of itself "it availeth nothing, but a new creature ; it is only an out ward and visible sign and seal of an inward and spiritual grace, which grace is the washing and regeneration of the soul, by virtue of faith in the atonement of Christ, and through the renewing influences of the Holy Spirit.

4. This gift of the Holy Ghost, we are further informed in the narrative before us, was conferred upon the people of the city of Samaria. In the early days of the Christian church it pleased God in many instances to bestow upon its members not only the ordinary influences of his Holy Spirit, for their instruction, consolation, and sanctification, but also especial and miraculous gifts, for the confirmation and extension of the faith. Probably both the miraculous and the ordinary gifts of the Spirit were given to the church of Samaria: the former have long ceased; but the latter are still promised to every true Christian. It is the Holy Spirit who alone can open the heart, as he did that of Lydia, to attend to the things which are spoken in his word. To him must we look up, to enlighten the eyes of our understanding, to convert our hearts, to strengthen our faith, and to lead us in the paths of peace, of joy, and of devotion to the service of God.

5. This beneficial effect of the preaching and reception of the Gospel was seen in the case of the people of Samaria. Hitherto, though not idolaters like the Gentiles, they had been following the evil inclinations of their unrenewed hearts ; some of them were under the dominion of "unclean spirits; and the whole of them, "from the least unto the greatest, had gone after " a certain man called Simon, who used sorcery, and bewitched the people." But now, believing the preaching of Philip, they turned from their deeds of darkness to newness and holiness of life. Whereas satan and

his ministers had hitherto borne the sway over them, they now became the servants of God. "One was their Master, even Christ," whose personal instructions to them, when he visited Samaria three or four years before, they probably well remembered; and to whom, as the promised Messiah, they now turned with full purpose of heart, trusting in his atonement, endeavouring to walk in his steps, and worshipping God in the manner he had taught them, " as a Spirit," "in spirit and in truth."

6. And in so doing "there was great joy in that city." The Gospel of Christ, wherever faithfully preached and cordially received, is a source, the only true source, of substantial happiness. The joy of the men of this world is founded on no solid basis; it is at the mercy of time, and chance, and casuality; but the blessings of religion are satisfactory and durable: they include the pardon of sin, a conscience at peace with God, adoption into his family, the enjoyment of his favour, and the hope of everlasting glory in heaven. The healing of the sick, and the casting out of unclean spirits, which caused such joy in the city of Samaria, were expressive emblems of the spiritual blessings conveyed by the Gospel. We were weak, and we are strengthened; we were guilty, and we are pardoned; we were sinful, and we are cleansed; and if the angels themselves rejoice over a sinner that repenteth, how much more should the sinner himself rejoice when thus turned from the error of his ways, and restored to the favour of his Creator. Let us then, like the Samaritans in the text, give heed to the things which are spoken to us of God; let us believe them; let us duly estimate their importance; and let us hold them fast, amidst the troubles of life and in the hour of death, that we may find them the well-spring of happiness to all eternity. Amen.

Tothe Editorofthe Christian Observer.

THOUGH I have not seen M. Malan's book on which your correspondent B. W. makes the "friendly remarks" inserted in your last Number; and therefore cannot pretend to say how far they are just; yet I cannot but think that they contain some positions that cannot be defended by a comprehensive view of the whole of the Holy Scriptures, so as to reconcile the seemingly contradictory passages relating to doctrine with each other. First, your correspondent objects to M. Malan's proposition, "No works in order to salvation," and says it should have been, "No works in order to justification." M. Malan evidently means, that our good works have no part in procuring our salvation, which position certainly accords with the whole tenor of Scripture. Had he said, that we may be saved without having any good works to shew, B. W. might well have considered such an assertion objectionable, as it would have been tantamount to saying, that we may be saved without faith in our Lord Jesus Christ; for if we have faith in him as the Saviour of the world, our lives must necessarily exhibit works acceptable both to God and man. B. W. admits that we are justified irrespectively of good works: now, if so, we are evidently saved irrespectively of them; for it is written," whom he justified them he also glorified (Rom. viii. 30). Good works are certainly necessary to justify (or prove our faith genuine) before man, but not before God who knoweth the heart.

Again, B. W. says, "It is erroneous and dangerous to assert, that faith consists in believing and applying the promises of the Gospel, as if they were spoken absolutely, personally, and individually to ourselves. The promises of the Gospel are of a general, and also an individual application." This passage certainly involves a contradiction;

for, if the promises are of individual application, certainly I have a right to believe that they are made to me individually (M. Malan could not mean exclusively of others), and to apply them to myself individually; and this, connected with an entire reliance on the merits and bloodshedding of Jesus Christ for my salvation, I apprehend is true faith. B. W. says, that "it is unscriptural and dangerous to speak of salvation as already granted and obtained." But does not the Apostle Paul do so?" Who hath saved us and called us with a holy calling." This is surely speaking of salvation, as granted and obtained: and does not the Holy Ghost, by the mouth of Zacharias say, that John the Baptist" should go before the face of the Lord to give knowledge of salvation to his people by remission of their sins;" that is, as I understand the passage, a consciousness of forgiveness, by which they might be assured, that God was now reconciled to them by the mediation of his beloved Son, and made them heirs of salvation. True, this salvation, though granted "through the tender mercy of our God," is not yet complete in the experience of Christians in the present life, nor will be so until the resurrection of the body; yet, the Scripture certainly authorises them, yea, most earnestly exhorts them, to believe it, and to rely upon it, as a thing perfected in the purpose of God, with whom to will and to do are the same. "Fear not, I am with thee, I am thy God" (Isaiah): "Fear not, I have redeemed thee (Jeremiah): "I will greatly rejoice in the Lord; for he hath clothed me with the garments of salvation, and covered me with the robe of righteousness.' (Isaiah Ixi.) And does not our Saviour assure us, that they who believe on him "have passed from death unto life;" and the Apostle John, "now are we the sons of God, although it doth not yet appear what we shall be?"

