which move around it. Very many of the doctrines, which apply especially and directly to man, will take their direction and utility from the perspicuity and importance given to spiritual regeneration. But theirs reduces regeneration to mere external or relative insignificance.

The simplicity and unity of our system is very important. The youngest reader in the school of divinity, who understands the terms, is in no danger of being misled. The main object is one, and the mode of instruction intelligible and direct. But the system we oppose is not only complex and involved, but mystical and very liable to be misunderstood, as we have already seen, and may further see.

In the first place, it is the invention of ingenuity intended to remove a difficulty, by reducing the requirements of holy baptism into some conformity with the apparent effects of baptism, on a large portion of its recipients.

In the second place, it makes two regenerations requisite, and those no way necessarily allied to each other; yet describing or setting forth things as different from each other, as earth and heaven; still both by precisely the same language. How mystical! How dangerous!

2. We conceive there is no comparison between the two modes of interpretation, in our addresses to mankind. As we teach no doctrine but what is essential, and in no way but what is easy and intelligible (as much so as the high and spiritual nature of the subject will admit); so in our appeals to the consciences of our people, we need assume nothing but what they themselves profess to believe and acknowledge. Their very introduction into the Christian church by baptism, is, in our view of the case, that "beautiful gate of the Temple," by which the king's daughter" is admitted directly into the presence of her "Lord." There the baptised professes a new heart and a right spirit; and as a professor, is accepted and sealed as an heir of heaven. From henceforth he wears the livery of the Most High, having first sworn to be his "faithful soldier and servant to his life's end."

If, therefore, we see a man defective in his conduct, or, in other words, lax in his doctrine or morals, we point to his professing all we require. If he turn upon us, or

attempt to draw back, we have the additional guilt of hypocrisy or apostasy to lay at his door:-while from the very beginning, he is not allowed to claim a single spiritual privilege, but upon the ground of his sincerity of heart and purity of principle. But what disadvantage does the "ecclesiastical" and only"external" regenerationalist lie under? In his peculiar sense, he even enlists bad soldiers. Such may say, "I only professed an ' external' religion, I swore to no heartiness of fealty to my Lord: you cannot accuse me of hypocrisy; I avouched no more you cannot call me a traitor; for you mutilated or explained away the oath before I took it; and still you gave me assurance, that "all those who are baptised may, in this ecclesiastical and relative sense, be truly called saints, the children of God, members of Christ, and inheritors of the kingdom of heaven:" this was all I sought."

When a teacher has heard all this, and finds that he has encouraged, not only an honest spiritual soul to profess a true faith; but has actually (it may be) put the above words into the mouth of one of the grossest hypoerites in spiritual religion; what strange up-hill work he will find it to convict such professors either of sin, or of the truth and weight of the following admonition or remonstrance, thus late sounding in his ears. "But still it must be remembered, that this sanctification, regeneration, and adoption, conferred upon us at our admission into the visible church, is external and ecclesiastical." p. 43. And how will he persuade such, that another, even a "spiritual and real regeneration," though conveyed by the very self-same language, and symbolised by the selfsame process, is absolutely necessary and must be experienced in order to salvation? Has he not rather puzzled and entangled the candidate, than cleared the way for him, when he seeks to obtain just and spiritual views on the highest and most important of all subjectsthe holiness necessary to salvation?

This subject will receive practical elucidation in the next section.

SECTION II.

The Hypothetical Principle.-Ministerial Addresses.

We shall not now bring evidence in proof of this principle, as we shall hereafter consider it more at large; but shall take it as admitted by our author, and proceed to show how it bears on ministerial instruction. We shall consider what sort of direction it will fairly give to the doctrines and addresses of ministers among a baptised people. This question has become more particularly interesting, because some consider, that ministers of our church are bound in consistency, and many think, in spiritual fidelity, to take the character of "baptismal regeneration" as a sort of guide or key to all their pulpit and private addresses.

A considerable volume has been, not long ago, published, which undertakes to prove the necessity, and to exemplify the value and importance of preaching frequently the doctrine of spiritual regeneration in baptism. Of so much importance does the author deem this course to be, that if pursued, it would in his view be the means of national reformation. But from this theory we must beg liberty to dissent. We shall first just refer to the hypothetical nature of regeneration, and then proceed to our particular subject.

