conceive to be simply impossible, and certainly it is no part of the Wesleyan doctrine. In the utterance of this assertion, therefore, the Archdeacon spake unadvisedly with his lips, and had better have been silent. The Holy Scriptures describe the nature of conversion, and declare its absolute and universal necessity, but leave the time that it requires for its accomplishment to be determined by circumstances; yet all the conversions which we find recorded in the New Testament may be justly regarded as sudden, in the sense of being accomplished in a short space of time. Take, for example, the facts recorded in the second chapter of the Acts of the Apostles. In the morning of the day of Pentecost the Apostles received the gift of the "Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utter ance." This event was "noised abroad," and a "multitude came together," certainly not as saints, but as sinners; for Peter charged them as having with "wicked hands crucified and slain" Jesus of Nazareth, "a man approved of God," whom He had raised from the dead. On hearing this, "they were pricked in their heart," and inquired in terror and alarm, "Men and brethren, what shall we do?" The apostle pointed out to them the way of salvation. “Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls." Here, then, we have a large multitude of people, who were not only sinners one day, and saints the next, but sinners and saints on the same day: and the men and women thus suddenly converted, with others who afterwards joined them, formed one of the purest churches the world has ever Other examples of the same kind might be easily adduced, but this is unnecessary. Sudden conversion, then, is unquestionably a doctrine of Holy Scripture. seen. 2. The second allegation of the Archdeacon relates to the possible loss and recovery of conversion, which he seems to regard as a monstrous absurdity. Here, again, we cannot but regard facts as better than opinions; and to one fact, which bears directly upon the ques tion at issue, we invite attention. It will hardly be denied that St. Peter was a converted man. He was chosen by our blessed Lord as one of His Apostles; he was "with Him in the holy mount;" and attended Him in the guest-chamber, where he received the sacramental bread and wine at our Saviour's hands; and then followed Him to the garden of Gethsemane. During the same night he was challenged in the house of the high priest as a disciple of Jesus; which he thrice denied, and accompanied the denial with oaths and curses; which cer tainly are not characteristic marks of a converted man. He at length caught the eye of his Lord, and heard the crowing of the cock; when, being overwhelmed with guilt and remorse, he "went out, and wept bitterly." How he spent the remainder of the night and the next two days, we may easily imagine. That he was restored from his fallen state we have decisive proof; and it is worthy of special observation, that our Lord speaks of Peter's recovery as a conversion. "When thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren." (Luke xxii, 32.)* Peter after. * On this verse Stier well remarks, "Let it be carefully noted in opposition to all false teaching that our Lord declares an ékλeiweiv, a deficere in totum, an utter extinction of wards sinned at Antioch by dissimulation, and was again restored: (Gal. ii. 11-13:) and how many more cases of the same kind have occurred, and may yet occur, who can tell? Are the Wesleyans, then, to be condemned for believing the Bible? That which took place in the religious history of St. Peter has taken place in the lives of ten thousand other men. 3. The third allegation of the Archdeacon relates to the moral effects of the doctrine in question. He says, "It is doing infinite harm to the progress of spiritual truth;" and he describes it as producing "more delusion, and more self-deception, not to say hypocrisy, than any other that could be named." What the doctrine is now producing, it has never failed to produce for more than a hundred years; so that this can be no secret. What is meant by "spiritual truth," which is said to be now "in progress," and to which the Wesleyan doctrine of conversion is doing "infinite harm," we are not informed; but if by this is to be understood the theory of sacramental efficacy, which makes the officiating priest, in the administration of the sacraments, the direct medium of salvation, and not Christ Himself, we deny that it is any "truth" at all, but one of the worst errors of the age. In many quarters this theory is strenuously maintained; so that when men who are in a certain order of “succession " administer baptism, the baptized person is said to be infallibly regenerated; and when they administer the Lord's Supper, the communicant is, as a matter of course, made one with Christ. If the Wesleyan doctrine of conversion be doing this fearful delusion “infinite harm," we cannot but rejoice, and hope that no effort will be spared in giving the doctrine the widest possible extension. If the Archdeacon does not mean this, let him tell us what he does mean, and not shoot his arrows in the dark. As to the practical effects of the doctrine in question, the reverend accuser of the Wesleyans does not impute to them any acts of immorality of which people in general