its certain existence, by not hindering it, under certain circumstances, and his being the proper actor or author of it, by a positive agency or efficiency."And as in ages past, so the views of the Christian world continue to be the same on this subject to the present day, if we except those, who have adopted a different theory on this side of the Atlantic.

Dr. Thomas Scott, in his Family Bible, a work highly esteemed by the Christian public, in his notes on Exod. iv, 21, hath these words.-"Harden. God never communicates hardness, or wickedness to the heart of man by a positive act. For he cannot be tempted of evil; neither tempteth he any man. But when provoked by atrocious crimes, he gives up a man to his own heart's lusts; he permits Satan to deceive, entice, and blind him; and he takes off his providential restraints, by which many are kept from wickedness, because they have not opportunity or power to commit it, or dare not through fear or shame. When a man is thus left, commands, warnings, judgments, deliverances, every truth in Scripture, and every dispensation in Providence, prove the occasion of increasing obstinacy and insensibility, pride and presumption."

In the Christian Observer, a work published in England, and celebrated on both sides of the Atlantic for its piety, learning, candor and excellent Spirit, the doctrine of ascribing the wickedness of the heart of men, to a positive divine influence is considered as going an awful length.-See vol. 16, p. 395. This suspicion will be heightened, if we push each train of reasoning to its utmost limits. For as Mr. Faber provcs, we may even go on the one side to the awful length of concluding, that God is effectively the author of sin, and that virtue and vice are mere names," &c.

To this section we may subjoin a few remarks.

1. The consent of all great and good men in all ages of the Church, that God does not by a positive efficiency, move the hearts of men to sin, is a strong

presumption, that this is not the doctrine of the Bible, and that there is something in this sacred volume that cannot be easily reconciled to this idea. And what is this but such solemn declarations of the Holy Ghost as these, "Let no man when he is tempted, say, 1 am tempted of God," &c. "All that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father." "This wisdom cometh not from above, but is earthly, sensual, devilish."

2, The failure of the attempts of Divines in past ages, to account for the introduction of moral evil upon philosophical principles, does by no means prove the truth of this new theory.-The speculations of Calvin, President Edwards and others, on this subject, it will not be pretended, ought to satisfy the philosopher. But it is believed, that the Christian ought to be satisfied with such light as the Scriptures impart, and not to attempt to explain on principles of mere abstract reasoning, what is not revealed and is above our comprehension. Here the reasonings of men may do much hurt; good they never do.

3. As in all past ages, the Church of God has understood these texts, which speak of God's hardening the heart and blinding the minds of sinners, &c. as relating to his providential disposal of events, so it is in an high degree certain that this will be the doctrine of the Church in general in all future ages.As to the pious and godly, who are not seduced by attachment to some favorite philosophical theory, they will always find enough in their Bible to keep them right in this point. And as to such as make no pretensions to vital godliness, and even deists, they, in general, are kept aloof from this mistake by a kind of natural horror, at the idea of God's working directly on their hearts, and moving them to all the crimes they commit.

Mon. Denon, in his account of Buonaparte's expedition in Egypt, relates the following anecdote.— An Arab boy about fourteen years of age, was detected in theft in the French camp, and brought im

mediately to General Desaix for trial. "Who excited you to this criminal deed," says the General. The instant reply of the lad, was, "God moved me to do it?" The general for a moment seemed to be struck dumb, with a kind of pity and horror; but presently exclaims, "Wretch! let him go," as if one, who could utter such a sentiment, was too ignorant or infatuated to be made an object of criminal justice. I do not offer this as an argument,but as an instance of the fact, that there generally is, even in wicked men, something that is shocked at the idea, that the one trae God does move men, by a direct operation on the heart, to sin, and that this will operate to prevent their falling into the mistake.

CONCLUSION.

If all that has been stated in this Essay in refutation of the new principle examined, did no way concern the interests of vital piety, evangelical truth, sound or healing doctrine, our time, we concede, must have been poorly applied. If the vehemence of my zeal in any point exceeds due bounds, it is in disgust against that spirit of controversy, which would sacrifice the peace and unity of the church of God, to what is of no more importance to the salvation of sinners, than the breadth of a Jewish philactery. But by the view of the subject which we have attempted to defend, we conceive the following interesting advantages are gained.

1. The purity and simplicity of the Gospel of Christ is hereby preserved.

This simplicity consists essentially in two things. First, in preserving unmixed and unsophisticated, those ideas and views of divine things, which are revealed in the holy scriptures. If these undergo any shade of addition or alteration, so far the gospel is corrupted. In preaching the gospel, its truths ought to be held up to view, and caused to flow forth, pure as the waters of life from the throne of God and the lamb. In this case they become a tree of life, whose leaves are for the healing of the nations. But alas! though the visage of eternal truth, when first she descended from on high, was

clothed in perfect radiant light, yet how is it deformed by the disgusting embraces of fanaticism, sectarianism, or the dogmas of a proud, self-sufficient philosophy. Nor is it one of the least distortions of her fair form, to speak of God as the direct efficient cause, working in ungodly men all their abominable lusts,-teaching that neither the devil, nor any motives or second causes, can possess a power under the providence of God to do this. 2. But not only does the simplicity of the gospel consist, in preserving unmixed its infinitely precious and holy truths, but in the language and style in which we speak of these things. We are indeed not to cherish any superstitious attachment to mere words and phrases, as though there was a wisdom and sanctity in them, entirely independent of those ideas, of which they are the symbols; yet that there is a choice of words and expressions even in the transaction of secular affairs, no considerate man will deny. May not principles and plain facts, be discoursed of in language obscure, uninteresting, and unconciliating? Nay, is not the nature of language such, as that by a little variation, men may breathe into it their own unhallowed feelings and passions? So dark is the mind of fallen man, and opposed is his nature to what is perfectly holy, pure, and divine, that the doctrines of Christ cannot well pass through his lips in a new dress, without contracting defilement, as the most limpid stream will assume a tincture of those strata, over which it flows.-But from all these defects, the language of the inspired volume is in the highest degree exempted. For holy men of old spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. And he taught them all as he did Solomon, to seek out acceptable words, words of truth and soberness,-words in the best manner adapted to promote the great end of a divine revelation.-A material departure from the language of inspiration in speaking of divine things, tends to introduce incorrect views of those things.