tinated to heaven, no power whatever to escape their impending fate. Since the fall, and in consequence of it, whether before it or not, Presbyterians recognize the leaden jacket, and allow the non-elect sinner no alternative but to sink into the abyss of hell.

They who are elected, being fallen in Adam, are redeemed by Christ. ...,

. . Neither are any

other redeemed by Christ, effectually called, justified, adopted, sanctified, and saved, but the elect only." Chap. III., Art. VI. This, taken in connection with what is said in the article just cited above, that man by the fall“ has lost all ability of will to any spiritual good,” warrants the conclusion, that the reprobate, not being redeemed by Christ, are left in their disability to good, and by the depravation of their will, consequent upon the fall, are led to every kind of evil and corruption, without its being possible for them to do good. Thus we read concerning our

first parents,

“ II. By this sin they fell from their original righteousness, and communion with God, and so became dead in sin, and wholly defiled in all the faculties and parts of soul and body.

“ III. They being the root of all mankind, the guilt of this sin was imputed, and the same death in sin and corrupted nature conveyed to all their posterity, descending from them by ordinary generation.

“ IV. From this original corruption, whereby we are utterly in. disposed, disabled, and made opposite to all good, and wholly inclined to all evil, do proceed all actual transgressions.

“ V. This corruption of nature, during this life, doth remain in those that are regenerated ; and although it be through Christ pardoned and mortified, yet both itself, and all the motions thereof, are truly and properly sin." - Chap. VI.

Here we are plainly taught that the non-elect are disabled and made opposite to all good, and therefore we do not say compelled, but necessitated, to all evil; and even those motions of concupiscence which arise prior to any reflection or deliberation are properly sin, and are forgiven to the elect, but to no others. Here, undeniably, is the leaden jacket, which causes the sinner necessarily to sink, though in the act of sinking, he is willing to sink, and even takes delight in sinking. But this does not affect the necessity of the act, because he has no power not to sink. He is predestinated to hell, to which he is drawn, without compulsion indeed, but necessarily and irresistibly.

But here is another passage, from the chapter Of Effectual Calling, still more explicit : - VOL. I. NO, IV.

69

NEW SERIES,

"III. Elect infants, dying in infancy, are regenerated, and saved by Christ through the Spirit, who worketh when, and where, and how he pleaseth. So also are all other elect persons, who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the word.

IV. Others not elected, although they may be called by the ministry of the word, and may have some common operations of the Spirit, yet they never truly come to Christ, and therefore cannot be saved: much less can men, not professing the Christian religion, be saved in any other way whatsoever, be they never so diligent to frame their lives according to the light of nature, and the law of that religion they do profess; and to assert and maintain that they may is very pernicious, and to be detested.". Chap. X.

A queer passage this. If an Indian, or infidel, a Chinese for instance, be a Presbyterian elect, he will be saved, though he never hear of the Christian religion; but another Chinese, not a Presbyterian elect, cannot be saved, although he does his best to live according to the law of nature, and to say that he can is very pernicious and to be detested!

To refute this revolting doctrine, that some are under an invincible necessity of committing sin, we undertake to prove that every sinner, even since the fall, however reprobate in the estimation of Presbyterians, is truly and properly free as to the commission of sin, has truly the power to refrain from sin, if he chooses; and, also, that every inordinate effect beyond the control of his free-will, as certain bad thoughts and motions of concupiscence which may arise prior to deliberation, though inordinate in its nature, is not properly sin, and is not punishable as such, whether the individual be an elect or a reprobate, a saint or a sinner. We say not, however, and this must be borne in mind, that this true power of resisting evil, which all sinners certainly have, proceeds in all cases from the proper and innate strength of their free-will, which has certainly been much weakened by original sin; but we do say that the grace which strengthens the will can never be wanting to empower them to resist sin, if they choose. This grace is given to all through the merits of Jesus Christ, who proves himself the Saviour of all men, by imparting all the graces necessary for the avoiding of sin and the obtaining of salvation.

The fact of free-will in man is proved from the first chapters of Genesis, where it is said man was made to the image and likeness" of God, which is repeated after original sin, and even the flood, and assigned as the reason for prohibiting his

blood to be shed. Gen. ix. 6. In these first chapters God himself declares to Cain that he is able to restrain his inclination to sin, which had impaired, but not destroyed, the image of God. Before he murdered his brother, Cain saw his offerings rejected by the Lord, because they were made from an unclean heart. “ Cain was exceeding angry, and his countenance fell; and the Lord said to him, Why art thou angry, and why is thy countenance fallen ? If thou do well, shalt thou not receive ? but if ill, shall not sin be forthwith present at the door ? but the lust thereof shall be under thee, and thou shalt have dominion over it." Gen. iv. 5-7. It would seem that Almighty God made this declaration from the beginning, that he might shut the mouth of fatalists in every age. By it he teaches clearly and undeniably, that, even after original sin, — for Cain had certainly contracted it as deeply as any one, — we have the ability to refrain from sin and to keep

, its lusts in subjection; and certainly God is always able to give us the strength necessary to do this, if he chooses.

