IT is the author's intention to publish this work hereafter semi-annually, in November and May; in numbers of 75 or 100 pages each Four numbers will constitute a volume. It will be devoted chiefly, as heretofore, to discussion on the doctrines of religion. A greater variety, however, will be introduced in topics of that kind; and reviews occasionally offered of interesting theological works, and notices of important ecclesiastical events.

DR. DWIGHT'S

VIEWS OF THE CAUSE OF SIN.

SINCE the publication of the last Number of this work, several disquisitions on some of the subjects of which I have heretofore treated, have made their appearance, which merit some attention.

The first which I shall notice, is "An Inquiry into the Nature of Sin as exhibited in Dr. Dwight's Theology, by Clericus," from the pen, as is too publicly known to leave any reserve in regard to its origin necessary, of the author of the discussion in the Christian Spectator respecting "Edwards's views of Original Sin," and of the Concio ad Clerum to which he refers,—the object of which is to vindicate that eminent theologian from the charge of having taught the doctrine of physical depravity.

I shall first briefly exhibit Dr. Dwight's views of the depravity of man, and then notice this gentleman's statements and arguments respecting them. The question to be determined, as stated by Clericus himself is, whether Dr. D. " maintained the doctrine of a sinful or corrupt nature,

which is prior to and distinct from all action." The following are the principal passages, from which the reader is to form his opinion on the subject.

"Since our first parents were entirely holy, how could they become sinful?

"This question in its simple and proper form is no other than this. How can a holy being become sinful? or, How can a holy being transgress the law of God? This question, to which, perhaps, no satisfactory philosophical answer can be given, has been unnecessarily embarrassed by the modes in which answers to it have been attempted. The language often adopted has been in a great measure abstract; and being supposed to have meaning when it had none, and to convey ideas which it did not contain, has served only to bewilder, when it was intended to instruct.

"The common method of conducting the investigation of this subject has been, to seek for some cause in the nature of man, styled a principle of action, to which this effect might be fairly attributed. As the principles of moral action in Adam must have been holy, and could in no degree have been sinful, it is inquired, How could a holy principle be the cause of sinful action?

"It will be obvious to a careful examiner, that in this inquiry the word principle is intended to denote a fixed unchangeable cause, productive only of effects of the same moral nature, and is supposed to exist and to operate during the interval of transgression. On this foundation the inquiry is made; and if the foundation be solid and just, the inquiry cannot be answered; because in the actual case, viz. the case of our first parents, there was no other principle of action beside a holy principle.

"But in this scheme of thought there is a plain and important fallacy; not improbably originated and certainly established by the use of the word principle. I do not deny; on the contrary I readily admit, that there is a cause of moral action in intelligent beings, frequently indicated by the words principle, affections, habits, nature, tendency, propensity, and several others. In this case, however, as well as in many others, it is carefully to be observed, that these terms indicate a cause, which to us is wholly unknown, except that its existence is proved by its effects. There is, as every man who does

not embrace the doctrine of casual, or contingent existence, must admit, a reason, why one being is holy and another sinful; or why the same being is holy at one time, and sinful at another, as truly as that there is a reason why he exists. There is also a reason why a being is at some times more strongly inclined to the practice of sin or holiness, than at others. Our judgment respecting moral beings is customarily formed in accordance with these truths. We speak of human nature as sinful, intending, not the actual commission of sin, but a general characteristic of man, under the influence of which he has committed sins heretofore, and is prepared and prone to commit others. With the same meaning in our minds we use the phrases, sinful propensity, corrupt heart, depraved mind; and the contrary ones, holy or virtuous disposition, moral rectitude, holiness of character, and many others of the like import. When we use these kinds of phraseology, we intend that a reason really exists, although undefinable and unintelligible by ourselves, why one mind will either usually or uniformly be the subject of holy volitions, and another of sinful ones. We do not intend to assert that any one, or any number of the volitions of the man whom we characterise, has been or will be holy; nor do we indeed design to refer immediately to actual volitions at all. Instead of this we mean to indicate a state of mind generally existing, out of which holy volitions may in one case be fairly expected to arise, and sinful ones in another; such a state as that if it were to be changed, and the existing state of a holy mind were to become the same with that of a sinful mind, its volitions would thenceforth be sinful; and vice versa. This state is the cause which I have mentioned; a cause the existence of which must be admitted, unless we acknowledge it to be a perfect casualty that any volition is sinful rather than holy. This cause is what is so often mentioned in the scriptures under the name of the heart; as when it is said, The heart is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked. I have already remarked that this cause is unknown, except by its effects. From these, however, we learn that it is not so powerful, nor so unchangeable, as to incline the mind in which it exists so strongly to holiness, as to prevent it absolutely from sinning; nor so strongly to sin, as to prevent Both revelation and it absolutely from acting in a holy manner.

facts, the only sources from which we derive any knowledge of the subject, place this truth beyond a reasonable doubt. Beings who

have sinned, have afterwards become holy, and beings who have been holy, have afterwards sinned: and nothing more seems necessary to explain this subject to us sufficiently, than barely to suppose, what we cannot avoid supposing, that a temptation actually presented to the mind, is disproportioned in its power to the inclination of that mind toward resistance."

“There are certain characteristics of human nature, which, considered by themselves, are innocent. Such are hunger, thirst, the fear of suffering, and the desire of happiness. All these are inseparable not only from the rational, but also from the animal nature as existing in this world, and accompany the christian through every degree of holiness which he attains, as truly as the sinner." "Some of the natural human characteristics are amiable. Such are natural affection; the simplicity and sweetness of disposition in children, often found also in persons of adult years; compassion; generosity; and what is sometimes called natural conscientiousness."

"These and all other qualities of the mind are however means either of virtue or sin, according to the nature of that controlling disposition or energy which constitutes the moral character.

"By this disposition or energy I intend that unknown cause whence it arises, that the actions of the mind are either sinful or virtuous. On this energy depends the moral nature of all actions, and the moral character of every mind. This character and these actions are variously and extensively modified by the attributes above mentioned. But the moral nature is not changed. So far as they have a prevailing influence, a sinful disposition is checked and prevented from operating in the worst manner and degree. Under the prevalence of a sinful disposition these attributes are partly extinguished, and partly converted into instruments of sin. In a virtuous mind, they all become means of virtue, and increase the energy of such a mind."

"I shall only add that a cause of human depravity is here alleged, of which all the characteristics mentioned in the commencement of this discourse, may be truly predicated, viz. the corruption of that energy of the mind whence volitions flow, and which I have heretofore asserted to be the seat of moral character in rational beings. This cause must be acknowledged to be universal; to be every where the same; and not to have always existed. It must also be conceded that it began to exist, according to the scriptures, as early as the