glad when I could have opportunity with any person alone, whether in the house or on the way, and failed not to improve almost every opportunity to speak to them about their souls' concerns. But it was with me as with others; in about a year I much declined, and grew more heartless to divine things. The third and last time that I met with something special, was a sort of double season, viz:-in 1774, 1776, and 1777. In the first of those years there was a special revival of religion, as I have before mentioned. I was glad of the religious appearance, and tried every way in my power to promote it. But I was soon taken sick with an awful and shocking fit of sickness, in which nobody expected me to live. In this sickness, I had remarkable views of divine things, and received uncommon tokens of favour from my people, who were then full of religion: and when, after a considerable time I was able to preach, both I and my people seemed to have some special impressions of divine realities. In this sickness I have just mentioned, I had a greater sense of spiritual things, greater willingness to die, and greater submission to God's will, to lay upon me what pain or suffering he pleased, while I should continue in life, than I ever had before. I had a distressing season of pain, but felt quite willing that God should lay upon me more or less, just as he pleased. I had awful and affecting views of the dreadful case of sinners falling into the hands of an angry God. I had also what to me were remarkable and surprising views of God's having the devils in chains, limited and controlled, so that they could do nothing but what God permitted; and upon the whole chose they should do.* The Editor feels constrained to mention some circumstances attending this sickness of his father, which are not adverted to in the sketch. The Editor was In the fall of the year 1776, I was again taken sick and brought very low, yet retained my reason, as I did in the beforementioned fit of sickness. In this latter turn of illness, my mind was much employed on divine things. But I found more difficulty to be quite resigned and satisfied under the pains and distresses of bodily disease, than I had in my former sick then at that period of life when impressions of the deepest and most lasting kind are usually made on the memory, and he has a distinct recollection of the following facts, as to their substance. His father's illness commenced, or rather rose to its height, by what appeared to be an apoplectic fit. When he came out of this, all his symptoms seemed to threaten speedy dissolution. He was, however, in the perfect possession of his intellectual faculties, and fully aware of his situation. He requested his eldest daughter to read to him a portion of St. John's gospel,-it is believed that it was the 17th chapter. The hearing of this produced in him a kind of holy rapture. The day on which he was at the worst, and on the evening of which he had his family collected at his bed-side, and gave them what he and they considered as his last advice and admonition, and his final farewell-expecting fully to be in eternity before the next morning-the day preceding this evening, was one, when, what was denominated a PUBLICK LECTURE, was to take place in his church. Agreeably to the usage on such occasions, a number of neighbouring ministers came together, and a large congregation was collected; it being a time, as stated in the sketch, of a revival of religion among the people. In place of the usual preaching, or exhortation, the time was spent by the ministers in prayer with the people, with short addresses between the several devotional exercises: and such prayers-such intercessions-such pleadings at the throne of mercy-that God would spare a pastor, now in the meridian of his life and usefulness, and blessed with a revival of religionhave, it is believed, been but seldom equalled, perhaps never exceeded. The answer was as signal as the exercises were singular. The man who expected to be in eternity before morning-an expectation in curred was, in the morning, free from alwhich physicians as well as friends conmost every threatening symptom of his disease; and his recovery, though gradual, was regularly progressive, till his usual health was restored. This record is made, under the impression that it had been wrong to omit it. EDIT. ness. And in this sickness my thoughts ran much on the experience and views I had at college, of being willing to bear eternal pain and misery for the glory of God. I now found it difficult, and perceived there was a difference between actually feeling pain, and the thoughts of enduring it when it is absent. But on the whole, I was fully sensible that the resignation, contentment and satisfaction, in pain and misery, depends wholly on the views and perceptions that are in the mind. That the soul may have such a view and sense of God, of justice and desert, as will swallow up and quite overcome bodily pain: and that without some such views, granted by God as a special favour and help to the soul, pain and misery will excite fretfulness, murmuring, and even quarrelling with the ways of God. In this sickness I had remarkable views of the difference between the church and the world, and how much Christ regards his church, or true believers, above all and every thing in the world beside. That Christ's kingdom is not of this world, and that he cares little how things go in the kingdoms of the world, compared with his regard to what they are in his church; and I had clear and strong views of the duty of ministers of the gospel to be wholly engaged to promote the kingdom of Christ, or true religion, in the hearts and practice of men. After recovering health, I by degrees lost the brightness and clearness of these views, and came to my usual frame of mind; though I hope I retain a considerable sense of these divine things to this time. August, 1777.