There is nothing strange or inconsistent in this; we see something like it every day. For example there is a man who, the last year, was a federalist in politics; he was perfectly free, and willing to act as he did but this year he is a republican, and acts in direct opposition to what he did the year before, and is willing to do so. He is just as free and willing in what he does this year, as he was in what he did the year before, although he is pursuing, perhaps, an entirely different course.

But why this change in the man? We of ten say, (and with propriety) that his influential neighbour has influenced him to believe as he does. It is true, the man's pride may rise against such an assertion as much as it may against the assertion that God has power to influence him; but, at the same time, there is no doubt to us, but that it is often true. We all believe, and know, that men have power to a certain degree, to influence or persuade others; and will any dare to assert that the Lord hath not this power to an infinite degree? God has made the soul and will of man, and is perfectly acquainted with all the secret springs of action within it; who then will dare to say, in opposition to his word, that he has not power to influence any soul that he pleases, to be willing to serve and obey him? We are aware that some, in the pride of their hearts, may "I know that the Lord has power, but he did not influence me, I came of my own ac

say,

cord." The man who has been influenced by his neighbour to change his mind in politics, the pride of his heart will induce him to say the same; and, possibly, both may think it true, barely because they are willing. But, according to the Bible, we say to every one that is now willing to believe in Jesus, that it was the unseen hand of our God that made you willing.

Again, the Methodist preachers are often endeavouring to persuade men to become Methodists. They surely do not expect that they will become such against their wills; but they expect to be able to persuade them to be willing. Do they think that they have more power to persuade men, and make them willing, than God has? The reader may perceive that every point of the freewill scheme tends to exalt man above the Creator. Man shall be master to do as he pleases; and God, his servant, to create things comfortable for him, and give him "liberty and power to accept of proffered salvation," whenever he chooses to call on this almighty servant for it. It is this that makes the doctrine popular among the creatures whom Satan promised that they should be as gods; it reaches to the very root of human depravity.

We firmly believe, that there are many pious people in the communion of those who teach the freewill scheme of salvation, both among the Roman Catholics, and the Methodists. And we are sorry to see such lending

the weight of their pious example to build up a doctrine so fraught with danger to our fellow-men. Of such, we say there is an inconsistency between their doctrine and their practice They pray for sinners, and exhort others to do the same; why do they do this? Do they expect that God will take sinners to heaven against their wills? or without their becoming willing to repent, and forsake their sin? They say they do not. Then why do they expect that the Lord will make sinners willing to repent, if he has not got this power, but has lodged it in their own hands? It is impious to ask him to do that which is not in his

power. Besides, the most of true believers know from their own experience that they cannot determine their own wills to holiness. They can remember that at the time when they were awakened, although they could refrain from much sin, yet even then they were not able to believe in Christ and hate their sins, (as God requires,) any more than the Ethiopian is able to change his skin, or the leopard his spots. But they went many days in great distresswithout peace of soul-until God enabled them to believe. They then knew, to a certainty, that they could not accept of proffered salvation at any time. However, after the work was done, it often appears to them to be very easy, and looks as though they might have done it before, It is true, that after Christ gave life to Lazarus, it was easy for him to live.

And when he strengthened the withered hand, it was easy for the man to stretch it forth.

4th. We have shown already, that the scripture teaches, in the plainest manner, the doctrine of personal election to holiness and salvation. This doctrine is also denied. Because, say they, it does not comport with reason, and implies a reprobation of the non-elect. When the General Conference draw their inference on this doctrine, they say, "such blasphemy as this, as one would think might make the ears of a Christian to tingle." And they go on to say--"It represents the most holy God as worse than the devil,' 11* &c.

It is not even pretended that this doctrine is contrary to reason, or absurd. They themselves, nor any other persons, pretend to deny but God can make this distinction if he pleases. But the reason is this, they say if he did do it, he would be worse than the devil, because it would be partial. But on this ground, why should they vent such malice against us, and against the Lord? They all allow, that many of the children of men are damned; and they say in their book," that whatever good is in man, or done by man, God is the author and doer of it' If so, he can be the author and doer of good in one, as well as another. And they also say, that there is a particular light which God. gives; and which the unbeliever is an utter stranger to. Let the reader reflect for himself.

Tract 2, page 33, Tract 2, p. 24. Tract 5, p. 58.

Besides, there are many among them, who fall down at camp-meeting, and appear to lie senseless. They say, that these become converted; and that they cannot help falling as they do, because it is by the power of God. (According to them,) here is special grace and mercy given to some, and not to others. Here our doctrine is proven not only by words, but by examples; by facts before our eyes. We ask the candid reader. why the Lord did not smite down and convert every person in the whole camp? or whether he had no more power than what he had already exerted ? And if so, why do they pray to him for more? According to this, it would appear to be self-evident, that God had mercy upon whom he will have mercy; and that in a very powerful manner, he had mercy on some of the fallen race of men, and leaves others to die in their sins. Why then should they say he was worse than the devil, because he did so? For what difference is there, as it respects partiality, whether he intended to make this distinction among sinners from eternity, or only intended it on the day in which he did it? It is not probable that it was done by accident. Why then should a whole body of men, calling themselves ministers of the gospel, rise up against Jehovah, and say he was worse than the devil, because he