19-The wicked are easily converted to your theory; but where is the power to convert them to holiness? Our doctrine has converted thousands from Belial to Christ-from sin to holiness-from vice to virtue. But where are your converts? The honest preachers who have come out from among you, and of these there are a few, with one voice declare that your system never did reform an individual; but that it has made many worse, very much worse for embracing it. As I shall make this the sixth specification of the inutility of your system, I shall be at some pains to adduce some evidence in proof of it. I will introduce a very competent person, one of your own editors and preachers, of much moral worth; one, too, whom you have most shamefully abused because of his honesty in relation to his experience while among you. You are, I presume, by this time thinking of Mr. Lewis C. Todd. 1 have no personal acquaintance with that gentleman. I learned he heard me discourse the other day at Garrettsville, Ohio. He was after he left you a Methodist preacher, I believe: I know not what his present views are. His neighbors give him a good name, and his book shows that he is a gentleman of an enlarged and cultivated mind. As far as I have read it, (say 100 pages,) it is clear, strong, and convincing-well written. I have not room for many extracts. I may do the author injustice by short quotations; but I will not misrepresent him:20-"I became a preacher of universal salvation, and was ordained as such in Fairfield, Herkimer county, N. Y. about eight years ago. I believed the doctrine true, and thought that, in proportion as it was propagated, mankind would become good and happy. I preached in different parts, far and near, and itinerated over an extensive region of country, suffering the excesses of heat and cold, and the pitiless peltings of stormy skies, and muddy roads. No danger or effort did 1 consider too great that was possible; for I believe, for a number of years, I should often have rejoiced in the martyr's privilege of attesting my faith. Some years since, however, I occasionally reflected that although the doctrine had spread much faster than I had anticipated, it did not seem to produce the effects I had expected. This gradually cooled my ardor and diminished my zeal, so that for some years I cared but little whether I preached or not. In this state of mind, believing Universalism to be the true sense of the Bible when rightly construed, and being unable to see any considerable good resulting from the system, I was much inclined to doubt divine revelation. I could not go entirely into infidelity, nor feel much confidence in revelation." * "I had seen the blessed influence of the doctrine spread out often on paper, but I could not see them any where else! No-God knows I am honest in this assertion. I do not feel to abuse the denomination; but it is true that I could not for my life see any good resulting to society from the sentiment. This conviction rolled in upon my mind and my feelings with tremendous effect. Alas! thought I, have I been spending my 'labor for that which satisfieth not!' Are all my efforts useless, and only tending to make looser the restraints of religion and virtue!' * * "But with these impressions, I was obliged still to be a Universalist; for I could not make up my mind fully to be an infidel, and viewed all the doctrines of the orthodox almost with abhorrence. I could much easier have gone into infidelity than orthodoxy." * "I know individuals among them of the most amiable dispositions and characters,

* *

*

that would honor any profession. But I do not think their doctrine ever made them so. I candidly aver in the fear of God, that I do not believe the doctrine ever made a single soul any better than he otherwise would have been, while it has been the means of removing necessary restraints, and giving latitude to thousands whose propensities and passions needed restraint, whereby they have indulged in criminal pursuits and gone to perdition. I only judge from what I know-from what I have seen, in reference to the general effects of the doctrine. "The tree must be known by its fruits.' And after taking the fruits of the tree of Universalism into long and deliberate and prayerful consideration, so far as I have ever seen them, I am compelled to conclude the tree is radically defective-that God never designed to give mankind a religion which would do them no good, and about which most of its friends would feel so perfectly indifferent as Universalists generally do about their religion. When I learn of a single drunkard, or swearer, or gambler, or debauchee, or knave being reformed in consequence of the Universalist doctrine, I shall think better of its influence than I do now; for it is my solemn opinion that such an instance never occurred. And I would gladly hold up this truth to all the friends of the doctrine, and make it speak out in thunder to their consciences; and then ask them if * * they will still teach this doctrine to their children!" * "I do not pretend here to accuse all Universalists, who deny future punishment, of dishonesty; but that they do not believe in the scriptures in their plain, natural, unvarnished sense. To bring people to their system, their principal business is to vurnish over the scriptures so as to give them the appearance of teaching what common readers would never have suspected from the words. The system, in my opinion, is so near Deism, as to be precisely the same in its moral effects."

