VI.-CORRESPONDENCE.

ON THE FITNESS SUPPOSED TO BE REQUIRED, PREVIOUSLY TO COMING TO THE SAVIOUR.

(To the Editor of the Baptist Record.)

SIR, I have read with attention the strictures of your correspondent, K., on my paper "On the Vocal Praise of God," inserted in your number for September. I defer, for the present, to make any reply to his objections on that topic. There is, however, a subject incidentally introduced in my first paper, and commented on by K., which, irrespective of its connexion with the vocal praise of God, is of so great intrinsic importance, that I have to request the favour of a small space in your valuable miscellany, that I may briefly state my sentiments on it.

That subject is, the character of the DOCTRINE contained in a verse, quoted in my first paper (page 476) from the hymn, of which the first line is, "Come, ye sinners, poor and wretched."

The verse is the third. I said, "The doctrine, I am persuaded, is not scriptural." K. expresses great surprise at this, as in the following passage, which, in justice to him, I transcribe. "This doctrine we are told is not scriptural. Indeed? Must not conviction or repentance precede faith? That no more than this was meant must be evident from a little attention to the scope of the hymn, as well as from the known sentiments of the writer. From reading the whole verse, it will be seen that the word fitness is not the word of the author's choice; it is taken by him out of the mouth of an objecting sinner, and is then immediately explained, so that there can be no misapprehension of its meaning. Will your correspondent affirm that no

interesting illustration of our remarks, on the rejection of the sacrament of marriage by the Cathari, made at pp. 190-193. It is an extract from the 'Lenten Indult,' of William Bernard, Bishop of Hetalona :-" An abuse has arisen in large towns which we cannot sufficiently condemn, or enough lament. Catholics who make a profession, more than a practice, of their holy religion, rather than abandon their sins and approach to the sacrament of marriage, have impiously, and against their own consciences, shunned the sacred ministry of the church, and have striven to satisfy their uneasy consciences with a marriage by civil contract only, at the registry offices. Now, dearly beloved, whoever do thus deprive themselves of the holiness of marriage, they put themselves under the law of nature, as if Christ had not died. They turn their backs on divine law, and refuse its sanction to their union. They deny themselves the sacrament and all its graces. They marry as the heathen married. They renounce one of their divinest rights and privileges, acquired by the blood of the Son of God. And, however much this kind of union may be good and binding, as a natural institution, to such as know not God and his grace, yet has it not the benediction of God and his grace, when by the children of light it has been with wilfulness and with disobedience rejected. Marriage, says St. Paul, is a great sacrament, when it is contracted in Christ, and in the Church. But out of the Church, when contracted by the children of the Church, it is a work of the flesh, a work of disobedience, and a work unblessed; and such as do this, shall indeed have tribulations. Do nothing then out of the Church, dearly beloved, that you may not despise God, who says, they that despise you, despise me."" The only lawful marriage recognized by the Church of Rome, would thus seem to be that which is contracted within her pale, and blessed by her priests.

preparation of heart is needed in order to embrace the Atonement? If not, his criticism must fall to the ground."

The hymn is addressed "to the perishing," and is an invitation to such persons to come to Jesus. They are entreated not to linger in this matter, influenced either by conscience, or by fondly dreaming of fitness. I shall admit, as K. alleges, that the word "fitness" is not the word of the author's choice, &c.; but, as he remarks, it is immediately explained. My objections do not respect the word at all; it is a very fit word; they apply to the explanation.

There is no misapprehension, I am persuaded, on my part, of its meaning; but I dislike the sentiment. The following I take to be the author's meaning. "Let not any perishing sinner be prevented coming to the Saviour, from supposing that he has not that which is required to warrant his coming; all that is required is, that he should feel his need of the Saviour. This Jesus gives; yea, it is the very first instance of his Spirit's gracious influence."

This is the sentiment which I am persuaded is not scriptural, and which I mean to controvert.

In my first paper, I assigned some reasons for thinking so, but it seems requisite to state them more fully.

This sentiment destroys the unlimited character of the gospel invitation. I consider that invitation, as presented in Scripture, to be absolutely universal; whereas, in this mode of stating it, it is restricted to those who feel their need of a Saviour. The gospel invitation would not meet the exigencies of the case, if it were not co-extensive with the prevalence of sin. That determines the limit, and no narrower limit must be admitted. The judgment of heaven is, "There is none righteous; no, not one;" and from the gracious invitation to participate in the blessings of pardon and salvation, none are excluded, "no, not one."

The gospel does, indeed, address every man as a sinner, but it asks no questions, either as to his sense of sin, or his feeling his need of a Saviour; it interposes no such obstacle between a man and the Saviour; it seeks no pre-requisite whatever on the part of the sinner, either to justify his coming to Jesus, or to secure a welcome when he comes. No, no; it is ordained of God to be preached "to every creature," with the assurance, Come and welcome; come just as you are; come now-only come-believe and live.

