This is

say, that they shed the same desolation upon the heart. not the case. They differ as the shadowy charm of a bewildering dream differs from the horrors of a desolating tempest. Scepticism, or philosophic impiety, is necessarily fiendlike, and by a law of its nature moves with a stern and impious recklessness. But while the sceptic embarks in the enterprise of hostility to all religion, and arms himself against God and conscience, there is something in mysticism, which, though wild and extravagant, is nevertheless often splendidly so;-something that is not in the same manner repulsive, because it does not appear in the same impious garb and temper. The mystic is an ardent votary of religion, who lacks that inestimable requisite to christian experience which the apostle calls a "sound mind." He is wrought up to the belief, that he possesses a sort of inspiration, and his reason is trammeled, perhaps overborne, by the flow of imaginative emotions. In short the blood that circulates in the arteries of scepticism, is frightfully black and cold, and is altogether different from that which gives life to the mystic, whose character usually combines much moral excellence and self-denying devotion with the exhalations of a distempered mind.

Mysticism presents a great diversity of shades, from the soft and beautiful colorings in which it enchanted the mind of Fenelon to the wild ravings of Swedenborg. Many excellent and useful men have been found among its votaries, and, in some of its forms, it is eminently contagious. When the soil is properly fitted it flourishes with great luxuriance. Perhaps this is to be accounted for chiefly by the fact, that men are naturally and strongly inclined to abuse their intuitive perception of the soul's immortality and of a spiritual world, by seeking familiarity with the supernatural and spiritual through the medium of sensible images; thus sensualizing the spiritual, and in religion changing christian experience into supernatural influxes of feeling, or palpable communication with the Divinity. However it may be accounted for, few mental diseases are more contagious, or more fondly harbored than this, wherever it spreads. It steals into the mind like a spirit of fascination, trans

* M, Victor Cousin furnishes a brief analysis of mysticism in the fourth lecture of his "Cours de l'Histoire de la Philosophie." Some of the best things in his "Cours" are contained in the twelve first lectures, which have not yet won the honors of translation. He says of mysticism,

"Le mysticisme n'est pas autre chose qu'un acte de désespoir de la raison humaine, qui, forcée de renoncer au dogmatisme, et ne pouvant se résigner au scepticisme, ne voulant pas non plus abjurer son indépendance, tente une sorte de compromise entre l'inspiration religieuse et la philosophie."

However backward any of Cousin's readers may be to receive some of the peculiarities of his philosophy, all will concede to him, not only great abilities and various learning, but a reverence for christianity, which secures him against any thrust that can be intended when his name is associated with "the infidel philosophers of France and Germany."

muting its imaginations into realities, and the glow of nervous excitement into the ecstacy of inspiration. In its more sober forms, especially, its power to beguile is wonderful, and wherever it secures dominion it acts like a bewildering spell.

Perhaps there never was a man in the slightest degree infected with mysticism, who was farther removed from dreamy quietism, or who was more truly and extensively useful than John Wesley. Probably the only way to gain an accurate view of the peculiarities of his mind and character, as well as of the influences that tended to make him what he was, is to read his journals in connection with the memoirs of his parents, particularly of his mother. None of his biographers have quite succeeded. We do not see the man precisely as he was, in Southey. He appears more naturally in his life by Watson, which, upon the whole, is one of the best that has appeared. But to contemplate him through a medium that is perfectly clear and colorless, we must look into his journals. There we see John Wesley. There we may survey the mechanism of his character and trace its progress through all its stages. There we find the true expression of its peculiar elements, the insane as well as the sane,-the wild and extravagant as well as the correct and pure. They contain a record of his superstition, his mysticism, his living piety, his holy life, his tireless labors to save men, his sufferings from persecution, his unshaken steadfastness in his work until he went " up higher" to stand before the throne. Far be it from us to speak of Mr. Wesley without suitable feelings of respect. He was a highly distinguished servant of God, whose glory no human efforts can tarnish, and if we could we would not pluck a leaf from the crown that laurels his brow. We regard him as a luminary of uncommon brightness, whose shining gladdened the church, and whose splendor still lingers upon its path. His name is enrolled with those worthies whose destiny is to shine forever in the kingdom of heaven with the brightness of the firmament. But while we eulogize, we cannot be insensible of the fact, that this luminary was not perfectly unclouded. There were spots upon it, which enthusiastic admiration may easily overlook, but which the unjaundiced eye of a candid christian spectator may detect and expose without the least diminution of merited respect.

We design in this article briefly to notice his sermons* on the "Witness of the Spirit." In describing the evidences of regeneration, he makes two kinds, namely, the witness of the Divine Spirit and the witness of our own spirit. By the latter, he means our consciousness of possessing "the fruits of the Spirit," or holy ex

These sermons will be found in the New-York edition of his works, vol. i. pp. 85-108.

ercises, and this he makes secondary. The former he sets forth as the primary and great witness,-the sine qua non of regeneration, and of this he treats in these sermons, in which he unfolds the sentiment we propose to examine; a sentiment the influence of which may be traced in the character of Methodism every where, from the period when Wesley landed in England, on his return from Georgia, to the present time. It is his mysticism; and our first object will be to give our readers a distinct view of the sentiment as he has stated it.

In the first place then, what does he mean by it? He describes it as a real impression. Thus he says:

The testimony of the Spirit is an inward IMPRESSION on the soul, whereby the Spirit of God directly witnesses to my spirit, that I am a child of God; that Jesus hath loved me and given himself for me, and that all my sins are blotted out, and that I, even I, am reconciled to God.'

