and forcible writers and editors in the Baptist denomination, and one, too, that pleads for the Bible, the whole Bible, and nothing but the Bible, as forcibly and as convincingly as any of our editoria} corps. He has, with a manly courage, presumed to take the same ground against two very distinguished leaders, Fuller and Gill, that we have long occupied, as the intelligent reader will see in the following extracts:

For the Recorder.

VIEWS ON CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE.

"Andrew Fuller in preparing to write a system of Divinity, selected the cross of Christ as the central point around which the other doctrines of the gospel were to be collected as so many planets around the sun. Justification by faith is the doctrine which I wish to place in the centre at present, and as such it will be first considered

1. What, then, is Justification? It is acceptance before God-it is being received and treated as a just and righteous person by God, whereby the penalty of the law is averted and the title to life is established. This in short is justification.

2. On what ground, or for what consideration does God thus receive and justify the sinner? Not on the ground of personal justice or holiness, because the Bible teaches "there is none righteous, no, not one," and declares as a consequence that "by the deeds of the law no flesh shall be justified." This is confirmed by the experience and observation of all men, as all feel the working of depravity within them, and see its manifestations in the prevalence of crime and misery. The ground on which the sinner is justified-the procuring cause of acceptance before God to the guilty is the atonement of Christ. See Rom. iii. 23-26.

3. But before the sinner can be justified even on this ground, it is necessary he should believe in Christ: that is that he should receive him as Mediator-trusting in his merits for acceptance before God, and not on any personal goodness, and making a full surrender of himself to Jesus Christ from the conviction that he needs just such a substitute. This is no mere intellectual operation—it is principally an exercise of the heart, as we are taught by Paul-"It is with the heart that man believeth unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation." It thus effects a vital union between Christ and the sinner, and is the commencement, at least, of a transformation of character; for the Apostle having established the doctrine of justification by faith, immediately argues that the justified cannot continue in sin because of the change that has been wrought in their minds. Faith, therefore, is indispensable to justification for two reasons-First, it is a condition prescribed in the gospel, and secondly, it is the act of appropriation, by means of which the saving benefits of Christ are received and enjoyed.

I now proceed to apply the statements above to the doctrine of remission, from the conviction that they may shed some light upon the conflicting opinions that are advanced upon that subject. To remit

or forgive is to set the guilty free from the penalty that stands against him. I ask, therefore, if justification and remission, however they may differ in some respects, are not necessarily involved the one in the other? Can one exist where the other is absent? If any so affirm, I ask, is it possible for God to treat the sinner as just and righteous while his sentence of condemnation remains in full force against him? If so, God can approve and condemn the same person at the same moment, which is an absurdity.

Again, the Apostle Paul says-"Being justified by faith we have peace with God," &c.: but if the sinner is still unpardoned he is still under the sentence of the law, and consequently, how can he have any real intelligent peace? The thing is impossible. The peace the Apostle speaks of, arises from the conviction that the sentence of death is averted, and that acceptance and eternal life are secured by trusting in Christ.

Now let it be recollected that it is by faith that the sinner is justi fied in the manner and to the extent explained above, and if justification and remission are indivisible, it follows that remission is consequent upon believing without any other act, as much so as justification, and that those who make baptism or any other duty an indispensable requisite to remission, are brought in conflict with the great gospel doctrine of justification by faith-a doctrine which Paul has made too plain to admit of reasonable mistake, and which in the days of the Reformation formed the cardinal point of contention between the Protestants and Romanists. This contest still continues, and if instead of harping so much upon a few isolated passages there was a stronger grasping of the vital doctrines of the gospel, it would be much more easy to harmonize what appears conflicting." J. J. F.

Sedgwick Seminary, Dec. 9, 1848.

ELDER MEREDITH'S REMARKS.

The foregoing has been elicited, we presume, by some remarks of ours, published some two weeks back, on the subject of REMISSION. Taking this view of the case, csurtesy would seem to require us to respond; and, as it is reasonable to hope for a development of truth from a candid investigation of a subject so interesting, it is with much pleasure that we submit the following.-In the meantime we may be allowed to express the hope that our respected correspondent may find leisure and health, as well as inclination, to pursue the discussion until the merits of the argument may be fully set forth.

The first thing that struck us, on reading the article in view, was what seemed to be its singular want of agreement with the teaching of Christ and his Apostles. For example, the Saviour said "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved." Our correspondent says-Not so: "remission," and of course salvation, "is consequent on believing, without any other act." Again, Peter said to the Jews -"Repent and be baptized every one of you, for the remission of sins." Our correspondent says-This cannot be correct, because "remission is consequent on believing without any other act."Again, Ananias said to Saul—“And now, why tarriest thou? arise,

and be baptised, and wash away thy sins." Our correspondent says -This must be wrong, because Saul, having already believed, "remission is consequent on believing without any other act." It seems to us that these several teachers cannot all be right. If our correspondent be correct, in maintaining that baptism has no connection with gospel remission, then, Christ, and Peter, and Ananias, must be in error, in affirming so plainly that it has. On the contrary, if the inspired teachers be correct, in maintaining that faith and baptisma are both requisite to remission, then our correspondent must be in error, in virtually affirming that said act of baptism has nothing to do in the matter.

It seems to us that our brother F., with most others of his own way of thinking, has misapprehended the point really at issue. The question is not, as we understand it, when is the act of remission passed, in animo, that is, in the divine mind. If this were the question, perhaps it would be more correct to say, that the act of forgiveness was passed at the time when the Redeemer suffered; when the offering for sin was made; when the penalty of the law was cancelled; and when the justification of the sinner was actually effected. This, we think, is the general view of speculatists on the subject. And this, if we mistake not, will follow, pretty clearly, from the reasoning of our brother F. himself.

