> ^m4> f^ IV CONTENTS. Outline of all Experience, - - , . The Way into the Holiest, - Christian Faith, . - . . Settlement with the Past, Second Coming of Christ, Stuart on Romans 13: 11, The Man of Sin, Robinson on Matt. 24: 29—31, ' Mistake of the Apostles,' Date of the Apocalypse, - - - Scope of the Apocalypse, Dispensation of the Fullness of Times, Tlie Millennium, - - '' The Two Witnesses, The First Resurrection, Bush on the Resurrection, The Keys of Hell and of Death, Objections to the Foregoing Views of the Resurrection, Review of Ballon on the Resurrection, Connection of Regeneration with the Resurrection, Second Advent to the Soul, Throne of David, Birthright of Israel, -^ - . - , The Sabbath, . - - Baptism, Marriage, .• - Apostolical Succession, Puritan Puseyism, Unity of the Kingdom of God, Peace Principles, The Primary Reform, - Leadings of the Spirit, Doctrine of Disunity, - Fiery Darts Quenched, Love of Life, (^' V"-/ •' h- ' Abolition of Death,vi^ ' {^4-*f^}^ Condensation of Life, - Principalities and Powers, Our Relations to the Primitive Church, PREFACE The articles contained in this book were originally published sepafatelj^ md at distant intervals, in several periodicals with which the author was connected, either as contributor or editor, in the period between the years 1834 and 1846. They are presented here with few alterations, excepting those which were made necessary by the progress of time, and the difference between the proprieties of a periodical and a book. The principal labor in editing the present publication, has been that of selecting, curtailing and arranging, A book thus compiled will naturally lack formal coherency. But this loss will perhaps be compensated in common minds, by the superior attractiveness of short articles, and definite treatment of definite subjects. Moreover, if the believing reader finds in such a mass of broken materials a substratum of consistency and unity, which shall help him to a comprehensive system of truth, he will have the satisfaction of ascribing it more to the power and care of God, than to the logical art and forecast of the author. It is fair that a preface should make known summarily what readers may expect in the book before them. We present therefore here, the following frank synopsis of the leading doctrines of this book, as they are distinguished from the doctrines of the most popular sects. 1. In relation to the Godhead^ we agree with Trinitarians on the one hand, that Jesus Christ is a divine person, co-eternal with the Father, and was his agent in the work of Creation. But we agree with Unitarians, on the other hand, that the Father is greater than he, and that the Holy Spirit is not a distinct person, but an emanation from the Father and the Son, We believe, not in the Trinity, nor in the Unity, but in the Duality of the Godhead ; and that Duality in our view, is imaged in the twofold personality of the first man, who was made ' male and female.' Gen. 1: 27. As Adam was to Eve, so is the Father to the Son ; i. e. he is the same in nature, but greater in power and glory. 2. In relation to the divine decrees^ election^ and reprolation, we agree Avith Calvinists, that God from the beginning fore-ordained all that comes to pass in heaven and earth ; and that this fore-ordination includes the election of the saved and the reprobation of the lost. But we agree with anti-Calvin-^ ists that God did not by decree, choice, or permission, give birth to evil. We hold that the ' wicked one,' who is the father of all evil, did not originata I Vi PREFACE. in heaven or earth, but existed from eternity ; and that his existence and wickedness, like the existence and goodness of the Father and the Son, is not a subject, but an antecedent, of the divine decrees ; that the fore-ordination of God, so far as it relates to evil events, such as the sin and reprobation of the wicked, is predicated upon and necessitated by pre-existent evil; and con- sequently that all the odium which justly attaches to the fore-ordination of such events, is due to the devil. God fore-ordained the admission of sin and evil into creation, not arbitrarily, but because the judgment and destruction of the uncreated evil one required that measure ; he decreed the reprobation of a part of mankind, because he foreknew that as the seed of the evil one they would be incorrigible sinners ; and he elected the other part to salvation, because he foreknew that as the seed of the Son of man they would have * honest and good hearts.' 3. In relation to human depravity^ we agree with the orthodox that in consequence of Adam's . transgression, all men are born under the spiritual power of Satan, or, in scripture language, that the ' whole world iieth in the wicked one^ (see 1 John 5: 19, in the original,) and that in this sense hu- man depravity is total. We hold also that a part of mankind are not only born under the power of the wicked one, but are of his seed, (1 John 3: 12,) and consequently that their depravity is in every sense total. But on the other hand, we agree with Pelagians, Socinians, &c., in relation to another part of mankind, that their depravity is not originally inherent in their indi- vidual souls, but is superinduced by extraneous spiritual influence, and in this sense is not total ; that their hearts are so far ' honest and good,' that the word of God when it comes to them, finds in them an ear of sympathy. 4. In relation to the atonement^ we agree with the orthodox in the general truth that reconciliation between God and man was effected by the incarnation and death of the second person of the Godhead. But we differ from them in regard to the mode of the reconciliation. Their atonement is primarily legal : ours is primarily qnritual. They say that Christ died, that he might satisfy the demands of the law in the place of sinners. AVe say that the object of Christ's death was, 1, that he might perfect himself in all human sympathies, and so make himself a complete spiritual mediator between God and all men — the living and the dead ; (Heb. 2: 17, Rom. 14: 9 ;) 2, that he might, through death, destroy the spiritual power of the devil, in whom all men, by nature, are held captives ; (Heb. 2: 14 ;) 3, that he might (to use a mili- tary expression) outflank the law which is ' the strength of sin,' by passmg beyond its precincts into the life of the resurrection, and there presenting himself to mankind as the rallying point of faith, the head of a spiritual body which is free from tlie law, because it belongs to a world on which the law has no claim. Rom. 7: 4. Col. 2: 11 — 20. The case may be briefly stated in other words thus : The reconciliation of man to God required that there PREFACE. 71t should be, first, a union of the Father to the Mediator ; and secondly, a union of the Mediator to man. The first union was involved in the divine nature of the Mediator, and existed from eternity. Of course it only remained to bring about a union between the Mediator and man. The first step toward this object was the incarnation of the Mediator. Then it was necessary, first, that the incarnate Mediator should descend into the lowest depths of human sufiering, that, by spiritual sympathy, he might reach all men ; secondly, that he should break the power of the devil by whom men are alienated from the life of God ; and thirdly, that he should remove those whom he had thus reached and released, from under the condemning and sin-occasioning power of the law. All this was necessary to effect a stable junction between the Mediator and man : and all this was accomphshed by the death of Christ. This is the atonement. As to the extent of its bearing, it is obvious from its nature, that it opens the door of salvation to all. The incarnation of Christ placed him in sympathy with human nature as a whole. His death acquainted him with all human suffering. His overthrow of Satan's power shattered the prison house of the race. His resurrection gave an accessible refuge from the law to all. If any are not saved it is not because the atonement is limited, hvi because they have no will to avail themselves of it — no ear for the gospel which proclaims it. 5. In relation to regeneration, we agree with the new school men and legal- ists generally, that the motives of the law and a change of purpose in the creature, are necessary preparations to the second birth. But we agree with the antinomians and spirituahsts generally, that the substance of the second birth itself, is a change effected only by the Spirit of God — a change,, not of purpose or acts, but of spiritual condition — a divorce of the human spirit from the powder of Satan, and a junction with the Spirit of God. We agree with the Quakers that regeneration is a progressive work, including the outward cleansing effected by external moral and spiritual influences, and the inward quickening communicated by the life of Christ through faith. 6. In relation to the holiness of behevcTS, we agree with the most ultra class of Perfectionists, that whoever is born of God is altogether free from sin. But we hold that the second birth is not attained till the atonement is spirit- ually apprehended — till the perfect will of Christ crucified is received into the heart, his victory over the devil perceived and realized, and his freedom from law by the resurrection appropriated. This spiritual apprehension of the atonement, is not attained (ordinarily at least) in the first stages of disciple- ship.^ Hence we hold with imperfectionists generally, that there was in the primitive, church, and is now, a class properly called believers or disciples, (not sons of (Jod,) who, though not free from sin, are yet; in an important sense followers of Christ, and members of his church. Vlll PREFACE. 7. In relation to the perseverance of the saints, we agree with Calvlnlsts that whoever is born of God will infallibly persevere in holiness, unto salva- tion. But we hold with Methodists that the relation of sinful disciples to God IS not in its nature perpetual ; that the promises to them are conditional ; and that they are liable to fall away to perdition. 8. In relation to the judgment, we agree with the Universalists that the second coming of Christ took place in connection with the destruction of Jerusalem. But we differ from them in regard to the nature of that event ; believing that Christ hterally came in the spiritual world at the time predicted in Matt. 24, and sat in. judgment on that, part of mankind, both quick and dead, who previous to that time had been ripened for the harvest of destiny, by the influences of the Jewish dispensation and the gospel of Christ and the apostles. "VYe also differ from Universalists and certain classes of Perfection- ists, and agree with most other sects, in believing that the final judgment of miankind is yet future — that it will take place at the end of the ' times of the Gentiles,' as the judgment of the second coming took place at the end of the times of the Jews. 9. In relation to future retribution, we agree with Calvinists that they who sow to the flesh will reap eternal punishment. But we concede to Universal- ists that, if the Calvinistic theory of the divine origin of the devil, and of the unnecessitated fore-ordination of human wickedness, were true, the doctrine of universal salvation would be justly inferred from the benevolence and omnipotence of God. 'As Bereans, we have sought out these conclusions. To help Bereans, we have written from time to time ; and to the study of Bereans we now com- mend this collection ; desiring for it only that it may be a servant of the Bible, and for its readers that ' with all readiness of mind they may receive the word, and search the scriptures daily whether these things are so.' THE BEREAN §1. THE BIBLE. As the Bible is tlie record of God's past communications with men, and especially of his manifestation of himself in Christ and in the primitive church, so it is the most valuable external conductor of his continued communica- tions, and his appointed means of making known to all generations the work of his Son. The continuation of the primitive gospel — that by which the communication with God, opened by the atonement, is hept open to the world — is not a church, or a set of ordinances, or a line of successors to the apos- tles, but it is the Bible. By the ^gible, Christ and the apostles utter their proclamation across the ages that have past since the destruction of Jerusa- lem. By it they yet live and speak on earth. Christ promised that ' the gates of hell should not prevail against his church.' Thus far the only church which has had a clear right to be called his, is that which was in immediate personal communication with him, which completed the Bible, and which passed within the veil at the end of the apostolic age. But let no man say that the ' gates of hell' have prevailed against that church, even in this world, till the voice of the New Testament has been silenced — till the Bible has sunk in obUvion. Papists and Puseyites need not thrust forward their line of priests to save the promise. It is safe without them. The Bible, being thus the representative and organ of Christ's kingdom in the world, has, of course, been the centre of conflict between the powers of good and evil. Heaven has protected it and cheered it omvard in its mission. Hell has struggled to destroy its influence and its integrity. The Jews were God's first secretary, and kept his records till the advent of Christ. But at that time they revolted against him, and refused to take charge of the New Testament. He cashiered them, and gave their oflice to the Gentile church. The new secretary, when he had grown gi'cat, and put on the crown of Popery, became the instrument of the same diabolical enmity against the word of God which had comipted the Jews, and turned the power of his office against the trust committed to him. He kept the Bible safely, but he ' kept it laid up in a napkin' instead of putting it to the exchangers, and so proved to be an evil servant. He too was turned out of office. The Refor- mation gave the Bible into the hands of the Protestant churches ; and at the 1 10 Tnji: ciCLE* same time the invention of the art of printing scattered it far and Avide, and made its suppression thenceforth impossible. It must be acknowlcdp;ed to the honor of the third secretary, that he haa tlnis far discharged liis office with a good degree of fidcUty. The leading Protestant churches, whatever else may be laid to their charge, have not es- sentially mutilated or suppressed the Bible. They have indeed loaded it with perverting commentaries, and drawn it to and fro in their sectarian dif- ferences ; but -it may be considered as a fair oftset for this, that they have cherished a zeal for biblical investigation, and have scattered the word, with- out comment, over a great part of the earth. We freely and gratefully ac- knowledge our indebtedness to the influences of the Congregational church, and to the lal)ors of such men as Stuart and Robinson, for many incentives and facilities to biblical study. But the war Avhich Satan of old waged against the testimony of God, has not ceased. It has assumed a new form. The enemy, finding it hnpossilde either to exclude a part of the Bible astlie Jews would have done, or to su])- press the whole, as the Papists attempted to do, has set himself to resist its invading influences by discrediting its authority. Infidelity, hi various forms, is, in modern times, the most active assailant of the scriptures. The infidels of the last century were open and bold in tlicir hostility, giving no quarter to any part of the Bible, and seeking to destroy it by main force of scofting and blasphemy. The French Revolution was in part, to say the least, the fruit of their labor ; and its horrors w^ere such that a strong re- action against the principles of the blasphemers and in favor of the Bible, took place. The event and the result may well be described in the language of the Revelator concerning the two witnesses : ' There was a great earth- quake, and the tenth part of the city fell, and in tlie earthrjuake vere slain of men seven thousand ; and the remnant tvere affri(jhted, and gave glory to the G-od of heaven.'' Rev. 11: 13. The hifidel spirit, in its second attack on the Bible, which is now in pro- gress, has adopted a new and more prudent system of tactics. The fashion is to discriminate between certain parts of the Bible and others. It has been found impossible to destroy the entire credit of the sacred writers by summary scoffing, and the next method is to separate them and cut them up in detail, by speaking respectfully of some of them to save appearances, while the war is carried on against the rest. Some of those who are employed by the spiiit of infidelity in this way, profess to honor the New Testament, but speak slightingly of the Old ; othei-s adhere to the four gospels, but des})ise the writings of the apostles. They generally agree in conceding to public sentiment that Jesus was a great and good man, and that those books of scripture which relate directly to him have some sort of divine authority ; but ' as for this Moses,' say some of them, ' we wot not what has become of hhn ;'-^as for Paul^^ say others, ' who made him a ruler and a judge over us V This is the kind of infidelity which, according to our observation, is creeping in at every opening, especially among ' refonncrs,' and scceders from the churches. We meet it thus : The credit of the Bible, as a whole, is identified with the credit of Jesus THE BIELE. 11 Ckrlsfc. The Olil Testament, as it is at this day, existed when he was on earth, and he endorsed it, by assuming it as the basis of his own reUgious system. The New Testament is the work of his accredited agents, and ho is responsilde f n* its sentiments, as the President of the United States is re- S[)onsible for the sentiments of his official organ. The Bible therefore will stand or fall with Christ, and Christ will stand or fall with the Bible. Who- ever discredits one, discredits both. Whoever honors one, honors both. — ■ Whoever loves Christ, and knows the power of his grace, loves the Bible as a whole, and knows that it is a vehicle of spiritual light and life. These propositions we proceed to defend. L CiiiirsT E.Yi>ORSED THE Old TESTAMENT. It was liis Constant praxjtice to ([uote the Jewish scriptures as authorities in his discourses. He cited or referred to all the i)rincipal books in the Old Testanient. The reader may examine at his leisure the following list of endorsements. Christ cites from the book of Genesis, in Matt. 19: 4, 5, 24: 37, Luke 17: 29. From IJi-o^ das, in Matt. 5: 21, 27, 38, 38, 15: 4, 19: 18, 19, 22: 32. From Leviticus, in Matt. 5: 43, John 7: 22. From Namhers, in Matt. 12: 5, John 3: 14. From Deideronomt./, in Matt. 4: 4, 7, 10, 5: 31, 19: 7, 8, John 8: 17. From Samml, hi Matt. 12: 3. From Kings, in Matt. 12: 42, Luke 4: 25 2i3, 27. From Chronicles, in Matt. 23: 3o. From Psalms, in Matt. 5: 5, 21: 16, 42, 22: 43, 27: 4(3, John 7: 42, 10: 34, 13: 18, 15: 25. From Proverbs, hi Luke 14: 8. From Isaiah, in Matt. 13: 14, 15: 8, Mark 9: 44, Luke 4: 18, 19, 22: 37, 23: 30. ' From Jeremiah, in Matt. 21; 13. From Daniel, in M;itt. 24: 15. From Ilosea, in Matt. 9: 13, Luke 23: 30. From Jonah, in Matt. 12: 40, 16: 4. From Micah, in Matt. 10: 35, 36. From Zechariah, in Matt. 26: 31. From 3£alachi, in Matt. 11: 10, 14. The following passages, in which the Old Testament is designated by the various expressions, ''the law and the prophets,^ 'the scriptures,^ &c., show Christ's ordinary manner of testifying his respect for the sacred books. — Matt. 5: 17, 18. 'Think not that I am come to destroy the law or the pro- ])hct3 : I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, till heaven and eartli pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. 