The essential glory of the gospel is involved in this inquiry. It is a proclamation of peace and pardon-free as the air of heaven-addressed to all who NEED a Saviour; not to those only who FEEL their need of him. Admit this limitation, or any limitation whatever, and you mar God's gracious interposition. It cannot be necessary, I presume, to support these views of the truth, by reference to particular texts of scripture. I quote only two or three :

:

John iii., 14, 15, 16.—“As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up: that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."

John vi. 35.-"Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth in me shall never thirst."

Acts xiii., 38, 39.-" Be it known unto you, therefore, men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins: and by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which you could not be justified by the law of Moses."

Acts xvi. 30, 31.-" And he brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I

do to be saved? And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved."

The injurious effect of the prevalence of the sentiment in question, on an anxious inquiring mind, was adverted to in my former paper: a slight typographical error may have prevented my meaning being perceived. It ought to have been thus expressed: "Oh, let us not throw back the inquiring sinner's thoughts upon himself, to ascertain if he has got the required fitness.” This, I think, would be the natural process, were the sentiment in question adopted and acted on:-If it be required that I should feel my need of the Saviour, before I am authorized to come to him, my first inquiry must be, do I feel that need?-do I feel it really-correctly-sufficiently ?-may not my treacherous heart, or the enemy of souls deceive me? May not that feeling of which I am conscious, be a mere aversion from suffering, without any love to the Saviour, or any just impressions of the evil of sin? Such perplexing inquiries seem natural, in the case of the man who has adopted the sentiment in question, and who has not yet come to the Saviour: and how prejudicial may they prove,-what is to prevent them becoming fatal? But with such views of the gospel itself, and of gospel invitations, as I venture to advocate, these inquiries would have no place. The mental process in that case, would be ' similar to that of Poor Joseph, of tract notoriety. The gospel is addressed to sinners: I am a sinner-it is therefore addressed to me. The invitation to come to the Saviour is to sinners-not to convinced sinners only-not to penitent sinners only-not to those who feel their need of a Saviour only;-but to sinners without distinction. I am a sinner, and therefore I will go-he will not say me nay-for he hath said, "him that cometh unto me I will in no wise cast out."

I might here conclude these observations, but I must briefly advert to one or two points introduced by your correspondent. He asks, "Must not conviction or repentance precede faith?" and "Will your correspondent affirm, that no preparation of heart is needed, in order to embrace the Atonement ?" Perhaps, in other circumstances, I might ask for an explanation before assenting to the first statement, or declining to affirm the last; but, in the present argument, I shall admit, that conviction and repentance (I hope K does not think these terms synonymous) precede faith-that some preparation of heart is needed in order to embrace the Atonement,-but I do not admit, that my criticism must fall to the ground. It stands entire-as sound as ever.

It may be, that no man WILL embrace the Atonement who has not experienced that preparation of heart; but ought not every man to embrace the Atonement?-ought not every man, whatever be the state of his heart, to be invited, and urged to embrace it? Must there be a course of training, in order to produce that conviction and repentance, BEFORE THE ATONEMENT BE PRESENTED in all its divine freeness and sufficiency? Is that preparation of heart-that “ fitness," which consists in feeling the need of a Saviour, REQUIRED BY GOD, PREVIOUSLY TO THE SINNER COMING TO JESUS? I say, No-K says, Yes. THAT IS THE POINT AT ISSUE.

D.

VII.-LITERARY NOTICES.

Conversations on British Church History; adapted to Youth. By J. K. FOSTER, late Resident Tutor at Cheshunt College. Ward and Co.

THE name of the author of this publication, is, to those who have the privilege of being acquainted with him, a higher recommendation than any notice from our pen could be. For the benefit of those who have not that pleasure, we

may remark that the sound principles, the discriminating observations, and the attractive style of the work, render it a valuable acquisition to the juvenile library. It is a matter of serious consequence that early impressions of general subjects be taken from a right point of view; and, in our belief, the standing of the catholic Christian alone commands the right view of church history. From the simplicity of the conversations, they may be put into the hands of an intelligent child at a very early age; and we congratulate the parent of that child who takes his first view of British church history from the pages of this book. It has frequently been subject of regret, that ecclesiastical history does not form as marked a feature of school study as do various profane histories; but we confess we should be at a loss to turn to a volume which would be available for this object. We cannot but think, that the author of the book before us would render a most important service to this generation, if he would present them with a volume on this subject, for the study of more advanced, though still youthful readers. The invaluable principles which are associated with this subject, and which he knows so well how to bring out, would thus become familiar to minds just opening into life. Certain of their being presented in a way which then would command homage, it will be more than probable that mature judgment would confirm the early assent. One reason why so many fall from the principles in which they have been educated, into more secular notions is, that those principles have only been presented to the mind in a crude form, incapable of securing its adherence as it becomes further developed.

