MR. EDITOR,-As I have been informed that the pages of your April numberwill be so full as to preclude the insertion of the antidote promised in your last, perhaps you will permit me to postpone that to the one for the month of May. Yet I hope, notwithstanding, that you will be so kind as to let me have a small corner for a few lines supplementary to the two articles on an Antinomian Error, which you have already presented to your readers. And this supplement I shall regard as my magazine, in case of an invasion-the fortification-wall, to defend the said articles against an assault-a ready fixed battery, to prevent a foe making an attempt to demolish my bipartite castle. It is much better, I presume, to anticipate the worse in such a case as this, and prepare, than to remain unsuspicious and self-sufficient, and be taken unawares. A walled city is none the worse for being fortified; but should it be suddenly attacked by a foreign enemy, the inhabitants thereof are much more likely to escape harm, than those of a town that is left open to the destroying sword of every marauding band, and the malicious ambition of any flagitious depredator.

The point which I feel anxious to secure at present, is the doctrinal tendency of the articles in question. Superficial thinkers very frequently suppose, that a subject such as the one we have been endeavouring to explain, militates against a leading doctrine of the Holy Scriptures. I mean, the Spirit's influences, which are indispensably necessary in the work of true conversion. Now I think that it is very easy to show, that such is not the case; but it is so far otherwise, as that the two doctrines will perfectly and scripturally agree with each other. But we may justly suspect, that the fibrous roots of the above supposition reach, when it is properly stated, to a fear that the doctrine advocated in our articles will not accord well with the sovereignty of God, which He exercises in the bestowment of those necessary influences. But even here, again, we may detect a gross misapprehension of the subject; which may be clearly discovered in this manner. Should any one suppose, for a single moment, that the sovereignty of God binds Him to confer those influences in question so capriciously as to render futile and uncertain all human attempts to save souls, we would beg leave to say, with due deference and humility, that such a person, whoever he may be, entertains an idea, which, in our opinion, is very erroneous, and dangerous in the extreme. An idea that must

paralise all Christian exertions; yea, one that is sufficiently confuted, not only by the positive Word of God, or His gracious plan of general procedure, but even by His merciful and daily providence. He is a Sovereign in providence, as well as in grace. And does He not bless the farmer just in proportion as he cultivates his soil, or the tradesman just in proportion as he uses lawful means of accumulating wealth? Now I imagine, that all will be unanimous on this point. Well, then, why not adopt a similar method of reasoning in spiritual matters, as in natural? For I apprehend, that sovereignty is the same in either. However, it is the same evidently in the dispensation of the influences under dispute: that is, though God alone has the power necessary to convert sinners, yet He uses that power, (or, if you please, prerogative,) so as to patronise effort, and to countenance more or less all pious exertions made towards accomplishing the end before mentioned. Or we may thus state the subject: that it is perfectly consistent with the Divine sovereignty to employ human agency and for that agency again, according to Divine arrangement, to use every lawful and consistent means to accomplish fully the end designed. Hence, viewing the subject in this light, Divine sovereignty becomes one of the most efficacious of all motives to Christian activity. In fact, we find that the Almighty has pledged Himself in His Word to bless those most, who labour most wisely, earnestly and perseveringly to save souls. And He has assured us, that He desires the salvation of souls; desires also that we should labour to secure it; and has faithfully promised to afford us His gracious aid when we do so. Now when Gospel ministers and other Christian friends exert themselves under such impressions as these, can they be discouraged, I would ask, in their work and labour of love? Oh! no; but on the contrary, they would attend to Paul's exhortation to the Corinthians, when he said, "Therefore, my beloved brethren, be ye steadfast, immoveable, always abounding in the work of the Lord; forasmuch as ye know that your labour is not in vain in the Lord."-(1 Cor. xv. 58).

