tinually in profligate company, you must be debased in mind, and, in a manner, reduced to a state of heathenism. In some of your letters, I have observed you dashing, as it were, against the rocks of fatalism; suggesting as if you thought you were appointed to such a course of life. In others I find you flattering yourself that you are a penitent; when, perhaps, all the penitence you ever felt has been the occasional melancholy of remorse and fear. "My dear son! I am now nearly fifty-five years old, and may soon expect to go the way of all the earth! But, before I die, let me teach you the good and the right way. Hear the instructions of a father. You have had a large portion of God's preserving goodness, or you had, ere now, perished in your sins. Think of this, and give thanks to the Father of mercies, who has hitherto preserved you. Think, too, how you have requited him, and be ashamed for all that you have done. Nevertheless, do not despair! Far as you have gone, and low as you are sunk in sin, yet if hence you return to God, by Jesus Christ, you will find mercy. Jesus Christ came into the world to save sinners, even the chief of sinners. If you had been ever so sober and steady in your behaviour towards men, yet, without repentance towards God and faith in Christ, you could not have been saved; and, if you return to God by him, though your sins be great and aggravated, yet will you find mercy.' This affecting narrative cannot be better concluded than in the words of the late Dr. Ryland: "As this poor young man foreboded, this was his last voyage. He died off Lisbon, in March, 1809, after a lingering illness, in which he had every attention paid him of which his situation would admit. "From the testimony of his captain, and one of his messmates, we learn that his conduct was good, and such as to procure him much respect; and, from letters addressed to his father and his sister, a short time before his death, we hope still better things; we hope he was led to see the error of his way, and to make the Lord his refuge from the tempest and the storm. "His death, under such circumstances, was less painful to his friends than it would otherwise have been; and, in a sermon preached the Lord's-day after the intelligence was received, in allusion to this event, from Rom. x. 8, 9, his father seemed to take comfort from three ideas: that, 1. The doctrine of free justification by the death of Christ is suited to sinners of all degrees. It asks not how long, nor how often, nor how greatly, we have sinned: if we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins. It is suited to the helpless condition of sinners. We have only to look and live. 3. It is suited to sinners in the last extremity. It answers to the promised mercy in Deut. iv. 29: IF FROM THENCE thou seek the Lord thy God, thou shalt find him. Some are far from home, and have no friend, in their dying moments, to speak a word of comfort * 2. *but this is near! When Jonah was compassed about by the floods, when the billows and waves passed over him, he prayed to the Lord and the Lord heard him." * ** "Here he was obliged to pause, and give vent to his feelings by weeping; and many of the congregation, who knew the cause, wept with him! His heart was full, and it was with difficulty he could conclude, with solemnly charging the sinner to apply for mercy ere it was too late; for, if it were rejected, its having been so near and so easy of access, would be a swift witness against him." MENTAL SCIENCE. Radical Principles brought to the Test of Revelation. We have already stated the doctrine to be examined in this article, viz. the will is a distinct faculty of choosing, and is always governed by the pleasure of the heart. The question to be settled is whether this doctrine be recognised in the revelation of God. When this shall be fairly and satisfactorily settled, the uses of the doctrine will be obviously ascertained, and its importance more readily estimated. It will not be necessary to examine all the passages of scripture, in which the will and its exercises are indicated, in order to settle the question. Nor have we room for a full analysis of those passages in which the words are used figuratively, for other faculties or their exercises. It is easy to see why the term for will should be used, in its various forms, and in all the languages, for the exercises of mind without discrimination-for the heart-or its exercises--and for commands, orders, or decrees, which the mind may have made. This will be evident from an examination of a few selections, out of multitudes found in the Old and New Testaments. The principal Hebrew words used to indicate will or its acts are, 78, 71, 1, . These all occur, more or less frequently in the Old Testament, to indicate the will or its exercises; and they are used frequently in other senses. It is sufficient for our purpose to examine a few passages where each word occurs in the sense which indicates the human will. It might be more satisfactory to give a full analysis of all the different meanings of the words above cited, and the passages in which they occur, but we cannot now pursue that course: besides, if we had room, it would be a tedious examination, and transcend the design of these articles. N is used in the following passages to express the exercise of will: Lev. xxvi. 21.