to begin to be a Christian.
Had the child been trained in the family of such as Dr. Arnold,
of the English Church, she could have been addressed as a young
and very imperfect Christian, and urged to higher aims and a
more perfect imitation of her Savior.
Note B, page 345.
The author of the Conflict ofAges claims that he does not hold
to a mystical union with God; nor to a "grace" without which,
even in its normal state, the mind is incomplete and dead; nor to
the outflow of holy emotions and desires from the constitution independently of the will and main purpose; nor to the nature of
holy love as a mere emotion; nor to regeneration as produced by
an operation on the faculties and not by the truth.
These statements are not disputed.
The writer, in her Appeal to the People, claims that the common
people have a clear and complete system of mental philosophy of
their own, expressed in common language, and easy to be understood. It is claimed also that this system is recognized and adopt 
NOTES.
ed in the Bible, and that it is coincident with reason and common
sense. This system takes the mind of man as it is in this life.
But theologians teach that God created all minds on another
pattern, which they call the normal and perfect pattern. This
they attempt to describe, while, at the same time, they are obliged
to adopt the common system of mental philosophy also. This is
one of the causes of the fact illustrated in the thirty-second chapter of the Appeal to the People, where, by quotations, it is shown
that on this subject even the most acute and honest theologians
contradict themselves.
It is owing to this fact that it is impossible to state the views of
theologians to their satisfaction. For, if we take some of their
statements, they deny the depravity of infant minds, and, if we
take others, they affirm it.
Therefore, on this subject, the writer does not claim that she
gives the views of Augustine, or of her brother, or of any theologian corectly.  All that she claims is to give the impression made
on her own mind by the language used by a writer, at the same
time allowing that it is probable that a directly opposite opinion
can be found in the same work. So, also, in stating the views of
a class of theologians, there are always individual exceptions in
certain details.
But the main question is one of facts, and not of systems of
mental philosophy, which all depend on facts, which emust be proved
by proper evidence.
The question of mental philosophy, therefore, should be waived
till thefacts on which all depends are settled, viz.:
1. Were the minds of the first created angels diverse from those
of infants, and on the normal and perfect pattern?
2. Are infant minds diverse from what God created them, and
diverse from the normal pattern?
The opinions of Augustine, as stated in this work, were taken
from standard Church histories almost verbatim.
412 
NOTES.
The author designed to append in a note extracts from the de crees of the Council of Trent. But she has no hope of satisfying
any Catholic friend that she or any Protestant understands and interprets them aright, or does justice to the Catholic system of theology. The most she can hope is that she may have the credit of
having honestly and fairly tried to do so.
It is very certain that it is not in the power of human language
to form a creed which will not be interpreted in exactly contradictory senses. Thus we see the Thirty-nine Articles to be Calvinistic in form, as approved by Calvin himself, and yet held with
an Arminian interpretation. So the deorees of the Council of
Trent, though Augustinian in form, are Pelagian in interpretation.
" The Author's standing address is Hartford, Conn."
THE END.
413  
Dr. Spring's Sermons.
PULPIT MINISTRATIONS;
OR,
SABBATH READINGS.
A SERIES OF DISCOURSES ON CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE AND DUTY.
BY REV. GARDINER SPRING, D.D.,
Pastor of the Brick Presbyterian Church in the City of New York.
WITH PORTRAIT.
2 vols. 8vo, Cloth, $6 00.
Froos the NEW YORK OBSERVER, June 16th, 1864.
The venerable Dr. Spring has given to the press (Harper & Brotlers) two octavo volumes, including his choicest, richest, most spiritual, edifying, and permanently valuable sermons, those masterlv,
devotional, and instructive discourses, which have made his clihurchii
a house of worship and religious improvement through two generations in this great, restless, changing city. Their peculiar excellence
consists in a happy unfolding of the deep things of divine truth,
bringing out the marrow of the Word of God, with an amount of
that undefinable virtue in preaching called iunction, which brings the
speaker and hearer into holy sympathy. This virtue does not lie
in the toners or manner of the preacher. It is in the words his hearl
prompts him to speak. Dr. Spring always had this grace, and it
has rendered his ministry a blessing to successive congregations.
In these volumes, entitled Pulpit Ministrations, or Sabbath Readings, the author has arranged those productions which his own judgment has approved as the most edifying and best fitted to be popular
in the family, conveying his maturest thoughts and most finished illustrations of divine truth. There must be many who have sat under his pulpit, and many whose fathers and mothers sat under it,
who will receive these books as a precious legacy from one whose
words of holy counsel they have been accustomed to receive with
reverent affection. And we anticipate from these sermons extensive
and permanent usefulness; for they are not ephemeral, but exhibit
truths that will be as dear to God's people and useful to the Church
in the Millennium as they are now.
