baptism? And are we not, indeed, expressly told, that Simon Magus, though baptized by an inspired evangelist, was still in the gall of bitterness and the bond of iniquity? Interpretations of scripture that contradict plain facts cannot be true.

Mr. Mant betrays a fear that this part of his labours would seem like a logomachy. Let it not be supposed,' he says, that the present argument is a mere question of words.? Notwithstanding this caution, we cannot help being of opinion that Mr. Mant is all the while contending about empty names, and that he actually concedes every thing for which the Methodists plead. He maintains, with Mr. Overton,' that none who have arrived at maturity and are capable subjects, are in such a sense Christians, as that they will obtain happiness and heaven, except those who are influenced by Christian principles, and exhibit a Christian conduct, who are penitent believers, and habitual observers of God's laws.' p. 347. What is this, but to say that a person may have been baptized and yet not be a Christian in reality and to good purpose? and consequent ly that he must undergo such a change as is signified by the word regeneration as used by the Methodists?'

6

If, however, Mr. Mant had conducted his argument much more consistently, and his evidences for the sameness of baptism and regeneration, had been much weightier than they really are, the Methodists' would still have something to alledge in excuse for rejecting so strange a doctrine. It is, as they might observe, most illiberal and extravagant; since it excludes from the future blessedness, persons of unquestionable piety; and affirms a more sudden revolution to take place in the principles and temper, than ever was imagined by the wildest fanaticism, while, at the same time, it is evident from experience that no such change has been effected. It subverts the very nature of true religion; since, if we are made sons of God by an external rite, faith, love, and obedience are wholly unnecessary to the possession of this high character, In a word, it stands in direct opposition to all those scriptures that represent divine truth as the instrument of regeneration, and obedience to God, in heart and life, as its natural and invariable consequence.

In his seventh discourse, our lecturer undertakes, with true knightly courage, to show that a special and instantaneous conversion is not necessary for Christians'. Of this doctrine,

we hazard little in affirming that the abettors have no exist ence. It is upon those who are not Christians, who have neither Christian principles nor Christian dispositions, that, the Methodists inculcate the necessity of conversion; and here they prefer a gradual to an instantaneous change. But so

determined a controvertist is Mr. Mant that he will not permit them quietly to profess his own doctrines.

• Conversion, according to our notions, may not improperly be said to consist of a rational conviction of sin, and sense of its wretchedness and danger; of a sincere penitence and sorrow of heart, at having incurred the displeasure of a holy God; of steadfast purposes of amendment with the blessing of the divine grace; of a regular and diligent employment of all the appointed means of grace, and of a real change of heart and life, of affections and conduct, and a resolute perseverance in well-doing. p. 391.

So far well. But if the methodists declare that in order to a state of salvation a change of mind, of views, and dispositions must be effected in every person,'-not who has kept his baptismal vow, who, in the habitual tenor of his life has followed the example of our Saviour, but who has broken the law, and is a Christian in appearance only, this doctrine, a doctrine so like his own that they cannot be distinguished, is im mediately pronounced by this most orthodox appellant' a conceit, which revelation warrants not, and which reason and expe. rience disclaim. p. 396. He has written a book to abuse the Methodists, and abused at all events they must be. To shew the pertinacious quarrelsomeness of Mr. Mant's temper, we shall just subjoin two other passages. The first contains a description of evangelical preaching by way of caricature.

It is true, we hear them telling their deluded followers, that they ought to be converted; expostulating with them for not choosing to be converted, and for putting off their conversion, for not turning to God directly; intreating them to repent and be converted; Yet wherefore? when in almost the same breath they tell them, that the Author of this conversion is the Holy Ghost; that it is not their own free will; it is not moral suasion; that nothing short of the influence of the Spirit of the living God can effect this change in their hearts.'

With this, (which, it should be remembered, is considerably exaggerated,) we beg our readers to compare the description of the orthodox teaching.

Founded upon this are the exhortations, which we address to our people; whilst carefully reminding them on the one hand that "we are not sufficient of ourselves to think" or do " any thing as of ourselves, but that our sufficiency is of God," "who worketh in us both to will and to do of his good pleasure; we are equally assiduous on the other, in exhorting them to "fight the good fight of faith," to "strive for the mastery," to give diligence to make their calling and election sure," and to" work out their own salvation with fear and trembling.” Bearing in mind the prudent caution of our reformers, that "all men be to be monished, and especially preachers, that in this high matter, they, looking on both sides, so attemper and moderate themselves, that they neither so preach the grace of God, that they take away thereby free will nor on the other side to extol free will that injury be done to the grace of God :" whilst we promote the humility of our hearers by admonishing

them, that faith and repentance are "the gifts of God," we stimulate their exertions, by reminding them that "God commandeth all men to repent and believe." Whilst we encourage them by the promise of God to his people, that he will" circumcise their hearts" and "cleanse them from all iniquity;" we stir up their activity by his precept, that they "circumcise their own hearts," and "wash themselves and make themselves clean." Whilst we call on them, to pray to God with the psalmist, that he will "create in them a new heart, and renew a right spirit within them;" we warn them that God calls upon his people by a prophet, to "cast away from them all their transgressions, and make themselves a new heart and a new spirit." Whilst we animate the hopes of the desponding by God's gracious promise, that " he will put his fear in the hearts of his people, that they shall not depart from him," we endeavour to awaken the careless, and to humble the proud, by setting before them the end of those, who" did not choose the fear of the Lord."" p. 295.