I would remark, further, that the writer of the Antidotes does not entertain the opinion, that Divine influences are inherent in the Word, or are one with suasive preaching. Oh! no; but he holds them, as far as he can understand himself, to be distinct from each other. But by the great condescension of God, the one is used as preparatory for the other, just as cultivating the soil and sowing the seed are preparative to the reception of the dew and the influences of the sun for the purpose of producing the expected crop. Not that the reading or the preaching of the Word must precede Divine influences, ere a change of heart can be effected. Oh! no; the Almighty has in one or two instances stepped out of His usual way to teach us otherwise: such as in the case of the thief on the cross, and the conversion of Saul of Tarsus. But these were extraordinary cases, whereby God has been pleased to assert His sovereign prerogative. Yet He generally proceeds, notwithstanding, according to His own given plan. Paul is to plant, Apollos to water then He sends the increase: always asserting in positive terms-" Not by might, nor by power, but by My Spirit, saith the Lord."

two

Again; though the doctrine of the Spirit's influences is distinctly sustained in the articles alluded to, yet I thought it would not be amiss to write here a word or upon that doctrine; because it is one that can never be too much insisted upon nor viewed too frequently by Christian agents, who may be employed in the promotion of the best of causes-the cause of religion, of truth, and of God. Also, though we have been endeavouring to show the necessity and beneficial results of making urgent and affectionate appeals to the consciences of unrenewed persons in our Gospel ministrations, yet this fact we readily and fully admit into our creed, that though such appeals may be very awakening, and the preaching as convincing and as lucid as human ingenuity can render it, yet the said influences must be obtained else no kindling sparks will be elicited-no soul-enlightening will take place-no heart will be savingly opened to receive the Truth in the love thereof. They must be obtained; else special preaching days will not be signalised so as to become renowned in the memory of individuals, as the day of Pentecost is in the esteem of the Christian world. Yes; those influences must be obtained, else Ezekiel's valley will continue ever dry, so as for the atmospheric air to have such a corroding effect on the bones, as to pulverise them, until they vanish away from human vision. But let the Spirit descend on the preaching of any of His Peters, who have had their hearts fully prepared for the work, and soon will the voice be heard ascending from many a heaving bosom, saying, "Men and brethren, what shall we do" (Acts ii. 37)? Happy inquiry! Oh! would that it were oftener heard in our assemblies! Ministers would be willing, methinks, to be interrupted now and then with such Pentecostal scenes: yea, as often as their gracious Master would be pleased to cause such delightful seasons to take place.

Finally; there is something very interesting in Ezekiel's vision of the valley of dry bones. Let the reader peruse that attentively and prayerfully; for there we find human agency and the Divine prerogative beautifully blended and maintained. Paul, although he had a mind which was well furnished with learning and knowledge; and he understood well the principles of the Gospel, so as to teach others effectually in them; and Apollos, again, though he possessed an overcoming eloquence, so as to command the attention of his audience, his words falling on the attentive mind as showers on the new-mown grass; yet neither of these could effect any permanent and saving good without the blessing of God. And as for personal religion, listen to the words of inspiration by the apostle Paul, and be edified" Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; for it is God which worketh in you, both to will and to do, of His good pleasure."—(Phil. ii. 12, 13).

And now my earnest prayer for you, dear reader, is included in Eph. ii. 17—–23. CELATUS.

1. THE FATHERS.

THE Congregational Lecture for the present year is now delivering by the Rev. Dr. Bennett, who has chosen for his subject-"The theology of the early Church." From these discourses we may gather some useful information; as the reader will see by what we now proceed to extract from them.

The author of the Letter to Diognetus, which is of great worth. Its contents prove it to have been written before the destruction of the Temple, in A.D. 70. It displays the Scripture purity of the apostolic times. The genuine epistle ends in the middle of the 11th chapter; all the rest is of a much later age and different spirit.

Clement of Rome. The earliest date we can assign to him is A.D. 98. The only genuine epistle is what we call the first; the second is a very clumsy forgery. The epistle which he wrote, rambles over the Bible, and gives comments, sometimes very foolish, sometimes very instructive. The fable of the phoenix is gravely adduced as a fact, analogous to the resurrection of the body.

Ignatius, Bishop in Antioch. Martyred in A.D. 116. Seven of the epistles attributed to him are deemed genuine, but they exhibit a grotesque compound of simplicity and pomposity. His anxiety to obtain submission to the office of a bishop was so great, as to lead him to inculcate that he was to be honoured as Jesus Christ, and obeyed as Christ obeyed the Father.