7: 12. 'All things wliatsoevcr ye would that men sliould do to you, do ye even so to them : for this is the law and the prophets.' 22: 37 — 10. 'Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all tliy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it. Thou shalt love thy neighljor as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.' Luke 24: 25 — 27. ' He said unto them, fes of Israel/ 10: 28. ' I appoint unto you a kingdom, a-i mv Fatlior hatli a])iw»iiite(l miUi mc : that ye may cat and drink at my ta^ hie in mv kingdom, and sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.' Luke 22: '2\K '10. Comiiarc Kph. 2: 20, and Rev. 21: 14. In all this there is ahundant evidence that Christ endorsed the doings, say- ings and writings of the apostles in advance. Every gift of the Spirit whicli they afterward received, and every miracle which they performed, renewed Ills enirit of truth and the spirit of error."* Here is the second criterion, relating to the second link of the chain. Antichrist attacks Christianity on two vital points. He strikes first at Christ's incarnation ; and secondly, at the credit of the apostles. The first point most needed defense in the primitive age ; for it was long before the adversary allowed the advent of the Son of God to to become a fixed fact. The principal conflict at the present day seems to be gathering about the second point. The incarnation of Christ has estab- lished itself in popular belief; but it is quite a fashionable and spreading cus- tom to doubt and deny the authority of Christ's lieutenants. It appears from the preceding argument, that the Bible as a w^hole is un- der the protection of Christ's endorsement, and can only be assailed by as- sailing him. The books of the Old and New Testaments are not to bear the brunt of the infidel onset, but Christ who stands in the midst of them, staking his credit for theirs, and challenging the hosts of hell to strike him, if they wish to strike them. They who sneer at Moses and Paul, while they pretend to honor Christ, will find, when they understand the relation which Christ bears to Moses and Paul, that they have mistaken their policy. — Concessions in favor of Christ and the four gospels, give behevers a stand- point, from which they can sally both ways, and rout with case and certainty all adversaries both of the Old and New Testaments. The semi-infidels may 16 INFIDELITY AMOXG REFORMERS. ' «3 well return, first as last, to the war-cry of A^oltairc — 'Crush tJienrctchP — for they can novor crush any part of the Bible-phalanx till they crush Christ. § 2. INFIDELITY AMONG REFORMERS. The spirit of infideUty, when it works under the cover of reform, and with professions of respect for some portions of the Bible, is more captiva- ting and dangerous than when it stands forth in honest nakedness. Thus disguised, it infects not merely open despisers of religion, but many who were once sober and devout. Having given some attention to this particular disease, we propose to present our views of its nature, and of its rise and progi-ess among reformers in this country. I. The nature of the disease. Infidelity in general, is a state of mind, in which the moral affection, called by phrenologists, Veneration, is overborne and neutralized by some stronger aifection. As ' the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom,' so casting off the fear of the Lord is the beginning of skeptical folly. Reverence for God is the protecting rampart of the Bible. "Whoever fears his Maker will handle carefully the book which professes to be his word, and search diligently, before he rejects it. This reverent cautiousness is all that the Bible or its Author demands from those who have not yet ascertained its truth by rational investigation. The Bible asks no favors of mere marvelousness. Infidels will be condemned in the day of account, not for refusing to swalloAV all the absurd marvels which priestcraft offered them, nor even for hesitating to believe all the contents of the Bible : but because they had not humility and reverence enough to sus- pend judgment until they had given the message of God a fair trial ; because they ' spoke evil of things which they understood not ;' because they Avould not take the trouble to discriminate between a true revelation and the im- postures of fanatics, but condemned the innocent with the guilty, in lynch- law recklessness. Probably in most cases of infidelity. Veneration is overborne by Self-esteem in combination with Causality and Combativeness. Men are too proud and confident in the sufficiency of their reason, to give the Bible a reverent ex- amination. But in the particular form of the disease of which w^e are treating, there is reason to believe that Bc7ievolence, in many cases, is the usurping affection which prostrates Veneration. The enthusiasm of refonn which has burst forth within a few years, has made many exceedingly fierce for doing good. Their zeal has been too fervent to wait on the slow move- ments, by which God and the Bible are working out redemption for man. — They have devised more summary processes ; and then, by little and Httle, casting off conservative reverence, they have learned at last to trample on the Bible boldly, whenever they conceive that it crosses the path of their favorite enterprises for human improvement. INFIDELITY AMONG REFORMERS. ' 17 Persons wlio have been beguiled into this course, may flatter themselves that a sentiment so lovely and virtuous as benevolence, cannot lead to any great mischief ; that the fervor of their philanthropy will excuse them for stifling veneration, and thrusting aside the word of God. But we are sure that any amount of good which they can do without the Bible, will be ac- counted in the day of judgment as but dust in the balance, against the mis- chief effected by discrediting God's main instrument of redemption. We are sure that nothing can excuse ignorance or forgetfulness of the truth that the fear of the Lord is a higher duty than philanthropy ; that the rights of God are immeasurably superior to * human rights.' Incontinent, misdirected be- nevolence is not less — perhaps more — destructive in its ultimate efiects, than any lust of human nature. And it must be considered, that the evil of any usurpation is incurable in proportion to the apparent virtue, and consequent popularity of the usurper. ^ Let pohtical and religious Jacobins rail at the abuses of subordination, with •which this priest-and-king-ridden world abounds, as they may; they can never erase the inscription which the finger of God has written on the scroll of nature, as well as revelation ; assigning the throne of all human aflections to Veneration. The organ of that sentiment is literally ' the cro^vn of the head' ' — the top-stone of the cerebral temple — the center, around w^hich all the other moral affections cluster as constituents. Accordingly, reverence for '^ parents is the beauty of childhood ; and the fear of the Lord is the glory of manhood. The dethronement of Veneration, therefore, can never be a trivial disorder, even though Benevolence heads the msurrection. II. The rise and progress of infidelity among modern reformers. Phrenologists say (we think with reason) that the atmosphere of the repub- lican principles and leveling tendencies of this country, is unfavorable to the due development of Veneration. A people whose pohtical and social insti- tutions constantly teach them that independence is their chief glory, and that subordination is disgrace, will naturally have but a stinted growth of - reverence toward man ; and it would be strange if the deficiency did not extend, in some degree, to the kindred and almost identical sentmient of reverence toward God. Bigoted democrats certainly can have but little B3rmpathy with the pruiciples of that kingdom described and predicted by the Bible, in which one man (viz., Jesus Christ) is appointed, not by the people, but by God, the absolute monarch of all ; and claims as his first tribute from all his subjects, unconditional loyalty and subordination. The divisions of Protestant Christendom have generated another influence, tenduig especially to weaken reverence for the Bible. As sect after sect has arisen, conflicting commentaries have been multiplied, until men have accus- tomed themselves to regard the Bible, not as an authoritative judge of con- troversy, but as a pliable witness that may be brought by a skillful lawyer to favor any side of any question. Such a witness cannot be held in much re- spect. Such were the predisposing influences in operation, when the enthusiasm of reform which has characterized the last sixteen years, commenced *its ca- reer. In the Temperance cause, benevolence first essayed the usurping 2 W tifViDBLitX AMO^fQ ilEf'OIlMEllS'. J)rocc53, by wliich veneration has since been subverted. In hiirlrying' on ih^ triumphs of total abstinence, it was found necessary to remove certain ob^ structions placed in the way by the Bible. These obstructions might have been removed without injiny to' the Bible, if the leaders in the cause had choseti to defend total abstinence as an expedient, not of intrinsic and per- manent cbligation, but adapted to the exigency of the times, and adopted on the principle which justifies fastmg, and which Paul sanctioned when he said, * If meat make ray brother to offend, I will not eat meat w bile the world standoth.' Birt to press the BiMe into the service of total abstinence, by denying that the writers of the Old and New Testaments, with Jesus Christ at their head, countenanced the drinking of wine ; or by assei-ting that Bible wines were not intoxicating, m a violence which no man, under the influence of due respect for the Bible, w^ould undertake. The language of such art attempt is — ' The Bible is too sacred to be contradicted ; but we will evade its force by dexterous colnmentary.^ Yet this attempt was made ; and that too, by such men as Stuart, Beecher, and Hewitt. The ' mighty men' of the popular churches planted the noxious genn, which, in the apostate and blaspheming ultraists of later time^f, has 'gone to seed.^ Next came Anti-slavery. The nature of this enterprise, harmonizing and co-opetating with the liberty-spirit of our political institutions, inevitably in- creased the atmospheric predisposition to me'rge veneration in benevolence. It was soon found in this as in the Temperance cause, that the Bible stood hi the way of the extreme ttltraism^ sugge^ed by enthusiastic zeal. The doctrine that slave-holding is neceggarily sinful, and that immediate abolition B in all cases a matter of religious obligation, coitld not be maintained without forcing a new construction on many things in the writings of Moses and Paul. Theodore D. Weld had learned in the Temperance service the importance of wresting the Bible out of the hands of the adversaries of reform. With lawyer-Hke shrewdness, in his ' Bible Argumelit' against slavery he cross^ questioned the opposing witness, till he apparently made that witness his Own. As it was the favorite position of Temperance men that Bible-wines tverd not intoxicating, so Weld boldly averred and plausibly proved that !Bible-fllayery was not slavery. The argument w^as as good in one case as in the other ; and no better. Thus the Bible was the second time placed oti the rack of reform, and benevolence prevailed over veneration. * Woman's Rights' was the next topic of agitation. In both the previous cases, the language of the Bible adverse to the views of the reformers, had been bo far dubious, as to admit of favorable construction ; and veneration had not yet been so prostrated, a^ to permit a direct attack. The collisioJi was oblique ; and the Bible, though dishonored, was not mutilated. But now the time had come for open hostilities. Many influences conspired to bring on this issue* A new baptism of the spirit of irreverence had come upon the reformers, by the accession to their ranks of those Perfectionists who had learned from T. R. Gates to blaspheme Paul. The Quaker, Unitarian, Uni- versalist and Transcendental elements in the spiritual compound engaged in the reforming enterprises, had begun to prevail against the more conserva- tivo influencoa of orthodoxy : and the ' Evangelicals' were preparing to with- INFIDELITY AMONG REFORMERS. 19 draw. Above all it was manifest, that tke theory of Woman's Rights which ^affirmed the entire equality of the sexes, and repudiated all subordination of woman to man, was in point-blank antagonism to tlie testimony of Paul. — There was no possibility of compromise or evasion. In tliis crisis the Misses Grimke, who led the van of the Woman's Rights reform, declared indepen- dence of the authority of Paul. Thus a third public injury was inflicted on the Bible by the spirit of reform. And it is worthy of notice that as T, D. Weld was accessory to the first, and the principal actor in the second, «o he made himself accessory to the third, by publicly connecting himself — and that, too, in avowed allegiance to the theory of the equality of the sexes — with Angelina Grimke. . Finally, Non-resistance became the prominent subject of hen«volent ^en- thusiasm. And once more the Bible stood in the way. The wars of Moses, and much of the morality of the Old Testament, seemed hideously repugnant to the ultra peace-principles. Some were prudent and patient enough to for- bear railing, and seek a reconciliation of the morality of the Old Testament with that of the New, But others had chafed against the Bible in the previ- ous reforms, till they were irritated, and veneration gave place to oombative- ness. When the angel of the Lord with a drawn sword had confronted Balaam three times, and his ass had crushed his foot against the wall, the prophet** anger was kindled. Moses was the object of hostility in this reform, as Paul had been in its predecessor. Thus the bulwarks of the Old ^nd New Testa- ments were assailed. The last of the series of Radical Conventions which w^re held in Boston ia 1841 — 2, gave utterance to the growing spiiit of infideUty. The attempt was made to place the Bible in the same category mth the Sabbath, Church, and Ministry ; and although the movement was apparently a failure, many were emboldened in their irreverence. Since then, a considerable class have gradually receded from their allegiance to the Bible, until they now lack little or nothing of the ordinary characteristics of downright infidehty. We believe this is a true account of the disorder now prevailing among ultraists ; and we present It with unceremonious and perhaps offensive plain- ness ; not because we are opposed to the objects of the several reforms con- cerned — for all our predilections are in their favor ; nor because we bear any malice against such men as T. D. Weld — for we have long been accustomed to regard him with respect, and even affection ; but because we reverence God more than all ultraisms and ultraists together, and are determined, at all hazards, so far as in us lies, to expose the machinations of the devil agaijist the Bible, ^ii^^-^s; § 3. THE MORAL CHARACTER OF UNBELIEF. The following remark, taken from an article which was published in the Herald of Freedom in 1843, (N. P. Rogers, editor,) presents one of thd most popular apologies current among unbeHevers : — •'The Clergy charg-e infidelity upon abolitionists. I, for one, reply that I regard it as no accusation. If it were true, it is not any lliinif that calls for defense, or needs any vindication. It is neither a fault nor a virtue, in itself. Belief or disbelief are, of course, mere results of evidence, or of the lack of it." The avowal of a sentiment so gi'ossly unscriptural, and awfi-scriptural, as that contained in the sentences which we have italicized, is good evidence that the writer is actually an infidel of the most foolish sort. His doctrine, if it w^ere true, would utterly stultify and condemn Jesus Chiist. If ' belief or disbelief are mere results of evidence, or of the lack of it,' having no moral meiit or demerit, Christ miserably abused his disciples when he ' tip- braided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen.'' Mark 16: 14. According to Mr. Rogers, they might justly have repelled these upbraidings, and as- gerted their innocence, on the ground that their disbelief of the report of Christ's resurrection was an inevitable misfortune — the ' mere result of the lack of evidence !' Nothing in all the records of the evangehsts stands out in bolder prominence, than the truth that Christ treated unbelief as the worst of moral abominations, and offered all the premiums of his administration in this world and the world to come to those who should believe in his mission and doctrine. ' Go ye (said he to his disciples) into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature : he that believeth [that gospel] shall be saved ; hut he that believeth not shall be damned.'' Mark 16: 15, 16. Here is sal- vation and damnation suspended on acts of the mind, which Mr. Rogers says are neither ' faults nor virtues,' but mere mechanical effects of evidence, or the lack of it ! It is needless to multiply citations. Every one who is fa- miliar "with the Bible can see without much study, that Mr. Rogers' principle aims a blow at the heart of Christianity. We are safe in assuming that he is an infidel in the worst sense of the Avord. Having then to deal with one who does not receive the Bible as a judge of controversy, but ' tramples it under his feet' (as he says in another article of the same paper) if it crosses his notions of right and wrong, we will leave the Bible argument, and try the dogma which he has propounded, in the court of common sense. Mr. Rogers' position obviously is, that praise and blame attach only to acts that are voluntary^ and that belief and disbelief are involuntary — the ' meke results of evidence or of the lack of it,' and of course, are not deserving of praise or blame. On the other hand, our position is, that behef and disbeUef are, in many cases, voluntary. We do not say that there are not cases in which evidence compels belief. In the clear simpUcity of mathematics, or in the spiritual brightness of the eternal world, there may be such a thing as involuntary belief. But in such a world as this, where evidence is often MORAL CIIAEACTER OF UNBELIEF. ^1^. 