tion by the Holy Ghost, and gratuitous justification by faith alone. But though these doctrines were maintained by Arminius, they were generally rejected by his immediate followers, and they have been commonly denied, or very much explained away, by the Arminians of the Church of England, who have usually enbraced the theological system of Episcopius, Curcellaeus, and Limborch. The general idea of Arminianism, as developed in the history of theology, is, that it implies a maintenance of the doctrines of the divinity and atonement of our Saviour, in opposition to the Socinians, and a denial of the peculiar doctrines of Calvinism, in regard to absolute election to eternal life, insuperable grace in conversion, and the certain perseverance of believers. But there is a very marked distinction between two dif ferent classes of divines-to whom in common this general description applies, and who may all in consequence be correctly enough called Arminians-according as they adopt Calvinistic or Pelagian views with respect to original sin, regeneration, and justification. This distinction is so important that it ought never to be lost sight of, and it is commonly, and accurately enough for practical purposes, expressed by calling the one class Evangelical, and the other Pelagian Arminians. The doctrines held in common by Calvinists and Evangelical Arminians, with respect to original sin, regeneration, and justification, may be said to constitute, along with those of the divinity and atonement of our Saviour, the fundamental and most essential principles of the scheme of revealed truth. It can scarcely be disputed that these doctrines occupy a higher platform in the Scriptural system of truth, than the peculiarities of Calvinism. But we think it can be proved, that the doctrines by which Evangelical are distinguished from Pelagian Arminians, can be held consistently by none but Calvinists, and it is on this ground that we are constrained to regard the theology of Wesley as superficial and inconsistent. The sounder and more Scriptural the views of Arminians are in regard to original sin and regeneration, the more inconsistent does their scheme of doctrine become; and the more easy is it to shew, that if they would fully and consistently follow out their own principles, they must admit all the peculiarities of Calvinism. Arminianism is essentially a system of compromise. Evangelical Arminians ought in consistency to be Calvinists, and Pelagian Arminians ought in consistency to be Socinians. We reckon it a thing greatly to be deplored, that Wesley was led to misapprehend and to reject Calvinism; and we regard it as an unspeakable blessing to the world, that he was led to adopt and to preach the views which have been generally held by Calvinists with respect to original sin and regeneration, and that these views are still faithfully proclaimed by all his followers.

Pelagian Arminians have never been honoured by the head of the Church in promoting the spiritual welfare of their fellowmen, and this reason is obvious, because they reject or disregard the most fundamental doctrines of the scheme of truth which has been revealed to us for our salvation. Even the doctrines of the divinity and atonement of our Saviour, though professedly held by them, are practically disregarded or left out, and exert scarcely an influence upon their ordinary presentation of Christian truth for the personal instruction of men. It is far otherwise with the Anti-Pelagian or Evangelical Arminians of the school of Arminius and Wesley. Not only do they treat the doctrines of the divinity and atonement of Christ as real and vitally important truths, but they proclaim views which are in substantial accordance with the Word of God, with regard to the moral state and condition of man by nature, the ground on which men receive forgiveness and acceptance, and the process and the agency by which they are restored to conformity to the divine image. On all these subjects, and they are the most important which are brought before us in the Sacred Scriptures, Wesley and his followers have always inculcated views which Calvinists admit to be accordant with divine revelation, and it is because they faithfully and earnestly proclaimed these, the most fundamental of all truths, that they have been honoured with such undoubted and extensive usefulness in promoting the spiritual welfare of their fellow

Of course, we believe that the extraordinary success of Wesley and his followers was vouchsafed to them, not because of their Arminianism, but in spite of it; but no reasonable and intelligent Calvinist, who is competently acquainted with the practical results of Wesleyan preaching and effort in England, in the United States, and in heathen lands, will have any hesitation in applying to this great movement the general principle indicated in the statement of the Apostle Peter. (Acts xv. 8, 9.) "God which knoweth the hearts bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as unto us; and put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith."

We have said that the most interesting question of a theological kind, suggested by Wesleyan Methodism, respects the probable permanence, or lengthened duration, of its peculiar system of doctrine. Evangelical Arminianism we hold to be an inconsistency, and on this general ground we think it improbable that it should be maintained in purity by any church or community for a succession of generations. According as a deep and vivid sense of religion has flourished or decayed among Arminians, their opinions should tend, and in the past history of the Church ordinarily have tended, either towards Calvinism or Pelagianism. The immediate followers and personal associates

VOL. XVI. NO. XXXII.

2 L

of Arminius, sunk greatly below their master, in the scale both of piety and of orthodoxy, and Arminianism has too generally exhibited this tendency. Nothing similiar to this, however, has yet occurred in the history of Wesleyan Methodism. Wesley's Evangelical Arminianism, as well as his zealous and devoted piety, has continued unchanged among his followers, down to the present day. This is an unusual, if not an unprecedented spectacle in the history of theology, and we cannot but contemplate it with a feeling of deep interest and satisfaction. But we cannot persuade ourselves that this state of things will last. The influences that tend to bring it to a termination, are, we think, too powerful to be permanently counteracted. If deep and vital piety should continue to flourish among the Methodists, as we believe it has hitherto done, they can scarcely fail to approximate to a more consistent view of the scheme of revealed truth, and to abandon their strong prejudices against the peculiarities of Calvinism. If true personal religion should generally decay among them, then they will infallibly, in spite of every precaution, and of all the legal restraints to which their founder by his "Deed of Declaration" has subjected them, sink down into Pelagianism.