* (To be continued.) *At this date the narrative part of the Sketch, as written by its author, closes. The subject of it lived nearly thirteen years after it was written; and it is the purpose of the Editor to continue the biography of his father to the time of his THE PRESENT STATE OF THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH, No. VIII. In our last number, our object was to show that the General Assembly, in disposing of the case of Mr. Barnes, acted in a novel and unconstitutional manner.-That the Assembly assumed the case as a court, and ended it as a deliberative body that it was begun presbyterially, and terminated congregationally. It is our present object to let our readers know-for we are persuaded many of them have not yet known-what the case really and truly was; and to make some remarks on the report of the committee, which the Assembly adopted as the award in this case. We see not in what way the case in question can be made known, so well and so unobjectionably, as by inserting the reference of the Presbytery, in the very terms in which it was laid before the General Assembly. This will indeed occupy a considerable space in our pages; but we consider it as a matter of no inferior importance that the nature of this business should be well understood in the Presbyterian Church; and we therefore bespeak a careful perusal of the following documents from all our readers, and especially from those who are office-bearers in the church. REFERENCE OF THE CASE OF THE REV. ALBERT BARNES TO THE GE- Resolved, That the whole of the proceedings, from first to last, of this Presbytery, in the case of the Rev. Albert Barnes, be carried by reference to the next General Assembly; and that that judicatory be, and it hereby is, respectfully death. But in the mean time, some of his remarks on several topicks, which he has connected with the Sketch of his life, will follow the above. and earnestly requested to adjudicate upon, and finally to issue the same, in such manner as, in its wisdom, it shall judge to be most conducive to the purity and peace of the church, and to the promotion of the glory of God. And whereas, in considering and acting on the case of Mr. Barnes, in this Presbytery, a serious and unhappy difference of opinion has arisen, as well in regard to several questions of constitutional order, as in relation to doctrinal orthodoxy; and considering, moreover, that the subjects which have occasioned controversy and division in this Presbytery may, and do, produce the like lamentable effects in other Presbyteries, so that it has become a concern of deep interest to the whole Presbyterian Church, that a correct course of procedure in relation to these subjects should be clearly ascertained and distinctly delineated; therefore, it is further "Resolved, That this Presbytery, agreeably to a constitutional privilege, do hereby most respectfully and earnestly entreat the Supreme Judicatory of our Church, (however it may be thought that some of the points, hereafter specified, have already been settled, by the constitution of the Church and the decisions of the General Assembly,) to express an unequivocal opinion on the subjects embraced by the following inquiries, viz: "1. Whether it follows as a matter of course, and of constitutional right, when any member in good and regular standing with one Presbytery, presents to another Presbytery unquestionable evidence of such standing, and requests to be admitted as a member of this latter Presbytery, that he must be received, without farther question or inquiry: Or whether, on the contrary, it is not the privilege of every Presbytery, to judge, primarily, of the qualifications of each, and all, of its own members; and to inquire and examine, (if it be deemed proper so to do) not only into their moral character, but into their soundness in the faith, and other ministerial qualifications; and receive applicants, or refuse to receive them, according as reception or rejection may appear to the Presbytery to be demanded, by a regard to its own welfare, and to the purity and peace of the Church: it being understood, that every decision of a Presbytery in such cases, is subject to be appealed from, or complained of, to a higher judicatory, by any individual who may consider himself to have been aggrieved or injured; and the Presbytery to be liable to have its doings in such cases reversed and censured; provided, that on an appeal or complaint, or on any other review of its proceedings by a higher Judicatory, such Presbytery shall be found to have acted oppressively, capriciously, partially, or erroneously. "2. Whether, by the constitution of the Presbyterian Church, it is not competent to any Presbytery, to take up and examine any printed publication, and to pronounce it to be erroneous and dangerous, if so they find it, without, in the first place, commencing a formal prosecution of the author, even supposing it to be known and admitted that the author is a member of its own body; or whether a Presbytery, in every such case, must, when disposed to act on the same, forthwith commence a formal prosecution of the author of the publication, which is believed to contain erroneous and dangerous opinions, or doctrines. "3. Whether, when a case is in process before a Presbytery, a party implicated, or his friends in his behalf, can, by objecting to the process as unconstitutional, or to the manner in which it is conducted as irregular, and by taking an appeal, on both or either of these grounds, to a higher Judicatory, stay the process of the Presbytery, till the constitutional question, or that of order, shall have been decided by the higher Judicatory: or whether a Presbytery, fully satisfied that both the process commenced, and the manner in which it is conducted, are clearly constitutional and orderly, may not proceed with the party to whom the process relates, although such party, or his