PUBLISHED BY HARPER & BROTHERS, FRANKLIN SQUARE,
NEW YORK.
l     Sent by Mail, postage pre-paid, on receipt of $6 00. 
"They do honor to American Literature, and would do
honor to the Literature of any Country in the World."
THE RISE OF
THE DUTCH REPUBLIC.
%  CjiMotr.
BY JOHN LOTHROP MOTLEY.
New Edition.  With a Portrait of WILLIAM OF ORANGE.  3 vols.
8vo, Muslin, $9 00.
We regard this work as the best contribution to modern history that has yet
been made by an American.-Methodist Quarterly Review.
The "History of the Dutch. Republic" is a great gift to us' but the heart and
earnestness that beat through all its pages are greater, for they give us most
timely inspiration to vindicate the true ideas of our country, and to compose an
able history of our own.-Christian Examiner (Boston).
This work bears on its face the evidences of scholarship and research.  The
arrangement is clear and effective; the style energetic, lively, and often brilliant.
I * * Mr. Motley's instructive volumes will, we trust, have a circulation commensurate with their interest and value.-Protestant Episcopal Quarterly Review.
To the illustration of this most interesting period Mr. Motley has brought the
matured powers of a vigorous and brilliant mind, and the abundant fruits of patient and judicious study and deep reflection.  The result is, one of the most
important contributions to historical literature that have been made in this country.-North American Review.
We would conclude this notice by earnestly recommending our readers to procure for themselves this truly great and admirable work, by the production of
which the anther has conferred no less honor upon his country than he has won
praise and fame for himself, and than which, we can assure them, they can find
nothing more attractive or interesting within the compass of modern literature.
-Evangelical Review.
It is not often that we have the pleasure of commending to the attention of the
lover of books a work of such extraordinary aud unexceptionable excellence as
this one.-Universalist Quarterly Review.
There are an elevation and a classic polish in these volumes, and a felicity of
grouping and of portraiture, which invest the subject with the attractions of a
living and stirring episode in the grand historic drama.-Southern Methodist
Quarterly Review.
The author writes with a genial glow and love of his subject.-Presbyterian
Quarterly Review.
Mr. Motley is a sturdy Republican and a hearty Protestant. His style is lively and picturesque, and his work is an honor and an important accession to our
national literature.-Church Review.
Mr. Motley's work is an important one, the result of profound research, sincere
convictions, sound principles, and manly sentiments; and even those who are
most familiar with the history of the period will find in it a fresh and vivid addition to their previous knowledge. It does honor to American literature, and
would do honor to the literature of any country in the world.-Edinburgh Re.
v/ew.
A serious chasm in English historical literature has been (by this book) very
remarkably filled. * * * A history as complete as industry and genius can make
it now lies before us, of the first twenty years of the revolt of the United Prov.
inces.  * *  All the essentials of a great writer Mr. Motley eminently possesses.
His mind is broad, his industry unwearied. In power of dramatic description
no modemn historian, except, perhaps, Mr. Carlyle, surpasses him, and in analy.
.is of character he is elaborate and distinct.-Westminster Review. 
MOTLEY'S RISE OF THE DUTCH REPUBLIC
It is a work of real historical value, the result of accurate criticism, written
in a liberal spirit, and from first to last deeply interesting.-Atheneum.
The style is excellent, clear, vivid, eloquent; and the industry with which
original sources have been investigated, and through which new light has been
shed over perplexed incidents and characters, entitles Mr. Motley to a high rank
in the literature of an age peculiarly rich in history.-North British Review.
It abounds in new information, and, as a first work, commands a very cordial
recognition, not merely of the promise it gives, but of the extent and importance
of the labor actually performed on it.-London Examiner.
Mr. Motley's "History" is a work of which any country might be proud.Press (London).
Mr. Motley's History will be a standard book of reference in historical litera
ture.-London Literary Gazette.
Mr. Motley has searched the whole range of historical documents necessary to
the composition of his work.-London Leader.
This is really a great work.  It belongs to the class of books in which we
range our Grotes, Milmans, Merivales, and Macaulays, as the glories of English
literature in the department of history. I * * Mr. Motley's gifts as a historical
writer are among the highest and rarest.-Nonconformist (London).
Mr. Motley's volumes will well repay perusal. * * * For his learning, his liberal
tone, and his generous enthusiasm, we heartily commend him, and bid him good
speed for the remainer of his interesting and heroic narrative.-Saturday Review.
