a fact exists, and that God decreed it, are identical; and he seems to think that the very circumstance of a fact existing is full proof that God decreed it. Admit these premises, and we will at once agree with the author that if the doctrine we are combating was "not found in the Scriptures, the scheme would be taken out from the analogy of the world." For when we have once admitted, for instance, that the Hindoo, who suffers and dies under the rage of a burning fever, suffers and dies because God has decreed that the healing properties of the quinine "shall not be applied to him;" then may we also conclude, reasoning from analogy, that the sinner who dies in his sins, or dies because God has decreed that that atonement which had an "original applicability to all," should not be applied to him. How absurd such a conclusion! How can a thing be "applicable to all men," when "it is the purpose-the decree of God that it should be actually applied to but a part?" The propositions are not merely "apparently contradictory," but really and essentially so. For if God decreed that the atonement should be applied to but part of the human race, then that very decree rendered it inapplicable to the rest.

But let us follow the essayist a little further. If one interpose the question, Why God made this universal atonement, if he determined for it a partial application? we should be met with the reply, that, "We see in this the hand of the same God that pours the rays of noon-day on barren sands, and genial showers on desert rocks, where no man is." A close inspection will show us that the "analogy" here is more specious than real. In the first place, "the rays of noon-day," and the "genial showers" fall in obedience to a universal law whose existence the determinate facts of science have demonstrated; but, on the other hand, the existence of a decree limiting the applicability of the atonement which is, at the same time, "applicable to all men," has not been satisfactorily proved. Again, is it really in vain, that the "rays of noon-day fall upon barren sands, and genial showers on desert rocks?" God careth for the beasts that roam over the barren wastes, and for the eagle that fixes its ærie upon the desert rock. But who shall say that amidst the changes and vicissitudes of society, the improvements that are progressing in commerce, agriculture, and the arts, these barren wastes may not be fertilized and become the abodes of civilized life-the theatres of thrilling and momentous events? Who shall say that the hitherto unbroken solitude of the desert rocks may not be broken by the din and bustle of another Petra nestled in their fastnesses? But what shall we say of the provision made for the salvation of those to

whom the eternal decree of God forbids its application? What can we say of it? or how can we account it other than (we speak with reverence) a God-dishonoring failure? But when we consider that provision is made for the salvation of all, and no bar is interposed by God to its accomplishment; then we discover at once its analogy to the "constitution and course of nature," by which the necessary blessings of life are provided, and nothing but the vices and follies of man can prevent their being enjoyed by all our race. Let us follow the analogies of the system a little further. "We interpret the decrees of God, so far as we can do it, by facts; and we say that the actual result, by whatever means brought about, is the expression of the design of God." So, then, the fall of man, brought about by the agency of fallen spirits, "is the expression of the design of God;" nay, the very wo and wretchedness of our race, brought about by the vices and follies of man, are only so many expressions of the same design. And yet, forsooth, we are very inconsistent to hold the "evangelical scheme" "responsible for the fall, as well as the recovery, of man." By what analogy in nature is such a system to be maintained? Here are the analogous facts: "Food is not given to all; health is not the inheritance of all; liberty, peace, and wealth, are diffused unequally among men." That these are facts, we readily admit; but whence come they? Come they not even of the lusts, the vices, and follies of men, rather than by "the design of God?" Who shall say that destitution, disease, and servitude are mere manifestations "of the purpose or decree of God," rather than the necessary concomitants of that "existing state of evil" which man has brought upon himself? But the existence of this decree, binding these evils upon our race, must be proved-must be demonstrated, before we can find any parallelism between them and the purposed or decreed partial application of a universal atonement. If God meeteth out liberty to one and servitude to another, then let not the victim of oppression complain of the oppressor in his nightly orisons, but thank God for the manacles that fetter his rust-eaten sinews. Do peace and war come and go absolutely at the bidding of God? and are they only "expressions of his design?" Is the fact, that one man pines away in sickness and poverty, while another rejoices in health and riots in luxury, to be considered as a mere manifestation of "the purpose of God?" And this, too, under the new “statements" of Calvinism? Then let us go back to "the rough-cast system," to the earlier and more honest "statements" of the doctrine.

We will tax the patience of the reader with the consideration of but one more of the positions of the essayist: "Is it owing to any

act of man that the bark of Peru was so long unknown, or that the silver of Potosi slept for ages unseen by any human eye? Is there not evidence that it was the good pleasure of the Giver that the favor should not be bestowed on, men till Columbus crossed the main?" &c. We reply, these blessings, for aught we know, might have been discovered and enjoyed long before, had it not been for the moral degradation and barbarism of that portion of our race. At any rate, these treasures were there, they existed, and were applicable to the use of men; nor have we any evidence of any decree that rendered them inapplicable up to the time of their discovery. If it be urged that the atonement was made, and made for all; still I reply, the purpose of God, according to the system we are combating, rendered it absolutely inapplicable, a mere nullity, so far as it concerns a portion of our race. For that unhappy portion of our race, the atonement is a solemn mockery; the perishing are told that there is a healing balm, but not to be applied to them; the famishing are told that there is a rich "banquet of immortal food" provided for them, but a decree that they shall not be admitted to it; those groaning under the bondage of moral darkness and death are told that there is a city whose streets for ever glitter in the sun-beam of God's countenance, and where the tree of life for ever yields its healing fruit, and that for their admission the ample price is already paid, but, alas! the "decree" has gone forth, and to them its pearly gates shall never open.