friends, may object to the measure as unconstitutional and disorderly, and express a desire to appeal from it to a higher Judicatory; it being understood and admitted, that when the process is terminated, it is the unquestionable right of any party, to take an appeal, or make a complaint, to a higher Judicatory, and to seek a reversal of the whole proceedings, believed by the appealing or complaining party to be unconstitutional or disorderly. "4. Do the doctrinal standards of the Presbyterian Church embrace the Larger and Shorter Catechisms, as integral and essential parts of the same: Or is that which is entitled "The Confession of Faith," in the book containing our standards, to be considered as alone obligatory: So that in taking his ordination vows, a minister in the Presbyterian Church, after solemnly professing "sincerely to receive and adopt the Confession of Faith of this Church," is still at liberty to object to, and reject, certain parts of the Catechisms, without any implication of his sincerity or orthodoxy. "5. Whether, in the judgment of the General Assembly, the objectionable points of doctrine, found by this Presbytery in the printed sermon of the Rev. Albert Barnes, entitled "The Way of Salvation," as expressed in their minutes of December last, have been truly and justly found. If the finding of the Presbytery has been erroneous, it is humbly requested, that the errors may be pointed out: and if the Assembly decide that the Presbytery are to act farther in this important case, that the manner in which their proceedings ought to be conducted and issued, may be distinctly indicated. "Resolved, That the Commissioners of this Presbytery to the next General Assembly, be, and they are hereby instructed and directed, to lay the foregoing statement, with the book of records of this Presbytery, the minutes of the last meeting of the Synod of Philadelphia, and a copy of Mr. Barnes' printed sermon, entitled "The Way of Salvation," before the Assembly at an early day after the commencement of the sessions of that Judicatory, in the coming month; and use their best endeavours to obtain a full discussion of the points submitted, and an explicit decision of the Assembly in regard to the same. "Ordered, That the stated clerk, as speedily as may be practicable, transcribe the Minutes of the present meeting of Presbytery into the book of records, and then deliver the said book to some one of the Commissioners of the Presbytery to the next General Assembly, that the same may be laid before that Judicatory, agreeably to the foregoing instructions." That our readers may know what were the objectionable points of doctrine found by the Presbytery in the printed sermon of Mr. Barnes, to which there is a reference in the foregoing 5th particular, they are here given in detail, and as they appear on the Minutes of the Presbytery. FINAL DECISION. "The Presbytery of Philadelphia, agreeably to the direction of the Synod at their recent meeting in Lancaster, having considered the sermon of the Rev. Albert Barnes, entitled the WAY OF SALVATION, are of the opinion that it contains speculations of dangerous tendency on some of the principal points in Christian theology, and ought not therefore to be sanctioned as expressing that view of the great truths of God's word, which the Presbyterian church has uniformly adopted and which is exhibited in their authorized Confession of Faith. "In stating the doctrine of original sin, the author employs a phraseology which is calculated to mislead, and which appears evidently to conflict with the spirit and letter of the standards of the Presbyterian church. "1. He denies that the posterity of Adam are responsible or answerable for Adam's first sin, which he committed as Ch. Adv.-VOL. X. the federal head of his race. Thus, p. 6, 'Christianity does not charge on men crimes of which they are not guilty. It does not say, as I suppose, that the sinner is held to be personally answerable for the transgressions of Adam or of any other man. "Although the word transgressions is here used plurally, yet it is evident from the whole tenor of this division of the discourse, that the prime sin of Adam, which constituted his apostacy from God, is meant. Again, he says, p. 7, Neither the facts, nor any proper inference from the facts, affirm, that I am in either case personally responsible for what another man (referring to Adam) did before I had an existence. And he explicitly declares, that if God had charged upon mankind such a responsibility, it would have been clearly unjust, vide p. 6. The doctrine of responsibility here impugned is clearly expressed, Con. of F. cap. vi. 6. Every sin, both original and actual, being a transgression of the righteous law of God, and contrary thereunto, doth in its own nature bring guilt upon the sinner, whereby he is bound over to the wrath of God and curse of the law, and so made subject to death, with all miseries, spiritual, temporal, and eternal.' "2. In accordance with the above doctrine, that mankind are not responsible for Adam's sin, he affirms, p. 7, that 'Christianity affirms the fact, that in connexion with the sin of Adam, or as a result, all moral agents will sin, and sinning will die.' And then proceeds to explain the principle upon which the universality of sin is to be accounted for, by representing it to be the result of Adam's sin, in the same sense, as the misery of a drunkard's family is the result of his intemperance. Here it would seem, the author maintains that the same relationship subsists between every man and his family, as subsisted between Adam and his posterity; that the same principle of moral government applies to both cases alike, or in other words, that mankind hold no other relationship to Adam, than that of children to a natural progenitor. "The public, federal, or representative character of Adam, is thus denied, contrary to the explicit statement