This text is so decisive, that Calvinists have found no way to escape its force, but by departing from the translation usually given by the Fathers. We copy the Protestant version : " And the Lord said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth ? and why is thy countenance fallen ? If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted ? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.” It is strange that Protestants should present the public such a foolish translation as this ; but Calvin felt the text was conclusive against bim, and that he must in some way alter it, sectarians are in the habit of making the Bible very elastic, and he, and Protestants after bim, make therefore the Almighty say to Cain, Thou shalt rule over him." Whom? As there were then in the world, besides Cain, only Adam and Abel, and as it will hardly do to suppose the Lord gave Cain dominion over Adam, the pronoun him must needs relate to Abel. Here God, by these words, makes Abel the slave of Cain, although he had a moment before preferred Abel to Cain; and, moreover, by giving Cain this express dominion over his brother, the Almighty must be understood to have all but sanctioned the murder which Cain perpetrated ! Are we to adopt a translation which authorizes such horrible conclusions ? A pronoun must be referred to the substantive which precedes it, unless there be some evident reason for inverting the natural order of construction. The translation, therefore, should be,

"Thou shalt rule over it," that is, sin, the substantive which precedes; not over him, for which there is no reason in the context. Calvin and his followers say that in Hebrew the pronoun is masculine, while the noun rendered sin is feminine; but commentators answer, and every tyro in Hebrew knows, that the word translated sin is of both genders, and consequently masculine, which they prove by showing that in the very passage," sin lieth at the door," a masculine construction is employed. But all this, though a hundred times more than sufficient, weighs nothing with Presbyterians, who very naturally prefer to assert an ungrammatical and absurd translation to writing down their own condemnation.

We find a second Scriptural proof against Presbyterians in Deuteronomy. Moses is speaking to the whole house of Israel, all of whom were concluded under original sin, and he says, "This commandment that I command thee this day is not above thee, nor far off from thee; nor is it in heaven, nor is it beyond the sea, that thou mayest excuse thyself. But the word is nigh thee, in thy mouth, and in thy heart, that thou mayest do it. I call heaven and earth to witness that I have this day set before you life and death, blessing and cursing. CHOOSE therefore life, that both thou and thy seed may live." xxx. 11-19. Hard language this to reconcile with the dogma that the greater part of men are so depraved as to be utterly unable to avoid sin and to be saved. Does not the Lord say by Moses, that his commandments are neither above us nor far off from us? What can more clearly prove that it is in the power of any sinner to avoid sin if he chooses, and to make a good use of his free-will, and of the Divine grace which is never refused? What more absurd and hypocritical than to tell a man to choose life, when he has no power to do so? What more cruel mockery than to tell one who has a leaden jacket around his waist, with great solemnity, in presence of heaven and earth, to choose floating?

In the last chapter of Josue we have another proof clearer than the light of day, that no one is ineluctably driven to sin, and that he who sins, sins because he chooses to do so. The great leader of the people of God assembles his nation, and, in the name of the God of their fathers, tells them," If it seem evil to you to serve the Lord, you have your choice. Choose this day that which pleaseth you, whom you would rather serve, -the gods which your fathers served in Mesopotamia, or the gods of the Amorrhites in whose land you dwell; but as for me

and my house, we will serve the Lord. And the people answered and said, God forbid that we should leave the Lord, and serve strange gods.” xxiv. 15, 16. Which shall we believe, — Josue who tells us in the name of the Lord that we have our choice, or the Confession which tells us that this choice, without our participation, was made for us, and that, if we are predestinated unto life, we must necessarily embrace virtue, and if predestinated unto death, we must necessarily cleave to our corruption, and have no possibility of being saved ? The word choose implies always the power to do either of the two things proposed. If free-will were only the strong inclination of the will to one of the alternatives, without the power to do the other, there would and could be no choice. Who will say to another, Choose to hold that two and two are equal to four ? Why not? Because there is no choice in the matter. Both the intellect and the will assent to the equality asserted, and have no power to do otherwise.

But here is still another proof that we have the power to choose between good and evil. Elias, having assembled the people of Israel, so strongly inclined to idolatry, says to them,

“ How long do you halt between two sides? If the Lord be God, follow him; but if Baal, then follow him.” 3 Kings xviii. 21. Assuredly Elias was no Presbyterian. He evidently supposes that the Israelites were halting between idolatry and true religion, but with full power to choose between the two and to embrace either. What would be more ridiculous than to say to a man falling from a tower, Why do you halt ? Would he not answer, “ I do not halt, — I have no power to halı”? But, according to Presbyterianism, those predestinated to everlasting death have even less power to halt, and are driven down even with greater power than that with which the man falls from the tower to the ground.

Let our Presbyterian friends also meditate on these words of Isaias, -“ Hear the word of the Lord, ye rulers of Sodom; give ear to the law of our God, ye people of Gomorrha..... If

you be willing and will hearken to me, you shall eat the good things of the land. But if you will not, and will provoke me to wrath, the sword shall devour you ; because the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it.” i. 10 - 20. It would almost seem that this was specially intended for Presbyterians. Does not the Lord here plainly imply that these sinners whom he addresses, and who had certainly contracted original sin, had the power either to hearken or to rebel? Suppose a number