This, however, is not the matter in debate. The question now under consideration is-When are the promises of the gospel appropriated to the sinner? In other words, when is the sinner, in accordance with the provisions and stipulations of the gospel, authorized to appropriate to himself the fulfilment of those promises-including not remission only, but even justification and acceptance with God? Is he at liberty to do this as soon as he shall have judged himself to be the subject of a mere speculative faith; or not until he shall have illustrated and confirmed his faith by the appropriate act of outward obedience? Is it, in other words, so soon as he shall have complied in animo with one of the conditions of gospel salvation? or not until he shall have complied, de facto, with both the aforesaid conditions; and thereby identified himself outwardly, as well as inwardly, with the cause and kingdom of Jesus Chist? This being the question at issue, it is easy to see that it must receive an answer essentially different from that given by our correspondent.

So far as the question of peace is concerned, it may perhaps be fairly questioned whether there be any intelligible, authorized peace, until the conditions are fully complied with. It was not until after his baptism, that the Ethiopian went on his way rejoicing. Nor was it until after they had been baptized, that the penitent Jews ate their bread with gladness and singleness of heart. Nor can it easily be conceived, that a sinner can have much intelligible peace of mind, arising from the application of gospel promises and mercies, until, having been buried with Christ in baptism, he shall rise again to walk in newness of life.

It has always been the fault of system-makers and theorizers, that they have had each one his favorite scheme. Andrew Fuller, it appears, had his. With him, we are told, the cross was the central orb, and all other doctrines were but planets and satellites. Dr. Gill, we

think, made the doctrine of election his centre, around which all other doctrines were held to move in due order and subserviency. And with our worthy brother F., we learn, the doctrine of justification is considered the central point, by which the magnitudes and relations of all other doctrines are to be estimated. It seems to us that by far the better plan would be, to take all these doctrines as we find them in the Bible, and to assign to each, as far as possible, the position, the magnitude, and the relative importance which have been given to it by Christ and the Apostles. System-makers, in our opinion, have done but little to simplify or commend the gospel plan of salvation. They have done much, however, to obscure its doctrines, to distort its proportions, and to involve the whole in mysticism and doubt."

This is unquestionably an age of free discussion, of free inquiry, and consequently an age of progress. No society in America has, in the present century, progressed more rapidly than Baptists. I do not say the Baptists, but Baptists. Baptists now have a moral and political influence in the United States, set down by the most enlightened statistical pens, as equal to five millions in eighteen millions; that is, more than one-fourth of the whole population.

But I do not speak simply or primarily of their numerical force or increase, though that must be taken into account when we speak of their responsibility, but I speak of their intellectual, moral, and evangelical progress. Their ministry in the aggregate, is better educated, their public scribes are more enlightened, their moral character is more elevated, and their biblical attainments more comprehensive and accurate than they were a quarter of a century ago. What a portion of their ministry and their communities could not then hear with candor, nor investigate with patience, they can now calmly consider and deliberately weigh, with Christian patience and perseverance. As a consequence it has come to pass, that what some of the more contracted and ill-informed then reprobated as damnable heresy and destructive error, is now regarded as inspired wisdom and divine knowledge, or at least well worthy of still more concentrated examination and regard. Hence, as they progress to the great attractive and radiating centre of the divine science and learning, they approximate nearer and nearer to those who are with themselves advancing to that same grand focus of light and love. They were formerly so much fascinated with the splendor of such planets as Gill, and Fuller, and Booth, as to glory in their light and heat, as though they were suns and not planets, radiating centres and not reflecting

moons.

But that spell is broken, that charm is dissipated, and now "what saith the scriptures," and not what saith the creed -what saith the SERIES III.-VOL. VI. 12*

apostles and not what say the doctors of divinity, is the great question to be debated and decided. That day has actually come, and as one proof of it, we have inserted, with pleasure, the very sensible and just remarks of Elder Meredith, on the speculations of a brother correspondent who is yet entangled in the meshes of a too metaphysical and speculative theology, from which we hope he may yet, in the fullness of time, be disentangled and set free.

A. C.

FAMILY CULTURE.

CONVERSATIONS AT THE CARLETON HOUSE-No. III.
EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS, CHAPTER II.

Olympas. The first paragraph of the 2d chapter, is the subject for the evening; you will repeat it James.

James. "Wherefore, you are inexcusable, O man! whosoever you are, who condemn: for in condemning another, you pass sentence upon yourself; because you, who condemn, practise the same things. Besides, we know that the sentence of God is according to truth, upon them who commit such things. And do you think this, O man, who condemn those who practise such things, and yet do the same, that you shall escape the sentence of God? Or do you despise the riches of his goodness and forbearance, and long-suffering; not acknowledging that the goodness of God invites you to a reformation? But according to your obdurate and impenitent heart, you treasure up to yourself wrath, against a day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God, who will render to every one according to his works: eternal life, indeed, to them who, by perseverance in well-doing, seek glory, honor, and immortality: but anger and wrath to them who are contentious, and obey not the truth, but obey unrighteousness. Affliction and great distress shall come upon every soul of man who works evil; first of the Jew, and also of the Greek. But glory, honor, and peace to every one who works good; first to the Jew, and also to the Greek. For there is no respect of persons with God. As many, therefore, as have sinned without law, shall also perish without law; and as many as have sinned under law, shall be condemned by law, for not those who hear the law are just before God; but those who obey the law, shall be justified in the day when God will judge the hidden things of men by Jesus Christ, according to my gospel. When, therefore, the Gentiles, who have not a law, do by nature the things of the law, these persons, though they have not a law, are a law to themselves: who show plainly the work of the law, written on their hearts; their conscience bearing witness, and also their reasonings between one another, when they accuse or excuse each other."