* * *

This is the reason why I think it would be fairer or better for mankind and for posterity, if the advocates of that doctrine would openly espouse Deism. For I do not believe that by preaching open infidelity they could undermine the Christian faith and increase hostility to religion as fast as they do now. I think it impossible to look over the country, and trace Universalism in any place where it prevails to any extent, and not be satisfied of this truth. Many professed Universalists have told me, at different times, that they only supported Universalism as a means of putting down superstition, (revealed religion) Many preachers take a kind of dark course on the subject of future punishment. They preach present punishment; and all their common arguments are calculated to induce a belief that punishment must be here and nowhere else. Yet they do not say but there may be punishment in a future state! Hence, while they teach ultra Universalism in its material features, they hold in reserve the advantage of taking shelter under Restorationism, whenever they are met with scriptures in debate, which they cannot evade, and which they must allow to teach future punishment.Mr. Kneeland was for years a learned and eminent Universalist teacher. He became an Atheist; and says that the fundamental principles, taught by modern Universalists and himself, are the same; that the elements of his system are all found in their arguments; that the principal Universalist writers and teachers are engaged in the same great work that he is-viz. to bring mankind out of superstition into reason and nature. He claims the honor of acting openly and honestly in promoting the

*

same results, which he says his Universalist coadjutors are promoting in their own way. I am informed by a reputable gentleman from Boston that Universalist societies in that region open their temples, and pay him for his instructions on Atheism, or Pantheism, which is substantially the same thing." "My objections to Universalism are founded mainly upon the fact of its inefficiency to reform the wicked, and to promote the growth and living energy of vital piety." "Sincerely and deliberately believing that such is the effect of the Universalian doctrine, I appeal to the heart-searching God for the purity of my motives. while I hereby publicly renounce the doctrine as unscriptural and of pernicious tendency; and I withdraw from all ecclesiastical connexion with the people called Universalists.

LEWIS C. TODD."

All of which is respectfully submitted-by yours faithfully,

A. CAMPBELL.

MR. LYND'S THIRD ATTEMPT.

From the Cross & Baptist Journal,

REPLY TO MR. CAMPBELL.

[CONTINUED FROM PAGE 450.]

THE Confusion of Mr. Campbell's philosophy will be apparent in the case of David will be admitted that he fully perceived and felt the motives to holiness, presented in the word of God, and addressed to his moral nature, before he sinned in the case of Bathsheba. At the time he sinaed he did not appreciate or feel the force of these motives in his conscience or his heart. But did this destroy his knowledge of those motives, his full conviction of their importance? Certainly not. He knew perfectly well that he was committing great sin both against men and against God; but the temptation preponderated over all his convictions, and he fell.

Take another case: Before a man is renewed certain motives are presented to his mind to engage in a sinful course. These motives are exactly suited to his depraved inclinations, and he feels the full force of them in his heart. He engages with pleasure in this sinful course. But after a time, he is renewed by the Spirit of God. He hates the things he once loved, and loves the things he once hated. The motives that formerly operated upon him, are, by way of temptation, again suggested to his mind. Does he feel their force in his heart now, and yield to their influence? Do they captivate his spirit as they did before? No: but why not? Does he less comprehend the nature of those motives than he did before? Before he felt the motives, and of course, according to Mr. C. himself, he fully understood them. But by what law of the human mind could he cease to understand them fully, when he ceased to feel their power upon his heart? Will Mr. C. tell us by what law? I presume not. The fact is he comprehends those motives better than be ever did, and the clearer his comprehension of them, the less force have they upon his heart. Why is this? Because his disposition is now averse to the course to which these motives prompt. And here we arrive at the true state of the case. Men naturally hate holiness, and the clearer it is discovered to them, and the more they see of their own vileness in the light of that holiness, the more they hate it, while the heart remains unchanged. While a sinner is thus looking at holiness and hating it, the Holy Spirit has power to soften his heart, and in an instant to make him cry out for mercy.

