supernatural I admit and maintain; but surely the change of the temper, so that it shall regularly send forth, at the bidding of motives, supreme love to God, where, before, the same motives called forth nothing but enmity, is much the most wonderful part of the general change. Shall this be pronounced the mere effect of light operating invariably as a second cause? This would,

III. Detract greatly from the glory of God's power in regeneration. It would make the change no more evincive of special power than restoration to health or the taming of the wildness of youth. All that the Holy Ghost does upon this supposition, is to hold truth to the conscience and heart, and when the sinner struggles to get away, to press it upon him, until the truth by its own power, (which you say is God acting statedly through that second cause,) prevails. What then is the office of the Holy Ghost in this thing, distinct from the God of nature? Between that thumb and finger I hold a candle to a wet board, and keep it there against all attempts to remove it, until the board is dried and inflamed and consumed. Does that thumb and finger represent all that the Holy Ghost does in regeneration, beyond what is done by the God of nature acting through truth? That holding of truth to the mind is only conviction. The Holy Ghost then does nothing but convict, and truth regenerates. Where then is the exhibition of mighty power? The change is spoken of as a manifestation of as great power as the first creation. "For God who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ." It is spoken of as a manifestation of no less power than the resurrection and exaltation of Christ. "The eyes of your understanding being enlightened, that ye may know-what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power which he wrought in Christ when he raised him from the dead and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places." Now is this marvellous power confined to the mere work of conviction? Thousands are convicted, apparently as much as those who soon afterwards are subdued, and yet turn back; and no one speaks of the mighty power manifested in their case. Or is it in conversion that this wondrous power chiefly appears? But this calling forth of holy exercises by motives addressed to a taste already holy, evinces no greater power than the whole process of sanctification. But no such emphasis is laid on sanctification as indicative of mighty power. The greatness of the manifestation lies in subduing an enemy, and the chief point consists in breaking his temper.

But you say, these texts do speak of the power of God in sanctification. Then your cause is lost. For if sanctification evinces so much power, none will pretend that regeneration discovers less.

But I seem to hear you say again, It is none the less the power of God because it acts through a second cause: what is the influence of a second cause but the stated action of divine power? This is probably true of

physical or material causes, but not of such a cause as truth. Although physical causes and their essential properties must be allowed to have a real existence, or, like Berkeley, we blot out the material universe; yet, so far as man can see, they are nothing but stated antecedents, and their influence is only the stated action of divine power, and nothing intervenes between that power and the effect. All this is generally admitted by philosophers of second causes in the material world; but truth is quite a different thing, as I hope presently to show. In the mean time it is sufficient to say, that the power of God acting statedly through a second cause, is only what we see in the ordinary course of nature.

IV. But it seems utterly impossible that light should in any way be a second cause of this change, or that God should act through it as he does through a physical cause. There seems no conceivable way in which light can operate even as an instrument, but these four: first, by being the natural means of doctrinal belief and knowledge; secondly, by being the instrument of supernatural conviction, and, as a consequence, awaking natural remorse, fear, desire, and the like; thirdly, by drawing forth holy affections from a holy heart; fourthly, by calling forth from a selfish heart, enmity, and in its perverted forms and misapplications, hope, joy, love, and various other passions. Can you conceive of a fifth way in which it can act? in which it can change the natural temper? What is that way? Look at the thing on every side and tell me.

But you say, Rein me not up so close. If I cannot tell how, the Scriptures pronounce the fact, and your reasoning is only philosophy. But the Scriptures do not pronounce any fact in opposition to my theory. They sometimes speak of regeneration in the larger sense, as comprehending conversion and perhaps conviction, and then make the Gospel the instrument of the general change. To this I fully agree. But if a question is raised about the cause which changes the natural temper, no text of Scripture, I believe, contradicts the view which I have given. I press you then to tell me how light can possibly be a second cause, or even an instrument, of this change.

Í admit however, what philosophers generally allow, that in the physical world it is impossible to comprehend how any one of two events proceeds from the other as its cause, or in another department, how the will moves the body. Nor can we any better comprehend how the First Cause produces its effects. Yet we must not, on account of this ignorance, say that any thing may be the cause of any thing. A physical cause is defined to be a stated antecedent, through which God acts so uniformly that from the cause we may infer the effect. Thus if we see fire falling upon powder, we may confidently expect an explosion. In supernatural operations I know not whether I ought to speak of second causes; but even here the course is so far regular and adapted to the known constitution of things, that we can judge what are and what are not instruments. Not every antecedent is an instrument, even when it is a professed harbinger of the

event. Thus Moses' rod, though purposely stretched out over the sea, was in no sense the instrument by which the waters were divided. This was done as much by the immediate power of God as though there had been no antecedent. There was no stated influence lodged, or apparently lodged, in the antecedent. So, though conviction by the instrumentality of truth precedes regeneration, for purposes obviously distinct from any causality in the change, we must not assign to that antecedent the power of a second cause or instrument if in no conceivable way it can act as such. We can easily apprehend the fact that light can produce belief and knowledge, can work conviction, can call forth holy exercises from a holy heart, can call forth enmity from a heart unholy; but how it can change the hostile temper, no man can tell, no man can conceive. It certainly has no perceivable tendency that way. It cannot influence the event according to any law by which second causes are known to act. In a physical cause there is to all appearance an inherent power; and God's stated mode of action is so much in a line with it, that we commonly call it the action of the second cause; and it requires a mind well disciplined by philosophy to see that the power does not reside in the stated antecedent. So when truth is brought into clear view of a mind which God has prepared, it acts or seems to act by its own inherent power. Nothing but the truth is seen, nothing but the truth is felt. But where is there any such apparent tendency in truth to change the carnal temper? where more than in loathed provisions to transmute the aversion to relish? Though unable to explain the action of second causes, we may very often know that an antecedent is not a second cause. You may build a fence before you Sow your seed, and that erection may be a stated antecedent, but we know it was not the cause of the crop. The birth of the father is a stated antecedent to the birth of the son, but not a physical cause.