Observe, it is not only an impression, but an impression that brings intelligence from heaven and distinctly communicates it. In other words, it is strictly a divine revelation. This is not a loose paragraph which carelessly dropped from his pen. It was not set down in haste. Twenty years after it was written, he referred to it in the second of these sermons, and remarked, "I see no cause to retract any part of this. Neither do I see how any of these expressions may be altered so as to make them more intelligible." Therefore it was with him a matter of deliberate doctrine, that every regenerated sinner receives the assurance of pardon and adoption by means of direct revelation from heaven, in conveying which the Holy Spirit communicates with the soul in sensible approaches or impressions.*

2. Another peculiarity in Mr. Wesley's views, is, that the impression commences and is felt before the commencement of holiness in the sinner's character. It comes in that previous renewal of the heart which must take place before there can be holiness of life, which is the indispensable pre-requisite, the real and only fountain of holy exercises. But let him speak for himself:

'We must love God before we can be holy at all, this being the root of all holiness. Now we cannot love God, till we know he loves us:

* Indeed Mr. Wesley did not hesitate to call these communications of the Spirit revelations. See the first part of his "Lecture to one who had lately joined the Quakers." In his note on Rom. viii. 16, Dr. A. Clarke says, "and the knowledge of this adoption cannot be given by any human or earthly means; it must come from God himself." In other words, there is no way in which a converted sinner can be assured of his conversion but by direct revelation. The evidence furnished in the bible is of no avail. Faith and consciousness avail nothing. He will be ignorant of the fact, unless it be directly revealed to him from above.

we love him because he first loves [loved] us; and we cannot know his love to us, till his Spirit witnesses it to our spirit. Till then we cannot believe it.'

What cannot love God,-cannot know, cannot believe the love of God until visited by inspiration,-until we receive a new revelation of it! What unsophisticated man can read his bible and believe it impossible to love God without such a visitation, or that loving God is not holiness! But, to understand this mystical language, it must be borne in mind, that Wesley's views of regeneration included much of what is known as the taste-scheme. Did it come within our present design to enter into this discussion, it might be profitable to make a minute examination into the theories and language of our Methodist brethren on this subject.

3. We note a third characteristic of this impression. It possesses certain criteria by which its divinity is instantaneously, mysteriously, and infallibly demonstrated. Let our readers weigh the following language:

'Suppose God were now to speak to any soul, "Thy sins are forgiven thee," he must be willing that soul should know his voice; otherwise he would speak in vain. And he is able to effect this; for whenever he wills, to do is present with him. And he does effect it; that soul is ABSOLUTELY assured "this is the voice of God."

Nor is this all. The subjects of these communications are shielded against the importunities of doubt by the plea, that the thing is inexplicable and they can give no account of it. Thus he says:

To require a minute and philosophical account of the intrinsic marks whereby we know the voice of God, is to make a demand which can never be answered; no, not by one who has the deepest knowledge of God.'

That no invention of human philosophy can explain the mode of the Holy Spirit's operation, all must agree, who concur with the bible or the convictions of a sane mind. But observe, what he describes as incomprehensible, is not how the Spirit acts upon the soul. He has already explained this to be by an "impression," a "voice." The only thing inexplicable is, that intrinsic something by which the divine voice is at once and infallibly distinguished from every thing false and delusive.

4. Except in one circumstance, his view of these special revelations is identical with that of the Quakers, and most other mystics of a similar cast. In the office he assigns to the "witness of our own spirits," he differs from the Quakers. Barclay maintains, that the influxes of "Immediate revelation" are the primary guide; and being above the bible cannot be subject to any test.

Wesley professes to have furnished a test by which to determine whether they are genuine. He directs those who profess to have heard the voice of God, to look to the "fruits." If it is not immediately succeeded by the witness of their own spirit, or the consciousness of possessing christian graces, they are deluded. It is a fatal objection to his test, that, when the fruits do follow, its power to detect delusion is gone. If true piety is discovered, no matter how much delusion is blended therewith, the test has no authority to proclaim, that all is not well. After investing the "witness of the Spirit" with intrinsic marks by which its divine. character is infallibly known, it was with a strange inconsistency, although doubtless under the influence of a much more sober and sounder view of christian character, that he differed from the Quakers concerning the test. The test is wholly superfluous, for why should there be an appeal to fruit, if the man to whom the Spirit speaks "is absolutely assured, this is the voice of God?" In such a case he cannot be mistaken, and what need has he of more evidence? Barclay is the more consistent of the two, for, if a man receives a revelation that itself contains indubitable evidence of being from God, how dare he doubt and subject it to a test? Mr. Wesley's appeal to the fruits, however, unquestionably contributed to save him from quietism, and to promote the excellence and untiring activity of his zeal.

We now propose to make a few remarks upon the fanciful nature and evil tendencies of this doctrine.

1. This doctrine of impressions must be regarded as an unwarranted fancy of mysticism. There are "evidences of regeneration," and it is certain, that every converted man may be assured of his conversion. Or rather, regeneration, the change wrought, evidences itself,-it is a matter of consciousness; and to talk of its "evidences," as something apart and distinct from its nature, is to use language without precision. If regeneration takes place in our hearts, we are capable of perceiving it, just as we perceive every other change in character. Our exercises are the offspring, not of an indefinable "gracious ability," but of our moral agency: we produce them voluntarily; of course they come under our notice, and we may have a distinct and accurate consciousness of our moral state. And surely no christian can know himself too accurately, or guard his character with too much vigilance. But, in arriving at a knowledge of his state, it is of the first consequence for him to know, that by exciting his feelings and analyzing his impulses, he will not only retard his progress, but blind and delude himself. His great inquiry should be, "Have I a christian temper? Have I ceased to do evil, and learned to do well?" How the Holy Spirit proceeds in the work of regeneration, he cannot tell. How this divine agent operates in producing and sustaining