most unscriptural belief; for it is declared that "He who began a good work in us will perfect it," and that "Jesus is the AUTHOR and FINISHER of our faith." In short the doctrine is so contrary to reason, so inconsistent in itself, and so opposed to Scriptural testimony, that one would almost suppose that nothing but the spirit of controversy for its own pastime, could ever have broached any thing so transcendantly preposterous.

Since, then, the Author of the Beacon" acknowledges, and the Reviewer coincides with his views,— that the knowledge of the truth, even by reading of the Holy Scriptures, can only be obtained by the preparatory operations of the Holy Spirit upon the heart, and that when received can only by the same power be rendered capable of producing "fruit unto holiness," is not the same watchfulness required, in order to the attainment of correct and clear views of the Gospel, as it would be were the external means of Scripture withdrawn? Is there not the same danger of being "blinded by the self-importance which their own delusions may produce," when reading the Scriptures, as at any other time? Does the simple fact of reading the Scriptures place us of necessity in a situation in which we are made incapable of delusions of our own, or of Satan's either? Christ says,

My

sheep know my voice, and the voice of a stranger will they not follow." But the author of the " Beacon," and his friends the Reviewers, according to their views of Christianity, would lead us to conclude that the voice of Christ cannot be heard except in the writings of the Old and New Testament, for they exclude the influence of the Spirit but in conjunction with the text,

or as I. C. calls it, "the outward word," so that unless a man either has the power of fleeing to his Bible, or has his memory well stored with its contents, he is left not only a prey to the delusions of the evil one, but to every suggestion of his own mental powers. And I would fain ask the advocates of this extraordinary doctrine, how they can assure themselves or others that this is really "the truth as it is in Jesus?" What reason can they give for this hope that is in them, that their hope of life and salvation, and other men's hope of the same, rests entirely upon the Holy Spirit's operation on the heart at-such time only, when with the outward eye and ear, they are reading or hearing read, the writings of Prophets and Apostles, and just so much of them too, as the learned men of the world have thought sufficient for the purpose? Is this really a truth, or is it only a suggestion of the mind, or is it a delusion of Satan? If it be a delusion of Satan, we know him to be the "father of lies," and therefore that he should tell this lie would not surprise us-if but a mere " suggestion" of the mind, unaided by any satanic prompter, then the "suggestion" of my mind, or of the mind of any other person, is as much authority against it, as the "suggestion" of Isaac Crewdson and the Reviewers on its behalf. If, however, it be a scriptural truth, I would ask I. C. and his friends, what portion of the Scriptures they were reading at the time, when the influence of the Divine Spirit prepared their hearts for its reception? For, mind—according to their declarations, the Scripture is "the ultimate appeal for the truth of every doctrine," but is nevertheless incapable of conveying the truth to the

heart WITHOUT the influence of the Spirit ;-therefore if it be the truth that the Spirit does not convey the truth without the Scripture as an auxiliary, any more than does the Scripture without the Spirit's assistance, and since it is contended that the truth is not communicated but under these circumstances, then this truth itself respecting their united efficacy, and their separate inefficiency, must have been revealed at some time or other, when they were reading or thinking of some portion of the Scriptures.

Now, the influence of the Holy Spirit is completely denied by this doctrine, except upon certain conditions -which conditions are a reference to revelations vouchsafed to "holy men," centuries and centuries ago, originally recorded in another language, and translated into ours, not from the original copies themselves either, but from copies of those copies, of which, probably, I may say more farther on. Under these circumstances alone, say they, does the Holy Spirit operate upon the heart of man. And how do they prove the truth of this doctrine ?—why, by referring you to these aforesaid revelations, and putting constructions upon some passages therein contained, in conformity to those suggestions which most comport with their own particular bent of mind." Yes! they refer you to these self-same revelations, inasmuch, as they say, they are "the ultimate appeal for the truth of every doctrine," and, therefore, of THIS. They must have gone there themselves to ascertain it-and when there, they could not have received it but " by the power of the Holy Spirit," which had "softened and opened" their hearts for its reception; for, say they, "It is indeed by the

66

power of the Holy Spirit that the heart is softened and opened to receive the truth." Now, let me put these plain questions to them.-To what part of the Bible did you apply for the truth of THIS doctrine ? And when you did so apply, did the “ power of the Holy Spirit soften and open your hearts to receive it as a truth?”—Did the Holy Spirit reveal to you that this doctrine is truth ?—Are you prepared to say that such is the case ?—because, if you are NOT, it resolves itself into a mere 66 impression," suggestion,” or “delusion of Satan ;" and "physician, heal thyself," may be accompanied with the words of Isaac Crewdson himself, where he states "how important is it that all, especially those who profess to be ministers of Jesus Christ, should possess correct and clear views of the Gospel, as taught in the Scriptures: lest, blinded by the selfimportance which their own delusions produce, and not distinguishing between the infallibility of the Holy Spirit, and their own fallibility, they become blind leaders of the blind. For if, by any partial or distorted statement, they produce an IMPRESSION which the whole counsel of God, as revealed in Holy Scripture, does not warrant, they dishonour its divine Author, by pretending his authority, for what he has not revealed; whereby they greatly endanger the souls of those who receive the erroneous impression."

Has THIS doctrine, then, God's authority? Has his Holy Spirit revealed it to you? And were your hearts opened and softened for its reception, at such time, under such circumstances, and by the specific modus operandi, by which alone its truth, according to your statement, could be established? Mind, this is your

own process of discovering truth; and I only ask you whether you maintain this doctrine, for truth, as the result of this process? It will not do for you to heap text upon text, and then tell me that it is in conformity with " the true revelation of God, by Holy Scripture." "The test" you have so vauntingly held up in the face of day, must not be thus dexterously and ingeniously eluded—you must not talk about the Holy Spirit opening and softening the heart to receive the truth, and then, confounding all precision of speech and distinctness of ideas, give us your constructions of texts of Scripture, as "the true revelation of God:"-this will not do! Clearly and plainly tell me, has, or has not, the Holy Spirit revealed to you, that he only reveals truth to man "by the instrumentality of the outward word (the Scriptures), either immediately or indirectly applied?" If you say he has NOT revealed it to you, then the "reason for the hope that is in you" is derived from impressions" made on your minds by some particular texts of Scripture, or, perhaps, from one of the other two causes, which yourselves have assigned as the "reason for the hope that is in" others. If, however, you expressly declare that the "truth of this doctrine" has been revealed to you, I reply, that I KNOW, whatever you may think or know either, that God's Holy Spirit has operated, does operate, and, I pray, may continue to operate, and not be quenched, in my heart without the assistance of any external means whatever; not that I mean to assert that He invariably does operate, independently of such means, as you assert to the contrary, that He never does act without. And, whether you own it or not, I KNOW that " a