But you say, though, like a physical cause, truth can do nothing itself, yet God can give it energy by acting upon it as "the sword of the Spirit," or acting through it as he does through a physical cause. God act upon

truth! What possible meaning ean there be to such an expression? God produces truth by bringing to pass those facts and relations which are the subjects of it. He can produce new truths by giving existence to new facts and relations, and can make a proposition which was true of a subject yesterday, not true to-day, by changing that subject. But what has become truth, cannot, while continuing such, be changed in nature or form or pushed from place to place. Of physical causes God does indeed uphold the existence and properties by acting on them, and as their influence is only the stated exertion of his power, he acts through them. Not so with truth. Truth is what it is, and God can neither take from it nor add to it, but by changing the relations of things. The doctrines it contains, after being made true by the relations established in things, have in themselves, and without deriving it from any being, such a tendency to affect a given temper as they have. No being can add any thought or relation of thoughts, (without changing the relation of things,)-any energy or any property whatever, not found in them before. Truth, in this sense, is eternal and

immutable. God no more upholds the existence and properties of divine truth, (aside from sustaining the relations of things,) than he supports the eternal relations of mathematical verities. But it is not for him to create or destroy the truth that two and two make four. If any thing is done to carry divine truth to the mind, it must be done by an operation, not on truth, but on the mind itself. This is done even in sanctification. Where truth is really made an instrument, the power is not exerted on truth but on the mind. As it is however the truths of the word which enter the soul in conversion, the word is called "the sword of the Spirit;" but the hand which introduces it is not applied to the sword to open a passage for itself, but to the heart to remove its seven-fold plates of brass. What is it that keeps truth from the conscience and heart of a stupid sinner under the Gospel? Nothing but unbelief, arising from hatred of the truth. As then the hindrance lies in the heart and not in the truth, where but to the heart should the removing power be applied? And what saith the Scripture? Not, "I will exert my power upon truth," but, "I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you a heart of flesh."

Nor is there any conceivable way in which God can act through truth, as he does through physical causes whose influence is only the stated exertion of his power. The power of truth is its own, and all that can be done besides presenting it, is to prepare the mind to feel and love it and act under its influence,-its own proper influence after the mind is thus prepared.

In this respect truth is altogether different from a second cause in nature. And it is different in another respect, which renders the application to it of the name of second cause of doubtful propriety, even when it is used as an instrument. The stated antecedents in nature are called second causes because to a superficial view they possess the whole power which produces the effect. But truth surrounds itself with no such shadow of an efficient cause. It holds out no appearance of power beyond its own. It drops indeed its own underived influence upon a heart which God has prepared; but, of two convicted men, it pretends not to make the difference between him that loves and him that hates itself. By a power upon the mind it is made, in conviction, conversion, and sanctification, to penetrate the soul like a sword, and seems exactly entitled to the name of instrument.

In short, as truth cannot change the natural temper as a second cause, and as God cannot help out its power but by acting upon the mind, (and thus really doing the work without it,) it cannot succeed in any way,

Objection I.-Upon this plan there is little encouragement to the unregenerate to put themselves in the way of the means of grace, or to the people of God to present truth before them.

Answer. There is every encouragement that there can be on any plan. Unless there is a body of truth formed in their understanding by the word of

God, and deeply impressed upon their conscience by the convicting Spirit, they are not prepared to exercise a new heart should it be given them, and we have no authority to say that it will in any case be given them, and we know that as a general rule it will not be given them. Without instruction and conviction therefore by the truths of God, there is no reason to expect that the Spirit will ever change their hearts. And when their hearts are changed, without truth before them there are no objects towards which they can exercise their new affections. Here are reasons as pressing as upon any plan to drive sinners to the means of grace, and to persuade Christians to follow them with the sublime and awful and winning verities of the Gospel.

Objection II. But this is dwelling so much on their passiveness and so little on their obligations immediately to accept the Gospel! is contemplating them so much as mere tablets and so little as agents who are to be assailed by "the sword of the Spirit"!

Answer. I said in the outset that they are both passive and active. This question respects them in their passive relation. But, as much in one view as the other, it leaves them complete moral agents, bound by every obligation to give their hearts to God at once. As much in one view as the other, the pressure of their obligations is the direct and most powerful means to convince them of their guilt and ruin and bring them to the feet of their King. That is, while we are pressing them with their obligations and demerits, and urging them to a Saviour's arms, that is the time when the Holy Ghost is most likely to transform the rock to flesh, to quell them into submission and draw them out to Christ. All this is true, and reveals the very process whose outward front has given colour to that notion of instrumentality which I am opposing. All this is true, and warrants me before I stop to turn full upon the enemies of God, and say, O rebels, drop those weapons from your bloody hands. Infinite obligations press you to this. Eternal plagues await a moment's delay. Almighty love has dropped around you from the skies, and written its claims in the bloody inscriptions of Calvary. Heaven pleads as though itself were to suffer. Compassion has wept her ocean full. O sinner, drop that murderous spear that would open all his wounds afresh. Tear out that heart that, unless bribed by prosperity and hope or stupified by ignorance or unbelief, is foaming with the rage of a devil. All that is great, all that is good, all that is lovely and tender, bends to implore you. O submit, or it shall be written on the broad side of heaven and on every corner of the universe, that for that hour's refusal you deserve eternal fire. Amen.