to feel, who have lived as without God in the world, who have exalted to his throne all the vanities of time and sense, and have in fact been a god unto ourselves, doing our own will, finding our own pleasure, and seeking our own glory? What I say ought such persons to feel?" To which we reply-nothing, if they hold his opinions, for they may then fairly turn round upon him and say, "however bad we may be, we are not to blame, for we came into the world in the last state of depravity, and have been ever since bound hand and foot, and perfectly incapable of helping ourselves."

NOTE 6.-to p. 29, 1.3.-" of the mind."-There is only one quotation from Scripture, of those advanced by Mr. Simeon in defence of his opinions on original sin, which has not been already examined in the text of the preceding sermons, and that is Rom. 8. 7; "The carnal mind is enmity against God, for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be." No doubt "the carnal mind," or, (to render the words more accurately,) "the minding of the flesh," the "making provision for the flesh to fulfil the lusts thereof," as the Apostle elsewhere expresses himself in the same epistle, (Rom. 13. 14.) the employing our whole attention in devising ways and means for the gratification of the sensual appetite, to the neglect and perversion of the intellectual and moral part of our nature-this is a conduct opposed to the will of God, and the precepts of self-regulation which he has given us; nor can such a principle of action, while it continues to operate, be possibly “subject" to a law, to which in its very nature and exercise it is adverse. But what has all this to do in proving the totality of human corruption? the text does not even imply the existence of natural corruption at all; it only states the necessary effects of sensuality, wherever found, and however occasioned.

Having done with Scripture, Mr. Simeon has recourse to the argumentum ad hominem. In p. 28, he asks his hearers á long list of questions, the substance of which is this," do you find that you are absolutely perfect." He reasonably enough anticipates that they will answer in the negative; and thence he concludes, that men by nature are as corrupt as he

has described them. But is there then no medium between a state of absolute perfection, and one of total corruption; and, if there be, what will be the value of Mr. Simeon's argument? not to mention that, even if he had succeeded in proving his auditors as depraved as he could wish, it would still remain to be enquired how they became so; whether merely from their innate corruption, or partly also from their own voluntary indulgence in sin.

NOTE 7.-top. 37, note-Mr. Simeon p.43, 1.14.-Notwithstanding these concessions however, Mr. Simeon appears to have a manifest partiality for sudden conversions, and especially when attended with symptoms of violence; so much so indeed that it induces him to superadd these attributes, without any authority, to conversions mentioned in Scripture. Thus he tells us that, on the day of Pentecost, "three thousand persons at once were crying out with great agony of mind." (p. 66, last line.) The Evangelist however relates nothing of this tremendous and simultaneous outcry, which is purely a creature of Mr. Simeon's imagination. From the narrative of the sacred writer indeed we cannot even infer that three thousand persons were assembled together on this occasion, though it is not improbable, but he only states that in the course of the same day" (Acts 2. 41.) that number was converted; and of those, who were converted by Peter's sermon, he merely, informs us that they said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles," (and with perfect calmness for any thing that appears to the contrary,) "Men and brethren what shall we do?" (v. 37.) They had been convinced of the truth of Christianity by argu ments, which perfectly satisfied their reason, and at the same time strongly awakened their consciences, and they naturally enquire, like sober-minded men, what they must do to make their peace with God at present, and to please him in future. This is something very different from the conversions described in the Journals of Whitfield and Wesley, to which however Mr. Simeon's representation would make it seem very similar. NOTE 8.-to p. 41, note.-So likewise Mr. Simeon: "This change far exceeds the power of fallen man." (p. 39, l. 11.)

Now this is true, as far as it goes, of spiritual renovation in general, but then it is not the whole truth: man cannot make himself what God would have him to be without the aid of divine grace, but it does not therefore follow that he can do nothing for himself; he may pray and labour, either to reform or improve his heart, and such exertions will be rewarded with a necessary supply of God's assistance. (Luke 11. 13.) Now the total omission of this latter consideration we hold to be highly pernicious, and likely to lead to the consequences enumerated in the text.

NOTE 9.-to p. 46, l. 26.-" professing Christians."-This consideration at once disposes of all the arguments grounded on our Lord's conversation with Nicodemus, a Jew, referring, as it plainly does throughout, to the case of persons, who had not as yet embraced Christianity.