21 deficient, or apparently contradictory, and especially in subjects so deep, and to worldly eyes so cloudy, as those of which the Bible treats, men have an opportunity, nay, are compelled to exercise their wills in forming their opin- ions. We will advert particularly to only one of the many ways in which volition is concerned in belief and disbelief. Evidence tliat is actually conclusive, does not necessarily insure that the conclusion will he draum in the mind of him to whom that evidence is presented. A man may take two steps in a sound syllogism, and yet refuse to take the third. For example, suppose it is demonstrated to a slaveholder, first, that ' all men are created free and equal ;' and secondly, that negroes are men ; the necessary conclusion from these premises, if any conclusion is draw7i^ is, that negroes are of right free and equal with the Avhites. But the drawing of this conclusion is an act of the mind, separate from and independent of the perception of the premises on which it is founded, and the slaveholder has the power to stop the action of his mind even at the point where the evidence is complete and admitted, and turn from that evidence to some more agreeable subject, with- out ever drawing the conclusion. In such a case (and ten thousand such cases occur daily) the unbelief of the man in respect to the rightful freedom and equality of negroes will remain — not for lack of evidence, but because he voluntarihj refused to look beyond the evidence to the truth evinced. — The general principle which we affirm, is, that in all cases Avhere truth is reached, not by instantaneous clairvoyance, but by a seiies of steps, man has the power of arresting his mind at any stage of the process ; and belief is not the mere inevitable result of evidence perceived, but depends on a continuity of thought which he has power to choose or refuse. The lack of this conti- nuity of thought, which we may call unfaithfulness of mind, is a very gen- eral cause of unbelief in respect to the advanced truths which are propounded from time to time in science, philanthropy and religion. Multitudes habit- ually act as a judge would do, who, after hearing the evidence in a suit, should dismiss the case without judgment. Universal consciousness is an unanswerable witness to the fact, that the transition from evidence to conclusion — ' the making up of the mind' — in a word, the act of believing, is in many cases heroically voluntary. When apparent self-interest clashes with the conclusion to be formed, however per- emptory may be the evidence, it requires effort, self-denial, courage to be- lieve. No man has ever made any valuable progress in wisdom, who has not again and again summoned all the energies of his soul to the work of decisive judgment upon evidence. And when a conclusion has been once attained by the clearest demonstration, if it is unfamiliar and offensive, or if the evidence of it is concatenated, and not easily perceivable, every body knows that it costs many a struggle of the will to keep it in the mind, and make it a permanent element of thought and action. The Bible is not alone in making belief and unbehef the criterion of char* acter and destiny. The grand difference between man and man in the esti- mation of human society, lies in the different degrees of wisdom in worldly matters which each possesses ; and wisdom is the result of faithfully and v-"' f tKU 22 HORAL CHARACTER OF UNBELIEF. t^ heroically pursuing evidence to its conclusions : indeed, it is but another name for the belief of truth. Common sense, the world over, gives its high- ■est praise and rewards to mental faithfulness, and awards blame and con- tempt to mental cowardice and imbecility. And in this matter abolitionists are by no means behind the rest of the world. They have a creed, — ^not religious, but social, — a creed on the subject of slavery ; and there is not a church or clergy in the world who blame unbehef and persecute heresy (with the tongue and pen) more unsparingly than the church and clergy of aboli- tionism. Does N. P. Rogers account the imperviousness of the South to antislavery sentiments, its unbelief in respect to the expediency of immediate abolition, the 'mere result of the lack of evidence'? Or does he think there is no ^ fault' in the belief of the popular clergy that he and his compeers are evil doers ? If so, his treatment of them strangely belies his opinions. We allude thus to abohtionists, not in the way of reproach, but that we may carry our appeal against the dogma of Mr. Rogers in regard to the in- different nature of belief and unbelief, into his and their own consciousness. The truth is, when a man is certain that he has laid hold of a new and im- portant principle in any department of truth, it is right and good that he should make it a part of his ' creed,' and endeavor to promulgate it ; and when he has established his position by substantial proof in the sight of men, he has a right to their belief, and may justly censure them if they believe not. Abolitionists know that there is something more and worse than the '*mere lack of evidence' at the bottom of Southern unbelief; and they are right in blaming it. Health Reformers, Phrenologists, Neurologists, the advocates of every new system of truth, hnow that there is something wrong in the cold repellant obtuseness with which the world meets their efforts to enlighten it. So also, as believers in the divine origin of the Bible, and of the doctrines which it teaches, we hnow (Mr. Rogers' dictum to the con- trary notwithstanding) that infidelity is the result of something more and worse than * mere lack of evidence' — that there is voluntary mental unfaith- fulness, moral perverseness of the most radical and pernicious kind, where the Son of God is denied. The gospel of Jesus Ohrist is peculiarly a system of central truth. It is the constitution of that universal government in which the principles of all other systems, whether scientific or moral, are but by-laws. It relates to the soul and to eternal existence. It is properly called the truth, in dis- tinction from mere truth in general. Such a system ought to be investigated first of all, and with principal interest and perseverance by every rational being. Whoever has thus investigated it, has found evidence enough of its truthfulness and divinity ; and to such a person, the fact that a man is an infidel, is sufficient proof that he is not a central thinker, not a constitivtional patriot — that he has never turned his mind with steady,* persevering gaze, toward the spiritual, the infinite, the eternal. In other words, believers know that infidelity is the offspring and evidence of superficiality. An infidel teacher is a quack in matters of infinite moment ; of course he is infinitely mischievous. 31 ^ro unavoidable ignorance is a misfortune; but superfi- MOKAt CHARACTBR OP UNBELIEF. ^^ Ciality and quackery are universally condemned as voluntary oifensesv If we go back of supei-ficiality, we find all its antecedents of a voluntary^ blamable nature. Mental laziness is a very common cause of superficial thinking. It is easier to employ the mind about matters on the surface of existence, and give up one's self to impressions from things visible, than to seek wisdom in the far depths of spiritual, central truth. Sensualky is an- other cause of superficiality. The same inversion of right order which lead* men to attend more to the enjoyments of their bodies than of their souls, disposes them also to employ their thoughts about things physical rather than things spiritual ; and propels them as by centrifugal force, evermore farther and farther from the internal light of the universe toward the darkness of mere materialism. Worldliness, which is only a wiser kind of sensuality, i«, we may safely say, always in some form at the bottom of that inattention and aversion to things spiritual and infinite, which is the ground of all infi- delity. ' The cares of this world, and the deceitfulness of riches, and the lusts of other things, entering in, choke the \rord.' A mind full of worldly business of any kind has no time, and can have no taste for the investigation of central truth ; and the most convenient refuge for it, is infidelity. These remarks may be applied to a larger class than that of avowed infi- dels. A lazy-minded, sensual, worldly ' Christian,' will as certainly be su- perficial, and centrifugal in his habits of mind, as the open blasphemer of the Bible. He has within him all the essential elements of infidelity, and is actually an mfidel with reference to the internal truths of the Bible ; thougla not with reference to the Bible itself. We might properly extend the mean- ing of the word infidel to all who turn away from the spiritual knowledge of God and his Son; and then divide them into two classes — the pro-Bible and the anti-Bible infidels. The gi-oundAvork of character is the same in both ; viz., unfaithfulness and Superficiality of mind, originating in laziness, sensu- ality and worldliness. The infidelity which has infested abolition and other kindred reforms, can be traced beyond 'mere lack of evidence.' Though it is apparently pecu- liar, we have no hesitation in attributing it to the same general causes, as in other cases. If the charge of laziness and sensuality, as the ground of su- perficiality of mind, may be denied, with reference to the Reformers, still We affirm that they are drawn away from central truth by worldliness. — Their worldliness, it is true, is of a peculiar— we might say of a very subli- mated sort. It is not the * deceitfulness of riches,' nor the ' cares of this world,' in the usual sense of the expression, which chokes the word in them ; but it is the ' lust of other things' than the spiritual knowledge of God, The objects which they have set their hearts upon, viz., the abolition of slavery and war, physical and social reform, are as truly worldly objects as Wealth or political power. They relate primarily to the bodies and temporal interests of men. The fact that they are somewhat nobler objects than those which ordinary worldhngs seek, cannot redeem them from the charge we bring against them. They are not within the circle of central, constitutional truth. They are not the leading objects of the Bible. A man may seek them all without ever thinkmg of God, or of his Son, of the spiritual world, 24 HARMONY OF MOSES AND CHRIST. ^. or of eternity. [Moreover thoy are objects which, when pursued In a spirit of ultraism, sucli as abounds among modern reformers, lead naturally and almost necessarily to irritatin<; collisions with the Bible, resulting in gTadual abandonment of it, and finall y^ in enmity against it. The infidelity or semi- infidelity of modern reformei*s, as we have shown in the preceding article, is the result of lustful benevokiuce, the love of liberty as the summum honumy and lack of veneration, — not of the ' mere lack of evidence.* § 4. THE HARMONY OF MOSES AND CHRIST. The most plausible of all the usual allegations against the Bible, is, that the New Testament contradicts the Old. The ultra-benevolent semi-infidels are fond of arraj^ng the principles of Christ against those of Moses. We will examine one of the worst of the stumbling blocks thus laid in the way of Bible-believers, as a specimen of the whole. Moses said — " If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her; and yet no mischief follow ; he shall he surely punished, according- as tlie woman's husband shall lay upon him ; and he shall pay as the judges determine. And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burning for burning, wound for wound, strips for stripe." Exodus 21: 22-25. Christ said — " Ye have heard that it hath been said. An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth : but I say unto you, that ye resist not evil ; but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also." Matt. 5: 38-40. The scorner says that in one of these passages Jesus Christ forbade what Moses commanded in the other, and thereby proved his infidelity to a portion of the Bible and showed conclusively that he did not consider it the word of -God, Let us see if this is true. 1. The mere language which Christ uses in substituting his rule for Moses' in this case, indicates no condemnation or disrespect of Moses' rule. For in the context immediately preceding he uses the same forai of speech in regard to several precepts of the decalogue : — ' Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time. Thou shalt not kill,' &c. Ver. 21. ' Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery,' &c. Ver. 27. No one will argue against the righteousness or the divinity of the Mosaic precepts against murder and adultery, because Christ deemed them insuffi- cient for the purposes of his spiritual kingdom, and substituted other rules in their place. He supplanted them, not because they were evil in them- :8elves, but because the nature of his dispensation called for larger principles, ^he same may be said of his dealing with Exodus 21: 24, for aught that appears in his language to the contrary. 2. Christ constantly taught that Grod's ultimate reckoning with men will proceed according to Moses' rule — 'An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.' Let us glance at som'B of his insti-uctions on this point. ' The Son HARMONY OF MOSES AND CHRIST. 25 of man ghall come m the glory of his Father, with hig angels, and tTien he shall reward every man according to Ms worJcs.^ Matt. 16: 27. "What is here meant bj ' rewarding every man according to Ids works,' may be seen by consulting such passages as Matt. 13: 41 — 43, 25: 31 — 46. The rule of judgment according to these passages, is that they who work evil shall be rewarded with destruction ; and that is equivalent to the rule of Moses. In the parable of the cruel creditor, (Matt. 18: 23 — 35,) the circumstances stated are these : A king, on the entreaty of his servant, forgave him his debt. The servant, having an account against a fellow servant in similar circumstances, would not forgive him, but cast him into prison. The king, being informed of the fact, called the oppressor to account, and dehvered him to the tormentors. Thereupon Christ says, 'So likewise shall my heav- enly Father do also unto you^ if ye from your hearts forgive not every one his brother their trespasses ;' which is as much as to say, they that show no mercy shall have no mercy, but shall be dealt with according to the rule — 'An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth. Even in the sermon on the mount — the very discourse in which the Mosaic rule of retribution is dis- placed, — Christ points his disciples forward to a time when that rule shall be enforced. 'With what judgment ye judge ^^ he say&, 'ye shall he judged;- and with what ineasure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.^ Matt. 7: 2. This is as strong as if he had said in so many words — ^God will reckon with you at last by Moses' rule. An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.' It appears therefore that if there is any inherent wmng in the principle of exact retribution, Christ is as deeply imphcated in the guilt of approving and promulgating it as Moses, and is moreover guilty of fastening the wrong upon God. We have then, not merely Christ pitted agamst Moses, but Christ against Christ. We need not go out of the book of Matthew — not even out of the sermon on the mount — to convict the Bible of self-antagonism, if there is any real antagonism between Matthew 5: 38 — 40 and Exodus 21: 22 — 25. This is carrying the matter too far. 3. The simple truth about the matter is, that the relation between Moses' rule and Christ's, is Just the relation between justice and mercy, and both are good and worthy of God, though they are appropriate to different times and different circumstances. The rule — 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth' — is the rule of exact justice. Common sense approves of it. It is the counterpart of the golden rule — ' Whatsoever ye would that men should do unto you, do ye even so to them.' The selfish passions of individuals ought not to be trusted with the administration of such a rule ; and accord- ingly it should be borne in mind that Moses enacted it, not as a principle of private action, but as the law to be administered in courts of justice, ' as the judges shall determine ;' and the same rule, in different forms, governs courts of justice in all civilized lands. It is by no means certain that Christ, if he had been legislating as Moses was, for the affairs of a visible kingdom, would not have made the essence of Moses' rule the basis of the administration of justice between man and man. Rather it is certain that he would have done so, since, as we have seen, he declared that rule to be the ultimate measure of awards in God's eternal kingdom. But he gave his disciples another rule, 3 M HARMONTf OP M0SB9 A5fl> CHRIST*/ for reasons 'which grew out of the nature of his mission as an agent not of justice but of mercy. Previous to judgment God interposes a dispensation of forbearance and forgiveness. The rule of justice is suspended ; God waves his rights, and returns good for e^^l, so long a& there is hope of saving men. Christ appeared in the world as the agent of this intei-mediate dispen- sation, and called on his followers to co-operate with him, by enlarging their hearts beyond the rule of justice, to tho fulness of the measure of God's mercy, who for tho present ' maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sonde th rain on the just and on the unjust.' In all this there was no condemnation of the rule of justice. It Was perfectly consistent with Christ's position to affirm (as he virtually did affirm by his endorsement of the law and the prophets in Matt. 5: 17) that Moses gave that rule by divhie authority, for he expressly declared it to be a rule which God would even yell enforce in its proper time. He only taught his disciples that the rule of mercy was better for the time then present— i. e., more appropriate to his and their mission of love. Eoth rules were good. The same God might use- both. Suppose A owes B a just debt, which he is able to pay. B may ex- act the payment of that debt in perfect righteousness- In that case he acts by the rule of justice. On the other hand he may in perfect righteousness forgire the debt. In that case he acts by the rule of mercy. Under certain- circumstances it might be best that he should exact payment, and under others that he should forgive ;• and his acting by a different rule in different cases would be no infraction of his consistency or uprightness. Indeed in the parable of the cruel debtor we have a complete illustration of God's ad- ministration of both rules. The king first forgives the servant his debt, ac- cording to the rule of mercy^ Afterward^ on finduig him to be unforgiving toward his fellow servant, he delivers him to the tormentors ' till he should pay all that was due unto him.' Thus he enforces the rule of justice. 'So likewise,^ says Christ, * shall my heavenly Father do unto you.'' There is no inconsistency between the different proceedings in this case ; and there is no more inconsistency between tlie rule of Moses and that of Christ. God commissioned Moses to institute a municipal law, which contained the ele- monts, and was a miniature, of the rule of eternal judgment. He sent Christ into tlie world to administer the fulness of his intermediate mercy. The pre- cepts of both, in their appropriate times and circumstances, were entirely consistent with each other. The allegation of Christ's opposition to Moses in this case, and indeed most of the plausibihties of Universalism, Non- resistance, and semi-infidelities in general, emanate from that shallowness and confusion of mind, which disallows altogether the principle of divine justice, and raises an entire and immutable theory of morality for God and man on tho sole foundation of divine mercy^ t;^fff:'^'^'^^^■■ ('v <- ''H^i^' § 5. THE ULTIMATE GROUND OF FAITH. There are several kinds of belief, which may be distinguished thus: — 1. There is a belief of the imagination. When a person believes his own thoughts Avithout reference to their agreement with external objects, his belief is imaginative. The romance-writer produces thoughts that have no founda- tion in external facts. Every person has the faculty of doing the same thing to a greater or less extent. Ordinarily imaginative thoughts are treated as such, and iK)t believed to be true. But sometimes men suffer the distinction between imaginative and true thoughts to be confounded in their minds, and come to believe whatever they think, without comparing their thoughts with objective reaUties. Devoted novel-readers not unfrequently fall into this confusion of mind ; and it is the special distinction of insane persons. 2. There is a belief of testimony ; i. e., of thoughts which are supposed to tigree with objective realities, because they are confirmed by the report of others. 3. There is a belief of the reason; i. e., of thoughts that are con- firmed by a process of reasoning. 