fourth place, there is the state of salvation' which includes those who are not merely nominal, but real Christians, who are not only believers but workers; those, in a word, who shall actually be saved.

Confusion must ever attend the detail of a system which, in setting out, confounds things essentially different. Now even if we were, for courtesy, to concede so far to his Lordship, as not to insist upon the second of the above named distinctions, his own words expressly establish the justness of the other three; namely,-1. The state of all mankind rendered salvable by the death of Christ, and by universal preventing grace:-2. The state of those who believe, and are justified by their faith, yet without becoming real Christians :-3. and lastly, the state of real Christians, who alone are truly safe, and within the pale of the invisible Church. What then are we to do? This two-fold distinction is given us, as the true and perfect solution of all difficulties. We attempt to apply it to particular instances; but between the two-fold distinction proposed and the threefold distinction implied, we are led into an inextricable maze; and are fain to revert, were it only for the sake of logical comfort, to our own views of the subject.

We read, "He that believeth, and is baptized, shall be saved: "but he that believeth not, shall be condemned." "He that be"lieveth on the Son, hath everlasting life; and he that believeth "not the Son, shall not see life, but the wrath of God abideth

on him." From such declarations we infer, that those who believe, are in a state of salvation, and that those who believe not, born wherever it may be, baptized or unbaptized, professing Christianity or rejecting it, are alike in a state of condemnation. If now it be asked, But who are they that believe? we answer, Those whose faith produces obedience-" worketh by love." Nor do we find in the Scriptures, either occasion or warrant for any

they held the faith, not to hold it in unrighteousness. St. James was not endeavouring to convince them how they might become Christians, such they were already; he was only urging them to continue in the Faith, to grow in Grace. They were therefore assured, that though they believed, they could not be perfect without obedience; that though justified, they would not be saved without works. Perfectly then consistent with the rest of Scripture, and entirely reconcileable with each other, are the assertions of both the Apostles. Be it only remembered, that St. Paul was laying the foundation of a Christian faith that he was reasoning with them who had mistaken the very grounds on which it was to be erected; whereas St. James was building up the superstructure, and was calling upon nominal but not real Christians, to make their salvation sure, by practising as well as professing the religion of their Lord and Master." (pp. 24, 25.)

further distinction. There is one state of condemnation; there is one state of salvation; and this salvation is the consequence of that faith which is "the Gift of God," and which, being His gift, invariably distinguishes its possessor by true holiness of heart and of life. In the day, therefore, when those who have "believed through grace," shall publicly receive that second "gift of God"-eternal life, it will appear that they, and they alone, are provided with those "fruits of righteousness," whereby they will be externally justified before men and angels.

The Bishop of Chester, however, derives from his Bible, a doctrine widely different, not merely in terms, but, as we shall presently see, in the impression it is adapted to produce upon the mind. Through faith,' he remarks, and that alone, we obtain the appointed means of salvation, and are admitted into the pale or fold of Christ.' Now, into which of his two states,' is it that we are introduced by this faith alone? Not into the second; for that belongs only to those who have added to their faith the works by which they will ultimately be saved. Is it then into the first state'? If so, in what state are men previous to their exercising this faith? In what state, we must repeat the question, are those numerous individuals in this country, for instance, who, being duly baptized and confirmed, have already obtained the appointed means of salvation, have already been admitted into the pale or fold of Christ, and have already been solemnly certified of the favour of God and the remission of their sins; concerning whom, notwithstanding, we are sure his Lordship would be ashamed to confess his conviction that they were ever the subjects of any such mental process as he would dare call faith. His Lordship must very well know, that of the many thousands of young persons upon whose heads he has himself laid hands,' a large number have been, (if indeed the state of the mind be a matter of any significance when the rites of the Church are in question,) in a state of yet undisturbed childish thoughtlessness; so that if they were at all under the influence of a sentiment of the serious cast, it was nspired solely by the title, the attire, the impressive solemnity of manner, and the mysterious touch of his Lordship: if they have indeed had any faith, its real object was not the Great Shepherd and Bishop of souls-but-the Bishop of Chester.

These certified' but inconsiderate youths then, have they, or have they not, really received the remission of sins,' justification,' and the regenerating influence of the Holy Spirit? Are they in a state of salvation, or of condemnation? It is, surely, one or the other. If, after all, it be the latter, do we go beyond the cold propriety of truth, in affirming that this same certifying,' is indeed a cruel-an appalling IMPO

SITION? But if it be the former, we must then ask under which member of his Lordship's alternative they are to be placed, so as to be distinguished from such as those to whom St. James wrote, viz. believers, but not real Christians.' Or what takes place what is it that remains to be added to them, when they, as individuals, become the subjects of that faith through which alone we obtain the appointed means of salvation, and are ' admitted into the pale or fold of Christ'?

We have sincerely endeavoured to fix upon the precise doctrinal intention of this sermon, but really we have not been able to discover a meaning that can be considered consistent, either with itself, or with the principles and practices of the Church to which its right reverend Author is attached. This is a matter, however, in which we have no concern: his Lordship must 'see to it. In the concluding paragraph he has undesignedly afforded the means of instituting a very fair and very striking comparison between his doctrine and that of the Bible. Had we attempted to argue from the nature of the case, that the disguised Pelagianism which the Bishop of Chester defends, can neither meet the wants of the alarmed conscience, nor afford the ground of a permanent hope consistent at once with holiness and with humility, much might no doubt have been said in reply, and the attempt would perhaps have been imputed to a narrow spirit of uncharitableness. There is however at present, neither need for circuitous deductions, nor room for circuitous replies.

