ཁ་

generally to have been this: The subject of regeneration is supposed to begin, at some time or other, to turn his attention to spiritual concerns. He begins seriously to think on them, to read concerning them; to dwell upon them in the house of God, in his meditations, in his closet, and in his conversation. By degrees he gains a more thorough acquaintance with the guilt and danger of sin, and the importance of holiness, pardon, acceptance, and salvation. By degrees also he renounces one sinful practice and propensity after another; and thus finally arrives at a neutral character, in which he is neither a sinner, in the absolute sense, nor yet a Christian. Advancing from this stage, he begins at length to entertain, in a small degree, virtuous affections, and to adopt virtuous conduct; and thus proceeds from one virtuous attainment to another while he lives. Some of the facts here supposed, taken separately, are real; for some of them undoubtedly take place in the minds and lives of those who become religious men. But the whole, considered together, and as a scheme concerning this subject, is in my view entirely erroneous.

Were we to allow the scheme to be correct and scriptural, still the consequence usually drawn from it, that regeneration is gradually accomplished, is untrue. Regeneration, according to every scheme, is the commencement of holiness in the mind. Without calling in question the doctrine, that man in the moral sense is ever neutral, it is intuitively certain, that a man is at every given period of his life, either holy or not holy. There is a period in which every man who becomes holy at all first becomes holy. At a period immediately antecedent to this, whenever it takes place, he was not holy. The commencement of holiness in his mind was, therefore, instantaneous; or began to exist at some given moment of time. Nor is it in the nature of things possible that the fact should be otherwise. All that can be truly said to be gradual with respect to this subject is, either that process of thought and affection which precedes regeneration, or that course of improvement in holiness by which it is followed. But neither of these things is intended in the Scriptures, nor ought to be intended in the conversation and writings of Christians, by the word regeneration.

It is often objected to the instantaneousness of regenera→ tion, that the change is too great to be accomplished in a

moment. Most of the persons who make this objection aim, I am persuaded, at what is customarily called by divines the work of sanctification; that is, the Christian's advancement in holiness after he is regenerated. This plainly is in fact, as it is exhibited in the Scriptures, a work which is progressive through life. It may well seem strange, for it certainly is untrue, that sanctification in this sense should be instanta

neous.

By those who admit that agency of the Spirit of God in renewing mankind which has been exhibited in these Discourses, the instantaneousness of this change has it is believed never been denied. The act of turning from sin to holiness in the first instance, on the part of man, and the act of communicating a disposition thus to turn, on the part of the Spirit of God, are in their own nature so obviously accomplished in a moment, that it seems difficult to conceive how any person considering them with attention can have supposed them to be progressive. In the Scriptures the accounts of this combined subject everywhere teach us, that it exists instantaneously. The phraseology by which it is chiefly denoted in the Scriptures, strongly indicates that this is its nature. It is exhibited to us under the expressions, Being born agaiu;' being created anew;' having a new heart and a right spirit created within us;' turning to God;' ' turning from darkness to light;' and others of a like nature. All these expressions originally denote events instantaneously existing; and in their figurative application indicate the instantaneousness of the fact to which they are applied.

The same thing we are taught in the accounts given in the Scriptures of this fact, as having actually taken place. Thus the three thousand Jews who were converted by the first sermon of St. Peter, yielded themselves to God at that moment. Such, also, was the conversion of Dionysius, Damaris, Sergius Paulus, the jailer, and generally of the great multitude whose conversion is recorded in the Acts of the Apostles. Such also was that of the nobleman of Capernaum, the father of the epileptic child, the woman of Samaria and her fellow citizens, and the thief upon the cross. 7. This change, as to the time and manner of its existence, is ordinarily imperceptible by him who is the subject of it.

There have not been wanting heretofore, there are not now wanting, persons holding the name of Christians, and those in considerable numbers, who profess to know the time and manner of their regeneration, and to have been conscious at the time of the existence of this change in their moral character; and who accordingly recite all this to each other without any apparent doubt of the soundness of the recital; nay, who make this a subject of public investigation with respect to all those who offer themselves as candidates for admission into their churches. By such men the existence of this change is considered as so manifest whenever it takes place, that they are able to point out the day, the place, and all the attendant circumstances. From the confidence with which they speak on this subject it has perhaps arisen that many others, who do not go the same length, still go a part of it; and believe in an indefinite manner that these things may, at least, be discerned and remembered with probability; that they are to be sought for; that the want of being conscious of them, and of remembering them, is an unhappy event, not experienced by more favoured Christians, nay, by most Christians. Accordingly, the want of this knowledge and remembrance is regarded by such men, however exemplary their lives may be afterwards, as involving a defect in the proper evidence that they are Christians. However good the fruit may be which they bring forth, instead of determining by the taste that it is good, they feel unsatisfied with this mode of proof; and wish rather to rely on some discovery which they consider as practicable, of the time and the place at which the bough producing the fruit was ingrafted.