4. There is a belief of the semei ; i. e., of thoughts that are confirmed by the impressions of the senses. The three latter kinds of belief are chiefly concerned in the formation of the opinions of sane persons in ordinary life. Tlie two latter are principally relied on by those w^ho are considered wise in their generation. The beUef of the senses distinguishes ^\q practical wise man ; and the belief of the reason the philosophical wise man. In proportion as a person leaves the guidance of his senses and reason, and relies on testimony and imagination, he ap- proaches credulous folly and insanity. ^ Besides all these, there is a fifth kind, which maybe called Byiritual belief. One spirit can present itself to the perceptions of another and communicate thoughts and persuasions, without the intervention of any verbal testimony, any process of reasoning, or any impression of the senses. This is proved by the phenomena of Mesmerism, and is recognized as an established truth throughout the Bible. When a man believes thoughts thus caused or con- ,^ firmed, his belief is spiritual. This kind of behef is liable to be confounded by superficial observers with imaginative belief. It ascertains the truth of its thoughts by none of the processes ordinarily used. It appeals to no external testimony, no train of argument, no sensual evidence. To ordinary apprehension its resources, like those of imaginative belief, are wholly subjective. Doubtless too, in many cases, pretenders to spiritual behef have mistaken their imaginations for spiritual impressions, and so have been really imaginative behevers, having nothing in common with spiritual believers but the negative charac- teristic of having left the region of sense, reason, and external testimony. But in its essential nature, spiritual belief is no more alhed to imaginative than either of the three kinds that are accepted by the world as rational. It most resembles belief of the senses and testimony. It is, in fact, belief of the internal senses and of testimony conveyed not by words, but by spiritual 28 ULTIMATE GROUND OF FAITH. impressions. It 13 not altogether subjective. Its source of evidence is froiit ■without the circle of its own thoughts — as truly so as verbal testimony. A man who behoves spiritual impressions^ is no more properly chargeable with behoving his own imaginations than one Who beHeves his neighbor's word. He is hable, however, to be deceived. There are f^lse spirits, as there are lying men ; and he who behoves the impressions of all sorts of spirits, will be as miserably misled as he who behoves every report that he hears. And in the infancy of spirituahsm there is perhaps more danger of running into this indiscriminate credulity, than there is in ordinary life ; because the novice naturally imagines that every impression he receives comes from God, and his veneration binds him to behove without questioning. But assummg that a spiritualist has learned to discriminate between true and false spirits as wisely as persons of common sense discriminate between true and false men, there is no more folly in his belief, founded on spiritual impressions, than there is in theirs founded on verbal testimony. And if he is in communication with God, the source of all truth, his belief is altogether more trustworthy than even the behef of the senses or of reason ; for God is less likely to persuade hun of falsehood than his own eyes or his own intellect. This is the nature of true faith. It is not a belief of imaginations, though it may easily be mistaken for that. It is no.t a belief of human report. It is not a belief of any process of reasoning. It is not a belief of the external senses. It is not an indiscriminate belief of spiritual impressions. But it is a behef of the persuasions of God's spirit. The faith of the prophets in their own predictions must necessarily have been a confidence in divine impressions. So faith in prayer, (which is a kind of prophesying,) must be an anticipa- tive persuasion wrought by the spiiit of God. So also all hopes of salvation that are authentic and sure, are of the nature of prophecy, and must be caused and sustained by the spiritual power of him who ' seeth the end from the beginning.' Now while we recognize and duly value all the lower evidences which may be set ui array for the defence of Bible-religion against infidelity, it is still to be borne in mind that the belief which is caused by these evidences is but the precursor and auxiliary of spiritual faith. Here is the advantage which the true believer may claim over all other disciples of truth. From all the sophistries of ' the disputers of this world,' he can appeal to the testimony of his o^yn internal perceptions. While he can say ' I have seen, and therefore behove,' the infidel can only reply, ' I have not seen and therefore believe not ;' and a mere negative of this kind in one man's mouth, has properly no force against the positive knowledge of another. — We will illustrate the fore- going positions by a sketch of the grounds, both proximate and ultunate, on which rests the behef of the existence of God. The evidence that there is a God is of two sorts — direct and indirect. It is manifest that God Inmself has evidence of his own existence, independently of any testimony of his works — the evidence of co7isciousness. So they who stand in his presence or are joined to his spirit, whether angels or saints, know his existence by immediate ferception. This we call direct evidence. On the other hand the whole creation is full of the tohns of his ' invisible UtTiMAl'B GROUND Ot FAITIt. 29 J^ower and Godhead.' So that a thoughtful and honest observer, howevfei* remote from his immediate presence, could not fail to infer his existence. This we call mdirect evidence. The following is a sketch of the most comprehensive argument for the ex- istence of God, from indireet evidence : 1. Mere matter has no power in itself. All motion must be the effect, and of course the evidence of life. But all visible matter is in motion. Therefore all visible matter demonstrates the existence of life. The unity of that life is proved by the unity of all the treat movements of matter ; and its omnipotence by their immensity. — . Order is not the effect of chance or of a blind will* All orderly motion is evidence of intelligence. But all visible matter is in orderly motion. Therefore all visible matter demonstrates the existence of intelligence. The immense extent and ingenuity of the order of the universe, proves that intel- ligence to be omniscience. 3. All orderly motion tending to produce hapj^i- ness, is evidence of benevolence. But all visible matter is in orderly motion tending to produce happiness. All visible matter therefore demonstrates that the inteUigent life which moves it, is benevolent. Thus the universe testifies of an invisible being, whose elements are infinite life, light, and LOVE. Such a being we may safely worship as GOD. Arguments of this kind show how much proof of the existence of God man onight have found by the light of nature, had he been an honest and diligent observer. Of course, they show that all, even the heathen, are under the obligations and responsibihties of the divine government. But they by no means indicate the process by which men do actually come to the knowledge of the true God. Human perverseness has been found proof against the testimony of creation ; and all valuable knowledge of God has come by means supplied by an economy of special revelation. That economy employs, as its chief and final powder of proof, direct spiritual evidence ; making all indirect testimony only introductory and subordinate. The process by which believers generally arrive at a solid practical assu- rance of the existence of God, is tliis : First, they hear of him from their parents and teachers ; (and it has been God's care from the beginning of the world to provide this first means of instruction ;) thus their minds are pre- occupied with a persuasion of his existence. Then they read the book which contains the records of his past manifestations to mankind, and gives them directions for approaching him. Finally, they follow those directions, and ascertaui that there is a God by actual communion with him. In other w^ords, they first believe the report of men and books, so far as to seek God ; and when they have found him, they believe the evidence of their own spiritual senses. This method of coming to rest in the conclusion that there is a God, how- ever it may be derided by skeptics, is by no means irrational. An illustra- tion will set it ui its true light. Suppose the case of a man bom in a remote province of some great empire. He is a subject of a king whom he has never seen. In order that he may be a good subject, he must have a sure beUef in the existence of his king. By what process may he most readily assure hunself of the truth which he thus needs to know ? He hears the •BO 6UIDE OF INTERPREtATION. testimony of common report ; he sees the administration of government aromid him ; he has a copy of the statutes of the empire ; he has conversed with some who profess to have seen the king. With these gromids of behef, he may sm-cly, without exposing himself to any fair charge of creduhty, incjuire his way to the king's presence, and so convert the persuasion that comes by report into the certainty that comes by personal knowledge. Ever after- ward, his answer to those who ask why he behoves in the existence of the king, will be — ''Because I have seen him^^ So, to the question, ' Why do you believe in the existence of a God V the spiritual man ^answers— ' I did beUevc at first because I heard reports ef him, and saw his works ; but I iioto believe because my spirit perceives him,'' By a similar process the believer's heart attains immovable confidence in the Bible as the word of God. At first he is persuaded to respect and read it by the testimony of men. Afterward perhaps his understanding is satisfied by historical evidences, by the miracles and fulfilments of prophecy which attest its divinity, and by his own perceptions of its intrinsic goodness and grandeur. But all these vouchers, external and internal, though sufficient to condemn infidelity, are but the harbingers of that ' full assurance of faith' which rests on the spiritual testimony of God. The man who assures him- self of the existence of his king by seeking his presence, will also at the same time verify, by pereonal inquiry, the authenticity of the statute-book which bears the king's name. To the question, ' Why do you believe the Bible V the best of all answers is — •' Because God endorses it in his communications with my heart, and m all his discipline of me, owns it, as the auxiliary of his Spirit.' ^ 6. THE GUIDE OF INTERPRETATION. Having ascertained that the Bible is the word of God, and of course our text-book of doctrine, the question now arises. Who shall he our instructor in that text-hook P The Catholic answers — ' The Churchy hy its traditions and the teaching of its p)riests.'' The Protestant answers — ' We need 7io in- structor ; the Bihle itself is the only sufficient rule of faith and practice,^ But we may reply to the Protestant, except it be interpreted it is no rule at all; and mterpretation implies something beside and ahove the Bible, viz., judgment or ophiion. Still then we ask, Who shall direct our judgment 9 — who shall govern our opinion in determining the meaning of the Bihle ? In the nature of the case, we need an interpreter with the Bible, as truly as the infant scholar needs a schoolmaster with his spelling-book. And in fact, Protestants have yielded to the necessity of the case. Their laity re- ceive their rule of faith and practice from the clergy ; the clergy in turn receive it from the schools ; and the schools receive it partly from tradition, and partly from human, and even infidel learning. }3ut even if the Pro- GUIDE OP INTERPRETATION. 8t {estant theory could be carried out, and private judgment actually take the place of tradition and human learning, it would still be true that the Bible of itself is not the rule ; for then private judgment would be the schoolmaster, and the Bible only its text-book ; and in- this, as in all other cases, the school- master would be above the book.. Seeing then we must have a guide, whom shall we choose ? We answer, THE HOLY GHOST. It should be presumed that God, if he has given the world a book, has also provided an interpreter. Accordingly we find the Bible itself plainly directs us to its author, the Spirit of truth^ as the ultimate guide of faith. The great promise of the Old Testament is, that ' all shall he taugU of God: (See Isa. 54; 13, Jer. 31: 34.) And the New Testa- ment records the fulfilment of this promise, in the outpouring of the Holy Ghost on the primitive Christian church. Christ did not rely even on his own verbal instructions to his disciples, (though we may presume they were as perfect as those of the scriptures,) but referred them to the Comforter, as their ultimate and effectual instructor. (See John 14: 26, 28.) Paul prayed that the Ephesians, whom he had taught abundantly by Avord of mouth, might have ' the spirit of wisdom and revelation.'^ Eph. 1: 17. John thus describes the church of the new covenant: ' Ye have an unction from the Holy One^ and ye know all things ; I have not written unto you because ye know not the truth. * * * The anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you^ and ye need not that any man teach you : hut as the same anointing teacheth you of all things^ and is truth, and is no lie, and eveji as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.'' 1 John 2: 20 — 27. Thus we have the authority of the Bible itself for regarding the Holy Ghost as the superior oracle, not contradicting or superceding the Bible, but interpreting and applying it. Eor the sake of developing our views on this point more fully, we will here present and discuss at some length the principles of the anti-spiritual school. One of the text-books at Andover is Ernesti on Inte^yretation, translated from the German and pubhshed with notes by Moses Stuart. The conclu- ding part of the book is a chapter from Keil, a German critic, ' on the quali- fications of an interpreter.' Prof. Stuart commends it as a ' well digested summary.' That our readers may have a fair view of the German and Andoverian equipments, we subjoin the substance of Keil's chapter : ^ 1. He who desires to understand and interpret the books of the New Testament, mnsi, first of all, acquire some historic knowledge of the author of each book ; of the state of things existing- when it was written ; of the body or collection of the New Testament books J of the particular history of its ancient versions, editions, and parts in which it was written ; and other things of this nature. To this must be added a knowledge of the principles of criticism, in respect to the text of the New Testament. $ 2. Of the second kind of knowledge, preparatory to the understanding and interpretation of the Neu) Testament. (1) The interpreter must understand the language in which the hooks are written. As the diction is not pure classic Greek, but the Hebrew idiom here and there intermixed with classic Greek, and as vestiges of the Chaldee, Syriac, Rabbinic and Latin languages occur; it follows, of course, that the interpreter should not only be acquainted with pure Greek, but with its various dialects, specially the Alexandrine. Above all, ho ought to be well versed in the Hebrew, Chaldee, Syriac, Rabbinic, and Latin idioms. (2) The interpreter must possess a knowledge of the things respecting tchich the book treats. These are partly historical, and partly doctrinal. The explanation of them must be 32 GUIDE OF INTERPRETATION. sought, primarily, froin the books themselves; and secondarily, from those writing's of more reectit authors, which may be subsidiary to tiie attainment of this knowledge. ^ 3. As to the liistorie matter of these books. It is of g-reat importance to the interpreter to be well versed in sacred g-eography, chronology, civil history, and archtT?ology ; i. e., to understand those things which respect the sitijation and climate of the countries where the events referred to h&ppcned ; as well as those which serve to define the times when they happened ; and also the history of the nation among whom they took place, and of other nations mentioned in this history, with their condition, manners,, and cus- toms. (1) Geographical knowledge. The geography of Palestine and the neighboring coun- tries should be well understood, as also their natural productions. To this must be added a knowledge of many countries in Asia, and of some in Europe; also the Roman empire, as it then existed,, divided into provinces. (2) Chronology. The interpreter should have not only a knowledge of technlcaf chro- nology, but of the Roman mode of reckoning ab urbe condita, and of the Greek Olympi- ads, on which subjects he may study authors well deserving of credit;) but in respect to historical chronology, he should know in what order of time the events related in the Old Testament happened ; when and where the first Roman emperors, the various kings and princes that sprung from the house of Herod the Great, the Roman consuls at the beginning of the empire of the Cesars,^ the Jewish high priests (and the number of them) in our Savior's time, and the Roman magistrates, speeially in the provinces of Syria and Judea, succeeded each other. (3) History civil and political. In regard to the history of events among the nations mentioned in the sacred books, and also their forms of government, it is important for the interpreter to make himself acquainted, first, with the ancient history ot the Jews.^ In studying this, he is not to confine himself merely to the Old Testament; he must also consult the traditionary accounts which were extant in the time of Christ and the apostles. Secondly, he must study the history of the Jews under the Herods, and that ot these princes. Thirdly, the condition and circumstances of the Jews in Palestine, while under the dominion of the Romans; and also of the Jews living in other coun- tries. P'inally, the history of the Roman emperors at that period, and of the Roman prefects over the Asiatic provinces. (4) Manners and customs. In regard to these, a knowledge of Hebrew antiquities ii* general is necessary. A considerable knowledge of the Greek and Roman antiquities. A knowledge of the ecclesiastical rites and customs of the primitive churches; both; those which they received from the Hebrews, and others which were introduced by Christians themselves. § 4. Doctrinal contents of the sacred books. That part of the New Testament which is directly concerned with faith and practice, will be rightly understood when the interppe- ter rightly understands what each particular writer has inculcated. As there are many passages which relate to the Jews ; and as the writers of the New Testament and their first readers were of Jewish extraction ; it will be important, (1) To know the sentiments of the Jews of that period, in regard to religion; spe- cially of those who used the Hebrew-Greek dialect, and of the three great sects among: which the Jews were divided, viz., the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes. (2) Thcjrrecepts of the Christian religion. What was adopted from the Jewish religion^ what rejected, and what was added anew to Christianity, must be understood in order to explain the New Testament properly. But knowledge of this nature, that is certain, can be drawn only fiom the sacred writings themselves. (3) The doctrines of heretical sects. It is important to know the opinions of early here- tics, because, it is probable, some passages of the New Testament have a special reference to them. ^ 5. In enumerating the qualifications of an interpreter, wemust not omit a knowledge of grammar, rhetoric, and philosophy. (1) Gramviar. Not only a general knowledge of its principles is necessajy, but also especial technical knowledge of both etymology and syntax. The interpreter must be acquainted with the various forms of words, and understand how the significations are connected with the forms ; he must understand the manner in which words are con- nected in a sentence; the use of the particles; and also of the grammatical figures, asr they are called, such as ellipsis and pleonasm. (2) Rhetoric. A knowledge of this is necessary, not so much to judge of rhetorical figures, as to find out the meaning of them, or the sentiment they are designed to convey* (3) A knoicledge of philosophy. Not that of some particular school or sect merely, but that which pertains to the cultivation of the mental powers, and to nice psychological GtJIDH OV I^TERPRBTATIO!