and conflict of a pilgrimage in the old straight way. He would have him, by all means, send for his wife and children and live in a pleasant respectable way in the beautiful village of Morality in the great town of Carnal Policy.

In fact there is nothing but a return to, and a faithful application of, the homely, outspoken, primitive theology of the unchanging Bible which can rescue the Church from the mournful laxness of discipline which is now opening wide the doors of the Church to the world, and thus virtually turning the Church out of doors. Nothing but this God-given and Heaven-blest old way of the Fathers that can correct the prevailing, insane desire for exciting, showy Union meetings, and for superficial, Union literature which dilutes the Gospel and debauches the taste of the Church, leading it to clamor for the preaching which will draw, like a theatre, the masses of the people.

It is not true, as is so flippantly said, that the churches sufficiently understand the distinguishing and controlling doctrines of the Gospel; and the shepherds will have a solemn account to render therefor. What Christian understands enough of Christ and his Cross, which is but another expression for the whole cluster of Christian principles, and which alone the Apostle determined to preach and teach? Disguise it as we may, it is a fearful sign of the prevalence of new and perverting theology that multitudes in the churches are profoundly ignorant of the teachings of the Scriptures concerning the divine way of justifying lost sinners. Though there are no themes so interesting to healthy and vigorous minds, we ask what proportion of the congregations, or even of the churches, can give you any clear definition of what is meant by Regeneration, Justification, Adoption, and Sanctification? How many can enumerate the divine attributes, and not be stricken dumb when told that they believe three persons to be one person, and one God to be three Gods? How many can converse intelligently about the office-work of the Holy Spirit, the ground of the Christian hope of Perseverance, or the state into which the race fell by the sin of our first parents? And if these and their kindred subjects are so poorly comprehended, what hope may we reasonably indulge that Christians will stand fast, when new and plausible errors spring up, and that they will not be "carried about by every wind of

doctrine"? What hope that, ere long, we shall not have, in every church, the talkative Mr. By-ends with all his numerous relations; "and in particular my Lord Turn-about, my Lord Time-server, my Lord Fair-speech; also Mr. Smoothman, Mr. Facing-both-ways, Mr. Any-thing; and the parson of our parish, Mr. Two-tongues, was my mother's own brother, by father's side; and to tell you the truth, I am become a gentleman of good quality; yet my great-grandfather was but a waterman, looking one way and rowing another, and I got most of my estate by the same occupation."

The last evidence of our drifting from the old standards which I shall mention, is found in the common confessions of church-members. The very mention of the themes of the Shorter Catechism in the presence of young, excitable America, creates laughter and ridicule. Imagine the Apostle Paul to arise and to go into our bookstores, our counting-rooms, our shops, and seriously introduce the doctrines which the early Christians so loved; and how quick the lip of the fast Christian of our day curls with sport or with scorn, while the author of the Epistle to the Romans turns pale and trembles with amazement to hear, "Why, you do not really puzzle your head with, or read on, these subjects nowadays, do you? Why, these old doctrines are dead and buried long ago. Nobody studies the Catechism now. Does your minister preach on such subjects? He must be two hundred years behind the times. There is but here and there an old fogy who cares a fig for that kind of Christian literature. It is extremely unpopular even in Puritan New England. Why, Sir, you are not awake to the times in which we live. Mind is active, ministers must be wide awake or they'll be left behind. Everything goes by steam now. We do not go to heaven in the lonely, slow, and toilsome way of former ages. They have a railroad, Sir, and go in cheerful crowds by steam, and have a good social time of it too. That old slough of despond has been entirely filled up by the liberality and public spirit of this wonderful age. The wicket gate was a very narrow and bigoted entrance, Sir; and it has been greatly widened and beautified. Bunyan's old friend, Evangelist, who used to give each Christian a roll to carry and to examine with so much care, is

now ticket-master, who gives to each passenger a neat card which he has only to hand to the conductor, Mr. Smooth-itaway. Instead of having to carry our bundles on our back, according to the ridiculous old fashion, we deposit them safely in the baggage-car, and receive checks as security that they shall be restored to us at the end of the journey. Yea, we have even persuaded Old Apolyon, who used to give such annoyance to pilgrims, to be our engineer, and a capital one he makes too. The famous Hill Difficulty, Sir, is tunnelled right through; and when we pass, as we do now and then, one or two of the obstinate, old-fashioned, grim pilgrims, who still persist in going the old way, our wide awake engineer puffs steam in their faces, to the great amusement of the happy passengers."