could be judges, but "delusion," "self-deceit," and "hypocrisy." The charge is general, and applies to Wesleyans in every age, and throughont the world. There are at this day some millions of persons, young and old, in the various gradations of rank, and dispersed through different islands and continents, who have received the Wesleyan doctrine of conversion, the greater part of whom profess to have realized its truth in their own experience. How does the Archdeacon know that "self-deceit " and "hypocrisy" are extensively prevalent among these people, and prevailed generally among the Wesleyans who have taken their place with "the dead in Christ ?" How many of personally known? and if he speaks without knowledge, what is the value of his accusation? Not daring to prefer against a large body of Christian people a tangible charge of immorality, he accuses them of secret vices, which neither he nor any other them has he ever man can prove. But, leaving this gentleman to his own reflections, let us examine what the Lord Bishop of Carlisle advanced on the same subject and on the same occasion. Before he could assent to the proposal which had thee to be certain; and even in the case of an Apostle, of Peter!" faith, not only to be possible, but, without something intervening [ I have prayed for been made, of a formal union of "the Wesleyan body" with the Church of England, he "must have some things put right amongst them; one, of all others, that which Archdeacon Pollock had mentioned, the practical exhibition of the doctrine of conversion amongst them :" adding, "I hold the doctrine of conversion; and God forbid that I should ever cease to hold it; for, 'except ye be converted,.........ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven."" In what sense he holds this doctrine, he did not fully state; but he went on to declare his dissent from the Wesleyan view: yet in doing this he did, on some points, affirm all that they believe and teach. He said, "Let us have scriptural conversion. Let us have it the work of the Holy Spirit, bringing home the Word of God to the heart, and leading souls captive to Christ.” "Do not let us believe that it is to be obtained by man's power, but that it comes by the Spirit of the Lord of hosts." This is just what the Wesleyans hold, as their prayers, sermons, and hymns abundantly testify. Thus they sing and pray, "I now from all my sins would turn To my atoning God; And look on Him I pierced, and mourn, Where my Redeemer died; And all things count but dung and loss, For Jesus crucified." "Give me Thy converting grace, That I may obedient prove, The insinuation, evidently implied in the words of his lordship, that the Wesleyans regard conversion as "obtained by human power," and not as 66 the work of the Holy Spirit," we indignantly repel, and fearlessly assert that there is not a Christian community in existence that more explicitly and consistently affirms the natural depravity and helplessness of fallen man, and the absolute necessity of the grace of the Holy Spirit in the entire process of conversion and salvation, from the first dawn of light upon the understanding, to the completion of the work of sanctification, and the entrance of the disembodied spirit into the heavenly paradise. We will not attempt a formal proof of a fact which must be perfectly familiar to the mind of every one who has paid any attention to the progress of religion, and of religious opinion, in England during the last hundred years. His lordship further said," Let us have the reality of that obedience" [the obedience of conversion] "carried out from day to day, from week to week, and from year to year, increasing in fruitfulness to the very end of a man's days." This we presume is intended to be a caveat against the Wesleyan doctrine, that a man may lose the grace of conversion and recover it again, and that repeatedly, in the course of his life: yet there is not a Wesleyan in the world who would not add his hearty "Amen" to this proposal of the right reverend prelate. It is the undoubted privilege and duty of every converted man, daily and hourly to grow in grace, and to exhibit in his conduct all the fruits of righteousness to the end of his life. This is also the earnest desire of every one who is concerned for the spread of religion in the world, and for the honour of God. But the question is not, What does the great Lawgiver require, and what do godly people desire and pray for? but, What do the Scriptures authorize us to expect? Are there no warnings against backsliding and apostasy in the Sacred Writings? no examples of such evils? and no intimations that they would actually occur? It is easy to say, "Let us have the reality of that obedience carried out from day to day, from week to week, and from year to year, increasing in fruitfulness to the very end of a man's days;" but when men fail in that "obedience," and even fall into open sin, are we to conclude that they never were converted; that their recovery is impossible; or that they still retain the grace of conversion? If we embrace any of these theories, we involve ourselves in inextricable difficulties. The Wesleyans believe that professors of religion who indulge themselves in wilful and open sin are fallen from grace; that while their lives are prolonged, the door of the Divine mercy is still open to them, so that they may recover what they have lost; but that, in order to this end, they must repent, and "do their first works:" in other words, they must be reconverted. 