in the answer to the 22d Q. of Larg. Cat. The covenant being made with Adam as a public person, not for himself only, but for his posterity; all mankind descending from him by ordinary generation sinned in him, and fell with him, in that first transgression.' "3. He declares, p. 7, that the notion of imputing sin is an invention of modern times,' contrary to Con. of F. Chap. vi. 3, They being the root of all mankind, the guilt of this sin was imputed, and the same death in sin and corrupted nature conveyH ed to all their posterity, descending from them by ordinary generation.' "4. In p. 5, he admits that his language on the subject of original sin, differs from that used by the Confession of Faith on the same subject, and then accounts for this difference on the ground of the difficulty of affixing any clear and definite meaning to the expression we sinned in him and fell with him.' This expression he considers, as far as it is capable of interpretation, as 'intended to convey the idea, not that the sin of Adam is imputed to us, or set over to our account, but that there was a personal identity constituted between Adam and his posterity, so that it was really our act, and ours only, after all, that is chargeable on us.' "The whole of this statement is exceedingly incautious and improper. The language of the Confession of Faith on one of the cardinal doctrines is held up as obscure and unintelligible, or, if possessing any meaning, as expressing an absurdity. The framers of this confession are charged with the absurdity of maintaining the personal identity between Adam and his posterity, when their language conveys no more than a federal or representative relationship. This whole view of the doctrine of original sin, is, in the opinion of Presbytery, obscure, perplexed, fruitful of dangerous consequences, and, therefore, censurable. "The statements of this sermon on the doctrine of atonement, are also, in the opinion of Presbytery, in some important features, erroneous, and contrary to the orthodox views. "1. At p. 11. He says 'this atonement was for all men. It was an offering made for the race. It had not respect so much to individuals, as to the law and perfections of God. It was an opening of the way of pardon, a making forgiveness consistent, a preserving of truth, a magnify ing of the law, and had no particular reference to any class of men.' "Here it is denied that the atonement had any special relation to the elect, which it had not also to the non-elect. But if it be true that the atonement offered by Christ, had no 'respect to individuals,' 'no particular reference to any class of men,' upon what principle can it be regarded as a satisfaction to divine justice for the sins of men? or in what proper sense can Christ be considered as a vicarious sacrifice? Unless the atonement be a satisfaction for the sins of individuals, upon what principle can it open the way of pardon, make forgiveness consistent, preserve truth or magnify the law? The special reference of the atonement to a chosen people in opposition to this view is taught Con. of F. cap. viii. 5. The Lord Jesus, by his perfect obedience and sacrifice of himself, which he, through the Eternal Spirit, once offered up unto God, hath fully satisfied the justice of his Father, and purchased not only reconciliation, but an everlasting inheritance in the kingdom of heaven, for all those whom the Father hath given unto him.' Again, in answer to Q. 44 L. C. 'Christ executeth the office of a Priest in his once offering himself a sacrifice, without spot, to God, to be a reconciliation for the sins of his people,' &c. "2. At p. 11. He says, 'the atonement of itself secured the salvation of no one,' and again, the atonement secured the salvation of no one, except as God had promised his Son that he should see of the travail of his soul, and except on the condition of repentance and faith.' This language is incautious, and calculated to mislead, as it seems to imply that the atonement of itself does not secure its own application, and therefore may, by possibility, fail in its design. It is improper to suspend its efficacy upon conditions, when the conditions themselves are the results of its efficacy-See Con. of F. cap. viii. 8. 'To all those for whom Christ hath purchased redemption, he doth certainly and effectually apply and communicate the same; making intercession for them, and revealing unto them in and by the word the mysteries of salvation; effectually persuading them by his Spirit to believe and obey,' &c. "3. At p. 10. He unequivocally denies that Christ endured the penalty of the law. He did not indeed endure the penalty of the law, for his sufferings were not eternal, nor did he endure remorse of conscience; but he endured so much suffering, bore so much agony, that the Father was pleased to accept of it in the place of the eternal torments of all that should be saved.' Here it seems to be inculcated that Christ did not satisfy the precise claims which a violated law had upon the sinner, but that he did what might be considered a substitute for such satisfaction; or it is implied that God remitted or waived the original claim and accepted of something less. And that this is the sentiment of the author, is evident from his language, p. 11. "Christ's sufferings were severe, more severe than those of any mortal before or since; but they bore, so far as we can see, only a very distant resemblance to the pains of hell, the proper penalty of the law. Nor is it possible to conceive that the sufferings of a few hours, however severe, could equal pains, though far less intense, eternally prolonged. Still less that the sufferings of human nature, in a single instance, for the divine nature could not suffer, should be equal to the eternal pain of many millions.' Here it is affirmed that Christ was not capable of enduring that penalty which the justice of God had exacted of |