my comments were founded, was, that GOD, ALL THINGS CONSIDERED, PREFERS HOLINESS TO SIN IN ALL INSTANCES IN WHICH THE LATTER TAKES PLACE." These are the very words of Dr. Taylor; and on this position, all my reasoning was based. I said,

"If it be true, that "God, all things considered, prefers holiness to sin in all instances in which the latter takes place," then it must be his choice, all things considered, that all men should become holy and be saved; and his infinite benevolence will prompt him to do all in his power to bring all men to repentance. What then becomes of the doctrine of election? Who maketh thee to differ? Not God, surely; for if he prefers, all things considered, holiness to sin in every instance, he will, of course, do all in his power to make every individual holy. It cannot be true, that he hath mercy on whom he will have mercy; for he would have mercy on all if he could.If he prefers, all things considered, holiness to sin in every instance, he would secure the existence of holiness in every instance, if it were in his power. Consequently, in every instance in which sin exists, it is beyond the power of God to secure holiness in its stead.-Take a particular case the sin of Adam, for instance, in eating the forbidden fruit. Why did not God prevent this sin and secure holiness in its stead? It must have been, because he could not do it, or because he did not choose to do it. If he did not choose to do it, then he did not prefer, all things considered, holiness to sin in this instance; for if this had been his preference, he would have prevented the sin, and secured the holiness. To say that God chooses not to secure, that which he, on the whole, prefers, and which he is able to secure, is a manifest contradiction. According to Dr. Taylor's theory, therefore, the only reason that holiness does not exist in the room of sin in every instance in which sin now exists, is that God is unable to prevent the sin and secure the holiness. Consequently the only reason that any individual sinner is not converted, is, that God is unable to convert him He desires, all things considered, that every individual should become holy and be saved; and most certainly, if it were in his power, he would bring to pass that which he on the whole desires. But according to this view of the subject, how is it possible, there should be any such thing as election?" pp. 556, 557.

The reader will perceive that all my reasoning on this topic, is based, not on any position of my own, but on the position of Dr. Taylor, quoted verbatim in his own language. And how does Dr. Taylor meet this reasoning? Or rather how does he evade it? Why, by shifting his ground, and taking a new position ;* and then charging me with "misstating the very points on which the question turns,” and with "substituting (my) own incorrect statements, for (his) positions"!!

The reader can now judge, how much confidence is to be reposed in the charges of unfairness, misrepresentation, misquotation, &c. with which Dr. Taylor's communications abound.

* If Dr. Taylor should say, that although the position which he has now brought forward, was not before formally stated, yet it was implied in some part of his reasoning-I answer-This, if it be true, does not justify his charge against me. My reasoning, as I have shown, rests not on any substituted position of my own, but on the position formally announced and explicitly stated by Dr. Taylor himself. If he has maintained other positions inconsistent with this, the fault is bis, and not mine.

One remark more and I have done. Dr. Taylor repeatedly intimates that the points on which he and his associates differ from their brethren, are of trifling consequence, as they redate solely to "theories i. e. mere suppositions made to obviate objections to our common faith." He seems to think me very unreasonable that I should attach so much importance to these theories, and feel so much solicitude in regard to their tendency. "It is" says Dr. Taylor, "the apprehension of heresy creeping in unawares, which by sounding its note of alarm and denunciation, has disturbed the peace of the churches. And who has sounded this note-and proposed to sound it from a sense of duty-aye, and to sound it only about theories ?"

Let the reader just look over the Review of my Remarks in the Christian Spectator, and then decide who has sounded the loudest note of alarm about theories. I have, it is true, expressed the opinion that some of the positions advanced by the brethren at New Haven, are erroneous and of dangerous tendency. But when have I ever given such a representation of their views as they have given of mine in the Christian Spectator? When have I ever said that nothing but their inconsistency saves them from being THE VERY WORST OF HERETICS?" When have I said that their theories "if carried out into their legitimate consequences, lead to UNIVERSALISM, TO INFIDELITY AND TO ATHEISM?" When have I represented their theories as involving the positions that "God is the responsible author of sin"-that "man is doomed to sin by natural and fatal necessity"-that "sin is a good thing" and "the only real good to man as a moral being"that "the terms of salvation, and the exhibition of motives to comply with them, are a delusive mockery"-that "the divine lawgiver is a deceiver" that "God is a criminal tempter"that in no respect is "Satan more truly criminal as a tempter than God is"that "evil intention in Satan, is as truly good and right as benevolent intention is in God',-that "we have in every act of sin, done the very best thing we could do"that "God made a large part of mankind on purpose to damn them" and that "to sin and be damned to eternity is the result and the sole result in respect to the greater part of mankind, designed, preferred and purposed by their maker?" These are only a few of the dreadful consequences which are charged upon my theories by the conductors of the Christian Spectator. Who, then, I ask again, has sounded the loudest note of alarm about theories? And let it be remembered, the theories which I have maintained, and which are thus

VOL. VI.-NO. V.

