prosperity, and the first moment that the prophet of the Lord, and the Spirit of the Lord, presented truth to his mind! But let us remember that the light of Saul was darkness compared with ours. How dreadful is our condition, if like Saul, increasing age is hardening our hearts. If the Holy Spirit be quenched, if the Lord has departed, he must be our enemy. Let us remember that in the day of distress Saul sought the Lord; but the Lord answered him not. There are those now, who in the prospect of death, fly to the damning consolations of unbelief. But like her of Endor, such consolations seldom give peace, destructive as that peace would be. They only help to put off reflection to the last. They concentrate into one unhappy moment the remembrance of all past sins-These sins at last force themselves on the horrorstruck imagination, and like the prophet to Saul, they tell of an awful to-morrow. Of each unhappy individual, the falsehoods he has forged or uttered, whether in jest or in seriousness, without design, or in malice, or in selfishness-his frauds and his extortions-all rise to his view, point him to his fate, and say in a voice, which his conscience now hears and feels-" Despair and die." Behold me, says the form of the robbed orphan, the oppressed widow, or the injured neighbour"Let me sit heavy on thy soul to morrow." Now mercy itself, the tender mercy of him whose goodness never fails, seems to have changed its nature. Heretofore it followed, it entreated, it hung over him. But spurned to the last, it now seems to be changed into inexorable justice. The gospel, the message of grace to mankind, which while the day of grace continues, pours the oil of consolation into the broken heart-the gospel so often rejected, seems now "the savour of death unto death." The slighted and despised means of grace, seem now only to aggravate inevitable ruin. Each seems to cry-Despair and die. The blood of the Son of God, that precious blood, and that divine benevolence which once said "Father forgive them, for they know not what they do," now seem to say-Despair and die. And in the departing moments what will sit so heavy on the soul, as the blood of that Divine Redeemer trampled under foot. Ah! could the least hope arise in the soul that these sins of so deep a die, and others remembered, and others forgotten, had been removed by the blood of the cross; had been lamented with godly sorrow" working repentance unto salvation not to be repented of;" it would heave a mountain from the breast: "Oh! let us seek the Lord while he may be found, and call upon him while he is near." Now "Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts, and let him return unto the Lord, and he will have mercy on him, and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon.” The Deacon ceased-His fellowsinners had become tired. Some appeared impressed and affectedothers said they did not like such ghost and witch stories. The door was open, and they were departing one by one. [It is known to us that there is a portion of the population of Pennsylvania, not a hundred miles diştant from Philadelphia, among whom the vices and superstitions which our correspondent the Deacon depicts, have actually an exist ence. It is his lot to witness them; and we believe his pictures are taken from the life, and are not cari. catures. This state of things ought to be known. We verily believe that missionary labours are as much needed among these people as among those who reside in the most destitute parts of the frontiers of our country. We consider their moral condition as not less deplorable than that of the Indians-Their superstitions are quite as stupid and degrading.] From the London Evangelical Magazine for February, 1824. ANECDOTES. Episcopal Benevolence-"Dr.Wilson, the late worthy Bishop of Sodor and Man, sent once for his tailor to make him a cloak, and desired it might have only one loop and button. The tailor submitted, but at the same time remarked, that if that fashion were to become general, it would starve all the button-makers. 'Say you so, John,' replied the good bishop, 'then button it all over.'" Importance of Promptitude.-The benevolent Dr. Wilson once discovered a clergyman at Bath, who, he was informed, was sick, poor, and had a numerous family. In the evening he gave a friend fifty pounds, requesting he would deliver it in the most delicate manner, and as from an unknown person. The friend replied, "I will wait upon him early in the morning" "You will oblige me, Sir, by calling directly. Think of what importance a good night's rest may be to that poor man." The Value of Money.-"I remember (says a clergyman,) some years ago to have buried a corpse: In the extremity of the audience that surrounded me I discovered a female wrinkled with age, and bending with weakness; one hand held a motherless grandchild, the other wiped away her tears with a corner of a woollen apron. I pressed towards her when the service was closed. Have you lost a friend? She heaved a melancholy sigh-The Lord bless her memory! I soon found the deceased had allowed her, for several years, sixpence per week! Is it possible (thought I) that a sum so inconsiderable may cause a widow's heart to sing for joy, and save the child of the needy! Who then would waste a sixpence in extravagance? Who would not deny himself, to be able to secure the blessing of them that are ready to perish?" A good Hint to a Catholic.