^, S^ dlscrlmliifttlon. Such a knovvleflge is requisite, in order to form clear conceptions in the mind, and accurately to define our ideas; to discern what is similar in diflerenl thing-s, and what is distinct ; to judge of the connexion of thought and argument; and finallj'', to qualify one perspicuously to represent the opinions of an author to otliers. — Great caution however is necessary here, lest the interpreter intrude upon his author his own particular philosophy. — Erncsti, p. 120-124. The remarkable thing about this ^ summary' is its entire omission of all spiritual qualifications for biblical interpretation. Every one of Keil's requi- sites are as attainable by a studious infidel as by a disciple of Christ. The teachings of the Holy Ghost and a knowledge of the mysteries of the spirit- ual world have no place in his account. It may be said however, in extenuation of this omission, that it was not Keil's intention to describe the «w6;'e080 to call one thing by the name of another. The pretensions to the supernatural, pillorie4 by Butler, sent to bedlam by Swift, and (on their re-appearance in public) gibbeted by Warburton, and anatomized by Bishop Laving(on, one and all have this fortli^ir esseur tial character, that the Spirit is made the immediate object of sense or sensation. Whether the spiritual presence and agency are supposed cognizable by indescribable feeling or unimaginable vision by some specific visual energy; whether seen or heard, or touched, smelt, and lasted — for in those vast storehouses of fanatical assertion, the Vjoluroes of ecclesiastical history and auto-biography, instances are qpt wanting of the Ihree latter extravagances, — this variety in the mode may render the several pretensions more or less offensive to the taste; but with the same absurdity for the reason, this beingr dep- rived from a contradiction in terms common and radical to them all alike, the assumpr tion of a something essentially supersensiial, that is neyerl.hele^s the object of seijsg^ that is, not supersensual." jp. Jig, 44 OBJECTIONS OF ANTI-SPIRITUALISTS. The enthusiasts alluded to, ought not to be charged with a ' contradiction iw terms,'* for they certainly never use the terms ascribed to them by Cole- ridge. Who ever heard of an enthusiast, who first defined the spirit as some- thing ' essentially supersensual,' and then affirmed that it is an object of sense ? The definition belongs to Coleridge, not to the enthusiasts ; and the contradiction is between their doctrine and his definition, not between the terms of their doctruie. Coleridge assumes, that the spirit is ' essentially supersensual,' and then assumes that every body admits his assumption — the enthusiasts of whom he is speaking among the rest — and so lays the founda- tion of his charge of self-contradiction, in a twofold assumption of his own ! We are not disposed to admit that the spirit is ' essentially supersensual,* in the sense which Coleridge attaches to that expression. We agree that it is not cognizable by the five bodily senses. But this does not satisfy Cole- ridge. He denies that the spirit is immediately cognizable by any 'inward perception,' by ' consciousness or any sensible experience,' by spiritual ' feel- ing or vision ;' and this is what he means by the word super sensual. He would have expressed himself more accurately, if he had used some such term a$ super-perceptible, which excludes every mode of cognizance, spiritual as well as sensual. We object to calling all possible modes of direct perception, sensual, for that word has commonly been used in connection with the corpo- real senses, in contrast to the word spiritual, and so has contracted a con- temptible meaning. We believe that the Spirit is super-sensual, in the ^^rop- er meaning of that word, i. e. that it is above the cognizance of the corporeal senses, but we do not believe that it is super-perceptible. It is certauily too much to assume that the five bodily senses are the only modes of direct perception, and call all other supposed modes, ' indescriba- ble' and ' imimaginable,' as though they were chimerical. By which of the five senses does a man perceive his own thoughts ? He certainly neither sees, nor hears, nor touches, nor smells, nor tastes them, and yet he per- ceives them, and that not merely by their effects, but directly. In fact, the mode of perception by which a man takes cognizance of his own thoughts, or which is the same thing, of his own spirit, is the most direct conceivable ; for whereas in all external perception the perceiving power acts through material organs, which are to it as the telescope to the eye, in reflection or consciousness, the perceiving power acts without any intervening organ ; the man perceives liis own thoughts, or his own spirit, as it were, with the naked eye. If it is admitted (as w^e suppose it is) that the five senses are only five modes by which one p)erceiving power, called the mind or spirit, takes cognizance of the outward- world, is it reasonable to suppose that that one perceiving power has no 'visual energy' in its naked independent state, and with relation to objects in immediate contact with, and homogeneous to itself? As well might we say, that a man in a room with five windows, has no visual power but that which he employs in looking abroad. Whereas, in fact, his perception of things within the room is more direct and naked, than any possible perception of things outside tlie windows. So it is when spirit looks on spirit. Consciousness is admitted to be the very highest kind of evidence ; more OBJECTIONS OF ANTI-SPIRITUALISTS. 45 8ui*e than that of the senses ; and consciousness is nothing but self-percep- tion, i. e. spirit looking at spirit. There is nothing in the nature of things so far as we can judge abstractly, which should preclude a man's spirit from perceiving any other spirit as well as his own. If a man can perceive by direct sensation, his own thoughts, (as he does in memory,) why may we not suppose, that under favorable circumstances, by a great increase of spiritual energy, or by special intimacy of spiritual fellowship, he might in the same way perceive the thoughts of others? There is abundant evidence that this actually takes place in the case of the subjects of animal magnetism. It is said of Jesus that he 'perceived tlie thoughts* of the people around him ; and the power of 'discerning spirits' was one of the gifts of the primitive church. Spirits in general, then, are not super-perceptible ; and we have no reason to believe that the Spirit of God is an exception to this principle. The metaphysical argument on this subject, so far as it goes, would lead us to presume that men in a suitable state of spirituality, may perceive the Spirit of God, even more sensibly and nakedly than any material object. We will now appeal more directly to the Bible for evidence on the point in question. And in the first place, we would ask those who, like Locke and Coleridge, still maintain the sensual maxim of the heathen logician — nihil in intellectu quod nan prius in sensu^ [nothing was ever in the intellect, which was not first in the sense, i. e. in the corporeal senses,] by which of the five senses men perceived those spiritual thuigs, which were manifested in the visions which abound in the records of scripture ? For instance, when Paul was caught up to the third heaven, and hnew not whether he tvas in the body or out, which of his corporeal senses perceived the things which he reports himself to have seen and heard ? or are we to beheve that his report is a muthos or fable, and that he actually perceived nothing but the phantoms of his imagination, which originally entered his mind by his corporeal senses ? In a word, are angels, disembodied souls, and all celestial things, as well as the Spirit, supersensual in the sense of super-percep)tible ? If they are per- ceptible, and yet not by the corporeal senses, is it not certain that man is capable of an ' inward visual energy,^ adapted to the perception of spiritual substances ? Again, if the operations of the Spirit are cognizable only by the ' gifts and graces infused' by it, how shall we explain the process of inspiration f When the ' word of the Lord' came to the prophets, it was certainly the ' immediate object' of a sense of some kuid. So when ' the Spirit bade* Peter go to Cornelius, (Acts 10: 19,) who can doubt that he heard in some way, the words which are reported ? The sound as of a mighty rushing wind, which came from heaven on the day of Pentecost, was certainly pro- duced by the Holy Ghost, and as certainly was an object of sensation. The Spirit is represented ui scripture, as a life given to men, and by their faith received into their life. Is it conceivable that the soul should receive life and not feel it, or perceive it in any way but by its objective results ? External observers may uideed know its presence only by its fruits : but shall we beheve that the soul itself, in naked union with the vital energy of God, has no way of perceiving the presence of that energy but by observa^ 46 OBJECTIONS OP ANTI-SPIRITUALISTS. tion of its effects, and by inference ? The following language evidently rep- resents the presence of God by his Spirit in the soul, as a matter of direct perception : — " I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you forever ; even the Spirit of truth, whom the world can not receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him : but ye know him ; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you. I will not leave you com- fortless : I will come to you. Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more ; but ye see me; because I live, ye shall live also. At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you. He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me ; and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father ; and I w^ill love him, and will mawfent myself to him. Judas saith unto him, (not Iscariot,) Lord, how is it that thou wilt manifest thyself unto us, and not unto the world ? Jesus answered and said mito him. If a man love me, he Avill keep my w^ords : and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him." John 14: 16—23. ' He that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit,' i. e., one spirit with the Lord, as they that are married are one. (See 1 Cor. 6: 17, and context.) This being true, if a Christian can feel his own spirit, he can feel the Spirit of the Lord; for they twain are one. Thus consciousness itself, the most direct mode of perception possible, may be brought to bear on the Spirit of God. Li fact the faith of salvation is not our own, but ' the faith of the Son of G-odi! and yet we feel it. How ? Most clearly by unity with his Spirit, and by fellowship with his consciousness. Li the same way also, Hhe Spirit heareth witness tvith our spirit^ that we are the children of God.' But the Spirit of God works not only in the soul, but in the body. By the Spirit Jesus healed diseases, cast out devils, raised the dead, &c. Is it probable that an agent that wrought such mighty visible effects, was itself altogether imperceptible ? When ' Jesus perceived that virtue was gone out of him,'' we doubt not that the woman perceived that the same virtue had entered into her blood. It is said ' the fountain of her blood was dried up ; and she felt in her body that she was healed of that plague.* ' If the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead, dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies, by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.' Rom.- 8: 11. Can the body be quickened, without feeling that which quickens it ? We see that according to Coleridge's test, the Bible itself is a ' vast store- liouse of fanatical assertion ;' and its ' pretensions to the supernatural,' are of the same sort with those which were ' pilloried by Butler, sent to bedlam hy Swift, gibbeted by Warburton, and anatomized by Bishop Lavington,' M ^8. THE FAITH ONCE DELIVERED TO THE SAINTS. It is apparent to the most superficial inspection of the scriptures, that the Ireligion even of the Old Testament saints, and much more that of the prim- itive church, was one which placed man in direct communication with God. Not a saint can be found among all whose names are enrolled on the inspired record — from Abel to the last of the apostles — whose biography does not savor strongly of that marvelousness which necessarily waits upon the open manifestations of Divinity. Dreams, visions, oracles, angelic visitations, conversations with God, inspirations, infusions of superhuman power, &c., are profusely scattered through the history of Judaism. And yet the glory of New Testament Christianity as far exceeds that of the preceding dispen- sation, in respect to all these and many other manifestations of God's pres- ence, as sun-light exceeds star-light.* * Phrenologists define hiarX'elousness to be ' c'reduIity--disposition to believe Vvhat is not proved, or what are considered supernatural manifestations.' (Fowler (^' Kirkham^ p. 141.) Spurzheira says it is ' a tendency to believe in inspirations, presentiments, phantoms.' &o. Combe says the org-an of marvelousness * is uniformly large in fanat- ics. It predominates in the Rev. Edward Irving, and in all his followers whom I have seen.' (Combe s Phrenology, p. 79.) By the marvelousness of the Bible, v^'e mean that characteristic of the Bible which requires 'marvelousness' in those who receive it. The following statistics give the result of a running examination of the whole Bible with reference to this point : MARVELOUS EVENTS RECORDED IN THE BIBLE. Supernatural omens, - - • - - 14 SigniHcant dreams, - - - - 23 Appearances of angels and other supernatural beings, - - 51 Supernatural visions^ - - - - 66 Miracles specifically mentioned, (not including the vast number alluded to in Matt. 8: 16, and like passages,) ... 175 Inspired prophecies, revelations, and other direct communications from the Lord, 449 Total, 778 The items here enumerated, by no means embrace all the matter in the Bible that might be classed under the head of marvelousness. Special providences, religious ex- ercises like those described in many of the psalms, and in short every recognition of the presence and direct agency of God or any other invisible being, might be placed in the same category. But the statistics already given are suflicient for our purpose. It is manifest that marvelousness is a very prominent characteristic of the Bible; and any one who will take the trouble to examine, may see that it pervades every part, we might almost say, every page of the book. It is not confined to those portions which were written in the earlier and darker ages of Judaism. Modern philosophy teaches that supernatural wonders diminish, as light increases. But we find the contrary of this true of the Bible. The character and history of Jesus Christ is surrounded with more of the materials of marvelousness, than that of Moses and the prophets. The new dispensation which he ir.troduced, with all its increase of light, was accompanied by dreams, visions, appearances of angels, miracles, revelations and wonders of every kind, in greater abundance than ever was known before. The New Testament begins with the record of the supernatural conception of Jesus Christ, and ends with a gorgeous vision of the spiritual world. Thus it is manifest that the Bible is fitted to feed and perpetuate what the sages of these philosophical times caW fanaticism. A book, filled with excellent stories of special providences, miraculous deliverances, angelic visions, spiritual ecstasies, &c. &c.,— and especially a book which is so implicitly credited as the Bible — cannot be generally read without begetting in many minds the image of its own spirit. Such men as Swe- 48 THB FAITH ONCE DELIVERED TO THE SAINTS. The main difference between the two dispensations, was this : In accord- ance with the general character of the introductory dispensation, God mani- fested himself to the Jewish saints in an external mamier ; i. e., by visions, vocal oracles, angels, or at the most by tnbse external influences of the Spirit which affect, as it ^vere, only the outer surface of the soul, as in the case of prophetic inspiration. Whereas he manifested himself to Christian behevers in the deep sanctuary of their hearts, making them radically new creatures, taking away their sins, and giving them full and permanent fel- lowship with his own vitality. The indwelling of God was a mystery w^hich was ' hid from the ages and generations' of Judaism, but was manifested to the primitive church. There was also this further difference. God manifes- ted himself, even externally, only to a few under the Jewish dispensation. Whereas the promise of Christianity was, ' I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh : and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams.' This promise was fulfilled. The special manifestations which had before been confined to a few individuals in every age, were given, on the day of Pentecost and afterwards, to the w^hole church of God. These differences, however, do not destroy the identity of faith under the two dispensations. The religion of both — i. e. the religion of the whole Bible — was based on immediate communication with God. The later manifesta- tions were more complete, spiritual and universal, and of course produced greater changes of character, than the earlier ; but the faith which invited and apprehended those manifestations, was the same in all ages. Hence Paul, in the 11th of Hebrews, traces the history of one and the same faith, by a continuous line, from the beginning of the world till the advent of per- fection by Christianity. The generic element in all the instances of faith which he adduces — and in the faith of Christianity as well as Judaism, — is an apprehension of, and confidence in the living God, as actually present, man- ifesting himself by signs and wonders, communicating superhuman wisdom and power, overrulmg, for the believer's comfort and protection, the powers of the spiritual and natural worlds. We must distinctly mark the difference between tliis faith, and several counterfeits which have been extensively substituted for it. 1. Many talk about 'contending earnestly for the faith once delivered to the saints,' as though this were to be referred to theological controversy^ and as though the faith of the saints were belief in a mere scheme of doc- trine. But was it by belief in an orthodox creed that the saints ' stopped the denborg- and Irving', however false and pernicious may have been their views in other respects, were certainly more nearly in spiritual concord with the Bible, in respect to marvelousness, than the philosophers and theolog-ians who deride them. And while marvelonsne&s remains a part of human nature, and the Bible is allowed to feed it, we may assuredly look for the nppearance of such 'fanatics' adinfinitum. Those conserv- ators therefore, of the public morals, whose business it is to put down 'pestilent heresies,' must either return to the policy of Popery, and forbid the reading of the Bible by any but the clergy, (and even then some cicricaZ enthusiast like Luther will break forth,) or they must give up their business, and seek the welfare of mankind by en- deavoring to enlighten and purify the fanatical propensities, which they can neither Bnnother nor control. THE FAITH ONCE DELIVERED TO THE SAINTS. 