not received? now, if we receive all as a free gift, why should we glory, as if we had not received it?-Matt. 21: 42. 2 Cor. 3: 5. Gal. 2: 20. Isa. 26 12. 1 Cor. 15: 10. Eph. 2: 3. Psal. 54: 8. 1 Cor. 4: 7.

B. Admitting that you are free from sin, would it not be better to avoid professing it?

Ans. - With the heart man believeth unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. Go home to thy friends and tell them how great things the Lord hath done for thee, and hath had compassion on thee. And he went his way, and published throughout the whole city how great things Jesus had done unto him. No man, when he hath lighted a candle, covereth it with a vessel, or putteth it under a bed; but setteth it on a candlestick, that they which enter in may see the light. I have not hid thy righteousness within my heart. I have declared thy faithfulness and thy salvation; I have not concealed thy loving-kindness and thy truth from the great congregation. — Rom. 10: 10. Mark 5:19. Luke 8: 16, 39. Ps. 50: 10

This speaks language which cannot be misunderstood. Whatever may be their conceptions with respect to the Reformation, they give the Reformers no credit save for having produced a reform in that which was anti-Christianity; and they assert that God then raised up others who have produced a true reformation, and who have carried it on until this day, when it has issued in that new divinity, of which we have all heard so much. This new divinity, it seems, according to their own account, was the thing which gave them the first stepping-stone; and no wonder,- for, if the premises be true, their argument from them is correct. If it is true that the sinner is able to keep the commandments of God, and if the Spirit makes him willing to keep them, there can be no sin. The inference is most clear and logical; and, if I believed the first position, I would go the whole; nor can there be any consistency in doing otherwise. The friends of the new school must either return and take up the exploded doctrine of human inability, or carry out the opposite scheme, and

avow themselves Perfectionists. Let them publicly abandon their whole system; or let them go forward like honest men, and boldly carry it out to its results.

Lest it should be supposed that the Perfectionists have done Dr. Beecher injustice, by associating his name with that of Mr. Finney, I will show how his course was viewed in New England, by some quotations from the letter of Mr. Rand:

Another reason why you are reckoned as a decisive advocate of new principles is, the associations you have voluntarily formed. And here we judge according to the common maxim, that a man is known by the company he keeps.— p. 12.

Some years ago, but after Dr. Taylor had made himself conspicuous as a theorizer in theology, Dr. Beecher had occasion to be absent a few weeks from his people, in a time of religious excitement; and he put Dr. Taylor in his place, to preach and "conduct the revival." Dr. Taylor did not harshly obtrude his new theories upon the people at that time; but Dr. Beecher was considered, by discerning men, under all the circumstances of the times, as giving distinct evidence of partiality for his views. When the first protracted meeting in Massachusetts was held at Boston, Dr. Taylor did a large portion of the preaching, and was the only minister from abroad who took part in the public exercises. When Dr. Beecher was in New York, on his way to the West, he is understood to have taken frequent occasion to extol Dr. Taylor, as one of the first theologians of the age. And they who are acquainted with consultations, correspondence and other indications of intimacy, have long told us that these two gentlemen were united in promoting the same theological views. — p. 13.

Now, sir, who was Mr. Finney's principal adviser, coadjutor and confidential friend, from his coming to Boston till he finally left it? I answer, without hesitation, Dr. Beecher. Who originated the invitation, I know not. It was extended by Union Church, or their agents. Mr. F. replied, "I am ready to go to Boston, if the ministering brethren are prepared to receive me; otherwise, I must decline." The question was submitted to the pastors assembled. No very decisive answer was given by most, I believe; but Drs. Beecher and Wisner expressed their doubts of the expediency of the measure. But their doubts were soon after removed; and he came, with their express approbation, and the acquiescence of others.

He was immediately made the public preacher for the whole Orthodox Congregational interest in Boston, and a contribution was levied upon the churches to support his family for six months. He held public evening meetings, generally twice a week, in a large and central house. These meetings were uniformly notified in the several congregations on the Sabbath. Some of the pastors usually attended with him, took part in the exercises, gave his notices, and appeared to act in perfect concert with him, though he was always the preacher. In these movements, Drs. Beecher and Wisner were more prominent and active than all the others and Dr. Beecher repeatedly declared in public his full accordance with views which had been advanced.