-"if ye walk contrary unto me and will not hearken unto me." 1 Chron. x. 4. "Then Saul said to his armourbearer draw thy sword, and thrust me through therewith-but his armour-bearer would not." Chap. xi. 19. When David longed for water from the well of Bethlehem, and three men had jeoparded their lives and brought it to him, he poured it out to the Lord-" he would not drink it." Ps. lxxxi. 11. "But my people would not hearken to my voice; and Israel would none of me." Isah. i. 19. "If ye be willing and obedient, ye shall eat the good of the land." Ezek. iii. 7. "But the house of Israel will not hearken unto thee: for they will not hearken unto me: for all the house of Israel are impudent and hard hearted." These are a few of the passages in which this Hebrew word is used to denote the exercise of will, but they are sufficient to determine three things: that the conduct of men is directly the result of volition, that volition proceeds from a faculty of determination, and that the will is governed by the feelings of the heart. We are not aware that this word is used in its substantive form for the will, but as a verb it denotes the exercise, and is so associated in its connexion as to involve both the faculty and the law of its government. In the specimens above given, the word cannot answer to the future tense of the fact expressed, because both volition and obstinacy are involved in the thoughts expressed. VD will be found in the following passages, and might be compared with many others of like import. Exod. xxxv. 29. "The children of Israel brought a willing offering unto the Lord, every man and. woman, whose heart made them willing to bring for all manner of work, which the Lord had commanded to be made by the hand of Moses." 1 Chron. xxviii. 21. After David had given Solomon, his son, the pattern of the house of the Lord, he said to his son, "there shall be with thee for all manner of workmanship every willing skilful man, for any manner of service." In chap. xxix. 5. David said "who then is willing to consecrate his service this day unto the Lord?" Ezra, iii. 5. In the account of the "set feasts of the Lord that were consecrated," it is said that the people brought their offerings to the priests, and they "offered the continual burnt-offering" and of the feast; and "of every one that willingly offered a freewill offering unto the Lord." These may suffice for one important use and meaning of 17. They show conclusively the same things as stated under ; volition directing the conduct, proceeding from a faculty of determination, and that under the government of the heart. The interpretation of this word according to the connexion and scope of the passages where it occurs, cannot fail to show the recognition of the doctrine we have stated before. seems to have primarily the meaning of animal life, but it has a secondary meaning which indicates will. Take the following passages as a specimen of its occur rence in the latter sense. Exod. XV. 9. "The enemy said, I will pursue, I will overtake, I will divide the spoil; my lust shall be satisfied upon them." Ps. xxvii. 12. "Deliver me not over unto the will of mine enemies." Ps. xli. 2. "Thou wilt not deliver him unto the will of his enemies."Ezek. xvi. 27. "Behold, therefore, I have stretched out my hand over thee, and have diminished their ordinary food, and delivered thee unto the will of them that hate thee " We need not multiply quo tations; these show distinctly a recognition of the doctrine. For the same meaning of ny we direct only to the three following passages as sufficient for the purpose. Levit. xix. 5.-"if ye offer a sacrifice of peace-offerings unto the Lord, ye shall offer it at your own will." Chap. xxii. 19. "Yè shall offer at your own will a male without blemish of the beeves, of the sheep, or of the goats." Again, verse 29. "And when ye will offer a sacrifice of thanksgiving unto the Lord, offer it at your own will.” That here is a recognition of the dotrine, we think no one can rationally doubt, who will examine the passages and interpret them according to their obvious meaning and connexion. The New Testament abounds with the full recognition of the same doctrine, but we shall content ourselves with the examination of some passages in which λna, and Ow, the principal Greek words occur. The more frequent meanings of nu are three, will, purpose, design, or intention, for the first class; for the second class is the object of one's will, in general, without specification, or specifick command, statute, or law;' for the third the pleasure of mind is indicated. Although we distinguish three significations of λnua they are all directly or indirectly connected with the faculty or the exercise of will; so that they all directly or indirectly recognise the doctrine. We quote a few of the many passages in which μa is found, that we may present the varieties of meaning intimated above. John i. 13: "Who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, (ουδε εκ θεληματος σαρκος) nor of the will of man, (ovde ex bεanualos avôgos,) but of God." λpa