Such is a brief outline of this futile effort to find analogies in nature for a doctrine so obviously absurd. The effort was indeed plied with ingenuity and commanding ability; but what architectural skill can rear the stately dome, or form the beautiful temple out of inapt and disjointed materials? The effort is in perfect keeping with many others of a sect that is not satisfied with titling its peculiar and sectarian organizations, "American,”— "National," &c., but that seems to consider itself an exclusive proprietor of every standard evangelical work that can be made to give countenance to its peculiarities, whether the author designed it or not. Butler has reared a pillar of truth of no common magnitude and durability; but the man who essays to shove it under the crumbling and tottering fabric of Calvinism has no ordinary task to perform. We protest against this and all other attempts to amalgamate error; peculiar, partial, and sectarian views, with a work so evangelical in its general character—a work altogether too elevated to be made, by any possible contortion, to stoop down to any exclusive sectarianism.

Amenia Seminary, Jan., 1842.

VOL. II.-20

ART. IX.-CRITICAL NOTICES.

1. A Discourse on the Administration of Discipline. By ELIJAH HEDDING, D. D., Bishop of the M. E. Church. 24mo., pp. 91. New-York: G. Lane & P. P. Sandford. 1842.

THIS manual, small as it is in its dimensions, is a work of very great interest to the church. "The administration of discipline" is one of the most delicate and difficult duties which devolves upon the pastor of the flock of Christ. Embarrassments often arise from the want of specific rules in the New Testament to meet particular cases, and the difficulty with which such cases are reduced to a class, which would naturally come under some established general principle. And hence the great diversity in the administration of church discipline in the bestregulated churches.

Uniformity in all essential points in the administration of the rules of the church is vastly important to the unity and harmony of the body. And there is no doubt but we, as a church, come as near to this as could be reasonably expected. There are not many points of importance upon which the different administrators of the discipline have settled upon divergent courses.

There are, however, many points of great importance which are so far from being explicitly settled in our generally excellent book of Discipline, that especially young and inexperienced administrators are liable to take different views, and to pursue a different course of action. From such causes, beyond a doubt, much injury has befallen the church. In our church the subordinate is so immediately under the eye of his superior, that some degree of caution in proceeding in difficult cases, and a timely reference to constitutional instructions and advisement, will generally prevent fatal mistakes.

But all are not equally cautious in their movements. Some construe the language according to what they conceive its legitimate meaning, without any reference to usage or to the harmony of the whole system; while others study the philosophy of the rule, examine its connections and relations as a member of a complete system. These two processes often conduct men to quite different results; and hence arise injurious and mortifying discrepancies in the administration of the laws of the church. These discrepancies, if not remedied, will generate factions and feuds, and the peace and harmony of the church must give place to strife and discord.

The bishop's Discourse is designed to settle many queries which have arisen in relation to the manner in which some of the rules of the Discipline are to be applied. This is done in a manner as plain, as

natural, and as satisfactory as could be expected. The great experience of the author, in matters of discipline, has furnished him with a variety of facts. He has seen all the difficulties arising from the practical operations of the whole system of Methodism, and of all its various parts. He has been called upon to settle, both in private and in the chair, the thousand and one queries which may be raised upon some obstruse and doubtful points. In addition to his great experience, the venerable bishop has a mind peculiarly adapted to such an analysis and exposition of the Discipline as would be a safe and necessary guide to the inexperienced administrator, and would settle points which sometimes perplex even the wisest heads.

The work is executed with the bishop's characteristic precision and logical skill. The style is simple, perspicuous, natural, and forcible. The expositions are somewhat like axioms, or first principles, in reasoning, self-evident-carrying with them their own evidence. Where reasons are judged necessary, they are given in few words, to be sure, but they are never inconclusive and unsatisfactory.

No preacher, old or young, will be likely to neglect this little book; and most who have any thing to do with the administration of the discipline of the church will make it a pocket companion, certainly, until its contents are stored up in the recesses of the mind.

But the work under consideration is not only a directory to the ministry, it is such an analysis of the government of the Methodist Episcopal Church as should be examined by all, both of the friends and foes to our economy, who may desire to find within a small compass the philosophy of our system truly delineated. And who can read what is here so graphically presented upon the subject of the duties and responsibilities of a bishop, without being deeply affected? Our truly apostolic bishops are the direct antipodes of those who in some portions of Christendom bear the title. Their honors are the censures of the indolent, the ambitious, and the worldly; their emoluments, weariness, painfulness, perils, and poverty; and their relaxation, ceaseless journeyings from conference to conference, far from kindred and earthly home. Their ears must ever be open to the petitions, remonstrances, and complaints of the preachers and their families, and the church at large. The burden of the whole church is upon them.

And yet we sometimes hear of their pride of power, and of their want of sympathy with their sons in the gospel, and their wives and children, in their privations and afflictions! If, indeed, our bishops lived at their ease-laid burdens upon us that they refused to touch with the tip of their fingers; if they rolled in wealth and splendor while the preachers were required to sacrifice all their worldly prospects and comforts, there would be some ground for complaint. But