After this example of the conformity of evangelical preaching on the subject of conversion, with what he found it convenient to attribute to the orthodox divines; and after what we have seen of his vehemence in defending, under the name of 'baptismal regeneration', the most instantaneous kind of conversion that can be conceived, it seems quite needless to interrupt Mr. Mant, in his ravings, against those who maintain the necessity of sudden conversion for Christians, or of the neces sity of conversion for those who have so followed the heavenly motions of the Holy Spirit, and improved his, sanctifying graces; have so pursued the calm and blameless tenor of their way; have preserved that child-like simplicity of character and that child-like innocence of conduct, that their angels may not blush to behold the face of their heavenly father.' It would be a waste of time to animadvert on the inconsistency between what we have quoted, and the attributing of the 'conversions wrought by the apostles to moral suasion,' p. 413; or to point out the resemblance which the conversion of the jailor bears to that effected by methodistical' preaching; or to expose his misrepresentations as to the tendency of such preaching, or to correct him for his prophane exposure of the most, pitiable infirmities of humanity. pp. 416

The last of the Methodistical doctrines, which Mr. Mant attacks, are, assurance and perfection. These subjects occupy the eighth discourse. Against neither of them, however, in their moderate form, does it become him to contend. Not against the last; for it is his opinion, as we have seen, that there are Christians who have so pursued the calm and blameless tenour of their way, that their angels may not blush to behold the face of their heavenly Father. Not the former; because, the doctrine of scripture, he contends, evidently

is that as many as are led by the spirit of God," acting in obedience to his heavenly motions, in conformity to his revealed will," they are the sons of God;" they continue in full possession of those privileges of adoption, to which they were admitted when they were "born again ;" and they enjoy an inward testimony of their continuance in that state, a testimony conveyed to their hearts by the influence of the Comforter, the Spirit of truth; and they are filled by Him with all joy and peace in believing." If these passages are to be understood according to the ordinary usage of language Mr. Mant holds both assurance and perfection. He may shake hands therefore with the methodists, though at the expence of quarreling with himself.

1

We mean not to advocate either of the foregoing doctrines. Neither of them is necessary to a state of salvation or the enjoyment of final happiness. As to an assurance of our safety, it seems to be the fruit of extraordinary religious attainments rather than the common lot of every Christian. It arises, not from any mysterious voice, so much as from perceiving that our character is similar to that of the faithful who have gone before us. That true faith in Christ necessarily produces a full assurance of salvation," is therefore a doctrine that we re ject as unscriptural and dangerous: and in doing so we shall have the sufferage of all, but a very small minority of the evangelical body. The notion also of perfection in the strict sense of the word, being attainable in this life, seems to Jabour under insuperable difficulties.

But the doctrine of perfection though we give up altogether, and that of assurance hold in a mitigated form, still Mr. Mant appears to us extremely censurable. He is guilty of uttering flat contradictions; asserting, as we have just seen, assurance and perfection, at the same time that he contends against both. He has deduced conclusions from these doctrines to render them odious which their advocates utterly disavow. He has, without proof, attributed their origin to principles of which no man, without the strongest proof, ought to accuse another; and has drawn the character of their adherents, in defiance of fact and observation. These circumstances prevent us from speaking of this discourse, many parts of which we highly approve, in such terms as we should otherwise have been glad to adopt.

The concluding discourse consists of general miscellaneous remarks. He begins with commenting on the 'general character' of the charge he has been endeavouring to refute. It is, he observes, arrogant and presumptuous,' implying a decision upon the most difficult and mysterious questions: it is uncharitable and unjust, being accompanied with much misre

6

presentation: it is also urged with bad temper, and is extremely vague and unmeaning. Whatever degree of truth there may be in these reflections, no one, we are satisfied, who attentively reads this volume, or indeed any of the publications penned by the orthodox divines' against the evangelical teachers, will fail to perceive that they may, with great jus tice and propriety, be retorted on their author and his fellow labourers.

In the fifth and sixth remarks, in which our lecturer attempts to vindicate himself and his brethren, from the specific accusation of having abandoned the doctrine of the reformation, and of preaching popery, there are many offences against historical fact, and some hallucinations in argument? There are two ways of representing the events of past ages. The one consists in narrating them, as, it appears from credible documents, they actually took place; the other in describing them, in contradiction to all kind of testimony, just as we wish they had, and think they ought to have occurred. This last way is adopted by our lecturer, in the view that he gives of the doctrine of the English reformers. 'Unquestion ably the doctrines of Calvin, he says, did not form part of the system of faith, which was generally adopted by those who separated from the church of Rome.' pp 521. Let it not be supposed,' he adds in the following page, that these doctrines did in fact constitute a part of the creed of those, whether individuals or churches, whom we are bound to regard with the most grateful and fond attachment.' And this, he says, notwithstanding a very slight comparison of the Confessions of faith of the different protestant churches will be sufficient to make it appear, that the doctrines of the reformers were in general the same: notwithstanding the assertion of Bishop Burnet, that in England the first reformers, were generally in the sublapsarian hypothesis:* notwithstanding Mosheim explicitly states, that under the reign of Edward VI. Geneva was acknowledged as a sister church, and the theological system, there established by Calvin, was adopted and rendered the rule of public faith in England; notwithstanding it is affirmed by Hume, that the first reformers in England, as in other European countries, had embraced the most rigid tenets of predestination; and notwithstanding a host of other accessi ble and well informed writers have exprsssed themselves decidedly to the same purpose.

As a practical conclusion from the whole of these discourses,

* Expos. of xxxix. Art. pp. 151. † Eccles. His. vol. iv. p. 387. History of England, vol. vii. p. 291.