26

impugned, are the very theories maintained by Edwards, Bellamy, Dwight, and the Orthodox of New England generally. Such then are representations which the conductors of the Christian Spectator have given of the views of their brethren; and yet strange as it may seem, they consider themselves slandered by the least intimation, that they have departed in any material point, from the faith of the New England Churches.

One of two things is true. Dr. Taylor and his associates do differ from the standard Orthodox writers of New-England, or they do not. If they do, then, their professions of agreement with these writers, are not true. If they do not, how has it happened, that they have not yet been able to make it appear to the Christian public? And moreover which are we to believe in regard to their boastad improvements in theological science?

With these inquiries I drop the controversy, for the present, with undiminished regard for the best good and increased usefulness of Dr. Taylor and his associates, praying that they and their opponents may yet see eye to eye, and be established in the faith once delivered to the saints. B. TYLER.

TO CORRESPONDENTS.-We hope some of our correspondents who may have expected to see, ere this, some articles we have from their pen, will have patience. They shall have a place by and by. Our correspondent who sent us an article lately in successive sheets, is informed that the one containing the conclusion, if sent, has not been received. We hope it is not lost, or if it is, that the writer will furnish another.

ERRATTA. For "strutting up" on page 281, read shooting up.

In the first extract from Dr. Dwight, page 293, for "things" in the sentence, "Should it be said that these things-read beings.

[In our number for April, we published the Report of the Suffolk South Association, in answer to certain inquiries of the Committee of the Pastoral Association See pp. 185, 186.-The following Reports from other Associa tions, which we have since received, we are requested to publish together.]

REPORT OF THE HARMONY ASSOCIATION.

To the Committee of the Pastoral Association. Rev. Dr. Woods, Chairman.

BRETHREN:

Without repeating your questions, we reply to them in their order.

1. We have reason to bless God, that the eleven churches which are within our bounds, have all enjoyed a special season of refreshing from the divine presence, within the last fifteen months.

2. These revivals have generally been of short continuance, especially where they were the result of Protracted meetings.Professors were first led to feel their leanness, and in somemeasure aroused to a sense of the responsibility lying upon them. Sinners, as they became anxious, generally manifested deep solicitude, and a painful sense of guilt and danger for a short time, but found relief, and indulged hope sooner than in former revivals.-Between 500 and 600 have been added to our churches, as the fruits of these revivals, and we know of nothing in their deportment to distinguish them from the subjects of former revivals. The proportion of males has been greater than usual.-In some instances, violent opposition was

VOL. VI.NO. VI.

27

manifested, and the dismission of one minister was probably hastened by it.

3. Generally by means of Protracted meetings, in connexion with the ordinary use of means; though in one or two instances a revival had evidently commenced prior to such meetings in the place. Where this was the case, the revival was more powerful, of longer continuance, and the fruits more abundant.

The preaching in all our Protracted meetings, being almost entirely by members of the Association, who had previously engaged to sustain the meetings, God assisting them, was what we consider strictly evangelical, interspersed with prayers and direct appeals to the understanding, the heart and the conscience. Inquirers were separated from others, particularly addressed and personally conversed with. Minis ters endeavored to drive sinners from all their false refuges, and to bring them to an immediate decision upon the subject of religion, and to an unconditional surrender of themselves to God. They were not backward in exhibiting the sovereignty of God, -the purity, extent and unbending justice of the divine law,the self-ruined condition of men, their entire alienation of heart from their Maker, and their dependance on the renewing and sanctifying influences of the Holy Spirit-God's readiness to grant his Spirit in answer to the prayers of his children, and to pardon the penitent through the efficacy of a Saviour's blood,God's determination to punish forever the finally incorrigible, and to reward with everlasting blessedness all who comply with the conditions of mercy.-Sinners were taught, that nothing but their own perverse rejection of the terms of mercy, would pre vent their salvation, and that nothing but the Spirit of God, operating through the medium of divine truth, would make them willing to accept.

As it was our design to exhibit the fundamental doctrines of the gospel, in some due proportions, it would be difficult to say which, if any one, produced the best effect. We conceive it to have been the combined influence of all these, which wrought effectually upon the minds of men; though, in some instances, one, and in some another, was the more apparent in its benign influence.

4. We think favorably of Protracted meetings in promoting the interest of the Redeemer's kingdom. But our want of experience does not enable us to speak with confidence as to the utility of often repeating them in the same place. We feel that there is danger of producing a fastidious taste among the people, and of rendering the more ordinary use of the means