mean then resolutions and desires which gradually improve the heart without holiness? But this again is running foul of the doctrine of progressive Regeneration, which has been shown to be a dream. You must then mean more light; and it comes to this at last, that all which has been received is an enlightening influence, that all which is to be received is more light, and still more light,-and the self-determining power of the will, influenced only by light, is to change the heart: and this carries you back to downright Arminianism, from which you never departed but in name, and in a more perfect confusion of tongues. Indeed it is capable of the fullest demonstration, that between the grossest Arminianism and the correct system there can be no medium. And then this ruinous attempt to bolster up the self-righteousness of sinners, by telling them that God will reward their unholy deeds! Has it not been shown that all the feelings and actions of the unregenerate, so far as they partake of a moral nature, are not only unholy but sinful? And will you presume to tell men that God will reward sin, or things at best but indifferent? that He will lavish rewards on men who are out of Christ, and still lie under condemnation? Do it if you will, but you must answer it to God.

In opposition to all these theories the Calvinist tells you, that the heart is so depraved that it will not improve divine influence till it is changed; that it stubbornly resists all light and motives till it is forced to submit ; that the moral Ruler has as

much occasion to subdue it by strength, as an earthly king to quell by force his rebellious subjects; and that the simple history of the change is, that God makes His people willing in the day of His power. And if the change is instantaneous, from unabated enmity to supreme love, the Calvinist must be right. These other theories are founded on the principle of progressive Regeneration, (so far as they recognise any such change,) and on that of the self-determining power. Prove Regeneration to be instantaneous, and thus dissolve the dream of the self-determining power, and all these theories sink of course.

But to whom do the Scriptures ascribe the change in question? The answer meets you on every page. "The preparations of the heart in man, and the answer of the tongue is from the Lord." "Every good gift, and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights." "By grace are ye saved, through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God." "Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man? I have planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the increase. So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth, but God that giveth the increase."*

II. Is this change brought about according to the stated operations of nature, or in a supernatural way?

* Prov. xvi. 1. 1 Cor. iii. 5-7. Eph. ii. 8. James i. 17.

In settling this question every thing depends on obtaining precise ideas of the meaning of the terms. What then is meant by the stated operations of nature? Precisely what the terms obviously import, and what they have always been understood to express; viz. the stated operations of divine power, exerted through the medium of second causes, and in so uniform a way, that a person having a comprehensive view of all the laws of nature, and of the second causes that would be brought to act in a particular case, might infallibly calculate the issue, unless disappointed by a supernatural interposition.

This stated operation extends not only to matter but mind, and of course to man as composed of both. Could you perfectly know the habitual disposition of a man, what would be the state of his body and outward circumstances at a given time, and all the motives that would assail him; and were you sufficiently skilled in the laws of nature to estimate universally and with precision the influence of second causes; you might infallibly calculate how he would feel and act, if not prevented by a supernatural influence. Even with our limited knowledge of the laws of nature, we can form in many instances very correct conjectures respecting the future conduct of men. A skill at this calculation forms much of the ability of the statesman, and indeed much of the prudence of ordinary life. From the laws of nature you may calculate with great certainty, that men in given circumstances will

exercise feelings wholly unlike any which they now possess, and in some cases, wholly unlike any which they ever had; as that a passionate man, whom you now see placid and affectionate, will rage when he is provoked; as that a covetous man, who is now melted into compassion and charity, will exercise oppression as soon as a fit occasion offers; as that a youth, when he becomes a parent, will exercise parental affection. Now can you form any such calculation respecting the future conversion of men? or could you if you were perfectly acquainted with all the laws of nature? THIS IS THE

QUESTION TO BE TRIED.

But before proceeding to examine those laws of nature on which this effect must depend if it is a natural effect, let us be fully apprized of the consequences which must result from adopting this principle. If the change is brought about by divine power working through the medium of second causes, in a stated order, according to the established course of nature, then these consequences will follow:

First, no greater or other exertion of power is made at the time of producing the effect, than was made in the antecedent preparations in nature to produce it.

Secondly, no greater or other exertion of power is made where the effect follows than where it does not, the whole exertion being put forth to support the attributes of the natural agents, which are always the same whether combined for action or

not, and must produce the effect when they are combined, and meet with no special resistance. Thus no greater or other exertion is made to produce a crop, where seed, and soil, and rain, and heat, and air combine, and find no special resistance, than to support the same agents where they do not combine, or where the crop is prevented by reptiles, flood, fire, or the violence of man.

Thirdly, where all the natural agents combine, the effect cannot be prevented without a supernatural interposition.

Fourthly, where natural agents enough combine to produce the effect in one instance, they will produce it in all, unless prevented by special resistance. We should then expect that the same outward means that can convert one, would convert all, unless some invisible cause, such as peculiar stubbornness, or temptation, or the self-determining power prevented. But persons apparently the most stubborn, and most exposed to temptation, often become Christians, while others, apparently more pliable, and less tempted, remain in sin,-both under the same instruction. To account for numberless differences of this sort, we should be obliged, so far as we can discover, to resort to the self-determining power of the will.

The whole drift of these consequences is to deny that Regeneration is any greater or other exhibition of divine power than the common operations of nature. But how does this comport with those texts which represent the change as preemi