- p. 14.

;

I have read this to show that it is not without reason Dr. Beecher was connected by the Perfectionists with Dr. Taylor and Mr. Finney. The system held by them all is substantially the same, though they do not all express it so fully as Mr. Finney and Dr. Taylor. The testimony we have heard has established the fact, that some of the Perfectionists were students in Lane Seminary. Dr. Beecher's own book has established the 2d specification. It is now with the court to see what is the nature and amount of my charge. I do not blame him that such students were there; nor do I charge him with being a Perfectionist, for he is not aware of it. I merely charge him with preaching sentiments from which those doctrines naturally flow. And if these sentiments are inconsistent with our standards, then let Dr. Beecher say which of the two he renounces, and to which he adheres. The Presbytery here took a short recess.

FOURTH CHARGE.

DR. WILSON now read the 4th charge, and 1st specification. [See it on p. 89.] He said that he was not prepared to deny this when he wrote the charge; but he was now fully prepared, from historical evidence, to do so.

I will now give a definition of slander. The verb means to belie, to censure falsely. The noun means false invective, disgrace, reproach, disreputation, ill-name. A slanderer is one who belies another, who lays false charges upon another. These are the definitions of Dr. Johnson; and I will now reduce them all to a scriptural definition, which is contained in the 14th chap. of Numbers, 36 and 37 verses:

And the men, which Moses sent to search the land, who returned, and made all the congregation to murmur against him, by bringing up a slander upon the land; even those men that did bring up the evil report upon the land, died by the plague before the Lord.

Now, I say that Dr. Beecher has, in his writings, brought up an evil report upon the Church of God, and upon those ministers who teach the doctrines of the Confession of Faith. To make his impression the deeper, he has given a caricature of their sentiments. Who that holds the doctrine that a sinner is unable to keep the law of God preaches that men ought to engage in the "impenitent use of means"? Is not this a slander? Yet, from what was read here yesterday, it appears that Dr. Beecher continued to utter this slander, even after the charges had been tabled against him. For he contends that it was part of that false philosophy which was twisted into the creeds of the Reformation. And he further states that revivals have always flourished where his doctrine is preached; or, if any have occurred elsewhere, it has been where the old system has been mitigated in its severity; and that it is other doctrines, and not those of the old system, which, in such cases, have been blessed of God. Sir, this is the slander which has, for years past, been cast upon the old school, that its advocates are the enemies of revivals, and that they preach doctrines which destroy the souls of men. 14*

VOL. III.

What did we hear in this Presbytery when a young brother applied for license? Although his doctrines were admitted to be in accordance with the Confession of Faith, and his licensure could not be withheld, yet it was openly declared that such doctrine never converted men. We are told, by Dr. Beecher, that where the doctrines of human inability to keep the commandments of God, inability to convert ourselves, inability to engage in any holy exercises, have been taught, those churches have remained like Egypt by the side of other churches where the opposite doctrines were inculcated. Yes, Sir, like Egypt in its midnight darkness; like the mountains of Gilboa, without dews of heaven, or fields of offering; or like the valley in Ezekiel's vision, where the bones were very many, and dry, very dry.

Now, Sir, I ask, What has been the true history of the revivals thus produced by the preaching of the doctrines of the new school? It has been just what The Perfectionist stated. Such revivals have left the churches cold, barren, and spiritually dead. Such has been the utter sterility experienced in the State of New York, and in some parts of New England, that all vitality is gone, and nothing but some new dispensation of Divine grace can renovate the face of the Church. Sir, what has been the history of these revivals on this side of the mountains, in our own region, and within the bounds of our own Presbytery? Wherever the doctrines of the new school have prevailed, and artificial excitements have been got up among the churches, there all vital religion has been prostrated, and the churches sunk into a state of deathlike apathy and silence; just such as The Perfectionist informs us has taken place on the other side of the mountains. But, on the contrary, where the doctrines of the Confession of Faith have been received and faithfully preached,