The work from which we have thus digressed, consists of imaginary conversations held by different family parties in successive ages in Britain. It embraces a variety of periods, from that when Cerdoc instructs his young children at the opening of the fourth century, in the past religious history of his country, down to the group assembled at Chester at the beginning of the present century, to inquire into the rise and progress of Methodism in the widest sense of that term. As the scene changes from one age and from one locality to another, a few graphic touches place before the young reader the appearance of the country and the manners of the inhabitants, with the important events occurring at that period, while an occasional sportive, or tender remark, serves to show him that the interlocutors are beings of like natures and sympathies with himself.

We most sincerely thank our author for the service which, in spite of the languors of enfeebled health, he has been enabled to render to his young fellow-countrymen, and we shall look with much pleasure for a second edition, at no very distant period.

Principles to Start with: A Word to Young Men. By Isaac Watts, D.D. With Introduction, by T. Binney. London: B. L. Green.

SOME valuable hints, printed in a size to adapt them for the waistcoat-pocket. "Young men have here," says Mr. Binney, “a statement of those general principles and laws which constitute the true philosophy of life. Out of these, by the Divine blessing, they may evolve for themselves a useful, honourable, and happy career." Our judgment coincides with that of Mr. Binney.

The Pastor's Request: A Sermon, preached in the Baptist Chapel, Southparade, Leeds; being the first discourse after accepting the pastoral office. By A. M. Stalker. London: B. L. Green. 1848.

THIS sermon was preached on the last Lord's day in October, and is an interesting memorial of the event referred to. We like the discourse for its VOL. I.-No. XII.

3 C

plain, practical good sense. It was adapted for the occasion. Although not marked by any particular qualities of thought or diction, it is yet to the purpose, and was felt to be so; and, therefore, we wonder not at the church's desire to see it published. It was a "proof" of the new pastor's "love" to the people to give them such a charge, and a "proof" of their "love" to him so gladly to receive it. May their "love" to each other increase and abound more and more!

Sketches. Part I. Joseph Lancaster and his Cotemporaries. Part II. William Allen, his Life and Labours. By Henry Dunn. London: Houlstone and Stoneman. 1848.

LANCASTER and BELL, while pursuing one great object, the education of the poor, stand contrasted in every social and moral quality. Both enthusiastic in this one thing, they stood as wide as the poles asunder in all others. Religious fanaticism was the prominent feature in Lancaster; worldly-mindedness and avarice stood prominently forth in the character of Bell. William Allen stands apart from either. He was a philanthropist of the highest mould. Pure religion, and undefiled, welled forth from the depths of his gentle, yet earnest and enthusiastic spirit. Industry, simplicity, and disinterestedness, especially characterized him, and piety crowned it all. Mr. Dunn's sketches of these remarkable men are interesting; clearly and lucidly written, with many sensible and judicious remarks. We can cordially commend them to our readers' perusal.

VIII.-HOME AND FOREIGN RECORD.

ITALY.-The following singular document first appeared in an Italian newspaper. It was reprinted in a smaller form, and has been most extensively circulated, and with striking effect, throughout the peninsula. The state of feeling towards the present Pope is remarkably illustrated by it, as is not less so the fears of the clergy, by the comminatory letter of the Archbishop, which follows it.

"Il Papa Piange!"

"The Pope weeps! Weep, ill-counselled pontiff! weep for your vanished glory -acquired at so light a price, and lost at so costly a sacrifice of the blood of men, who idolized a vain man, an image of clay-the shadow of a man.

"Weep, pontiff!-weep for the nations you have betrayed; for the destinies of Italy which your fearful, timid, paltry mind could not grasp; sheltering yourself under the sublime mantle of a religion which you might have led back to its pure fountain heads; but to which, on the contrary, following the old custom of your predecessors, you have added your own contribution of shame and defilement !

66

Weep, O pontiff!-Thou sceptred and living Antichrist (scettrato e vivente Anticristo), weep for your dearly beloved Germans, and hurl at the heads of their slaughterers before proud Milan and unconquered Bologna,-hurl all your thunderbolts--they have not weight nor edge.

"The Pope weeps! Weep, Count Mastai; weep that the providence thou trustest in has not yet granted the results aimed at in the destinies of Italy; for it is plain that the providence to which thou hast committed thy people, means nothing more than thine ancient ally, the Empire-that ever faithless prop of the Simoniacal Papacy.

"In order that Rome might lie tranquil under the double yoke of thine own demoralising policy and of northern despotism, thou hast in vain commended thyself to all thy saints--and so it should be. Hast thou not in thy delirium of fear reached to very blasphemy? Hast thou not dethroned the Eternal, and placed in his stead the Virgin, with the chief of the apostles, for responsible ministers ? Hast thou not to these, rather than to Him, committed the guardianship of Rome, hoping, perhaps,