Polycarp, Bishop of the Church in Smyrna. Martyred A.D. 166. Far superior in good sense to Ignatius. His letter terminates the writings of the apostolical Fathers.

Justin Martyr. Beheaded about A.D. 167, aged 64. He was but a recent convert from Paganism; and at once fanciful and dogmatical.

Tatian. Soon became a heretic.

Theophilus of Antioch. Bishop there, about A.D. 168. Feeble in judgment, and defective in his account of Christianity. The first who employed the Greek word, which gave rise to the term Trinity.

Athenagoras the Athenian.

Scripture.

Irenæus, a Greek father.

raises more dust than he lays.

Living in A.D. 178. He mixed up fables with

Bewildered himself in his researches; he often

Titus Flavius Clemens. Lived about A.D. 220. A sincere Christian, but spoiled by vain philosophy. Displays mortification without holiness, and knowledge without wisdom.

Origen. Born about A.D. 185. The first of the fathers, who took the right method of studying Scripture by learning Hebrew. His answer to Celsus does him great credit.

From the Greek fathers, we pass to the Latin.

Marcus Minutius Felix. We have only one short treatise of his entitled "Octavius"-but it is a precious gem.

Tertullian. Supposed to have died about A.D. 245. His addresses on behalf of the persecuted Christians are powerful; but he was fond of absurd paradoxes. It is to be feared, that he did not really know what the Christian religion was. He died out of the pale of the Church.

Cyprian, Bishop at Carthage. Martyred in a.». 258. Of little celebrity as a theologian. But he teaches, that instead of interpreting Scripture by tradition, we are to correct tradition by Scripture.

Here for the present we stop; and pass from antiquity to a thing of the present day :

2. ORIGIN OF THE OXFORD TRACTS.

Ir has recently appeared from a Letter of the Hon. and Rev. A. Perceval, that these works were commenced under an agreement, formed between Mr. Perceval, Mr. Froude, the late Rev. H. J. Rose, the Rev. J. H. Newman, and Professor Keble; the latter drew up the document in question, which we subjoin. Dr. Pusey had at that time nothing to do with the undertaking.

"Oxford, Sept. 6, 1833. "Considering, 1. That the only way of salvation is the partaking of the body and blood of our sacrificed Redeemer :

"2. That the mean expressly authorised by Him for that purpose is the holy sacrament of His supper:

"3. That the security, by Him no less expressly authorised, for the continuance and due application of that sacrament, is the apostolical commission of the Bishops, and under them the presbyters of the Church:

“4. That, under the present circumstances of the Church in England, there is peculiar danger of these matters being slighted and practically disavowed, and of numbers of Christians being left or tempted to precarious or unauthorised ways of communion, which must terminate often in virtual apostacy:

"We desire to pledge ourselves one to another, reserving our canonical obedience as follows:

"1. To be on the watch for all opportunities of inculcating on all committed to our charge, a due sense of the inestimable privilege of communion with our Lord through the successors of the apostles; and of leading them to the resolution to transmit it, by His blessing, unimpaired to their children.

"2. To provide and circulate books and tracts, which may tend to familiarize the imaginations of men to the idea of an apostolical commission, to represent to them the feelings and principles resulting from that doctrine in the purest and earliest churches, and especially to point out its fruits as exemplified in the practice of the primitive Christians-their communion with each other, however widely separated, and their resolute sufferings for the Truth's sake.

"3. To do what lies in us towards reviving among Churchmen the practice of daily common prayer, and more frequent participation of the Lord's supper. And whereas there seems great danger at present of attempts at unauthorised and inconsiderate innovation, as in other matters, so especially in the Service of our Church, we pledge ourselves

66

4. To resist any attempt that may be made to alter the liturgy on insufficient authority; i. e., without the exercise of the free and deliberate judgment of the Church on the alterations proposed.

"5. It will also be one of our objects to place within the reach of all men sound and true accounts of those points in our discipline and worship, which may appear from time to time most likely to be misunderstood or undervalued, and to suggest such measures as may promise to be most successful in preserving them."