Surely, "Time is the greatest innovator; and if time of course alters things to the worse, and wisdom and counsel shall not alter them to the better, what shall be the end?"

ARTICLE II.

WILL FUTURE PUNISHMENT BE MERELY THE RESULTS OF NATURAL LAWS ?

WE Confess to "heresy-hunting" in this article. The charge often made is true of us in this endeavor. We hear and believe that the bulls of Bashan have come even unto the mountains that are round about Jerusalem. We have ourselves seen where the boar out of the wood has broken down the hedges, and wasted the vineyard of the Lord. With a frank avowal of our purpose, zeal, and expectation, we enter on the chase.

We confess, also, to an effort in this article for "a divisive movement' among the churches to such an extent, if possible, as to separate between the older theology of New England and certain modern innovations, called "improvements,' in the condition of the lost. And if we succeed in bringing back

into favor some doctrines, "older than any now extant" in many pulpits, we shall have gained our end. We hope also to create and strengthen "demands for more stringent measures to guard the old Theology.'

There is not a greater question now agitating the pews, the pulpits, and the theological world, than the condition of the impenitent dead. Something of piety, but far more of carnal reason and a deranged philanthropy, and most of all the restless enmity of the convict against the law, are moving a discussion of this question. The interest felt in it is wide and profound, and such anxiety is there in some evangelical quarters to break away from old fastenings, that the strain on creeds and ordaining councils is very great. The doctrine of Calvin, Edwards, and Griffin on this question, is not now popular and acceptable with many who call themselves Calvinistic and Edwardian. There is a feeling growing up with belles-lettres scholarship in the pulpit, and refinement in the congregation, that such a doctrine does not harmonize with the humanities and philanthropy of the age. It is esteemed abhorrent from a refined and tender piety.. So it is suppressed by the preacher, while he gives attention to "practical" topics. He does not eject it from the creed of the church. That would alarm the older membership and suggest universalism. The dogma is retained, but as a country-parlor, that is never opened and aired for use. The doctrine is qualified and compromised in various ways. Some invent, as Olshausen in his "Commentary of the New Testament," so common and popular with the younger ministry, a second probation, and so lay broad ground for universal restoration. Some confound disciplinary with penal suffering in this world, as the author of Nemesis Sacra, who pleads for retribution here, and by a confused philosophy spreads the outlines of hope for the ungodly in the world to come. Others, perplexed by the vastness of the idea of everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, come out boldly for the annihilation of the wicked.

But the less suspicious and more agreeable form of weakening and wasting this doctrine of future retribution, is to limit and qualify its mode of administration by confining it to the action of natural laws. Thus God is withdrawn, positive punishment is

withheld, and the lost soul is left to suffer only the sad effects of a violated constitution.

The show of the older theology is kept up by a continued use of its terms. So the hearer is not left to suspect the orthodoxy of his minister. He gives to the language of the sermon its ancient import, and a meaning beyond the intent of the author. What Hilary said of Nicene hearers under Arian preachers is worthy a repetition in this connection, and is pertinent to many of our congregations. "Sanctiores aures plebis, quam corda sunt sacerdotum." The ears of the audience are more pious than the hearts of the preachers. Great labor is expended in analyzing the moral constitution to show the executive ability of conscience to punish, and great rhetorical effort is made to set forth the punitive visitations of conscience. All this is well in its place and to its measure, but does not exhaust, or at all meet, the import of some fearful passages in God's word.

Yet it keeps up the appearance of preaching the old doctrine of everlasting punishment. Less of philosophy and rhetoric and more of close exegesis would show that all the forces and action of natural laws cannot answer to "the wrath of God" against a lost soul.

And what should lead us in advance to distrust this theory of future punishment by natural laws only, is, that it is quite acceptable to restorationists. They have held it longer than those modern speculators, who would soften and polish for gentle ears the rough orthodoxy of Edwards. The restorationists feel at home in this theory, and see its strong points and irresistible logical inferences for a final and universal salvation without an atonement. So they accept it from orthodox pulpits as a flag of truce and promise of a compromise.

But we pass on to mention some of the objections to the theory.

By the term, natural laws, as used in expressing this theory, we understand the constitution of the man, physical, mental, and moral; and by the results of natural laws we understand the legitimate action, development, and fruit of this constitution, God doing no more than to sustain the conditions of being. For illustration, Ananias and Sapphira received the