-A Protestant, who rented a small farm under Alexander, second Duke of Gordon, having fallen behind in his payments, a vigilant steward, in his Grace's absence, seized the farmer's stock, and advertised it to be sold by auction on a fixed day. The Duke happily returned home in the interval, and the tenant went to him to supplicate for indulgence. "What is the matter, Donald?" said the Duke, as he saw him enter with sad downcast looks. Donald told his sorrowful tale in a concise natural manner: it touched the Duke's heart, and produced a formal acquittance of the debt. Donald, as he cheerily withdrew, was staring at the pictures and images he saw in the ducal hall, and expressed to the Duke, in a homely way, a wish to know what they were. "These," said the Duke, who was a Roman Catholic, "are the saints who intercede with God for me." "My lord Duke," said Donald, "would it not be better to apply yourself directly to God? I went to muckle Sawney Gordon, and to little Sawney Gordon; but if I had not come to your good Grace's self, I could not have got my discharge, and both I and my bairns had been barried (i. e. turned out from house and home)." In an Obituary of the Rev. SAMUEL LOWELL, contained in the number of the Magazine from which the above extracts are made, it is said that "after a very distressing and restless night, his attention was forcibly arrested by those words of the inspired psalmist, Be still, and know that I am God; which had an evident and powerful effect in tranquillizing and consoling his spirit; immediately after which he composed the few following verses: "I come to thee, my gracious God, These verses were sung with great interest after the funeral discourse at Castle Green. Heviews. NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. A Discourse delivered Aug. 17, 1823, by James Murdock, D. D. 66 diction cannot be expressed in words. It shocks common sense, and sets all argument at defiance. But the truth is, that, according to the author's scheme, there is no such thing as justification, in any proper sense. The theory is, that law and justice are totally disregarded in the salvation of the sinher. The word justification, like the word atonement, is retained, while the thing properly signified by it has no existence. Here then we see that the attributes of justice and mercy are so far from harmonizing in the plan of salvation, that the former is utterly disregarded, to make way for the latter. The thing is not denied; it is as explicitly declared as words can express it. There is indeed an appearance of caution in some of the expressions, as, "a departure from the regular course of justice," as if there might be some other course. But to crown all, this theory makes the great end of the atonement to be, "an exhibition of the rectitude of God!" (Concluded from page 129.) 5. We remark again, that the idea of pardon and justification, entertained by Dr. M. is inconsistent and impossible. According to his views," the atonement does not cause a sinner to be justified on the principles of law and distributive justice;" "nor did it cover his sins," "nor cause them to be overlooked and forgotten." But "the pardoned sinner not only remains, in fact, the same guilty creature he was before, but he is viewed by his Maker as personally guilty." On what principles then does justification take place? To this he answers, we pronounce the justification of believers to be an act of the Sovereign mercy of God, a departure from the regular course of justice; and such a departure as leaves the claims of the law forever unsatisfied." This, we must think, is a kind of justification never heard of before. The law which binds the creature, and which is immutable, remains forever unsatisfied, and the person is justified! The pardoned sinner remains as guilty as before his pardon! This justification then is, confessedly, in violation of the demands of the law-plated. It is a departure, from justice. Was such a doctrine ever promulged till now? If the demands of the law remain unsatisfied, then the transgressor remains in a state of condemnation, for the demand of the law against the sinner is, that he should die. But he is justified by an act of sovereign mercy. How is this? condemned and justified at the same moment? Yes, forever condemned and yet forever justified! Pardoned, yet not divested of guilt!-A more manifest contra We are constrained, from this view of Dr. M.'s theory of the nature of the atonement, to declare, that it is more dishonourable to the Divine attributes, and more inconsistent with itself, than any system which we have ever before contem 6. The great end of the atonement, according to this theory is, to make such a display of God's holiness and determination to punish sin, that a lasting impression may be left on the minds of rational creatures, that sin shall not pass with impunity under the government of God. But we assert, that according to the view given by this theory, the death of Christ can have no such effect; for the fact is, that in every instance in which it is pardoned, it is unpunished, and how can this teach other creatures that their sins shall certainly receive their due wages? As far as conduct can establish a principle, the very contrary of this is made certain. It is true Christ has suffered a painful and ignominious death; but this cannot teach that the sinner will hereafter be punished. Christ was not a sinner, and no sins were imputed to him: he suffered, according to Dr. M., in all respects as an innocent person. All that can properly be inferred from this is, that if creatures transgress the law of God, they will not be punished, but the Governor of the universe will pour out his wrath upon some other party. It is calculated to make the innocent tremble, but there is nothing in the transaction to terrify the guilty. Let us, for illustration, suppose, that some king, after a number of his subjects had been guilty of the highest crimes, should, instead of executing the law upon them, inflict a terrible punishment on his own son, to make the impression on his subjects that he was just, and would certainly hereafter execute the laws upon offenders. Would not all the world cry out against the measure, not only as most unjust, but most preposterous? The impression made would indeed be deep and awful, but it would be an impression of horror in relation to his administration. But such is the theory of the atonement inculcated by a learned professor in one of our orthodox seminaries, on more than a hundred