All these are, I apprehend, opinions wholly unscriptural, and of course deceitful and dangerous. For,

(1.) The Scriptures nowhere refer us to the time or manner of our regeneration, for evidence that we are regenerated. If the time and manner of our regeneration were certainly known by us, it is intuitively evident, that our regeneration itself would be equally well known. If this then were the case, it is incredible that the Scriptures should not, even in a single instance, refer us to so completely satisfactory a source of evidence, to determine us finally in this mighty concern; but should at the same time direct us to the so

much less perfect evidence, furnished by the subsequent state of our affections and conduct. By their fruits shall ye know them,' says our Saviour. Then are ye my disciples indeed, if ye keep my commandments.' Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, but he, that doeth the will of my Father who is in heaven, is my disciple.' These are the rules, by which together with others of exactly the same nature, we are directed in the Scriptures to judge of our moral state. But these rules are not only superfluous, but useless, if the time, the manner, or the fact of our regeneration were ordinarily known by us. For these, and each of these, would furnish evidence of this subject completely decisive, as to the state of all men. He who knew these things, would certainly know that he was a Christian: he who did not, would certainly know that he was not a Christian. No other rule, therefore, could ever be needed, or could ever be employed. According to this scheme, then, Christ and the apostles have devised an imperfect rule to direct us in our decisions concerning this interesting subject; while uninspired men of modern times have by their ingenuity fortunately found out a perfect

one.

(2.) The relish for spiritual good, and the exercise of holy affections, are at their commencement certainly no more distinguishable, than the same relish and the same exercises in the same mind usually are afterwards. Men sometimes seem to suppose that in these first acts of a virtuous mind there is something extraordinary and peculiar. All that makes them extraordinary is, that they are the first. In the degree in which they exist they are usually among the least remarkable. There is of course nothing to make them distinguished, except the mere fact, that they are the first.

But no person needs to be told, that the subsequent holy exercises are so far from being certainly known to be such, that they are ordinarily at the best believed, and in most instances merely hoped, to be of this character. If, then, the first holy exercises are not more distinguishable than the subsequent ones, and the subsequent ones are only distinguished in such a degree as sometimes to be believed, and at most times merely hoped, to be of this character; then it is certain, that the time, the manner, and even the fact of regeneration are so far from being clearly known in all ordinary cases, that

they can never be relied on with safety, if considered by themselves only. Much less can they be regarded with undoubting confidence.

(3.) Multitudes of those who have professed, with much apparent assurance, to know all these things concerning themselves, have afterwards fallen off, and become sometimes lukewarm professors of Christianity, and sometimes open apostates. This fact, which is by no means uncommon among persons holding the opinion here censured, clearly proves, that the reliance which is placed on the knowledge professed is often unfounded, and may be always. That, which has frequently deceived our fellow-men, ought ever to be supposed to be capable of deceiving us.

The truth is, the infusion of a relish for divine things into the mind is a breathing of the Spirit of life on dry bones,' perceivable only by its effects: like the communication of the animating principle to the embryo, real, yet not discernible in itself, but in the consequences which it produces. Were the case otherwise, St. Paul could never have asked the Corinthian Christians' Know ye not your ownselves?' Nor directed them to prove themselves, whether they were in the faith.' Were the contrary opinion just, this apostle would certainly have appealed to the time, place, and manner of his own regeneration, which were probably better known to him than the same things ever were to any child of God, as proofs of the fact that he was regenerated. But this he never does. On the contrary, the evidence on which he relied was furnished by the fruits of holiness apparent in his life.

REMARKS.

From the observations, which have been made concerning this subject, it is evident, that the work of regeneration is worthy of the Spirit of God.

Regeneration is a change of the temper or disposition, or, in other words, of the heart of man; and, by consequence, of his whole character. The heart is the great controlling power of a rational being; the whole of that energy by which he is moved to action. The moral nature of this power, therefore, will be the moral nature of the man. If this be