Art. III-A Practical Treatise on the ordinary Operations of the Holy Spirit; by the Rev. G. S. Faber, B. D. Rector of Long-Newton, in the County and Diocese of Durham, 8vo. pp. 256. price 78: London. F. C. and J. Rivington.

BETWEEN the man who rejects the doctrine of the influences

of the Holy Spirit and him who firmly believes it, there must be a radical difference in the whole religious character. Their views of Deity, of themselves, of the nature and consequences of transgression, of scripture, and of Providence;-the habitual state of their minds, their devotional exercises, and the manner in which they apply themselves to moral and evangelical duties; can have very little similarity. The man who expects no guidance in his researches but his own reason, who deems himself the sole author of his virtues, and who relies entirely on his wisdom and power to resist temptation, must feel himself comparatively little indebted to God;-must have at once a high notion of himself, and a low estimate of Divine law. His songs of praise, being dictated by a much lower idea of obligation, must be far less animating and lively; and his prayers, being confined to fewer topics, and those of minor value, much less frequent and earnest. His references to a Being who, though invisible, is ever present, will be less frequent; and his mind will be altogether destitute of that feeling of reliance on a power always in exercise for his support, which constitutes so great a source of comfort, and inspires the believer with so much courage and ardour in his efforts against évil propensities, and in his endeavours to attain higher degrees of piety and virtue. That sublime state of mind, when it feels itself as if borne aloft by the power of God, penetrated by his invigorating presence, and enabled to triumph in a strength which will vanquish every enemy, and surmount every difficulty, must be wholly unknown; and the feelings of hope and confidence, if such feelings exist, being no longer consistent with deep convictions of moral debility and unworthiness, instead of inflaming our love to God, and inspiring hosannas to his name, will degenerate infallibly into presumption and pride. If it were possible to conceive that a person who has once heartily believed the reality of Divine, sanctifying operations, who has habitually availed himself of the comfort that belief supplies, and who, in all his efforts towards improvement, has constantly trusted for success in their energy, should afterwards entirely lose the reliance and the conviction by which it had been supported; it would be difficult to describe the change which would thereby be induced in his mind and conduct. Religion, as it would then appear to him, would be divested of its lofty character, its di

vinity, its glorious holiness, and its power of uniting the soul to God: a disruption would have taken place between him and Deity; and, however exalted in a kind of individual and separate importance, he would feel himself no less debased than was the Temple when the Glory of the Lord, the Shechinah of his presence, departed. His duties towards God, consisting only of acknowledgements for the gift of life, and the bounties of providence, together with a vague idea of forgiveness, would be few and easily discharged; and all that remained to complete his obligations, would be to cultivate kind affections, and perform acts of benevolence towards his neighbours. But, as by diminishing the necessity of applying, with constancy and care, for a power to work within him, he would lose what is generally denominated spirituality of mind, and the life and power of religion,' so his ability and disposition to benefit his fellow creatures, would be greatly diminished. It is at the throne of God, while bewailing our imperfections, acknowledging our weakness, and imploring Divine assistance, while interceding for those around us, and commanding even our enemies to mercy and grace, that we learn to conquer the malevolent feelings, to suppress all lofty thoughts of ourselves, to be pitiful, tender, meek, and affectionate, and to conduct ourselves towards others as we wish to be treated by him who teaches us to forgive as we ourselves expect forgiveness. Whatever notions weaken our dependence upon God, and abate the necessity of prayer, proportionally foster self-importance, and enfeeble the general practice of all the moral virtues. The question, therefore, whether there is, in fact, such a Divine influence operating on the minds of good men, illuminating their understandings, and renovating their moral nature, is one of great practical importance: the affirmative of this inquiry, is indeed by some utterly denied, and the very idea of it denounced as irrational, and reviled as enthusiastic; while, by others, it is received with so hesitating a credence, and entertained with so slight a conviction of its value, that it is but incidentally referred to, and feebly inculcated. But why should we resign the advantages of a doctrine so consoling? why should it be thought incredible, that He who constituted our spiritual nature, should renew and correct it, when it has become degenerate and disordered? Can it be supposed that there is any part of his works from which the influence of the Creator is necessarily excluded? Who will say that the Almighty is the only agent who must for ever abandon as beyond his power to restore, if once impaired, what he himself originally made perfect? Is it a contradiction to suppose, that He who annually renews the energies of nature, and who can raise the dead at pleasure, should be capable at any time, in a manner altogether sovereign and infallibly effectual,

to re-fashion our hearts, and recover us to the excellence and the purposes from which we have declined? And if it must be allowed that he can, why should it be judged improbable that he does? May he not have great and worthy ends to fulfil by such interference; ends equally important with those which, in the beginning, moved him to create? or are there any reasons against his interposition so strong, that to expect and hope for the exercise of such benevolence, becomes therefore absurd? Is God dishonoured by thus graciously displaying his control over us? or is man injured by being made good and happy? Are there any principles of moral government thereby subverted, or any rights of a free agent violated? To suppose, indeed, an accountable creature to be morally deteriorated, or his liberty impaired by Divine agency, would imply those consequences; but in the fact now under consideration, neither of them is involved. Our advantage is the result; and the manner of producing it, is conformable to the laws of our moral nature. The will is not forced against judgement;-is not impelled without the direction of intellect ;-is not suspended from exercise; but it is left free in its elections, and preserved from error by a removal of the cause of failure. Wrong choice implies erroneous judgement; and erroneous judgement, want of understanding, which is occasioned either by a defective representation of objects to the mind, or a perverted disposition. The former is obviated by scripture testimony, and why may not the latter be corrected by Divine energy? If it be allowed that the Maker of all things may restore what is decayed, and correct what is disordered in general; and if there is nothing in the nature of man as an agent, which should exclude him from Divine care in this re spect;-why should we renounce the hope that he will renew us after the image in which we were first formed? We cannot say that there is no need of renovating power;-that to publish laws and to furnish inducements, are sufficient to ensure virtue and happiness. The state of the world proves the contrary. It is obvious, that, notwithstanding these, numbers do continue vicious; and were nothing more afforded, no reason can be assigned that all men would not continue so. If these things comprised the whole which God could do for the benefit of his creatures, to ensure the recovery of any of the human race would be impossible. However he might pardon past offences, no one continuing disobedient, could be either an object of complacency to his Maker, or happy in himself; nor would it be within the reach even of compassion, grace, and mercy, to restore him to holiness, and rescue him from misery. But why should we then limit Almighty benevolence? Where is the being on earth too wretched for it to reach? To believe, therefore, that God can work upon the mind of man so as to purify the source of moral

