interpreters contend for in their philological exegesis, then they simply assert the fact that there is no man without sin. Well, from this fact, asserted by the sacred writers, as they suppose, the learned reformer above referred to, Dr. Dick, Mr. Buck, and the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church, conclude that perfection is not attainable. And though Dr. Woods and others on the contrary assert the attainableness of a state of perfection, what practical influence will this have upon themselves or others, so long as they deny the fact that any will ever attain to this state? Will not the latter be likely to practice just as the former reason? Witsius, with singular consistency, carries out the practical bearings of his doctrine. He says, "Seeing God has expressly declared that he does not give his people absolute perfection in this life, it is the duty of all to acquiesce in this disposition of the divine will, nor are they allowed to beg of God to grant them that perfection here, which they know he has not appointed for this, but for the other life."-Economy of the Covenants, vol. ii, p. 61. Now this is right. No man should feel himself authorized to ask of God now what he knows is in the divine economy not appointed for this, but for the other life." And can Dr. Woods, with his present views, fervently and believingly pray to God to make him perfect now? Bélieving him to be constituted just like other men, notwithstanding all he has said upon the subject, we still have some doubts as to this. How a man, in the exercise of a sound mind, can pray, with the expectation of being heard and answered, for what he believes never was and never will be, is something quite beyond our comprehension. But is there any marked difference between the preaching, praying, and the actual efforts of those divines, who, with the Catechism, assert that "no man is able, either of himself, or by any grace received in this life, perfectly to keep the commandments of God," and those who, with Dr. Woods, simply deny the fact that any ever have perfectly kept the commandments of God or ever will do so? If there be any such difference, it is yet for us to learn. And should Drs. Woods and Pond begin to preach the immediate attainableness of Christian perfection, assuring their hearers that God requires and promises complete and perfect holiness Now, and that they are permitted, and even bound to seek for it as at present within their reach, how long would it be ere they would be suspected of strong affinity with the views of the Oberlin divines? We shall be happy to learn that these wise and good men are urging all their brethren on to the high mark of entire sanctification, and that their efforts are producing their appropriate effect. There is, indeed, one light in which the concession of the attainableness of a state of entire holiness is truly important. It will naturally enough be concluded, that what is attainable may be attained—yea, has been, and will again be attained. And so the paralyzing influence of the doctrine of the necessary continuance of indwelling sin will be destroyed. Indeed, now that the opposers of the doctrine of Christian perfection are admitting its attainableness, they will find it rather difficult long to hang upon the simple denial of the fact. Mr. Mahan's opponents say, "the question between us is simply one of fact." Though this is not conceded by Mr. M. to be "the question" of difference, and, as we have before said, has never been considered the main question between those who assert and those who deny the doctrine of Christian perfection, yet in consequence of its bearing upon that question, it has generally been mooted in the controversy. And now after conceding that the doctrine of entire sanctification is taught in the Bible, and that the state is attainable in the present life, how can any prove that there are no instances of this state among men? How can they know that there is no existing fact corresponding with and practically carrying out the doctrine? If they have this knowledge, it must be the result of a universal knowledge of mankind-they must "know all men, and know what is in man," or it must be the result of a perfect knowledge of the nature of things-they must know a priori that this perfection is not predicable of man in his present state-that the thing is impossible; or their knowledge must rest upon a specific revelation of the fact that none ever was or ever will be thus perfect. No claim, it is presumed, will be set up to either species of evidence above named, except the last. The question, then, to be settled is, whether God has revealed in his word the fact that no man ever did or ever will attain to the state in question. But even if we should find this fact clearly revealed, we are not quite clear of embarrassment. We have the anomaly to account for, of a principle or doctrine without a corresponding fact. We think it will be found upon the most careful examination, that all the doctrines of the Bible, relating to the improvement of man's moral character, have corresponding facts illustrative of their nature and practical tendency. The doctrine of repentance is exemplified in the life and conduct of the true penitent; the doctrine of faith, in the believer; that of justification in the justified; regeneration in the regenerated, &c. But, according to the views we oppose, here is the doctrine of perfect holiness without any perfectly holy individuals to exemplify the doctrine. We do indeed read in the Bible of saints, or holy ones, persons sanctified, perfect, &c., but as the "fact" of the existence of an individual entirely holy must not be admitted, the aids of criticism and logic are called in to deprive these terms of their legitimate meaning. A specimen of the Scripture argument upon this point may not be inappropriate in this place. AT 1. To say nothing of Enoch, Elijah, Daniel, and others who are represented, as far as we recollect, as without offense, we premise that men of this class are recognized by the sacred