NOTE 10.-to p. 47, l. 26.—“ external instrument."-The opponents of baptismal regeneration have one very short method of proving that Baptism cannot be the same thing with Regeneration, but it is unhappily chargeable with two grievous logical errors-the one is, that of reasoning in a circle, and the other, that of taking for granted the very point in dispute. They set out with assuming that Baptism is not necessarily attended with any spiritual benefits: they thus reduce it to a mere rite, and then they prove, (incontrovertibly no doubt,) that this same bare external rite of washing or sprinkling, cannot possible come up to the scriptural idea of Baptism. This is the fallacy which runs through the whole of Mr. Simeon's remarks on our Lord's conversation with Nicodemus, as where he says: Admitting that he, (our Lord,) insisted on the necessity of being born of water, he insisted also on being born of the Spirit, in order that he might convince Nicodemus tha he spoke, not of an outward and carnal, but of an inward and spiritual change." (p. 41, 1. 4.) And again; "On the sup position that he speaks of a spiritual birth, his reasons are clear and forcible; that, which is born of the flesh, is flesh, and therefore unfit for a spiritual kingdom; but that, which is born. of the Spirit, is spirit, and exactly suited to that kingdom which he was about to establish." (7. 10.) Thus then he makes a

separation, without any authority, between the external rite and its internal efficacy, and then shews that, what is predicated of them taken together, cannot be predicated of one of them taken by itself, and hence he infers, that this one does not include both; so that it is at length proved, that, what in the first instance was assumed as a part, and treated accordingly, is and can be only a part. He must be a desperate sceptic indeed who will deny the conclusion of this reasoning at least, but at the same time the reader will be pleased to observe, that the only question which called forth all this logic, namely, whether Baptism and Regeneration are in their nature separable, remains precisely in statu quo.-Mr. Simeon however, says, in reference to that contested text, (John 3. 5;)" It were much to be wished that those, who will have Baptism to be the new birth, would take this passage and try what sense they can make of it according to their own interpretation." (p. 42, 7. 14.) We are very ready to make the experiment and to abide by the result, understanding by the word Baptism, not as Mr. Simeon does, merely an outward work of man upon the body," but such a work duly performed, in obedience to the express institution of the divine Founder of our religion, and depending for its inherent efficacy, solely on the authority of his institution. According to this sense of the term, the text in question may be thus paraphrased: "Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit,"-unless he be initiated into that spiritual religion which I am come to establish, by the rite which I have appointed for the purpose, which will give him a covenanted and an assured title to the blessings of the Christian dispensation, to the necessary spiritual assistance for performing the conditions of that covenant in spirit and in truth, and to an heavenly inheritance as the reward of such obedience, "he cannot enter into the kingdom of God"-he can neither be a subject of my kingdom here, nor can he have any claim to eternal happiness hereafter." This sense of the passage is surely an intelligible one, nor is it chargeable with the consequences frequently imputed to it, (see note 15,) of making Baptism the only thing necessary to salvation, for our Lord

is here merely alluding to the privileges conferred in the first instance by Baptism, and the results to which they will finally lead, if they are diligently preserved and competently im◄ proved; he does not take into account the case of their being afterwards lost; he merely states the provision, which God has made on his part for human salvation, supposing men not to be deficient on theirs. We have enlarged on this text for the purpose of complying with the requisition made by Mr. Simeon, and of shewing, (what he considers to be impossible,) that it is capable of a very natural and rational interpretation on the principles of those persons, who differ from him in his views of baptismal regeneration, although we have already seen, (note 9,) that this text is perfectly incapable of deciding the main question, the necessity of a new birth to baptized aud professing Christians. An observation of Dr. Hey, which we have met with since writing the preceding Sermons, will illustrate and confirm the sentiments advanced in them and in this note. After shewing that, in the language of our Church, Baptism and Regeneration are convertible terms, he adds, "Some may apprehend danger from this remark, as if it let down Regeneration to mean only the external form of Bap tism, but I do not see how it does that. "When shall we complete our contract; when shall we sign and seal?" These being used for one another do not let down contracting to the mere outward ceremony of sealing. The outward part in a symbolical act must always imply the thing signified, that is, in Baptism, putting on the new man, (Ephes. 4, 22, 23, 24.) or acquiring the true Christian disposition. When we speak of entering on any state of life, as by manumission, indentures, marriage, &c. we take for granted the ordinary effects; they pass unmentioned, because it seems needless to mention them."-Hey's Theological Lectures.-Book 4. Art. 9. Sect. 24.

NOTE 11.-to p. 48, note 2.-" "Tis abundantly evident that the common phrase of the Jews was to call the Baptism of a proselyte his Regeneration or new birth. And the Christians did in all antient times continue the use of this name for