proved from Scripture, and the usual common-place objections of such writers as Messrs. Spurgeon and Ryle, and Drs. McNeile and Cumming, fully met and answered. In the second of these publications, I have examined the whole word of God, with reference to its bearing on the state of grace in which the people of God, whether Jews or Christians, are supposed to be.

I have gone through each of the Apostolic Epistles seriatim, with reference to the fact that all the Christians to whom they are addressed (no matter what their religious characters) are assumed either to be in grace, or to have fallen from it. I have also drawn out fully the analogy between the two Adams, and its bearing on the transmission to us of their respective natures; and have devoted á considerable part of the volume to the relations between the doctrine of Predestination and that of Baptismal Grace. I am not so presumptuous as to suppose that I have made every difficulty clear, and obviated every objection; but one thing I am sure I have done-I have shown that whatsoever difficulties attach to this matter are Bible difficulties, not Prayer-book difficulties. The Prayer-book statements upon this matter are a mere echo of Bible statements.

The difficulties attaching to the reception of certain Prayer-book statements, and their reconciliation with certain other statements and with facts in daily life, attach equally to certain Bible statements respecting Baptism and the state of the baptized, and their reconciliation with facts in daily life.

Take two instances.

St. John, in his First General Epistle, lays down the ideal of the regenerate state as perfect freedom from sin― "Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin." Now, taking this as it stands, it is not merely at variance with certain statements in our Service, but, first of all,

with the fact that no sect or party has ever asserted, and no sane man has ever believed, that a man, from the time of his conversion, is absolutely free from sin; and, in the second place, St. John here is apparently at issue with his brother Apostle, St. Paul; for the highest state of grace which St. Paul recognises is that of a "member of Christ:" and we have seen how St. Paul considers the sin of some among his converts the more sinful because they had once been made members of Christ.

The Church of England, in the matter of Baptism and Baptismal Grace, adheres to the language of St. Paul, and, I may say also, to that of St. Peter and St. James; for all these three Apostles contemplate the possibility of the regenerate man sinning. (See above, pages 68-70.)

If she did not, she would commit the absurdity of making one or two difficult statements of one short Epistle overbear the plain statements of all the rest of the New Testament.

I have gone fully into the interpretation of the expressions in St. John's General Epistle, in the 14th chapter of my "Second Adam and New Birth," and shown how St. Augustine's interpretation is the true one, being the only one by which they can be reconciled with the statements of the other Apostles, and of St. John himself. I only mention them now to show that the use which some have made of them does not affect the statements of the Prayer-book, but those of the Bible.

Take a second instance.

There are certain statements in the 17th Article asserting Predestination, Election, and the Final Perseverance of those who, by a decree "secret to us," have been designed by God to receive everlasting life. There are also certain statements which the Church directs to be made respecting each person who has been admitted into her

fellowship, that he is "grafted into the body of Christ's Church," i.e. regenerate and certainly, for the time being, in the favour of God. ·

These two statements, which are assumed to be contradictory, are the counterpart of certain statements in the New Testament.

There are statements in the Scriptures which imply an election to eternal life. There are other statements, far more numerous, which assert that all in the visible Church are, or have been, in the actual grace of God, and which imply that there is no degree of grace from which man cannot fall away. The difficulty is not in reconciling the statements in the Prayer-book respecting Election with those respecting grace bestowed upon all the baptized, but in reconciling with one another the corresponding statements in the Scriptures upon both these topics.

The difficulty lies wholly in the Scriptures. The statements in the Prayer-book, either on one side or on the other, are the mere echo of the Scripture statements.

Before concluding this subject, I must consider briefly a construction put upon these services by a large number of clergymen. I mean the hypothetical interpretation : sometimes designated as the view of "hope and charity.”

On this principle we are supposed to pronounce the child regenerate, not absolutely, but hypothetically, i.e. if certain conditions are fulfilled, of which fulfilment we are ignorant; as, for instance, if he belong to God's Secret Election, or if his parents, or god-parents, are true Christians, or have exercised faith- -we are supposed to assume charitably that these conditions have been fulfilled, and, not knowing anything to the contrary, we give the child the benefit of the doubt, and pronounce him regenerate.

Of late a very high place in the exposition of Scripture

has been demanded for this "hypothetical view." It has been said to pervade the whole word of God. By it we are called upon to qualify all God's addresses to His people. In particular the mode of address adopted by the Jewish prophets in addressing all the Children of Israel as "children of God," and a "holy people," and the same language taken up by the Apostles in addressing all their converts as "members of Christ" and "children of God," is asserted to be capable of rational (!) explanation only on this hypothetical principle. The Israelites are on this view assumed to be "children of God," because some of them were so. The Corinthian Christians are assumed to be "members of Christ," because some among them had been so made, and the glory of the few is supposed to be transferred to the many.

The terms of grace applied by the Apostles to the whole Church are not to be got rid of on this principle. It creates far more difficulties than it solves; indeed, I do not know that it solves one difficulty, whilst it creates the enormous one of obliging us to maintain that the language of the inspired writers in addressing the Church is deceptive, and has to be qualified before it can be received.

Assuming, however, for argument's sake, the truth of this theory, let it be carefully remembered that the Bible and the Prayer-book are in precisely the same position. with reference to it. If the hypothetical principle is required to reconcile certain statements in the Prayerbook with certain facts or theories, it is equally required to reconcile corresponding statements in the Bible with the same facts or theories.

Assuming, then, for a moment, the truth or feasibleness of this theory, a very little consideration will serve to show, that practically it makes no difference (so far as regards our treatment of the baptized as regenerate) if we

adopt it; provided only we carry it out honestly and consistently for the Bible and the Prayer-book alike pronounce all the baptized to have been "grafted into Christ's Church :" and when the baptized fall afterwards into sin, the inspired writers most distinctly, and the Prayer-book by implication, treat them as having fallen from grace, or as having sinned against grace.

Now this assumption is never lost sight of or dropped, either in the Bible or in the Prayer-book ;-never, I mean, dropped so that the baptized man should be addressed as a heathen, and bid to become, as for the first time, “a member of Christ."

So that, on Church principles, we are required to believe that a man is really made a member of Christ in Baptism; and ever afterwards he is to be addressed as having been received into Christ's Church: and, on the hypothetical principle, we are required to assume that the child has been made a member of Christ; and if we adhere to the precedents furnished to us by both Bible and Prayerbook, this assumption is never to be cast aside; for when the person baptized afterwards falls into sin, we are still to assume that he has fallen from grace-in fact, to adhere to our original hypothesis respecting him.

No difficulty that I can see is removed by this theory. On Church principles, you have the difficulty of believing that God has, in such a simple rite as Baptism, made the person a "member of Christ." On the hypothetical theory, you have the difficulty of accounting for the fact that God requires you to assume that He has regenerated the person baptized, when, in all probability (according to your view of regeneration), He has not; and the further fact, that if the man, after baptism, falls into sin, you are to adhere to the assumption.

But this theory has not been honestly and consistently