This respected writer, without naming the principle, states its nature in the following manner:-"The general principle of the reformed churches, is, that salvation is by promise, that the promise is sealed by baptism, and that the worshipping church, consisting of baptised members, is, in the judgment of charity, and in the exercise of faith, a communion of saints, and a portion of the holy universal Church of Christ on earth."

This principle, as we have just shewn, is that on which, we believe, our church proceeds, and on which she ac

By Mr. Budd: whose line of argument is pursued by Professor Pusey, 176: and more strongly still by Mr. Dodsworth. We need not make the subject more complex by quotations from each of these writers: for if Mr. Budd's hypothesis cannot stand, much less can theirs.

cepts persons into her communion by baptism, and pronounces their regeneration; such pronunciation being of necessity subject to the uncertainty of the conditions on which it is made. The church accepts the profession of character as real, and pronounces her blessings on that charitable assumption. She supposes, assumes, and takes as granted, the truth and sincerity of the profession made, and then declares and announces the promises which properly belong to such sincerity of profession. This is what is meant by the "hypothetical principle." Let us now consider

The Doctrine which arises from it.

If what we have just stated be the mode in which our 'church admits her members, we must expect that they should be treated consistently with it to the end of their course. The author already alluded to, endeavours to shew this by a reference to our church services; and he states, that she treats them as believers, and leads their devotions in a truly spiritual manner, as if they were all real saints, though he admits, as the church also teaches, that they are not all so. And he also justly supposes, that she does this from its being utterly impossible "to compose a liturgy for believers and unbelievers, for saints and fellow creatures," which had lately been attempted for a holy church and natural men. And he further argues thus: "They must, if they pray in the name of all present, give them credit for being what they profess to be. This is the principle on which every church of Christ is built; and both our church and all the churches of the reformation, are founded on the same; and for this plain reason, because they can be founded on no other. The defect then is not in the principle but in the discipline, which is not sufficiently operative to protect the principle from abuse. This is our chief want, to divide the professed communion of saints from the community of natural men." See Christian Observer for 1834, pp. 413. 663.

But this is not all, for our author enters very largely on the subject of public instruction, and contends, that the preacher should enlarge upon "the baptismal privileges,"

as all we have to do is "to be just to our advantages." With respect however to public congregations, he says, that "to address them as really converted without distinction, while they are evidencing these privileges by no corresponding practice, would encourage a false security and confound nature and grace,—and would ascribe to the mere application of the sacrament what is due to the gracious effects actually wrought in the soul." And it is added." On the other hand to address a baptised people as heathens, must be equally a mistake in the contrary extreme. It is admitted, that there are baptised sensualists, baptised extortioners, and baptised infidels; but even these are to be addressed as not without hope. They have been baptised, they have assumed the Christian name, they bear it; they would be offended if you deprived them of it: and we have a right, till they absolutely renounce it, to call upon them for consistency, to show forth the excellency of baptismal privileges, and the due performance of baptismal vows." "Let this INTER

PRETATION BE EXPLAINED AT LARGE FROM THE PULPIT.

Let the minister dwell on the manifold advantages which directly and necessarily flow from it. An entirely new light will thus be thrown on all the services of the church." pp. 381, 383, 405.

The piety and pure design of all this no one can doubt; but the wisdom and judgment of what is advanced, is in our view more than questionable. Instead however of discussing questions of minor importance, we shall examine only two, which naturally arise from those quotations,

The FIRST is-Whether what is so warmly recommended be fraught with the manifold advantages that are claimed for it?

We dispute not the necessity, duty and usefulness of early instruction, catechising, praying for and watching over the youthful mind; nor the duty of enforcing on all men the observance of their baptismal vows; nor the duty of encouraging them to believe from the heart all the promises of God which they profess to believe were made to them in their baptism. As to these things we wholly agree with our author: and these are things which belong to every minister, and to every father of a family, let his views be what they may. They are necessarily connected with