1

the effect of greater repugnance to the doctrines of the Cross. It is indeed surprising what caprices, and what follies, in the heart of the sinner, are brought to light, in the condition I am describing: What inconsistent notions! what absurd expectations! what impertinences! what perverse ideas of God! what wanton impeachment of his holy character! And has such a man a claim upon the spiritual mercies of his Maker?-the very thing which he fancies to be his. And is God under an obligation to hear him?-the very thing he imagines him to be.

Adieu, My Dear Sir. Dare to examine the dispositions of your mind. Tender it to the scrutiny of an Omniscient Being. Pray-and act consistently with such a prayer-" Search me, O God, and know my heart; try me, and know my thoughts; and see if there be any. wicked ways in me, and lead me in the way everlasting."*

I am Yours, &c.

* Psalms, cxxxix. 23, 24.

LETTER. IV.

Previous misconceptions-Cause of delay-Any delay or suffering, the fault of the sinner-Mistake relating to the necessity of a certain preparatory process-Scripture examples-Error relating to prayer-" İ am not prepared"-"I am not holy enough"-The inconsistency of the complainer-On insensibility-Want of clear views of Sin-Degrees of conviction not necessary to be observed-Why conviction is more difficult to be effected in a man of strict morality-The Gospel invites without reference to the degree of conviction.

MY DEAR SIR,

Ir a Heathen, who did not well understand the first principles of the Gospel, were awakened to some sense of his guilt, we might expect him to cry out," what shall I do to be saved?" But suppose a man whose home is in Christendom, and who had been well indoctrinated in the truths of Christianity, yet ignorant of its power in his own experience:-suppose him, for the first time, to make the fearful discovery of his lost condition, and of the necessity of personal reconciliation to his God: -would you not imagine the question wholly unnecessary on his part? Would you not say, that to him the path of the convicted soul would be plain-plain as a path in which "the wayfaring men, though fools, need not err?"

Would you not believe that nothing could stand in his way to a direct approach to the author of salvation? Yes; judging from common analogy, you could hardly doubt, that a mind thus instructed, would know how to advance immediately to the Mercy-Seat. You would look for neither turnings nor windings, in a question that appears to carry its solution with it. See how we mistake! The plan that was so easy becomes intricate, the moment it applies to affairs of our own! The very rules we should have laid down for others, and in which we should have had every confidence, in their behalf, we are unable to reduce to practice for ourselves.

How shall we account for this? Does conviction darken the understanding? Or does it enfeeble our abilities? Or why, otherwise, should we not appropriate to our own use, what we should have prescribed to others, in similar circumstances?

This is not the place to solve these difficulties, although it might not be hard to do so. The truth, however, is as we have represented it-that competent as one thus instructed might believe himself, to teach others in a matter in which he has had no personal experience, he

finds his ability sadly diminished when the case becomes his own. Instead of proceeding, without waiting for intermediate measures, directly to the Redeemer, we see him, from the first moment of anxiety, enveloped in perplexities of which he had not thought, and which he would have declared entirely extraneous from a sincere inquiry. And he may long linger in this embarrassment, equally unhappy and sinful as it is.

The awakened sinner, who has been accustomed to the sight of others in a similar state of mind, is too apt to form conclusions from what he has thus seen or heard; and to consider exactly the same experience indispensable for himself. "He knew that such a one was a prey of distress, during a given space of time: that such and such was the conflict he sustained; until, at last, the Redeemer pitied his sufferings, and granted an answer to his prayer." Now this whole representation is incorrect; and not only so, but its conclusion is fallacious. All which he heard, or saw, gave him no fair insight into the truth. The simple fact here, and in every one of those cases which are presented in such a form as to lead to the inference that God is keeping the sinner at a distance to

K

experiment on his feelings and disposition, is as follows:-All delay arose from misconception of the truth as it is in the Gospel-from unwillingness to relinquish cherished sins--or from an unhallowed attempt to treat with the Creator on compromising terms. But never does it arise from any cause that is contradictory to the idea of a freely tendered pardon; or which does not prove, and enhance, the guilt of the sinner. And, it might be added, -all that pity which is so often expressed for the sufferer, by those around him, is usually misapplied: This sympathy, which wears so amiable an aspect, may, not unfrequently, be in behalf of a struggle discreditable to its subject; and in behalf of sorrows which have their origin in enmity to God. I know there is an apparent sternness in this opinion: but it is inseparable from the Scriptural position—that all the fault of the sinner's delay is, exclusively, in himself.

Contrary to this, is that sentiment so generally entertained, relative to the necessity of a certain preparatory process, which the sinner, it is supposed, must undergo, previous to his acceptance by a pardoning God. Hence we hear of necessary stages, in the course of