The story is a noble one, and is worthily treated. * * * Mr. Mqotley has had the
patience to unravel, with unfailing perseverance, the thousand intricate plots of
the adversaries of the Prince of Orange; but the details and the literal extracts
which he has derived from original documents, and transferred to his pages,
give a truthful color and a picturesque effect, which are especially charming.London Daily News.
M. Lothrop Motley dans son magnifique tableau de la formation de notre R6publique.-G. Gaozw VxAN PXINSTERIL
Our accomplished countryman, Mr. J. Lothrop Motley, who, during the last
five years, for the better prosecution of his labors, has established his residence
in the neighborhood of the scenes of his narrative. No one acquainted with the
fine powers of mind possessed by this scholar, and the earnestness with which he
has devoted himself to the task, can doubt that he will do full justice to his important but difficult subject.-W. H. PErscoTT.
The production of such a work as this astonishes, while it gratifies the pride
of the American reader.-N. Y. Observer.
The "Rise of the Dutch Republic" at once, and by acclamation, takes its
place by the "I Icline and Fall of the Roman Empire," as a work which, whether for research, substance, or style, will never be superseded.-IV. Y. Albion.
A work upon which all who read the English language may congratulate
themselves-New Yorker Handels Zeitung.
Mr. Motley's place is now (alluding to this book) with Hallam and Lord Mahon, Alison and Macaulay in the Old Country, and with Washington Irving,
Prescott, and Bancroft in this.-N. Y. Times.
TnE authority, in the English tongue, for the history of the period and people
to which it refers.-N. Y. Courier and Enquirer.
This work at once places the author on the list of American historians which
has been so signally illustrated by the names of Irving, Prescott, Bancroft, and
Hildreth.-Boston times.
The work is a noble one, and a most desirable acquisition to our historical literature.-Mobile Advertiser.
Such a work is an honor to its author, to his country, and to the age in which
it was written.-Ohio Farmer.
Published by HARPER & BROTHERS,
Franklin Square, New York.
HAImmR  & BIoTHit     s will send thc above Work by Mail (postage paid (for any
distance in the United States under 3000 miles), on receipt of the Money. 
Mr. Motley, the Amn rican historian of the United NThtherlaisds-we owe himi
English homage.-LONDON TUES.
" As interesting as a romance, and as reliable as aproposition of Euclid."
History of
The United Netherlands.
FROM THE DEATH OF WILLIAM THE SILENT TO THE SYNOD OF DORT.  W'ITII A
FULL VIEW OF THE ENGLISH-DUTCH STRUGGLE AGAINST SPAIN, AND
OF THE ORIGIN AND DESTRUCTION OF TILE SPANISII
ARMADA.
BY JOHN LOTHROP MOTLEY, LL.D., D.C.L.,
Corresponding Member of the Institute of France, Author of "The Rise of the
Dutch Republic."
With Portraits and Map.
2 vols. 8vo, Muslin, $6 00.
Critical Notices.
His living and truthful picture of events.I-Quarterly Review (London), Jan.,
1861.
Fertile as the present ago has been in historical  vorks of the highest merit,
none of them can be ranked above these volumes in the grand qualities of interest,
accuracy, and truth.-lEdinbutrgh Quarterly Review, Jan., 1861.
This noble work.-Westminster Review (London).
One of the most fascinating as well as important histories of the century.-Cor.
N. Y. Evening Post.
The careful study of these volumes will infallibly afford a feast both rich and
rare.-Baltimore Republican.
Already takes a rank among standard works of history.-London Critic.
Mr. Motley's prose epic.-London Spectator.
Itsopages are pregnant with instruction.-London Literary Gazette.
We may profit by almost every page of his narrative. All the topics which agitate us now are more or less vividly presented in the History of the United Netherlands.-_New York Timnes.
Bears on every page marks of the same vigorous mind that produced "The Rise
of the Dutch Republic;" but the new work is riper, mellower, and though equally
racy of the soil, softer flavored. The inspiring idea which breathes through Mr.
Motley's histories and colors the whole texture of his narrative, is the grandeur of
that memorable struggle in the 16th century by which the human mind broke the
thraldom of religious intoleranca and achieved its independence.-The World, N. Y.
The name of Motley now stands in the very front rank of living historians. His
Dutch Republic took the world by surprise; but the favorable verdict then given
is now only the more deliberately confirmed on the publication Cf the continued
story under the title of the Historyl of the United Netherlands. All the nerve,
and power, and substance ofjuicy life are there, lending a charm to every page.
Church Journal, N. Y.