pupils, and now printed for their instruction! We have read somewhere of a Brahmin, who, supposing that he had suffered a great injury from a person from whom he could obtain no satisfaction, brought his own son, and murdered him in the presence of the man who had offended him. This is the only analogous case which we have noticed in the proceedings of men. 7. Our last remark is, that this scheme robs the cross of its chief VOL. II. Ch. Adv. attractions, and greatly obscures the glory of the divine attributes displayed in the death of Christ. According to the theory under consideration, there is here no manifestation of God's hatred of sin, on account of its intrinsic evil; no exhibition of his justice in inflicting the deserved punishment on sin in the person of a surety; no regard manifested to truth, or to the sacred and immutable nature of the law, by executing the penalty incurred. And as to the wisdom of appointing such a costly sacrifice, merely to make a symbolical representation, we cannot see it. The expense appears to us far too great for the end to be accomplished. We were pleased, indeed, to find that Dr. M. holds firmly the doctrine of our Saviour's divinity, but we confess that we could not see the justness of that inference, in which it is represented as deducible from the doctrine of the sermon. We cannot understand why a divine person must become incarnate and suffer death, merely as a symbol, to make the impression of a certain truth on the feelings of rational creatures. We will concede to Dr. M. that the impression made, will be deeper from the sufferings of such a person, than from those of a creature, but that does by no means prove that it was absolutely necessary. The preacher, indeed, tells us what is very true, that the simple preaching of the cross has had a mighty efficacy in converting men from sin unto God; but this simple preaching to which he refers, has always been very different from those views of the cross which he has given. It was a plain declaration of what the scriptures teach, where every text that relates to the subject, conveys the idea of vicarious sufferings; of a sacrifice offered up for us; of the love of God in "not sparing his own Son, but delivering him up for us all.” The Gospel represents Christ as made under the law; as becoming Y the end of the law for righteous ness; as being made sin for us; as enduring the curse of the law, &c. The simple preaching of the cross displays the divine attributes; exhibits them in harmony, in the plan of salvation; represents the law as honoured and the rights of God as Governor of the Universe vindicated; and shows, (not after Dr. M.'s manner) how God can be just, and the justifier of him who believes in Jesus. But all these things are excluded from the scheme under consideration; and a strange doctrine introduced of a departure from justice; a justification in total disregard of the claims of the law and distributive justice; of pardon bestowed on the sinner, whilst he remains as guilty as ever; of a symbol to make some undefined impression on the feelings; of the punishment of a glorious person on whom no sin was charged, to demonstrate that God was righteous, and that he would certainly punish the transgressors of his law, &c. If this theory does not rob the cross of its attractions, and obscure the glory which encircles it, we will confess that we are blind. For ourselves, we are not sorry to see Dr. M. come out with his whole system, for we are persuaded there are thousands who are charmed with vague notions of a general and indefinite atonement, which has no respect to the sins of individuals, who will shrink with horror from the system when fairly extended to its legitimate consequences, and traced to its primary principles. And after all our immense improvements in this part of theology, we shall find ourselves under the necessity of rejecting it altogether, or sitting down in company with Luther and Calvin, and even of taking good old Anselm by the hand. We do not mean to insinuate that all who believe in a general atonement, have departed from just and scriptural views of the nature of this important doctrine; for we have the pleasure of knowing some estimable persons, who, with these views, maintain the doctrine of substitution and vicarious satisfaction as firmly as we do. With such we wish to enter into no controversy. When true views of this cardinal doctrine are entertained, we think the dispute about the extent of the atonement is one of very little consequence; and indeed, in our opinion, is more a dispute about words than things. But the new views, which are every day becoming more common, of the nature of the atonement, must give alarm to every friend of scriptural orthodoxy. These theories are characterized by a boldness of speculation, and a disregard of the plain declarations of scripture, which threaten consequences of the worst kind. We do not attribute bad motives to all those who are so fond of innovating; we believe, in general, that they mean well, and that they really think that they have made great discoveries in theology. And it seems to them disgraceful, that whilst every other branch of science is making rapid advances, theology should be destined to be stationary. Why should we be confined to the stature of our fathers on this subject, more than on any other? We would answer, that the cases are different. We have no clear revelation from God on other sciences; we are left to our own reason and experience; but in theology, we have our system as complete as it can be, in the holy scriptures. But we do not wish to hold out the idea that no new light can be obtained in this sublimest of all sciences; we only assert, that this will never be effected by bold speculations, however ingeniousThese, as we said before, are in theology, what hypotheses are in philosophy. But by patient, assiduous and devout study of the Bible, we may learn much more than we now know; especially if we |