The drift of all this is-No salvation but through sacraments, and no sacraments but in the Episcopal Church.

3. WILL SINCERITY SAVE A MAN?

The Rev. E. N. Kirk (North America) thus writes:

"The sentiment that it matters not what a man believes, so that he is sincere, is as unscriptural as it is absurd. Sincerity of belief has no more effect in warding off evil in the spiritual, than in the natural kingdom. If the teachings and persuasions of a reputed chemist should prevail on you to believe that arsenic is harmless, would it therefore be harmless? Could you mix it with your bread, and you and your children eat it without injury to health or life? Oh, no! Neither will the sincerity of your belief save you from the consequence of error in religious faith. Right belieftruth, God's truth, my brethren, is the only foundation on which you can safely rest your hopes. But true belief is not a mere act of the understanding, it involves exercises of the heart; the emotions are purified, and love pervades the soul."

THE SOUL RESPONSIBLE TO GOD FOR ITS RELIGIOUS OPINIONS.

REV. JOHN ALDIS.

WEDNESDAY EVENING, FEB. 3, 1841.

My dear friends, In addressing a few observations to your attention this evening, I feel not only that I have need to solicit your very patient and candid attention, but above all I feel solicitous that we should recollect the very solemn and practical bearing of the question we have now to consider; and that we should pray for grace, that in all our meditations upon it we may be preserved from the influence of error, and that in all we learn in reference to it we may be enabled immediately and practically to embody that learning into a happy result.

The question upon which I have now to address you is this-The soul responsible to God for its religious opinions. And first I shall endeavour to explain that proposition; secondly, to meet some of the objections, which I may suppose to be urged against it; and thirdly, to support it by direct arguments.

I. First, then, we shall endeavour to explain, so far as we may deem needful, the terms of the proposition itself-The soul responsible to God for its religious opinions.

The term opinions must be understood, not in its loose and general sense, but in a more peculiar and restricted one. As generally employed, it denotes those notions of the mind that are crude and indeterminate, because the mind has not much exercised itself upon them, or those about which otherwise no very definite conviction is entertained; or those which are regarded as being necessarily matters of mere speculation, there being no evidence either in nature or revelation, by which they can be confuted or established; or those which are regarded as being so utterly unimportant, that it is not very material whether we have a decided opinion about them or not, seeing that they neither indicate nor affect our character-can neither vitiate nor improve our feelings or our conduct. It is to be regretted, that many of these notions have engaged the attention of the narrowminded and the controversial, till they have become at once the symbols and the prolific sources of dogmatism and debate, have separated chief friends, have multiplied the distinctive doctrines and practices of different parties, and have rendered all parties too unmindful of "the weightier matters of the law" and the still more overwhelming matters connected with the Gospel. There ever have been-and, I apprehend, ever will be-many minor points of religious sentiment and action, which must belong to this uncertain and unimportant class; a sort of outskirts in the suburbs of the city of Revelation, where if persons will but walk quietly they may occasionally enjoy amusement and recreation; matters, upon which men may innocently, if modestly, form an opinion one way or another. It is to be regretted at the same time, that this principle has been applied to subjects, with which it has no rightful concern. It has been too much the fashion, and still seems strongly to be the tendency of the day, to regard all religion as matter of speculation and private opinion; although there is ample evidence, by which it may be tested; although it either must be truth of supreme majesty, or falsehood of unparalleled and unmitigated atrocity; although the rejection or the reception of it must alter the whole current of our thoughts and feelings in reference to the character and service of God, and materially affect our moral sentiments and our conduct towards our fellow-men. A conclusion, as general as it is fatal, and alike opposed to sound reason and the dictates of revelation; and one therefore, against which it is the design of this discourse to put you on your guard. We may receive this as a settled axiom, that the soul, for its religious opinions as well as for the whole conduct of life, is responsible to that bar, before which all mankind must appear.

Secondly: the term responsibility simply denotes, that we are in a position, in which we may have to give an answer to rightly constituted authorities, whenever they may call upon us to do so; and that we are exposed to the infliction of certain penalties, which law or equity, as administered by them, shall determine. Thus

VOL. XIII.

T