work, it must be well known, nevertheless, its appropriateness to our subject will warrant its insertion here. We allude to the case of the late venerable Rowland Hill, who, in addressing Mr. Watson, among a company of ministers of the independent denomination, and supposing him to be one of them, said, "Whatever shall we do, sir, to prevent the spread of Antinomianism, which is making such dreadful havoc of many of our country Churches? Don't you think, sir, there is really something in our Calvinistic doctrines which is calculated to produce this terrible evil?' Mr. Watson, who was taken by surprise, and felt himself placed in a somewhat peculiar situation, assented to Mr. Hill's suggestions; and the aged apostle of Calvinian theology added, in his own emphatic manner, 'I spent my younger days in fighting the Arminian devil; but I will spend the rest of my life in fighting the devil of Antinomianism.' This pledge that excellent man fully redeemed, and though it is not pretended that he renounced the peculiarities of his creed, yet they were less prominent in his ministrations than they had formerly been."

Among the persons who saw the propriety of adopting measures similar to those of this patriarch, was the late Robert Hall, who, in his preface to Chase's "Antinomianism Unmasked," admitted that the paucity of practical instruction, and the custom of almost exclusively dwelling on doctrinal topics, paved the way for Antinomianism; and that ministers, while dwelling wholly upon doctrinal subjects, were astonished at perceiving the eager impetu. osity with which a part of their hearers rushed into Antinomian excesses, when a thorough investigation might have convinced them that though they had inculcated the truth, it had not been altogether as it is in Jesus; and then proceeds to say "that the prevailing practice of repre senting the promises of the Gospel as unconditional, tends to such a result. The idea of meritorious conditions is, indeed, incompatible with the Gospel, considered as a system of grace; but if there be no conditions of salvation, how is it possible to confute the pretensions and confound the confidence of the most licentious professor. [Besides,] all promises must either be made to individuals by name or, indefinitely, to persons of a specific character. A moment's attention will be sufficient to satisfy us that the

promise of pardon is of the latter description. In no one instance is it addressed to the individual by name, but to the penitent, the believing, the obedient, or to some similar specification of character. Before any person, therefore, can justly appropriate the promise to himself, he must ascertain his possession of that character, or, which is precisely the same, he must perceive that he comes within the prescribed conditions. This absurd notion of unconditional promises, by severing the assurance of salvation from all the fruits of the Spirit, from every trace and feature of a renovated nature and a regenerate state, opens the widest possible door to licentiousness."

On this passage Mr. Watson says, "If this be Calvin. ism, it leaves but little to be disputed among those who feel the force of the principle laid down by the apostle,For circumcision is nothing, neither uncircumcision, but a new creature.* Its peculiarities are reduced to the rank

Although, according to Mr. Jackson, "Mr. Watson had many serious objections to the tenets of Calvinism, when considered in detail, and he was conscientiously opposed to the system as a whole; and he was accustomed to observe that its essential principles are not deduced from the word of God, interpreted according to its general popular import, but from metaphysical speculation concerning the Divine nature; nevertheless, no man cherished more of the spirit of liberality toward those who maintained the system of Calvin than he. This will be seen from the following state. ment:-We are not at all wishful to see our own peculiar views adopted by pions Calvinists, nor do we feel any disposition to force upon the attention of such persons their peculiar notions against their own wills, nor persist to charge their creed with consequences which they disavow, merely because such consequences appear to us to be the logical conclusions of their premises, and may, by the rules of strict reasoning, be very legitimate. And although in proportion as we believe those sentiments which distinguish the Calvin. istic creed from evangelical Arminianism to be contrary to the Scriptures, and injurious to the practice of the Christian temper and conduct, we rejoice that they are sinking in the estimation of wise and pious men. Nevertheless, we had rather see errors of this kind gradually fade away, than suddenly pushed out of sight. One of the greatest dangers of the human mind arises from sudden re. vulsions of opinion. Truth and error are so linked together, one being often the mere shadow or the excess of the other, that he who abandons error itself too hastily may renounce some important and essential truth, around which it has spread parasitical branches, or diffused a deceptive halo. From Calvinism, through a cold and legal Arminianism, there has been too often a sudden transition to Socinianism; and he greatly injures Calvinism in its strongest

and consequence of mere abstract speculations, thrown constantly into the distance, and never suffered to intrude into any question of religious experience or religious duty."* And we shall leave it with the reader who is the least acquainted with the Calvinism with which the Remonstrants had to contend, and the mitigated form of it as generally adopted at the present day, to judge whether the latter has not approached to the views of the Remonstrants, who were branded as heretics, and some of them expelled their country; while others were exposed to imprisonment and death for maintaining views similar to the above, by men whose successors in name, though not in creed, now as much as ourselves rejoice that a system so expansive, though not acknowledged to be Arminian, has very extensively won its way, especially among the British Churches. As to ourselves, we certainly believe that a movement has been made from Calvinism to Ar. minianism, a fact we state not with vain triumph, but thankfulness, as being for the world's benefit; and, therefore, concur with the sentiment of a modern writer of the moderate school of Calvinism, when he says "that as there is no difference in guilt, so there is none either in the conditions of pardon or in the eligibility of men to the Divine favour, and that God puts no difference between man and man;-is no respecter of persons; and that in EVERY NATION he that feareth God, and worketh righteousness, is accepted of him.-Bright expansion of

forms if he would not prefer its existence, with all its dangers and occasional excesses, to a system which has in it no human hope, because it recognizes no one principle of human recovery from the guilt and penalty of sin, as stated in the Holy Scriptures.