action, is not irrational, nor would it be too much, even without express assurances, to hope for such a display of his beneficence. It is an undeniable fact, that the most enlightened of the ancients frequently expressed their conviction, that true virtue was from the Deity; and if He is the fountain of all goodness, to suppose it the produce of our unassisted efforts, must not be less contrary to reason, than to imagine something more than infinite, or an effect without a cause. The numerous passages of Holy Scripture, therefore, which teach us to ascribe all good dispositions and righteous acts to his influence, and to pray for his Holy Spirit to guide us into truth, to renew our moral nature, and to Incline us to obey his will, are not to be overlooked or explained away as expressions merely figurative, or arising from Jewish habits of thinking, but as essential parts of Christian doctrine. And if it be a truth, that it is by Divine agency that we are restored to rectitude, it must be one of great importance, and ought, as connected with every branch of practical religion and morals, to be very prominent both in discourses from the pulpit, and discussions from the press. The most accurate statements of duty, united with the most eloquent persuasions to obedience, will necessarily be unavailable, if the fact of moral impotence through sin be not urged upon our attention, and if we are not directed to the source of power. This consideration cannot be too much impressed on the minds of all whose office it is to teach the way of salvation; and the too evident neglect of it, evinced in their sermons, by many who, in the forms prescribed by the Church, have distinctly and frequently recognised it in their prayers, shews sufficiently that the publication of the work before us by a Divine of so great respectability as Mr. FABER, was by no means unseasonable.

The doctrine of the influences of the Holy Spirit, though as a fact both clearly revealed and consonant with reason, has its difficulties. Many inquiries which might be suggested respecting it, would relate merely to objects of curiosity, and therefore to pursue them would doubtless be' alike unprofitable and unsuccessful; but others might refer to points, of which the knowledge would be of high utility in aiding our conceptions of moral science in general, and in illustrating a variety of theological topics: the investigation of these might be rewarded with valuable results. Our author has, however, chosen to confine his attention within narrower limits. Without entering upon deep inquiries, or elaborate discussions, respecting the nature and mode of Divine operations on the mind; he presents us with many useful remarks and judicious statements, which prove the necessity and illustrate the progress of the work of the Holy Spirit in producing that moral change, without which all our devotion will be unacceptable, and our practice, defective. The author's

reasonings are chiefly founded on scripture, and his object is, at once, to guard mankind against a neglect of Divine assistance on the one hand, and a dangerous supineness in working out their own salvation on the other.

To shew the necessity of a holy influence on the mind, the writer first adverts to the state of man by nature,' and takes a distinct view of the effects of original depravity on the understanding, the will, and the affections. The picture which he draws, however gloomy and painful to contemplate, is, as he shows, warranted in general both by Holy Scripture and the language of the founders of the English hierarchy; nor can it be denied either by any attentive observer of mankind in thẻ present age, or investigator of the records of past times, that it has been sketched by the pencil of truth. With much skill he detects the latent enmity of the human heart against God and goodness; and exposes the springs of self-deception by which men are led into delusive notions of personal exemption from crimes which they can without difficulty discover in others. His observations are not of a kind so undistinguishing, as to suffer every one to escape in a crowd; but sucli as are calculated to make his readers feel to what class they belong, and to evince the necessity of a change from the moral condition in which we are all first found;-a change not superficial only, and such as may be easily accomplished at pleasure, but radical, and requiring a power super-human. While, however, his remarks are thus generally just, impressive, and pertinent, we cannot but notice a few inaccuracies into which it might have been expected, that an author, on the whole, so well informed, would not fall. He speaks of those who have not the influence of the Holy Spirit, as labouring under a physical incapacity of enjoying the kingdom of heaven; as having no faculties capable in themselves of embracing spiritual truths; and as being as much unqualified to decide upon them, as a man born blind, is, to discriminate between the various tints of the rainbow." This is worse than merely loose writing; it is calculated to impart notions decidedly wrong, and not a little injurious. Surely Mr. Faber would not contend that Divine influence on the mind, is essential to accountability; which is, however, necessarily implied, if our previous incapacity be more than moral, and our rejection of Divine truth arise, not from a wrong direction, or a neglect of the faculties which we have, but from the want of others which we have not. The communication of the Holy Spirit, were this a true statement, would not be a gift, a favour, the conferring of which, was matter of sovereign pleasure; but a sine qua non of moral agency, an essential requisite as a basis of Divine government. But as original sin did not dissolve the bonds of moral obligation, however it might impair and disorder the physical powers of the mind, it ought