But though there was nothing new in the substance of Methodist theology, there was much that was rare and peculiar in the spirit of the men who preached it, and in the special objects to which they applied it. This Mr. Taylor develops under the head of the Substance of Methodism. He illustrates here what he calls the four "Elements of Methodism," viz., 1. The waking up in men's minds of a vivid sense of their relationship individually to God and eternity; 2. Of a consciousness of the relationship of God the father of spirits to the individual spirit; 3. A vivid presentation of a personal redeemer as an all-sufficient Saviour; and 4. Evangelic philanthropy. In the illustration of these four elements of Methodism, there is much that is true and beautiful, and well fitted to be useful to those who are called upon to apply Christian truth for the benefit of others. Some of the statements contained in this part of the work are perhaps rather vague and indefinite, and they have not suggested to us any particular topics for comment or animadversion, but we would strongly recommend it to the careful perusal of all who are engaged in the work of the ministry, or preparing for entering upon its duties.

There was one feature in the preaching and labours of Wesley and his associates, to which Mr. Taylor has not prominently directed attention, but which eminently characterized them, as indeed it has done all successful Ministers of the Gospel; we mean, a deep and constant realization of the great end of preach

Form of Wesleyan Methodism.

521

ing and the ministry, producing a real and earnest desire to accomplish this end, and a confident expectation of seeing it effected as the result of their labours. Ministers are exposed to the temptation, and too often yield to it, of coming greatly short in preserving this state of mind and feeling. They frequently fall into the habit of preaching as if it were a mere duty which they must discharge because it is incumbent upon them, with a view chiefly, if not exclusively, to the exoneration of their own conscience, while they have scarcely anything like a real active desire, or confident expectation, that sinners should be converted by the truths which they proclaim, and manifest little anxiety about the visible fruits of their labours. It was not so with Whitefield, Wesley, and their associates. They had devoted themselves wholly and unreservedly to the great work of the conversion of sinners, they made this the real business of their lives, they adopted the means best fitted as means to effect it, they used these means with unwearied activity, and then confidently expected, what they supremely desired, that men through their instrumentality should be turned from darkness to light. This is the spirit by which the preachers of the gospel ought to be ever animated. It eminently distinguished the founders of Methodism, and this was undoubtedly one leading element of their success.

The third part of Mr. Taylor's Work is devoted to an exposition of "the form of Wesleyan Methodism," and this is done under four divisions, in which it is considered, 1. As a scheme of evangelical aggression; 2. As a system of religious discipline and instruction as towards the people; 3. As a hierarchy, or system of spiritual government; and 4. As an establishment, or body corporate related to civil law and equity.

While the preceding part of the work contains much matter admirably fitted to be useful to ministers of the gospel individually, especially with reference to the function of preaching, this part contains much that is fitted to afford valuable instruction to churches or Christian societies, with reference to their constitutional organization, and their arrangements for prosecuting Christian objects. Under the first of these heads, the procedure of the founders of Methodism is set forth chiefly as an example which it would be well for ministers to imitate. Under the second, while there is something brought forward for imitation, there is much also that is fitted to operate as a warning.

The leading topics discussed in this third part, are, itinerancy in the ministry, class meetings, the relation of Wesleyanism to right principles of church organization, and the legal restraints which Wesley imposed permanently upon the society which he founded. These subjects are all treated with great philosophic

discrimination with much soundness and accuracy of judgment -and, so far as we can judge, with much fairness and impartiality of spirit.

On the important subject of an itinerant as compared with a fixed ministry, Mr. Taylor is of opinion, that an itinerant ministry was a matter of necessity in the circumstances in which Methodism commenced, that it contributed greatly to diffuse and strengthen the Methodistic movement, that it has some advantages as compared with a fixed ministry, that it may almost always be employed with benefit as a supplement to a more permanent arrangement, that when so employed it should be exercised by the most eminent men the body can furnish, but, that in general, in all ordinary circumstances, and with reference to the community at large, the advantages of a fixed ministry, of a body of men who are truly and permanently pastors of flocks, greatly preponderate. The following extract brings out some of Mr. Taylor's leading views on this topic. It is rather long, but the subject of which it treats is very interesting and important, the views it represents are, we think, very wise and judicious, and they are developed with much beauty and eloquence.

"Any one who, endowed with some natural faculty and fluency of utterance, has made the experiment, will have found it far from difficult to acquire the power of continuous and pertinent speaking, upon familiar topics-especially upon religious topics-and so to hold out for a thirty or forty minutes, or more; and if this habit of speaking be well husbanded, and kept always within the safe enclosures of conventional phrases, and of authenticated modes of thinking, this preacher may be always ready to ascend the pulpit-in season and out of season. His sermon, or his set of discourses, is, in fact, the glib run of the mental associations upon worn tracks-this way or that, as the mind may chance to take its start from a given text.

This sort of mindless facility of speaking proves a sore temptation to many a located minister; and its consequence is to leave many a congregation sitting, from year to year, deep in a quagmire. Better than this, undoubtedly, would be itinerancy,--far better is a frequent shifting of monotonies, than a fixedness of the same. But such an admission will not avail to establish the principle that this shifting system is in itself good; or that it ought to be regarded in any other light than as a necessary expedient, allowed under peculiar circumstances, or, (which would be far better, and indeed good,) as a method, or system, supplementary to a located ministry. Thus used, and put in act, as we have already ventured to say, by the most accomplished and highly reputed ministers of a Church-by its chiefs and its doctors, everything that is auspicious might be looked for as its consequence.

"This, however, is not the Wesleyan itinerancy,—it is not as thus