"To be fully convinced is to be fully disposed," has no common sense in it. Mr. C. has not even attempted to meet the arguments in my last reply. He has wondered at my want of good sense in using the arguments; but mark it, reader, he has not tried to answer them. Will Mr. Campbell now make the trial.

To convince and to persuade are the great aims of every moral argument. To prove

that certain things are as stated, either by testimony or by reasoning from admitted premises, is to secure the judgment that they are so; but to persuade inen to act two things aje necessary:-1. They must be persuaded that the action will answer some end; and, 2. They must have a passion for that end. To illustrate, I will take a miser of large possessions. I represent to him the condition of a family in his neighborhood perishing for want of the necessaries of life. I give him unquestionable proof that the family is reputable and has been brought to its present distress by a series of adverse providences beyond their control. I appeal to his ability to relieve them. He knows that he possesses this ability, but he refuses to aid because his passion for money is so strong that he cannot part with any of it. I appeal to his pride, and convince him that it will conduce to his Lonor, that it will raise him in the estimation of his neighbors. Here I show that the action will answer some end. But his passion for his money is stronger than his passion for the estimation of his neighbors, and be still refuses to give. I appeal to his pity, and prove satisfactorily to him that it will relieve a miserable family. But passion for money has long since closed up his heart to the feelings of pity, and he refuses to give. On another occasion he is informed of a scheme in which he can invest some money to great advantage. He is convinced by the arguments presented to his mind that it will promote his interests, by increasing his property. He has a passion for this kind of interest, and at once enters into the necessary arrangements. He is immediately persuaded to

act.

Let us take another case:-A person goes to a friend who has a bitter enemy. He lays before him a plan, which, if carried out, will have a tendency to mortify that enemy. His reasoning is conclusive. His friend perceives that such a course of action will produce this result. He is of course convinced, and if the simple fact that the action will answer some end could persuade him to act, he would be persuaded to act. But he has no passion for that end. He has no resentment in his heart towards that enemy, and therefore he will not be persuaded to act for the sake of mortifying him.

Take one more illustration:-A person is living in moderate but comfortable circumstances In this city He is informed of the rapid prosperity of some new settlement in a distant part of the West. The advantages to a rising family are vividly portrayed. Land is low in price; but from the progress of the place, it must command a great value in a few years. A few hundred dollars expended judiciously at this time will secure an ample fortune to his family ten or fifteen years hence. Considerable difficulties will have to be encountered for a time; but on the whole, the benefit will greatly overbalance other con siderations. He perceives that the facts are as stated, that the reasoning is conclusive as to the prospective results. The course of action recommended will answer some end, but he is not affected by it. Why not? He has no passion on the whole for the end. He prefers his ease. Show him how he can accomplish the same end and gratify his passion for ease, and he is persuaded at once to act.

Now in bringing the moral arguments or motives of the gospel before the mind of a sinner, it is not enough that he be convinced of a great end to be gained; he must have a relish for that end before he can be induced to act. In vain you appeal to his hopes of future blessedness. His passion for present enjoyment preponderates. His heart is opposed to the self-denial required in order to that blessedness. In vain you appeal to his fears, and warn him of the uncertainty of life. He may be made to tremble in view of a judgment to come; and yet so strong is his depravity, his passion for worldly pleasure, that he will say to you, 'Go thy way for this time; when I have a convenient season I will call for thee.' In vain you appeal to the honor which God will confer on all who serve him. He has no passion for the honor which comes from God, but seeks glory of men. In vain you present all the motives of the Bible to holy self-denial and consecration to God. He prefers his ease. The love, the passion for sin closes up his heart against the motives of the gospel. There is no fear of God before his eyes. Show him how he can get to heaven by paying for it, and he will spend large sums; or how he may be saved without holiness, self-denial, prayer, and other spisitual exercises, and he is at your command. While he is in this state the Holy Spirit can, through the truth, give him a relish for spiritual objects change his heart, and prepare him for heaven.