Motley, indeed, has produced a prose epic, and his fighting scenes are as real,
spirited, and life-like as the combats in the liad.-The Press (Phila.).
His history is as interesting as a romance, and as reliable as a proposition of Euclid.  Clio never had a more faithful disciple.   We advise every reader whose
means will permit to become the owner of these fascinating volumes, assuring him
that he will never regret the investment.-Christian lntelligencer, N. Y.
Published by HARPER & BROTHERS,
Franklin Square, New York.
T HARPEPR & BROTHERS will send the above Work by Mail, postage prepaid
lfor any distance in the United States under 3000 miles), on receipt of the Money. 
CURTIS'S HISTORY
OF THE
C O N S T I T U T I ON.
HISTORY OF THE ORIGIN, FORMATION, AND ADOP  TION OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED
STATES.   By GEORGE TICKNlOR CURTIS.   Complete in 2 vols.
8vo, Muslin, $6 00.
A book so thorough as this in the comprehension of its subject, so impartial
in the summing up of its judgments, so well considered in its method, and so
truthful in its matter, may safely challenge the most exhaustive criticism. The
Constitutional History of our country has not before been made the subject of a
special treatise. We may congratulate ourselves that an author has been found
so capable to do full justice to it; for that the work will take its rank among the
received text-books of our political literature will be questioned by no one who
has given it a careful perusal.-National Intelligencer.
We know of no person who is better qualified (now that the late Daniel Webster is no more), to undertake this important history.-Boston Journal.
It will take its place among the classics of American literature.-Boston Courter.
The author has given years to the preliminary studies, and nothing has escaped him in the patient and conscientious researches to which he has devoted
so ample a portion of time. Indeed, the work has been so thoroughly performed
that it will never need to be done over again; for the sources have been exhausted, and the materials put together with so much judgment and artistic skill that
taste and the sense of completeness are entirely satisfied.-N. Y. Daily Times.
A most important and valuable contribution to the historical and political literature of the United States. All publicists and students of public law will be
grateful to Mr. Curtis for the diligence and assiduity with which he has wrought
out the great mine of diplomatic lore in which the foundations of the American
Constitution are laid, and for the light he has thrown on his wide and arduous
subject.-London Morning Chronicle.
To trace the history of the formation of the Constitution, and explain the circumstances of thd time and country out of which its various provisions grew, is a
task worthy of the highest talent. To have performed that task in a satisfactory manner is an achievement with which an honorable ambition may well be
gratified. We can honestly say that in our opinion Mr. Curtis has fairly won
this distinction.-N. Y. Cougrzer and Enquirer.
We have seen no history which surpasses it in the essential qualities of a
standard work destined to hold a permanent place in the impartial judgment of
future generations.-Boston Traveler.
Should the second volume sustain the character of the first, we hazard nothing
in claiming for the entire publicatiorf the character of a standard work. It will
fuirnish the only sure guide to the interpretation of the Constitution, by unfolding
historically the wants it was intended to supply, and the evils which it was intended to remedy.-Boston Daily Advertiser.
This volume is an important contribution to our constitutional and historical
literature. * * * Every true friend of the Constitution will gladly welcome it.
The author has presented a narrative clear and interesting. It evinces careful
research, skillful handling of material, lucid statement, and a desire to write in
a tone and manner worthy of the great theme.-Boston Post.
Putlished by HARPER & BROTHERS,
Franklin Square, New York.
*   HIIARPER & BROTHSES  will send the above Work by Mail, postage paid (for
any distance in the United States under 3000 miles), on receipt of the Money.
I 
Carper'.s  atatlogt.
A DESCRIPTIVE CATALOGUE AND TRADE LIST OF IHIARPER & BROTHERS'
PUBLICATIONS may be obtained gratuitously on application to the Publishers personally, or by letter inclosing FIVE CENTS. The attention
of gentlemen, in town or country, designing to form Libraries or enrich
their literary collections, is respectfully invited to this Catalogue, which
will be found to comprise a large proportion of the standard and most
esteemed works in English literature-OCOMPREHENDING NEARLY THREE
THOUSAND VOLUMES —which are offered in most instances at less than
one quarter the cost of similar productions in England. To Librarians
and others connected with Colleges, Schools, &c., who may not have access to a trustworthy guide in the selection of literary productions, it is
believed the Catalogue will prove especially valuable as a manual of
reference.
To prevent disappointment, it is suggested that, whenever books can
not be obtained through any bookseller or local agent, applications, with
remittance, should be addressed direct to the publishers, which will meet
with prompt attention.
HARPER & BROTHERS will send their books by mail, postage pre-paid,
to any part of the United States, on receipt of the Catalogue price.