49 mouths of lions, quenched the violence of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, out of weakness were made strong V Nothing can he plainer than that ' the faith once delivered to the saints,' as exemplified by Paul in the 11th of Hebrews, was directed, not toward doctrines, but toward the living Qod. 2. Philosophers and poets have an apprehension of God as manifested in the ' tlie ivorks of nature ^^ which they call faith. But this implies no personal acquaintance with God. Believers of this kind sustain no nearer relation to God than one man would to another, in case the parties had never seen each other, or had any communication — but only had seen each other's pro- ductions. Whereas the faith exhibited in the Bible, manifestly introduced the saints to personal fellowship with God, so that they walked with him, con- versed with him, received messages and messengers from him, and lived un- der his immediate protection and superintendence. 3. The faith of many religious persons consists in receiving the Bible as the word of God. They apprehend God as revealed through the scriptures. — This kind of faith is like that last mentioned — only the believer in this case- has not merely seen the works of the unknown being, but has received a letter from him, which he reveres and believes. The letter however is not address- ed to him individually, but is a circular sent ' to all whom it may concern.' So that there is still no personal acquaintance. 4. Another class of religionists, a little in advance of the former, by syste- matizing the legal developments of the Bible, build up in their minds what they call a moral government, and place God at the head of it as king over moral beings. Their faith apprehends God in his official capacity. The re- lation between him and them is that of king and subject. Their king, like the kings of this world, is high and lifted up, far above his common subjectSy distant and reserved. They see him only through his laws and state trans- actions. In all this there is no personal acquaintance, no vital union. God thus apprehended, is not in the believer, ruling by spiritual power, but over him' ruling by written laws. This is not ' the faith once delivered to the saints.* 5. Many of those already mentioned, and others, go so far as to admit certain measures of God's j^ersonal influence. They conceive of him not on- ly as manifested through his works, his word, and his moral government, but as operating by his spirit on the mind. But they are careful to disclaim any thing like revelation, inspiration, and supernatural power. They regard the operations of the Spirit as only imperceptible auxiliaries to the truth, influ- ences which never manifest themselves directly to the consciousness, or in any other way ; and which never would be recognized at all, if the Bible did not testify of their existence. This is the worst counterfeit of all ; for while it appropriates to itself much of the language of the ancient saints, and so makes itself the most respectable substitute for Bible faith, it as effectually excludes the living God from his proper place in the heart, and in the church, as any of the grosser forms of unbelief. It is this kind of faith which, while pretending to honor the spiritual poAver of God as the chief agent of salvation, yet dares not trust it, but thrus* the law into its place as^the great presiding influence ; and makes the Spirit its secondary adjunct. It is this kind of 6 60 THH FAITH OXCE BELITERKD TO TH12 SAINTS, faith which daubs over the apostasy of Christendom from the standard of the* primitive saints, by teaching that 'the age of mirades is past' — an assumptiony or rather a presumptuoias falsehood, ^vhich is better fitted to destroy the legit- imate influence of the Bible than all the enactments of Popery ; since the Bible relates only to an age of miracles-^-its entire religion and morality is« indissolubly mterwoven with supernatural manifestations : it is therefore adap- ted only to an age of miracles, and if it were time that the age of miracles 19^ p^ist, men of the present day would have little more practical interest in it than they have in the Arabian Nights' Entertainment. It is this kind of faith, whicli, while it loudly praises the prophets and apostles, derides as vis- ionary enthusiasm every approach toward that direct communication with God wliich was the glory of prophets and apostles ; and thus covertly, but really casts infamy on the entire religion of the Bible, and on all the saints of God^ The true faith, of which the foregoing are counterfeits, while it recognizes the reflection of divine radiance in the works of nature, in the Bible, and in the moral government of the universe, still turns with chief interest to the direct manifestations of God by his Spirit ; and it limits not the Holy One to imperceptible and dubious influences, but gives him room to reveal himself now, as in past ages, by all the appropriate operations of his infinite energy^ There is an intrinsic and palpable absurdity in the idea of admitting the Spirit of God into the world, and yet curtailing its appropriate and formerly actual manifestations, under the plea that the age of miracles is past. The age of miracles cert'\inly is not past with God. He is as mighty as ever ; and wherever his Spirit comes at all, there is superhuman, i. e., miraculous power ; and if miraculous power is admitted into the world in the smallest degree, it cannot be said that the age of miracles is past with reference to man ; and the w^ay is therefore open for all the primitive manifestations of divine power. And then, how irrational it is to suppose that the same agent which once gave to man gifts of superhuman wisdom and powder, is still present, but only as a latent auxiliary of the clergy ! What a blasphemous descent is this, from the subhme to the ridiculous ! As well might a purbhnd dotard say that the sun still shines, but the age of daylight is past, and only one of the seven colors Avhich were the elements of ancient sunlight,— and that the dimmest — is now given to the world ! We repeat it — the great central idea of ' the faith once delivered to the saints,' was that of tlie living God present in individual believers and in the church, and manifest by manifold tokens of superhuman wisdom and power. And let it be observed that the relation between God and man which this idea involves, is not, as unbelief would suggest, uimatural, and foreign from the original design of man's constitution. God made man in his own image, with the very intent that this relation should exist between them — that man should be the temple, or, we may say, the complement of God. Adam at the beginning lived in open companionship with his Maker. As "Woman was married to man, so man was married to God. And it was to restore this union, which sin had severed, that the Son of God was made flesh, and suftered death. The renewal ana everlasting confirmation of the at-one-ment which eijdsted between God and the first Adam, was the great THE FAITH ONCE ©ELIVEEBD TO THE SAINTS. k^ achievement of the second Adam. Moreover, it is plainly predicted in scrip- ture that tlio human race in its final glory, shall return to open companionship with God — that ' his tabernacle shall be with men, and he shall dwell with them, and shall be their God.' A relation which existed at the beginning — which Christ came and died to estabhsh — which will exist in the final state of man, cannot be unnatural. On the contrary, the present ordinary condition of mankind, hving without God, is unnatural — at variance utterly with their -original constitution. Man without his original spiritual Head, is as mucli out of the order of nature, as woman without a husband. The apostasy is ifche widowhood of the human race. As the manifest indwelling of God is the essence of Bible religion, so it is the corner stone of Bible morality, education, social order, and physical well- being. All schemes of reform and improvement for soul and body, which have not this for their starting point and their end, however popular and promising they may be, are as certainly impostures as the Bible is a book of truth, and man was made to be the temple of his Maker. Who but a madman can expect to check the spiritual and physical disorders of social life, and restore mankind to harmony and happiness, while the first great wheel of the Avhole machinery by which the result is to be attained, is want- ing ? Trees without roots will as soon bud and blossom and bring forth fruit, as man will attain holiness of heart, virtue of action, wisdom of thought and health of body, without the indwelling of God. The true reason why the great Reformation by Luther has failed, is that it turned the faith of the world to the Bible, rather than to God. Protes- tants are learning by sore experience that the Bible is not a ' sufficient rule ©f faith and practice.' Tiie numberless and still multiplying schisms of the reformed churches, are making it more and more manifest that the balance- wheel of original Christianity is not yet recovered — that the Bible, without inspiration as the regulator of interpretation, is but an ' apple of discord.' In like manner all the subordinate reforms of more recent date which have any thing but the living God for their centre and propelling power, will sooner or later fail. On the other hand, let the foundation of Bible faith be laid, — let God be invited by believing hearts to make his tabernacle with men, and reveal all the glory of his wisdom and power as he revealed it to the primitive church ; let Him be installed and acknowledged as the ever-present and presiding Genius of Reform, and speedily sin and death will flee away, and the earth become as Eden. Let all, then, w^ho seek salvation for themselves, or long for the regener- ation of the world — ' contend earnestly/ for the faith ONCE deliveeed to § 9. THE AGE OF SPIRITUALISM. The whole world seems to be looking for a Revolution. Some expect an orthodox Millennium ; others, a golden age of phrenology ; others still, a physiological regeneration of the human race ; and not a few are awaiting, in anxious or hopeful suspense, the trump of the Second Advent, and the day of judgment. AVe also are looking for a Revolution ; and we will endeavor to set forth our idea of the form in which we expect it will appear. Dividing human nature into four departments, viz., the physical, moral, INTELLECTUAL, and SPIRITUAL, WO hold that man can be truly regenerated only by the paramount development of his spiritual nature. Accordingly we beheve that the great change w^hich is coming, will be an outburst of spiritual knowledge and power — a conversion of the world from sensuality, from carnal morality, and from brain-philosophy, to spiritual wisdom and life. It has been said that the Bible was not designed to teach any of the natural sciences. But the time will come when that book will be acknowledged as the great repository of the facts and principles of a science which rightfully takes precedence of all others, viz., spiritual philosophy — the science which treats of the nature, power, attraction, repulsion, and fellowship of spirits ; which refers health, wdsdom, and righteousness, to the energy of God ; and disease, fatuity and sin, to the power of the devil ; which thus points out, as the only means of radical reformation, the expulsion of the spirit of evil on the one hand, and spiritual union with God on the other. — This is the science which in the phenomena of its practical application, gleamed out from time to time along the whole course of the Jewish dispen- sation ; which blazed up and for a little space lighted the whole earth in the time of Christ and the apostles ; and which is destined, notAvithstanding all the attempts of unbehef to quench it, by covering it with the infamy of mysticism, to break forth again, consume the partition between heaven and earth, and become the judgment-fire of the world. We have come to the belief that such a Revolution is approaching, by several distinct lines of argument, which we will briefly trace. I. If our fourfold division of human nature is correct, we may expect to find in the growth and education of the race of man, under the superinten- dence of God, a progression from the physical to the moral, from the moral to the intellectual, and from the intellectual to the spiritual. Accordingly, the past history of the world may be legitimately divided into three distinct periods, corresponding to three of these departments. The first extends from Adam to Moses, and may be called, the period of pliydcal development : the only account we have of it, represents it as a period of physical longevity and sensuality : it certainly was not a period of either moral or intellectual discipline. The second extends from Moses to Christ, and may be called the period of moral development, as it was distinguished by the administra- tion of the Mosaic law, and the special moral training of the Jewish nation. The tlurd estQuds from Christ to the present time, and may be called, the THE AGE OF SPIRITUALISM. 53 period of intellectual development. The Gentiles, who took the place of the Jews in the school of God after the destruction of Jerusalem, have never equalled them in moral strength, but have far exceeded them in intellectual attainments. 'The (rre A seek after wisdom ;' (ICor. 1: 22 ;) and Greek and Latin wisdom has been the predominant element of Gentile Christianity. Scholarship, rather than moral power, has been, and is, the test of eminence among the clergy. The harvest of this third period has been a wonderful advance of ' science' in every direction. Three periods, then, of the education of the world are past. The fourth, i. e., the period of spiritual development, is that which is approaching. II. By a more particular survey of the history of the Jewish and Gentile churches, we shall come again to the same conclusion. During the first thousand years of the Mosaic dispensation, i. e., down to the last Babylonish captivity, God instructed and disciplined the Jews, chiefly by ceremonies, providential and miraculous manifestations, and occasional inspiration of individuals. The mass of the nation were ignorant of letters ; and for a long time the only copy of the law in existence, was that deposited in the ark of the covenant. The employment of the Bible as a means of general instruc- tion, dates from the period of Ezra, after the return from Babylon. At that time copies of the WTitings of Moses and the prophets began to be mul- tiplied and circulated, synagogues were built, and the Jews as a nation came under the influence of the letter of the word of God. This we may call the first reformation of the Jewish church. After several centuries, when the way had been prepared by the letter, the Spirit of the word of God was given. The Holy Ghost was poured upon the primitive church — not merely on a few favored individuals, but on all who believed — and wrought in them, and by them, not only all manner of signs and wonders, but righteousness and salvation. All were taught of God. All were admitted to personal acquaintance with the Father. This we may call the second reformation of the Jewish church. Passing now to the Gentile church which succeeded the primitive, we find that the process just described was, in the course of a few centuries, com- pletely reversed. As the Jewish church received first the letter, and then the Spirit ; so the Gentile church, descending by the same steps which the Jewish church had ascended, lost first the Spirit, and then the letter of the word of God. The ministers of the primitive church aspired to be only the servants of the Holy Spirit. It was their business not so much to teach the people themselves, as to introduce them to the great invisible teacher, the Spirit of truth. But the time soon came when the bishops enlarged their office, and became the principal teachers of the people. Of course they crowded the Spirit out of the world. This w^as the first step of apostasy from the word of God. In process of time, the bishops began to be jealous of the Bible also, as being a teacher that in part superseded their office. Accordingly they took upon them to forbid the common use of it. The people were cut off" from the letter^ as well as the Spirit of the word of God. This was the second step of the apostasy ; aud it consigned the Gentile chuixh to the dungeon of the dark bi THE AGE OF SPIRITUALISM. ages. There it lay a thousand years. Then commenced another reforma- tion. We are prepared by our previous observations to anticipate the nature and process of this return to the word of God. As the Jewish church ascended^ and the Gentile church descended, each by two steps, so we naturally look for two steps in the re-ascension of the Gentiles. As the Jews received first the letter and then the Spirit, and the Gentiles lost first the Spirit and then the letter, we may presume that in returning from their apostasy the Gen- tiles A\dll recover first the Bible and then the Holy Ghost. This presumption exactly accords with the actual history of the Gentile reformation, so far as it has yet advanced. The great achievment of Wick- liffe, Huss, Luther and Calvin, was the rescue of the Bible from its imprison- ment. The motto of Protestantism is — 'The Bible is the only and sufficienit rule of faith and practice.'' In the translation and universal circulation of the scriptures, which has been accomplished within the last few centuries, we recognize the first reformation of the Gentile church, corresponding to the work of Ezra and the fathers of the Jewish sjniagogue. But the second reformation is yet to come. The letter of the word of God has been recov- ered, but the Spirit remains yet to be won. The labors of Luther and Cal- vin have not restored to the Gentile church the inspiration and divine power of the day of Pentecost. Protestantism has no more of the spiritual glory which cro^vned the primitive church, than Popery ; in fact it is an accepted proverb through all reformed Christendom, that ' the age of miracles is past;' and by that is meant, that the age of the manifestation of the power-and glory of the Holy Spirit is past, never to return ; that all pretensions to inspiration, and spiritual power, such as attended the morning of Christianity, are out of date and under sentence of infamy. The first reformation, then, has not restored original Christianity, and the •analogy of past history clearly instructs us to expect a second reformation, :as much more glorious than the first, as the day of Pentecost was more glo- irious than Ezra's feast of tabernacles. III. The signs of the times indicate that God is making ready for a great ^spiritual manifestation. In the midst of the idolatrous enthusiasm of the day ifor physical improvement, legal morality, and scientific discovery, there is a ^visible movement of the public mind toward spiritual truth. Germany, the ipioneer-land of the Reformation, the emporium of human wisdom, notwith- i-standing its ' rationalism,' is teeming with psychological theories, which our iphlegmatic intellectualists call ' mysticisms ;' but which in fact are approxi- miations to the Spiritual Philosophy of the Bible. From Germany the leaven (has gone forth into England and this country. Men of note in the learned .