The only proof which Mr. Campbell offers to sustain his philosophy, is, that the Saviour, in the parable of the Sower, uses the word understand as he applies it. He says, "The question is, What is the difference between the man that hears the word to the salvation of his soul, and the other three sorts of hearers in the parable?' His decision of this all-absorbing question is, 'He that received seed into the good ground, is he that beareth the word and understandeth it.' Now Mr. C. knows that the Greek word used here is suniemi from sun, together with, and iemi, to send or put, and that the literal or proper meaning is to send or put together. In this place and in other places it is employed metaphorically to signify to put one's mind to, to regard, or to feel its full influence. The other evangelists confirm this sense. Mark says, 'Such as hear the word, and receive it.' Luke says keep it.' The decision of the Saviour, then, upon this all-absorbing question, is, 'He that received seed into the good ground, is he that heareth the word, and keepeth it.' Certainly Mr. L. does not say that the man by the way-side might have perfectly kept the word, and yet remained an enemy. No, no, Mr. Campbell, this play upon words will not satisfy men of sense. That the man who kept it understood it, I grant; but it is altogether beyond Mr. Campbell's logic to prove that the way side hearer who kept it not, did not understand it. It is perfectly a begging of the whole question.

Mr. Campbell says, 'I speak of fully displaying and fully comprehending all the moral motives of the Bible, as essential to the development of all its moral power.' Now, mark, when the motives of the gospel are fully displayed to the mind of a sinner, and he fully feels them in his heart and conscience and keeps them, then all the moral power of the gospel is developed. And then he affirms that no person has ever felt these motives in his conscience and heart, and kept them, and yet remained indisposed. But does not every reader perceive that Mr. Campbell has no antagonist in this point? And does not Mr. Campbell see that he has to travel back to any first argument, and meet it, or acknowledge that he is defeated? His whole labor bas resulted in the wonderful affirmation, that to be fully disposed is to be fully disposed, as I have already shown. Here I leave this new phliosophy to the meditation of our friends, reserving to myself the privilege of a few more sheets of paper in relation to it should it ever be found necessary.

I will now direct the reader to a condensed view of the teaching of the Bible upon the subject of divine influence 1. The Bible teaches that men are unbelievers, not for the want of evidence, but from blindness of mind, and enmity of heart to the truth as it is in Jesus. They will not come to Christ that they might have life. The heart of man is entirely depraved. Numerous passages of scripture may be offered in proof.

And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagi tion of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.' 'What then? are we (Jews) better than they (Gentiles?) No, in no wise; for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles that they are all under sin; as it is written. There is none righteous, no, not one. They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.' 'The carnal mind is enmity against God, not subject to his law, neither indeed can be.' 'Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past, in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were, by nature, the children of wrath, even as others. They that are in the flesh cannot please God.' If there was any thing good or virtuous in the hearts of men, so far men would please God. This then is the true account of the matter as I understand it. The understanding is darkened, being alienated from the life of God; the will is in rebellion against the claims of the divine law; the affections are earthly and sensual; there is an entire want of conformity to the image of God; and the soul is destitute of all relish for spiritual objects.

2. We can prove from examples in the Bible the impossibility of overcoming the natural blindness and enmity of the human heart, by any evidence, or motive, consistent with our present state, independently of divine power. Pharaoh had the most satisfactory demonstration that the God of the universe demanded the emancipation of the Hebrews; yet he hardened his heart more and more against God, until his armies were overthrown in the Red Sea. He had every evidence consistent with his rational existence, and the