*If the above writer could say this, in relation to the passage thus given in the text, with how much more justice might it be said. of the following statement of Mr. Hall: "I believe firmly in general redemption; I often preach it; and I consider the fact that Christ died for all as the only basis that can support the universal offer of the Gospel. I consider the sacrifice of Christ as a remedy, not only adapted, but intended for all, and as placing all in a salva. ble state, and removing all barriers to their salvation, except such as arise from their own perversity and depravity." **

Some modern.Calvinists assert that their offers of salvation to men are as general as those of the Arminians.-Be it so; we are glad to hear it.

* Life of the late Robert Hall, by Dr, Gregory, p. 118.

heavenyly glory! Welcome news from on high! with emphasis may we say, in hearing this canon of graceThe true light now shineth!"

Another circumstance growing out of the mitigated character of Calvanism, as introduced by Amyrant, must not be omitted on this occasion, that is, the cultivation of a more tolerant spirit among the divines of the Calvinistic school. The Remonstrants, who had imbibed the opinions, and copied the conduct of the amiable Arminius, were the first among the Protestants of Europe* to lift up their voice on this subjuect, and assert it to be possible for a friendly union to exist among individuals, though differing in minor shades of doctrine; and thus anticipated the Church by two hundred years in anxiously wishing to see the extinction of intolerance and bigotry among Christians, and the cultivation of the spirit of amity, as it is witnessed, at least to a great extent, at the present day, in this country.†

* Barneveldt, who was the principal lay leader of the Remon. strants, "was perhaps the first statesman," says Evans Crowe, "that made religious toleration one of his maxims."—Lardner's Cyclopædia, vol. xlvi, p. 210.

† Among the persons who seem incapable of coming up to the spirit of the times, and ridding themselves of the bigotry of former days, is Dr. Bennett. This man, it is known, several years since, published, in conjunction with the late Dr. Bogue, A History of the Dissenters, in which Arminianism, and the names of Wesley and Fletcher, were assailed with a degree of virulence worthy of Toplady, of bitter notoriety. Of the amiable Fletcher it is said in this work that in his writings he showed that he was "often very devoutly wicked, and almost blasphemed from a sense of duty." After the lapse of near thirty years Bennett sent forth a second edi tion of this work, with very little abatement of the temper and bigotry manifested in the first, a fact from which we gather that he intends the sun to go down upon his wrath. We think we have discovered the cause of the asperity of this man against Arminianism, or Wesleyan Methodism. In his early days he was apprenticed, at Bath, to a person of the name of Bowin, a cabinet-maker and upholsterer, "who was a good man and a Methodist class leader. I am not sure," says our informant, "that he [Bennett] met in class at the time he was with Mr. Bowin, but, to the best of my recollection, that was the case." If it could be made out satisfactorily that this man, while an apprentice to the above person, was a member of the Methodist society, the difficulty of accounting for his una. bating malignity toward that communion would cease, because it would then be seen to be the malignity of a RENEGADE.

It is said that the two doctors were in the habit of declining the

Some English writers, to their honour be it stated, have done these liberal men the justice to admit this fact, though others have claimed it for persons of our own country, of the Independent denomination of Cromwell's day. But the parties who have so done have shown that they were not acquainted with the history of the Dutch Arminians; otherwise they would not have put forth such pretensions. In the march of liberal feeling, as before stated, Episcopius, next to Arminius, stands the great leader, a circumstance which, among many others, was put to his account to prove that he was a heretic and a sinner. Hence it was said, "Il professé publiqement la tolérance de toutes les sectes qui reconnoissoient l'autorité de l'Ecriture-Sainté, de quelque maniere qu'elles l'expliquent. C'etoit ouvrir la porte à toutes les erreurs. Cette opinion l'avoit fait soupçonner de Socinianisme."* Such were the notions that prevailed some time after his death, that is, for a person to be tolerant was to be a bad man, and to be liberal was to be a heretic.

That the system of Amyrant would prepare the way for the cultivation of the spirit of tolerance and forbearance among the Calvinists of the continent, Curcellæus had distinctly predicted. His anticipations of such a result were founded upon the fact of many of the pastors among the reformed having embraced the views of this divine, while others as violently opposed them; and he saw that unless they cultivated a spirit of forbearance toward each other, their Churches must inevitably be rent in pieces. He, therefore, concluded that the French Calvinists would be impelled by the apprehension of common danger to cherish a better state of feeling among themselves, and that, as a consequence, the Arminians would reap the advantage of it, as it would necessarily manifest itself to others. The event, which he thus foreAnd though, for a time, the

saw, actually took place. merit of the authorship of some parts of this work. It is impossible for us to say which portion of it was written by Dr. Bennett; but certainly, if we may judge of his talents for writing, by his Lectures on the History of Jesus Christ, the baldness and meager. ness of which are confessed even by his own party, we should not be disposed to attribute to him what may be deemed the more intellectual part of the above history.

* Nouveau Dictionaire Historique; article, Episcopius.