•and religious world, are not ashamed to indulge in speculations, which once would have been classed with the hallucinations of Swedenborg and Ann Lee. Nor is the spiritualizing leaven confined to those upper classes whose ileisure and cultivation, allow them to philosophize. ' Mysticism' has assumed a visible and popular form in the phenomena of Mesmerism, and has gone •out into the ' highways and hedges,' compelling men, high and low, to believe ihat spirits are actusd and potent substances ; tliat life can dwell in life, and SPIRITUAL NATURE OF MAN. 55 Will actuate will. We know, that both these movements — the philosophical and popular — are only approximations to the development of true Spiritual Philosophy, and that they are associated more or less with unbelief and worldly motives in their advocates. Yet we regard them as influences, sent and directed by heaven, to turn the minds of men toward the invisible world — premonitory symptoms of the approaching spiritual Revolution. As the mariner, when he has taken an observation, and ascertained his place on the chart, knows how to trim his sails and set his helm, so we, with these views of the position of the world, and of the counsels of God, find our pathway clearly marked out. Our business is to be co-workers with God in ushering in the last period of man's education — the second Reformation — the victory and reign of spiritual wisdom and poiver. In devoting ourselves to this object, we have the satisfaction of knowing that we are not acting under the influence of blind and therefore impotent benevolence ; that w^e 'run not as uncertainly, and fight not as one that beateth the air.' The direction of our course is parallel with the visible current of human destiny, and with the manifest movements and purposes of God. The views which have been presented, also direct us to the means by which we may most effectually co-operate with God in the spiritual regenera- tion of mankind. As the Bible is the great manual of Spiritual Philosophy, our main business as co-workers with him, is to serve as door-keepers to the Bible — to do what we can to make all men ' meditate therein day and night ;' and especially to bring forth into due prominence the spiritual doctrmes of the Bible, § 10. THE SPIRITUAL NATURE OF MAN. I. What is a spirit ? The dictionaries answer — ^An immaterial sub- stance;^ which is the same as to say, ' It is not matter I' — a definition too negative to give any valuable information. We answer — It is Sb fluid; having many of the properties of caloric, light, electricity, galvanism and magnet- ism ; and, in addition to these, having powers of assimilation, growth, and self-originated motion, being susceptible of personality, feehng, inteUigence, and will. If any object to our calling spirit a fluid, we appeal for authority to the Bible. On almost every page of that book, the language commonly used with reference to the nature and operations of air, water, and other fluids,, is applied to spirits. For examples, see Matt. 3: 11, John 7: 38, 39, and 20: 22, Acts 2: 2, and 10: 44, 45, 1 Cor. 12: 13, Eph. 5: 18. If it is still objected that it savors of materialism, to say that spirits have many of the properties of caloric, hght, electricity, &c., we appeal again to the Bible. Without adverting particularly to the representations in scrip- ture, of powers in spirits analogous to the pervading quality of caloric, th^ 56 SPIRITUAL NATmiE OF MAN. radiation of light, &c., it is sufficient for our present purpose to refer tlie reader to a few passages in which one of the special characteristics of elec- tricity — its poAver of passing from one point to another by material conductors — ^is attributed to the spiritual fluid. See Luke 8 : 43 — 46. Acts 8 : 17, 18, and 19 : 12. Our definition should not be accused of materialism, till it is settled, that caloric, hght, electricity, galvanism and magnetism, are material substances. Turner, in the hitroduction to his Chemistry, (p. 15) says that the imponder- able fluids are ' agents of so diffiisible and subtle a nature, that the common attributes of matter cannot be perceived in them. They are altogether destitute of weight ; at least, if they possess any, it cannot be discovered by our most dehcate balances. They cannot be confined and exhibited in mass like ordinary bodies ; they can be collected only through the intervention of other substances. Their title to be considered material is therefore question- able.' But admitting that these fluids are material, still it will be seen that our definition assigns to the spiritual fluid only a part of their properties, and places it in a category beyond them, by attributing to it vital powers. Turner says — ' Matter, though susceptible of motion, has no power either to move itself, or to arrest its progress when an impulse is once communicated to it.' (p. 13.) This is the true point of distinction between matter and spirit. The one has power of action in itself; the other has none. Our definition, therefore, by superadding to the properties of caloric, hght, electricity, &c., the power of self-originated motion^ as one of the attributes of spirit, places spirit beyond the boundaries of matter. We freely confess that we are so far materialists, that we believe there is no such vast chasm between spirit and matter as is generally imagined, but that the two touch each other, and have properties in common — that caloric, light, electricity, galvanism and magnetism, are in some sense, connecting links between the material and spiritual worlds — that spirit is in many res- pects like these fluids, and is as truty substantial as they. We do not ascribe to spirit 'length, breadth and thickness,' in the common acceptation of those words, because the nature of all fluids precludes those properties. Who ever thinks of attributing length, breadth and thickness to the sunlight ? One would not know how to measure or which w^ay to go in taking the dimensions of such a substance. Yet if a specific portion of any fluid is separated from the mass and confined in a solid vessel, that portion of fluid assumes the length, breadth and thickness of the vessel. So if a specific portion of spirit or life is confined in an animal form, that life assumes the length, breadth and thick- ness of that form. In this sense we believe that spirits have length, breadth and thickness. Materialism is not the only error men are liable to fall into in their specula- tions on spiritual science. Every extreme has its opposite. There is a vast amount of morbid «?ifMnaterialism among religionists and metaphysicians. When the notion that spirit is an ' immaterial substance,' is carried so far as to deny all substantial qualities to spiritual beings, we call it etherialism, or ht/joer-spiritualisnif and regard it as an errpr quite as pernicious as materiahsm. SPIRITUAL NATURE OV MAN. 67 II. What is a soul ? We will seek an answer to this question, by examining the account which the Bible gives of the original creation of man. ' The Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul.' Gen. 2:7. Man then was compounded primarily of only two substances — the dust of the ground, and the breath of life — matter and spirit. There was no third sub- stance — no soul, as distinguished from the body on the one hand, and from spirit on the other. Adam's soul certainly was not made of the dust of the ground ; and yet all that God made, in forming him, was made of dust. The other element was not made, but existed before in God himself, and was breathed into that which was made. Was it Adam's soul then that was breathed into the dust which God formed ? If so, there is no distinction between soul and spirit; for the language used plainly indicates that the substance which God infused into the body of Adam was the vital fluid, or spirit, as we have defined that term on a former page. Moreover, if it was Adam's soul that God breathed into his body, it is evident that no beginning can be predicated of that soul ' — since it was not formed with his body, but previously existed in God. This theory will land us in the doctrine of human pre-existenee and metempsychosis* Besides, Paul expressly distinguishes between soul and spirit, as broadly as between soul and body, where he says, ' I pray God that your whole spi7it and soul and body be preserved blameless,' &c. 1 Thes. 5 : 23. • y/ We are shut up then to the conclusion that Adam's soul was neither formed of the dust of the ground, nor breathed into him from God, but was pro- duced by the union of the dust of the ground and the breath of God. The two primary substances compounded, produced a third. A soul, then, is a modification of spirit, produced by union with a material body. What is the nature of that modification, which distinguishes a soul from mere spirit ? We answer : — 1. When the vital fluid from God entered into combination with Adam's body, that fluid took the form of that body. It certainly animated every part of it ; of course it existed in every part, was as large as all the parts, and had the form of the whole. A soul then is distinguished from mere spirit in this respect — viz., the former, like the body, has a definite shape ; while the latter, hke air and other fluids, has ,/" none. 2. The spirit which God breathed into Adam's body, by its intimate union with every part of that body, and by its consequent intercourse mth various material substances, as food, air, &c., necessarily received into itself some of the properties of matter. As Ac^im's body was spiritualized matter, so conversely Adam's soul was materialized spirit. This modification places the soul in a middle position between mere spirit and matter ; and, in con- junction with the first mentioned modification, accounts for the fact that souls, according to the representations of scripture, even in a state of separation from bodies, have the forms and functions of bodies, and are definite visible substances to spiritual eyes. (See Luke 16: 22, 23, &c. Rev. 6: 9.) The spirit which God breathed into Adam's form, was a mere fluid without defi- nite form, and without material cohesiveness. If it had been instantly with- drawn, before a permanent union of it with matter was formed, it would ^ 7 58 SPIRITUAL NATURE OF MAN. doubtless have remained an incoheslve fluid — an undistinguished part of the whole spirit of life. But as soon as it entered into combination with the dust-formed body, it received the shape and cohesiveness of that body — became partially indurated or congealed ; so that it ever afterward retained a definite sliape, and of course an identity separate from that of the univer- sal spirit of life. If this were not so — ^if the soul were a mere fluid spirit, when the body dies that spirit would return into the abyss of hfe from whence it came, and lose its identity ; just as a portion of water, taken from tlie ocean, when its vessel is broken, returns and is distinguished no more. Our doctrine then, is, that the soul is spirit in a materialized or partially indurated state — that every man's soul is of the same size and form as his body. Paul's distinction of the several departments of human nature into body, soul, and spirit, we expound thus : the body is the material organiza- tion ; the soul is the corresponding spiritual organization which animates the body ; and the spirit is the vital fluid which radiates from body and soul combined. But it may be asked, ' If the soul is nothing but the life of the body, what is the difierence between man and brute ? — why may it not be said that ani- mals, as well as men, have souls ?' We reply, it is not true, and we have not said, that man's soul is nothing hut the life of his hody. It is this, and something more. The breath of God has in it the whole nature of God. That breath, in combining with Adam's body, became as to its outer surface -^its point of contact with matter — the animating principle of that body, and assunilated to it. But, as to its inner being, it was still in communica- tion -with God, and assimilated to him. Beside the hfe of the body, there was a reasoning moral nature, resembling God's. The animation of the body is only one of the functions of the soul. We shall speak of other powers — the heart, understanding, &c., — hereafter. The mere fact therefore that brutes have bodily life — one of the soul's manifestations — does not prove that they have souls like those of men. We have no objection however to allowing that brutes have souls in a cer- tain sense. They certainly have something distinct from matter that animates their bodies. The difierence between man and brutes, as we gather from the account of creation, is this ; God caused the water and the earth to bring forth all the animals below man. (See Gen. 1 : 20, 24.) Their life there- fore was not received directly from God, but came to them through an intermediate material conductor. At the beginning ' the spirit of God moved [or brooded] upon the face of the waters.' (Gen. 1 : 2.) Thus life was infused into the chaos of matter, and the earth became semi-animate. Then God caused the caith to bring forth animals — their bodies and spirits. The life they received was of course previously materialized. They were but the children of the semi-animate mass of matter. Whereas when God created man he made only his body of the dust of the ground, and breathed hfe into it directly out of his own essence. Adam's life was not materialized before he received it. He was the immediate offspring of God. We Avill here note down some of the results which are deducible from the foregoing theory of the souL SPIRITUAL NATURE OF MAN, S6 1. The prime element of the soul being not a created suhstance, but an -eternal spirit, is in its nature indestructible. Nevertheless the union of that spirit with the body, and the consequences of that union, which we have seen are the formation of the soul as distinguished from mere spirit, and the esta]> lishment of individual consciousness, are not necessarily eternal. Man will owe the immortality of his consciousness, and of his union with a corporeal organization, to the resurrection. 2. The soul, being the animating principle of the body, growing mth it, having its size and form, will retain its peculiarities when the body dies. We see therefore the folly of those who teach that there is no distinction of sex in heaven. 3. With these views we see also the error of those who make a wide distinction between the soul and the life of the body, as though these were separate and independent principles, to be managed and medicated in totally different ways. We have no account of Adam's receiving an ' animal' or * physical' life, in addition to the spirit of life which became his soul. The life of the body is manifestly a part of the life that constitutes the soul ; not the whole of it, for then, the death of the body would be the death of the soul. ' Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone ; but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit' It does not however die entirely. The inner germ lives and shoots forth into a new plant. The outer coating dies. But the life of the inner germ and of the outer coating is the same. So the life. of the soul and the body is the same. Yet the body may die, and the soul still live, and renew its strength. Doctors, physiologists, and all those theologians and philosophers who treat physical life as though it were altogether independent of the soul, would do weU to study Moses' acrgan on the left side. We find but three instan- ces in which the several writers apply the word to any part of the body, viz., Ex. 28: 29, 30, 2 Sam. 18: 14, and 2 Kings, 9: 24. In the two latter instances, neither the language or circumstances absolutely determine the exact part of the body referred to. But all the probable e^ddence that can be found in either, leads to the conclusion that the writers use the word lieart to designate the middle of the person^ in the same manner as it designates the middle of the earth, heaven, and sea, in Matt. 12: 40, Deut. 4: 11, Ex. 15: 8, &c. But the first of the three instances happily furnishes con- clusive evidence, and that directly from God himself, in regard to the cor- poreal location of the heart, as that word is used in the Bible. We will quote the passage. "Aaron shall bear the names of the children of Israel in the breast-plate of judgment upon Us hearty when he goeth into the holy place, for a memorial before the Lord continually. And thou shalt put in the breast-plate of judg- ment the Urim and Thummim ; and they shall be upon Aaron^s heart when he goeth in before the Lord ; and Aaron shall bear the judgment of the chMreii of Isvsiel upon his heart hehvQ the Lord continually." Ex. 28: 29, 30. To satisfy any one who may doubt about the actual position of the breast- plate on the person of Aaron, we quote the following passage from Josephus' account of the priest's vestments: — "The High Priest put on a garment called the Ephod. Its make was after this manner : it was woven to the depth of a cubit, of several colors, with gold intermixed, and embroidered ; but it left THE MIDDLE OF THE BREAST Uncovered. It was made with sleeves also ; nor did it appear at all differently made from a short coat. But in the void place of this garment, there was inserted a piece, of the bigness of a span, embroidered with gold and the other colors of the Ephod, and called THE BREAST-PLATE. This piece exactly/ filledup the voidplace in the Ephod'^ Ant. b. iii., chap, viii., §5. Thus, in obedience to God's command that Aaron should put the breast- plate on his heart, he put it on the middle of his breast. The Urim and the Thummim, the instruments by which God revealed his will, the symbols of his spiritual manifestation, stood over the spot which true physiology and universal consciousness point out as the special dwelhng place of the soul. — (For other Bible hints on this subject, see Dan. 7: 15, John 7: 38.) The heart, being the centre-point of all the faculties of body and soul, is the special seat of personal consciousness — the thing commonly signified by the pronoun * I.' It is the collecting and distributmg office of the whole man. As we have seen that the powers of perceiving, feeling and willing pertaui to the whole Hfe, so they are especially concentrated in this radiating point. In fact it is from this point that all the growth and manifestations of life originally proceed, as the stalk and branches of a plant proceed from ANIMAL MAGNETISM. 