After' attributing' to the prevalence of the opinions which his Lordship attempts to confute, among many other bad and horrible results, the growing hardihood in crime, through which convicted assassins so often deny their guilt, though almost in the presence of their Maker,' he adds:

• May these fanatical delusions prove a warning voice to my country, before it be too late. May they convince us of the alarming effects, and evil tendency of Enthusiasm: May they keep us in the sober steady path of that rational religion, under which this nation has attained its present proud pre-eminence, and in the practice of which, our fathers lived and died. Spiritual assurance becometh no one of the sons of men. All are sinners. The best of created beings should entertain an awful looking for of judgement to come; must close his accounts, with hope indeed, through Christ, but with a hope still trembling.' p. 32.

His Lordship can surely complain of no unfairness, if we assume the concluding sentences of this quotation, as containing an undesigned confession relative to the amount and the nature of the comfort which he is able to derive from his notion of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Thus, whatever some persons may say of the joy with which they anticipate the coming of their Lord, and the time when " the righteous shall shine forth

"as the sun, in the kingdom of their Father," with His views of the doctrine of man's Salvation,' he professes to await that day, under "an awful looking for of the judgement to << come. Others may pretend to be "looking for, and hasting "unto the coming of the day of God;" but he acknowledges that a spiritual assurance' like this, that goes so far beyond the awful looking for of judgement, is a happiness to which he dares not aspire. Others, indeed, while they look with a single and undiverted intentness upon the person, the work, and the promise of their God and Saviour, and while they confess themselves" nothing and less than nothing," think that they honour the person, the work, and the promise of this Saviour, in affirming, that they "know whom they have believed," and are sure that he will give to them, as to all "who love his appearing," "a crown of righteousness." Thus, we say, some may speak, thus many have spoken; but he must still be thinking of closing his accounts,' with hope indeed, through Christ, but with a hope still trembling,—a hope which must never amount to the 'unbecoming' sentiment of spiritual assurance,'-a hope which never dispels this "awful looking for of judgement to come.'

And we grant that however comfortless, however distracting such a hope, if hope it must be called, will prove to one whose daily thoughts are conversant with death and the infinite alternative which lies beyoud, it is all that can be derived from the system which this sermon defends. Our great moralist has defined the boundaries of a hope thus founded, with his accustomed precision. No man, he argues, can be sure that he has experienced that measure of repentance, or performed that number of good works, which are made the condition of salvation, and therefore, no man can be sure that he shall be saved. Dr. Samuel Johnson, it is well known, consistently preserved through life that reasonable gloom with which such a doctrine must inspire the thoughtful mind.*

Mankind, it is true, are saved by grace, but, according to this system, men, as individuals, are saved by repentance and

* We are told, indeed, that in his last moments, Dr. Johnson happily trespassed beyond the bounds of his system, and that For some. time before his death, all his fears were calmed and absorbed by 'the prevalence of his faith, and his trust in the merits and propitiation of the Redeemer. He talked often about the necessity of ⚫ faith in the sacrifice of the Redeemer, as necessary, beyond all good works whatever, for the salvation of mankind.' We may ask, by the by, did this approach towards spiritual assurance,' result from the persuasion that his repentance and good deeds were such as included the conditions of salvation, or from a clearer apprehension of the great doctrine of Justification by Faith alone?

good works. What can it avail a man, therefore, to believe that he has been redeemed by the precious blood of Christ? What can it avail him, unless he had a miraculous attestation from Omniscience, that the bottle of his tears,' and the tale of his deeds, have both risen upon their several scales, up to the line which divides the saved from the lost?

It must by no means be affirmed that the measure of spiritual comfort actually enjoyed, is always proportioned to the degree of attention paid to religion, or even to the habitual influence of unseen objects upon the mind. But we think it may safely be asserted, that the degree of hope and of spiritual comfort with which the mind is contented, or beyond which it does not in fact make any advance, is ever most exactly proportioned to the rate of this attention, and the extent of this influence. The fervent Christian, who truly lives for eternity, is either happy in his hope, or restless and sorrowing under its temporary obscuration. He has learned that not merely his comfort, but his advancing in holiness, his victory over the world, his strength and readiness for usefulness in the world, and especially his genuine humility, all keep pace with the brightness and steadiness of his hope. But his hope does sometimes decline, and he has also learned invariably to trace these declensions to the indulgence of a vain complacency in his own attainments, to selfrighteous fear and unbelief, to the eager pursuit of created good, or to an exposure to some unedifying influence. The Christian, we say, may be deprived for a time of the comfort of his hope; he may lose sight of that which he still considers as the pearl among his graces and the talisman of his profession; but his state of mind under such circumstances, differs as widely from the vague uneasiness of the half-believing worldling, of the self-pleased but ever fearful Pharisee, or of the inconsistent professor, as his good hope is unlike to their negative comfort.

It is thus then, that the Christian derives from what may be termed a necessity of the heart, a practical criterion of religious truth. We readily grant, that if the phraseology of Christ and his Apostles be assumed as the disguise of a decent deism,-if the great objects of faith be viewed habitually and chiefly as the mere matter and topic of professional engagements, -if religion occupy little more than the refuse hours of a life engrossed by the splendours, the hopes, or the pleasures of this present world,-if its exterior duties are punctually discharged with the latent intent of maintaining a title to the distant, indispensable, but undesired good;-then, we say, it may do well enough to talk of closing accounts with a hope which never casteth out fear; a hope, at the best, but evenly balanced against the awful looking for of judgement to come. But a hope like