66 a man David certainly was converted, when he was pronounced after God's own heart," was placed upon the throne of Israel, and when he poured forth the devout feelings of his heart in Psalms which have been the delight of the church to the present time, and will be till the end of the world. Yet David did not persevere in a course of uninterrupted obedience, as the Bishop of Carlisle requires, and as it was his duty to do; but fell into the atrocious crimes of adultery and murder. Solomon, too, was unquestionably a converted man when he built the temple, offered his sublime prayer at its dedication, and wrote his Proverbs. Yet did Solomon, in the closing years of his life, become a degraded worshipper of idols, and a patron of idolatry among the Covenant people of God. Will the Bishop of Carlisle say that when David invaded the bed of Uriah, and contrived the murder of that brave man, and when Solomon was worshipping Molech, and Chemosh, and Ashteroth, both the father and the son acted the part of converted men, and went on, to the end of life," from day to day, from week to week, and from year to year," in a course of holy" obedience?" The Wesleyans believe that in both cases converting grace was forfeited, and a fearful amount of guilt incurred; and that in neither case could that which was lost be regained but by renewed repentance, and renewed faith in the revealed mercy of God. The Bishop deprecates the doctrine of reconversion. We ask him, then, What is to be done in cases like those of David and Solomon ? Is their fall to be denied ? are they to remain in a state of guilt and defilement? or are means to be used in order to their recovery from their lapsed condition? and if so, what are those means? To reject the Wesleyan doctrine, and substitute nothing in the place of it, is a course one would not expect from any man who is concerned for the maintenance of pure and undefiled religion. 66 The Bishop of Carlisle and the Archdeacon of Chester both speak as if cases of backsliding and apostasy were peculiar to the Wesleyans; and as if they were all answerable for the misdoings of faithless professors of religion. But is this a just view of the subject? Have not sins of this kind been a source of grief to good men in every age of the Church? and were they not as frequent in the days of our blessed Lord, and of His holy Apostles, as they have ever been since the rise of Methodism? Jesus Himself declared that "because iniquity would abound" during the last days of the Jewish commonwealth, "the love of many would wax cold." (Matt. xxiv. 12.) His parable of the sower describes four classes of people who hear the Gospel, and two of them are backsliders. (Matt. xiii. 20-22.) Of His disciples it is said that "many" of them "went back, and walked no more with Him." (John vi. 66.) The members of the Galatian churches "did run well," but did not persevere; and St. Paul "marvelled" that they were so soon" turned out of the good way. (Gal. i. 6; v. 7.) Of the first Christians some "drew back unto perdition." (Heb. x. 39.) The Epistles of Peter, John, and Jude abound with references to apostate Christians; St. Paul prophesied of a general "falling away" from the Christian faith and practice; (2 Thess. ii. 3-12; 1 Tim. iv. 1-3;) and before he received the crown of martyrdom, he said to his son Timothy, "This thou knowest, that all they which are in Asia be turned away from me." (2 Tim. i. 15.) We ask, then, On what ground are the Wesleyans selected above all other people, as objects of vituperation, because some of their spiritual children "depart from the holy commandment delivered unto them ?" Because they plead for the recovery of backsliders, after even repeated falls, is it just to represent them as "the ministers of sin ?" The Church of England says, in her sixteenth Article, "After we have received the Holy Ghost, we may depart from grace given, and fall into sin, and by the grace of God we may arise again, and amend our lives." Can the same doctrine be both true and false? true, when held by a Churchman, and false in the mouth of a Wesleyan? true, when it is laid down in the Bible, and false when announced from a Wesleyan pulpit ? But the severest censures of his lordship are reserved for Wesleyan prayer-meetings, where persons under the sorrows of repentance are seeking the forgiveness of their sins. He says, "I have, of course, never been present at scenes such as those which are reported to be of frequent occurrence in Methodist places of worship. Let us not have our congregations thrown into a state of excitement by impassioned appeals from the pulpit. Let not us have a person invited to place himself in a particular spot, that members of the church may crowd around him, offering prayers, and almost compelling the Holy Spirit of God to come down and convert that soul. But I cannot, I will not, repeat all that is said to occur on these occasions. I will only say that if we wait to see the reality of the work, we shall find that that which has gone up with the brilliancy of the sky-rocket has come down a |