65- the germ. Of course all the powers that manifest themselves in the senses, nerves, brain, muscles, &c., were first in the heart. Accordingly the Bible applies to the heart almost every form of language commonly appropriated to the senses, and other specific faculties. It is represented as seeing, hearing, understanding, reasoning, beheving, speaking, &c. The heart, then, is distinguished from the soul, thus : The soul is the whole life of man, as it exists in combination Avith the whole body. The heart is the centre-point of that life, situated in the middle of the body, having no material organ of manifestation, but acting upon the other depart- ments of life as the mainspring on the wheels and hands of a watch, or as the Executive on his subordinate officers in a national government. IMark 7: 21, 22. § 11. ANIMAL MAGNETISM. V This curious science, (also called Mesmerism,) which was condemned and executed in France fifty or sixty years ago, by a report of Franklin and other scientific commissioners appointed by the government to sit in judgment upon it, has risen from the dead, and is now exciting as much interest in this coun- try, as was excited a few years ago by Phrenology. Nor is it a subject of mere curiosity and ridicule. It claims and compels the attention of sober and learned men, and is evidently fast winning its way to general credence and respectability. Its principles seem to be as yet not fully settled. It. breaks forth from time to time in new forms, each more wonderful than any that have gone before it. Its principal advocates are yet engaged, rather in exploring its mysteries, each in a separate direction, than in bringing together their discoveries into a harmonious system. We believe that its facts (how- ever crude and discordant may be the speculations of its professors) are over- coming materialistic skepticism, and opening a passage from the highest point of physical science, into spiritual philosophy. It is in our view the con- necting link between the sciences which treat of those subtler powers of na- ture, called electricity, galvanism, magnetism, &c., and the science of life, animal and eternal. As such we introduce it to our readers. A view of its / facts and elementary principles will help to complete our view of the Spiritual "^ Nature of Man. The primary idea of the science, in which all its advocates agree, is that there is a subtle fluid in the human body, in some respects like electricity, which may be transmitted in divers ways, from one to another, and under certain circumstances, may produce astonishing and beneficial effects of various kinds. The following is a brief synopsis of the most lucid and satisfactory exhi])ition of the subject which we have met with. It is an abstract of two lectures given by L. H. Whiting, in Putney, Vt., in connexion with a great variety of illustrative experiments ; 8 66 AmUAL MAGNBTISJf. t. Tlie agont of motion, sensation, &c., i. c. the substance 'wliicli is im^ mediately in communication with the mind, and which conve^^s its mandate* to the muscles and transmits to it the impressions of the senses, is a subtle fluid, resembling, electricity or galvanism. This is proved by such facts as that a dead body may be made to perform muscular motions and exhibit va- rious phenomena of life by the application of galvanism. 2. This subtle agent, called the nervous fiuid, is evolved by the apparatus- of hfe in all animals, and radiates from them constantly, surrounding them with an atmosphere of greater or less extent, hke the atmosphere of animal heai which emanates from them. 8. The developement of nervous fluid is greater in amount and power ia gome persons than in others, as some electrical machines generate the elec^ trie fluid more abundantly than others. 4. The passage of the nervous fluid from one person to another, takes' place under the familiar law of nature by which all fluids tend to an equilib' rium. As water seeks the level of the ocean— as clouds, unequally charged with electricity, send forth lightnings to each other- — as a warm body imparts- its heat to a colder, — so by contact, or under other favorable conditions, the nervous fluid of a person whose vital powers are strong, may pass into and possess, more or less perfectly, the body of one whose vital powers are weaker, 5. The senses and muscular powers of a person thus charged with the ner^ vous fluid of another, are shut off' more or less perfectly from the medium of their ordinary action, \dz. their own nervous fluid, and must act, if at all, iJt and by the nervous fluid of the magnetizer. Hence the subject sleeps, be- comes insensible to the causes of sound, smell, taste, and pain, so far as they are apphed directly to his own body; and sees, hears, tastes, smells, feels, &c., only as the nervous fluid of the magnetizer is affected by the causes of sensation applied to Ms body. 6. It is an ultimate indisputable fact that mind does control matter in cer-* tain circumstances. Within our own bodies our minds have power to set in motion the nervous fluid, so as to produce the various motions of our limbs. But in tho case of magnetic possession, the nervous fluid of the magnetizer comes into a relation to the senses and faculties of another person, similar ta that which it ordinarily sustams to his OYm. Hence his mind can set in mo- tion his nervous fluid so as to produce motions, sensations, and thoughts, in that other person. There is no more mystery in the idea of the mind's oper* ating beyond the limits of the body, than in the idea of its operating in ther fingers' ends. The mystery is how mind can operate on matter at all ; and this mystery attends not merely the facts of animal magnetism, but every motion of our bodies. These principles account for all the most common phenomena of the mag* netic state, viz. those which result from sympathy between the magnetizer and the subject. Clairvoyance involves other principles, of which we shall eay something hereafter. Whether this philosophy is true or not, the facts which it professes to ac- comit for are too certain and abundant to be disposed of as the tricks of jug- glera. In Mr. Whiting'a experiments, (which we ourselves attended,) mwb ANIMAL MAGNETISM, 6? I&ains was taken to preclade the possibility of collusion between tlie operator :»nd the subject ; and we are very certain that every intelligent person who witnessed them, was satisfied that they were performed in good faith. The following are some of the phenomena which w^ere exhibited : — The pulse of ithe subject was raised instantly by the will of the magnetizer, accompanied by a motion of his hand without contact, from 72 to 90 beats per minute. This fact Avas ascertained and attested by a disinterested physician. The subject with his eyes closed and without any visible communication with any 'One, named and described accurately a great variety of articles, such as pen- knives, coins, pencils, surgeon's instruments, &c., which were held heJiindJds head by indifferent spectators. Under the same conditions, he read letters :and words from a book, and told the time by several watches set differently, and in each case accurately even to the fraction of a minute. In all these ca- ges the magnetizer simply fixed his own attention on the object presented, and iminediately his perception was communicated by sympathy to the subject. So, pain caused by the spectators in any part of the body of the operator, was manifestly felt in the corresponding part by the subject ; though the prick of a pin in his own body produced no evidence of sensation. In the same jnanner tastes and smells were transferred from one to the other. The sub- ject was compelled to raise his arm, drop it, bend it in various directions, to •stand up, sit down, &c. &c.,by the silent will and corresponding motions of the magnetizer standing behind him. And the possibihty of collusion was precluded by the fact that the magnetizer allowed one of the spectators to dictate, by moving his own arm, the motions to be performed by the subject. In addition to all this, a great variety of experiments in phreno-mesmerism ■were performed, by which it was manifest that the magnetizer could control .and vary the thoughts and feelings of the subject as easily as a musician calls -forth the various tones of an organ. For further illustrations of this subject, we avail ourselves of the following ^extract from a pamphlet published some years ago by Charles Poyen : — « It i« a fact well established by the daily observation of at! magnetizers, both in Europe and America, that from the moment a person is put in somnambulism^ he becomes capable of appreciating correctly and seizing the thoughts, the will, and feelings, not only of his magnetizer, but also of those who are put in close communication with him. This surprising and very interesting mode of knowU edge is doubtless imparted to the somnambulist through an emanation of some liind, (call it if you please, the spirit, the magnetic or vital fluid) which springs from the brain of the two parties and thus forms about them a peculiar atmos- phere, the fluctuations or movements of which vary according to the direction ^ven by the organ from which the fluid originates. The brain of the magneti- zer or of the person placed in communication, is the active instrument or appa- ratus, every operation of which necessarily impresses a new movement and di- rection to the fluid, which is more clearly felt by the corresponding analogous organ, viz. the brain of the somnambulist, and thus creates herein the samo iBodifications as those which exist in the organ of the other party. Such modi* fications constitute what we call thought, reasoning, &c. &c. « I will quote here a few lines from a distinguished author whose name can but have a great weight in the mind of every well informed man. After de.scril)ing the manner in which the nervous atmosphere is formed, Dr. Rostan (see his Es- 68 ANIMAL MAGNETISM. say on Animal Magnetism, in the eighth volume of the Dictionnaire de Medecine,) continues thus : — < The active nervous atmosphere of the magnetizer mingles with the passive nervous atmosphere of the magnetized person ; this one is, there- by, influenced in such a manner that his power of attention is momentarily abol- ished; and both the impressions which h© receives inwardly, and those that are transmitted to him by the magnetizer, resort to his brain through another channel.' " The nervous agent possesses, like caloric, the faculty of penetrating through solid bodies ; a faculty which is doubtless limited ; but can satisfactorily explain how somnambulists may be influenced through partitions, walls, doors, &c., also it accounts for their perceptions of the savorous and odorous qualities through certain bodies, which in the natural state cannot be penetrated by those particles. The innumerable facts which prove in an indisputable manner that the magnetic action can be exercised through solid bodies, and that the presence of those bodies does not prevent clairvoyance, compel us to admit that the nervous or magnetical agent must pass through them. This is no more astonishing than light passing through diaphane or transparent substances, electricity passing through the con» ductive bodies, and caloric penetrating all sorts of bodies. The mingling of the two nervous atmospheres affords a very clear explanation of the communication of the wish and will, even of the thoughts of the magnetizer to the magnetized person. The wish and will, being ' actions of the brain, this organ transmits them to the circumference of the body through the channel of the nerves, and when the two nervous atmospheres happen to meet each other, they are so much identified as to form but one ; both individuals become one only ; they feel and think to- gether ; but one of them (the somnambulist) is constantly under the dependence of the other, while in the magnetic state.' " In the natural state we are not capable of feeling the fluid above mentioned and cAperiencing its various movements, so as to become conscious of it : it is surely because in the natural state the vital energy is thrown too much out- wardly ; the life of relation is then predominant, and constantly keeps our power of attention and feeling upon external objects. But through the profound change determined in the functions of the nervous system, during the state of somnam- bulism, catalepsy, or ecstasy, we are enabled to hold, with a being organized as we are, a communication more or less perfect ; according, of course, to the re- spective inward organic dispositions and capacity of the two parties. Indeed somnambulism and ecstacy are particularly characterized by a suspension, for the time being, of the life of relation, whereas an inward sense, derived frpm a great concentration of the vital energy, seems to be developed. "I hold it to be a well authenticated fact, that the will and thought can be communicated without the aid of language or sign, whatever the medium of that communication may be ; out of fifty somnambulists, you will find upward of forty who will present this order of phenomena to a certain degree. I have seen, produced and read innumerable instances of it, and believe it as much as my own existence : I believe it, also, because I can account for it through philosophical principles, as I have above briefly stated. On the contrary, the faculty of seeing things that are transpiring at a great distance, ^ in cities, for instance, where the somnambulist never was in his life, the situation and peculiar distribution of which he does not know, and perhaps never read about^ is wholly incomprehensible, and is not, indeed, substantiated by good authority ; I have never observed nor ever read any instance of it in the scientific authors who have a\ ritten on animal magnetism and somnambulism. I easily conceive and am willing to admit, that ANIMAL MAGNETISM. 69 certain somnambulists and ecstatic persons have been able to see objects at a distance ; but it was in places where they had been, and the exact situation of which they previously knew : they had thus the means of directing their faculty of vision through the country, and taking cognizance of things and persons more or less accurately, according to the extent of this power in them. But it is totally inconceivable, that they can see equally well in places about which they have no previous correct impression in their mind ! Suppose yourself a som- nambulist, gifted with a high degree of clairvoyance. How could you distin- guish one particular house or street out of the variety of streets and houses which form the cities of Paris, London, New York, (Sec, if you have never been in those places, or acquired by reading a perfect idea of them ? " I will quote a few instances of communication of thought and of the influ- ence of the will, which are very well calculated to illustrate the correctness of my views, — and are not less wonderful and conclusive than those described in your narrative. "The phenomena of the communication of thought and of the influence of the will were the first that were observed by the Marquis of Puysegur, when he discovered the state of somnambulism. In the very interesting letter written by him to some friends of his, immediately after witnessing those singular effects in the first somnambulist he had, he says — ' I obliged him to move a great deal on his chair, as though he was dancing by a tune, which by singing mentally only, I caused him to repeat aloud.' " Fournler, in his Essay on the probabilities of Magnetic Somnambulism, dwells principally on this phenomenon, as being the most common and important. He says, page 48, that * he saw a somnambulist, whom he willed to get up and take a hat lying on the table in the entry, and to put it on the head of a certain person in the company.' I did not speak a word, says he, but only made a sign which traced out the line which I wished the somnambulist to follow. I must observe that he had a bandage oyer his eyes all the time ; he rose from the chair, followed the direction indicated by my finger, approached the table and took the hat which was lying on it, among many other objects, and . . . put it on the head of the vevy person I meant. " I might quote a large number of such facts from foreign authors on Magnet- ism, of undoubted veracity and merit ; but I prefer to refer to some of the same description, which have occurred in this country, as being probably the more in- teresting and trustworthy to the Aratrican reader. " At one of my exhibitions in Pawtucket, some nine months ago, a medical gentleman from Providence handed to me a bit of paper, upon which this sentence vi^as written : < Ask mentally to the somnambulist how far it is from Pawtucket to Providence.' I put the question to her, vt^ithout either a sign made or a word spoken : she answered distinctly, ' four miles from one bridge to the other,' which is the correct distance. " At another exhibition in Boston, I was requested by an eminent gentleman then present, to will the somnambulist to rise from the sofa upon which she was sitting, and go and take another seat ; I stood about twelve feet from her, and mentally put her the command. She shook her head negatively, as though she was refusing to do something. I then asked her why she shook her head so : * You want me to move from my seat ; I don't want to.' In reference to this fact, Mr William Jenks of Boston, who witnessed it, says in an article inserted by him in the Recorder of Feb. 17, 1837, 'Farther and more strange to our expe- rience, while the eye& of the somnambule continue closely shut, (the experiments ■^0 ANIMAL magnetism/ have been tried too with bandaged eyes,) and while no gesture or sound is used, I saw the magnetiser ask the magnetised a question, (suggested on the spot, anA *>ecretly by a bystander,) and heard the patient answer audibly and correctly.* " A scientific gentlemen, who attended the experiments pertbrmed in Paw- tucket by Rev. Daniel Greene, told me that at his written request Mr. Greene ■willed that a piece of apple, which he held in his hand, would become a chestnut burr for the somnambulist. He, in consequence, handed it to her ; and immedi- ately she began to scratch her hand and complain that it was full of prickles. * What is the cause of it 7' * Why,' said she, *you gave me a chestnut burr.' — Mr. Greene, it is well known, has made himself celebrated in Rhode Island for the wonderful power which he exercises by his will only upon his patients. ^ Mr. George Wellmarth of Taunton, related to me the following admirable instance of communication of thought that occurred under his own operation. He was requested by a witness to will his somnambulist to quote Byron's well known song, the ' Isles of Greece.' Mr. Wellmarth mentally pronounced the first verse, and Mr. Andros, the somnambulist, starting from the last words re- peated by the magnetizer, recited the whole song. Mr. Wellmarth willed him again to recite another passage ; he said he did not know it by heart, but that he knew where it was in the book, and would shov7 it to him. Indeed, the sorn- »nambulist got up, walked toward the library, with his eyes perfectly shut, took the volume, and after looking over it awhile, pointed out the precise verses that had been indicated to him. *• Innumerable instances of the same kind might be offered. I will mention a ■few more ; the two following took place last night, in presence of forty ef the 'most respectable citizens of Salem, Mass. A young lady of the place was put into the magnetic sleep by a member of my class. Dr. Fisk, a surgeon dentist. A tumbler of water was presented to the operator, with the * written request that he would turn the liquid into brandy for the somnambulist.' The tumbler was in consequence handed to her ; she drank some of it ; and being asked what it was, siie exclaimed apparently in divspleasure, ^Itisrum.^ A moment afterward, the magnetizer was again requested to spill a little of the water upon her hand, willing it to be hot rum. So he did, and immediately the somnambulist began t© move her hands and wipe them against her gown. Being asked what was the matter, she said that some hot rum had been dropped on her hands. " A person under my care, being in the magnetic sleep, a medical genfleman passed me ten or twelve grains of aloes, contained in a paper, and requested me hy writing to < will it to be sugar for the somnambulist.' Aloes is known to be 'B. bitter drastic. The somnambulist tasted it, and exclaimed, * it is beautiful.^ i asked her what it was. * Confectionary sugar,' said she, and then swallowed a tongue full of it, apparently with much pleasure. But soon the medicine acted 'on her stomach, and she became quite sick. On another evening, her eyes being blindfolded, a bunch of white grapes was ^eld over her forehead by a gentleman of the company, I asked her what it was, -