B. W. also quotes some observa

tions respecting the unchangeable love of God to his people, and the impossibility of their falling from a state of grace, from M. Malan's book, in pages 80 and 81, which he thinks exceptionable; but he does not state why. I am sure he will be very far from replying to this doctrine as the men of the world do, who say, Then may a man follow his evil desires, and live in sin, since, from the unchangeable love of God, he can never come into condemnation. He knows that wherever God bestows his grace on the soul, it excites an unfeigned hatred of sin, and an ardent desire for holiness. "I will put my fear in their hearts, and they shall not depart from me?" grant that Antinomians, from the declaration of the free and un

I

changeable grace of God in the Gospel, argue for a liberty to live licentiously; but why? because they have never known" the grace of God in truth," and have "neither part nor lot in the matter." Since it is impossible that men can be saved but by the free, uncon ditional gift of this grace in Christ Jesus (unconditional, I say, for faith and repentance, are not conditions on our part, but fruits of this grace bestowed on us), shall the ministers of Christ hide its freeness and fulness from the world, lest they should turn it to licentiousness; as if they were wiser than God, and knew better how to deal with our fallen race than he does? God forbid. F.

Tothe Editorofthe Christian Observer.

THE form of abjuration of Popery used in Ireland, in the numerous conversions to Protestantism now in progress in that country, having been published in the journals, it may be interesting to many of your readers to compare with it the form used in the French Protestant Church in London.

The minister addresses the convert as follows:

My brethren,-Truth cannot be found in two communions whose doctrine and practises are opposite to each other: and the sacred Scriptures teach us, that there is but one bride of Jesus Christ; but one road which leads to heaven; but one church. Therefore they who are concerned in earnest about their salvation, are in conscience bound to abandon a religion in which they perceive errors, and to embrace that which is conformed to the word of God, and consequently But as this step is one of infinite importance, it should not be

true.

taken without good reasons, after having well considered the matter, and without any temporal inducement. You then, N. N., who wish to leave the communion of Rome, to unite yourself to our church,-

"Do you renounce the traditions which the Romish Church believes should be added to the sacred Scriptures, in order to render our faith more perfect; and do you be lieve, on the contrary, that every thing which is essential to religion. either as respects doctrine, or wor ship, or morality, is contained in the pure word of God, which is contained in the writings of the Old and New Testaments?

"Do you renounce the supremacy of the pope; that is, his rank as head and universal oracle of the church, and also the infallibility of any assembly or of any council whatever?

"Do you renounce indulgences, the merit of good works, auricular confession, and purgatory; so as to depend for the remission of your sins, and the hope of your salvation, only upon the free mercy of God,

gulation of mind, and that no false or partial habits of thinking or judging, on subjects perhaps intrinsically of little importance, should betray us into errors in that which is most important of all." And would, that all might comply with his earnest invitation, and with himself "shew that they are guided in their thoughts and pursuits by a reference to that state in which they are to exist hereafter, and, in comparison of that end, despise and contemn all immediate utility and present reward." "When once," he says, we admit indeed, the existence of a God, and the continuance of the soul's existence to eternity; these two considerations at once impress a character of comparative insignificance on all that does not concern these great matters, and on all that can be done in the way of result attained in this world." Such thoughts from time to time break forth in his sermon; and no suggestions could be more worthy of the Christian, or more beneficial to men who, from their education, are supposed to be literary.

66

But in regard to the subjects to which study is to be almost entirely limited, to the description of the value of scientific acquirements, and some other points, I must candidly express dissent from Mr. Rose's positions. Notwithstanding his assurance, that he does not "desire to check the desires of the human mind for improvement,” I submit that such is the tendency of his discourse. He says, for example, "It is not accurate knowledge of facts, it is not knowledge itself, but the process by which it is attained, the discipline, the exercise, &c. which elevate the mind of man." In the paragraph immediately following, he adds, "The only mark of progress in the species discoverable is a gift bestowed;" but this, he remarks, "is wholly unconnected with man's own efforts, and holds out no prospect and no promise to them." This is not only discouraging, but amounts, I think, to a denial

of many of the promises of Scripture. His apprehensions, on the topic of science, I consider to be far from correct. It is implied by him in several places, that immediate utility is the only object of science; that it strengthens none of the faculties except the memory; that meditation is a stranger to it; and that we are thereby "engaged in a constant and feverish activity of unmeaning exertion." I regret that such language is frequently used in this sermon. Such is not the effect of either of the discourses which I am about to recommend, though they are both admirably guarded and cautious.

I regret also that Mr. Rose should have said, that" with us the spirit of religious enthusiasm, except in the lowest and most disgusting form...is departed." Most sincerely as Mr. Rose may prefer the principles of some, whose zeal may be culpably lukewarm, this sentence is still both injudicious and unjust.

In regard to some of the leading remarks on the present overwhelming spirit of accumulation, which is most bitterly to be lamented, Mr. Rose must allow, that classical and literary attainments are made subservient to the ruling passion for wealth, not less than scientific ones. No judicious person would speak against literary talents, because they may be misapplied; why then, because science may in like manner be perverted, is she to be thrust from her legitimate seat of honour? But what I chiefly lament is, that Mr. Rose has not told us plainly what he is attacking. In reading his discourse, the question occurs, Is all this meant against the Cambridge system, or the projected London University? I incline to think the latter; and I flatter myself, that the overwrought descants which we hear of upon the march of intellect, and "the unbounded prospect of intellectual improvement to future ages," have not many supporters in our alma mater; yet surely, it is unworthy the dignity of Cambridge to express a