writers as living upon earth. The psalmist says, "Blessed are the undefiled in the way, ( perfect of the way,) who walk in the law of the Lord," Psa. cxix, 1. Again he says, "He that walketh in a perfect way, he shall serve me," Psa. ci, 6. And Solomon says, “The upright shall dwell in the land, and the perfect shall remain in it," Prov. ii, 21. Our Saviour says, "Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God," Matt. v, 8. Professor Robinson interprets oi kavapoì tỷ kapdia, pure in heart; "sincere, upright, void of evil." (Sec Lexicon.) And Parkhurst, "clean, pure, in a spiritual sense, from the pollution and guilt of sin." (See Lexicon.) After giving these few examples under this head, we must pass 2. To such passages as speak of a state of sanctification as preparatory to duties which are appropriate to the present state of being. The psalmist prays, "Create in me a clean heart, O God, and renew a right spirit within me," Psa. li, 10; and adds in the 13th verse, "Then will I teach transgressors thy ways; and sinners shall be converted unto thee." From this it seems evident that the psalmist must have thought of living to do good in the world, after he should have "a clean heart and a right spirit." And the prophet Ezekiel says in God's name, "Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean," &c.; "And cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them," Ezek. xxxvi, 25–27. St. Peter represents our election to be "through sanctification of the Spirit unto obedience," 1 Pet. i, 2, “eiç úπakoǹv; i. e., in order that they should obey the gospel."-Dr. Bloomfield. (See Greek Testament, with English notes, in loc.) In all these cases, and many others which might be quoted, sanctification is represented as a qualification for the great duties which are to be done in the present world, and, consequently, cannot be understood as only to be attained at death. 3. Particular instances of this state of holiness mentioned in the Scriptures. Some of these are declared by the sacred writers to have been blameless, perfect, upright, &c. Among these are Zechariah and Elizabeth; others profess to have attained to the state indicated by these qualifying terms. Among these we would mention the great apostle of the Gentiles. But we cannot here go into the evidence. 4. Passages which imply gross absurdity, upon the supposition that none are sanctified until death. St. Paul prays that his brethren of the church of Thessalonica may be sanctified wholly. Now does he pray that they may speedily be removed from the world? Our blessed Saviour prayed that his disciples might be sanctified: "Sanctify them through thy truth," John xvii, 17. Did he pray that they might be removed hence? This could not be, for he had just said, verse 15, "I pray not that thou shouldst take them out of the world, but that thou shouldst keep them from the evil." The entire argument of Dr. Woods is not a very specious sophism of the class called Ignoratio Elenchi, a misapprehension of the question. And whether, from the light he has shed upon the subject, Mr. M. and his friends will "feel themselves bound in truth to abstain from any further attempt to uphold their scheme by the arguments which" he has "noticed," remains to be seen. They may be sorry indeed that Dr. W. should be so "greatly disappointed" as to the success of his argument, but we fondly hope the glory of God, and the proper elevation of the church, are with them objects of paramount importance. February 10, 1841. ART. VIII.-CRITICAL NOTICES. Third Series. New-York, 1840. 1. The School District Library. THE publishers of these series are, beyond doubt, rendering a very important service to the community. The cause of school district libraries is identified with the best interests of the people; and there is no way in which it can be effectually sustained but by successive publications, in a collective form, of cheap and good books. We are happy to perceive that the Messrs. Harpers continue rightly to appreciate the obligations they have assumed in this matter; their third series is an admirable one, in all respects worthy of being placed by the side of those which have preceded it; and this, as far as our knowledge extends, is, without any exception, the judgment both of the public and the press. The number of original works in this series is greater than in either of the former, and we notice among their authors the names of some of our best writers and most distinguished scholars Washington Irving, Dr. Nott, Professor Renwick, Dr. Potter, Professor Upham, Mr. Mackenzie, &c. Halleck and Bryant have also contributed three beautiful volumes, consisting of selections from the British and American poets. The subjects treated of are exceedingly well chosen, and embrace the most interesting departments of useful knowledge. It would be difficult, we think, to find in any other collection of the same compass so great an amount of varied information. While every thing of a sectarian nature has very properly been excluded, we are glad to see that there is a due proportion of valuable religious matter in the present series-such as Counsels to Young Men, by Dr. Nott; Portions of the Family Instructor, of Professor Sedgwick's admirable Discourse on Study, and of Dr. Johnson's inimitable Moral Essays. In one respect the volumes in this collection are worthy of all commendation; they are thoroughly pure in language and in sentiment, a circumstance of vital importance in books intended for such an object. There are several works, both original and selected, which on account of their striking merit we should like particularly to notice; but, as our space is limited, and we are desirous to say something in relation to the great importance, &c., of the library system as established in this state, as a means of diffusing useful knowledge among the people, or, in other words, of educating the entire mind of the community, we must content ourselves with this general expression of opinion. It is now about six years since the subject of school district libraries |