here must involve volition, whatever particular meaning may be given to its interpretation. The intention of the inspired historian is very plain: it is would express merely the exercise It will be sufficient to cite two "And the spirit and the bride say, to ascribe the regeneration of those And let him that is athirst, come. And whosoever [] will, let him take the water of life freely." Every one acquainted with his bible, will at once recollect that there are multitudes of passages where will is used in the same sense, to signify the determination of the mind; or to speak more specifically, to denote the exercise of the faculty called will. As for command, statute or decree, we need not quote the passages where nua and λ are used to indicate them. The reader of the Greek Testament will readily perceive them, and know how to interpret their meaning. We leave the passages to speak for themselves on the plain common sense principles of interpretation. Confident that every mind, unprejudiced by philosophical speculation, will find obviously a recognition of the doctrine which we have stated. We have made our quotations few and our analysis brief, because we think that the recognition of the principles, is exceedingly plain, and because we wished to reserve room in this article, briefly to compare some other suppositions with the same standard. There is a pretended philosophy which represents the mind as consisting of exercises only, without any permanently existing principle. But this is so absurd on its face, and so contradictory to the whole current of the Scriptures, that we will not stop gravely to examine its claims. It never can be admitted, without setting aside all legitimate rules of biblical interpretation. Another scheme of philosophy, worthy of more regard, blends together in one class, the exercises of the heart and the will. But we have shown conclusively that the Scriptures do sometimes distinguish them, and ascribe qualities to one class which cannot belong to the other. Between the source of affections, and the source of volitions, there is often a wide discrimination in the holy Scriptures. The heart is hard or soft, grieved or joyful, pacified, or angry, but not so is the will ever represented in the Bible. It would not express the meaning of the sacred writers oftentimes to substitute heart for will, or will for heart. Take the specimen from John i. 13, and read it-" which were born not of the heart of the flesh, nor of the heart of man"-and it will be readily perceived that the sentiment is changed. It might express a truth, but not the mind of the Spirit. Take many other passages which express the appropriate exercise of either faculty, and substitute one for the other, and the discrimination will be clearly seen. There must be a different meaning attached to the different terms heart and will in the passages quoted in these articles, and in many other passages, which the careful reader will readily observe. But there is a philosophy which we think is mischievous in its theological influence, denying all distinction of faculties, or rather all moral character belonging to any principle or faculty of mind. According to this philosophy, all moral character belongs to voluntary exercises, and attaches not to their source. This scheme of philosophy subverts the plain exegesis and common sense interpretation of the Scriptures. In addi tion to what we have already said of the obvious distinction between heart and will, and the difference in the nature of their exercises, we see in many passages a recognition of the principle that the will is governed by the affections. To the heart is ascribed a character evinced by its exercises, but belonging to the principle, antecedent to its development. It is the heart upon which the Lord looketh; but why should he look upon it, if it has no moral character? Why should men be commanded to keep the heart with all diligence, if it be without character? Besides the reason given in the connexion, "for out of it are the issues of life," involves clearly the character as belonging to the heart. The phrases hard, stony, new, and evil heart, are all connected with a permanent moral principle, not with exercises merely; and we think "the hidden man of the heart" denotes a good or wicked principle. The ornament of this "hidden man" may relate to the exercises of gracious affection, which proceed from the heart. If we have not mistaken the principles of interpretation, the whole current of the Scripture opposes the philosophy in question. The mischievous theological influence to which we refer, is at present extensive in the church. The definition of the philosophy identifies it with the first principles of Pelagianism. It would therefore be natural to expect its application to the same doctrines, and its tendency to the same errors. The usual, and at present popular theological form of the first principle is, that "all holiness and sin consist exclusively in voluntary exercise." This is subject to some variety of modification, according to the more full or partial understanding or adoption of the principle. It is also applied more or less extensively to the interpretation of the Bible, and ex |