But if the sinner persist in forsaking his own mercy -if he resist or elude the many powerful impressions and convictions with which he is mercifully visited from time to time, the godly susceptibilities implanted at regeneration will be effectually quenched -will strive with him no more.

And then, gentlemen, as I humbly conceive, the sinner of whom we speak will be given over to a reprobate mind-will become reprobate; and be predestinated-prejudged, that is, or precondemned -unto perdition.

Gentlemen, the view which I have taken of the doctrine to which you object may be thus compendiously summed up: I hold it to consist in a change or amendment of nature, purchased by the atonement; and by one of those ways of God's wisdom which are past man's finding out, instrumentally conferred or effected at the sacrament of Baptism, by virtue of which certain godly susceptibilities endued with a self-acting, or rather divinely active, energy, are implanted in the soul.

quence of such an earnest and solicitous inquiry after Divine truth, would be the attainment of faith of a proportionable liveliness and strength.

The inscription on the market cross at Devizes records the awful death of a woman, who, when accused of purloining some article of trifling value, imprecated some fearful judgment upon herself; that the devil might fly away with her '—if the Author remember right-if she were guilty of the theft with which she was charged; and immediately fell down dead, with the article she had been accused of stealing in her possession.

Now, gentlemen, if you assent to what I have advanced in the course of the above exposition of the doctrine of regeneration; and more particularly if you allow that the description which I have given of its effect and operation is correct, it will be well. My exposition will, in that case, greatly facilitate the inquiry upon which we are about to enter; if it do not obviate all necessity of resorting to it, by convincing you that the doctrine which has been demonstrated to be that taught by our Church with respect to regeneration, does not afford any justifiable cause of secession from her communion.

But supposing you to object to what I have said; supposing you call in question, nay, expressly deny, any, or even all of the positions-or opinions rather -advanced in the course of my exposition; in that case, I must beg to observe, our contemplated inquiry will be in no degree affected by our disagreement in this particular; by what you will probably be pleased to designate as the failure of my attempt to convey a just and determinate conception of the doctrine objected to. The result of my supposed failure will simply be that of our proceeding to make the inquiry agreed upon without having arrived at any just and determinate conception of the doctrine demonstrated to be that taught by our Church with respect to regeneration; or rather with such a conception of it, whether just and determinate or the reverse, as each of us may previously have formed.

But, gentlemen, as this letter has already exceeded the usual length of my communications to you, I will defer our contemplated inquiry to a subsequent one and for the present conclude by subscribing myself,

With all deference and respect,

Your obedient servant,

A LAYMAN,

Sincerely interested in the peace and welfare of the Church.

80

LETTER V.

REVEREND GENTLEMEN,

FROM the circumstance, I doubt not, of your not entertaining an idea that the doctrine “that regeneration is wrought by virtue of a Divine efficacy inherent in the sacrament of Baptism," is "what is taught by our Church," at the time that you wrote the first of your Plain Tracts, you have advanced, in the course of it, many serious and most startling objections to that doctrine. In truth, it is evident that you have urged every argument that occurred to you, and brought forward every proof which it was in your power to adduce, for the purpose of establishing what you conceive to be its error. And in consequence, in prosecuting our contemplated inquiry as to' whether full and decisive proof can be adduced that the doctrine "that regeneration is wrought by virtue of a Divine efficacy inherent in the sacrament of Baptism," involves actual and positive error,' we cannot adopt a readier or more effectual method of procedure, than that of resorting to an examination of the various objections urged against it in your tract. For since, as I have mentioned, and as will manifestly appear as we proceed in the proposed ex

amination, you have brought forward, in the course of your first tract, the strongest arguments and most convincing proof which it was in your power to adduce against the doctrine adverted to, it will follow -it may safely be concluded, that by obviating your objections I shall adopt the most effectual means of convincing you that that doctrine does not involve a degree of error sufficient to constitute it a justifiable cause of separation from that confessedly catholic and apostolic Church in which it has pleased Providence to cast our lot.

The course, then, which I propose to adopt in the following letter, is this :-That of fairly stating the various objections which you urge against the doctrine which has been demonstrated to be "that taught by our Church with respect to regeneration," and answering them as satisfactorily as I can.

The first argument that you advance against the doctrine" that regeneration is wrought by virtue of a Divine efficacy inherent in the sacrament of Baptism," is to be found in your preliminary remarks. It is contained in the following paragraph, which occurs in page 6:

66

They" (that is, "some warm friends of spiritual regeneration," as the context informs us) seem willing to allow that a change of state does always take place in baptism, though not always a change of nature. But what is the nature of that change of state which always attends baptism? Is it a change of state which admits to privileges short of