unanimous acquittal which he obtained from the people, less important as tending to exalt God, and to establish his honour; for it is remarkable that, so far from Samuel attempting to raise his own character upon the honourable testimony thus borne to it by the nation, he only immediately takes occasion from it to remind them of the long-suffering of the Almighty, their own perverseness and ingratitude, the might exerted in their deliverance hitherto (in spite of all their perverseness), and the certainty of final destruction being yet the consequence of their continuing to forsake the "God of their fathers." All this seems to indicate that he had been anxious for the vindication of his own character, only for the purpose of giving greater effect to the message he brought, and the better commending to the people the credit of the Master whom he served. From this we may learn the great value of personal character in the ministers of truth, and the manner in which they may best succeed in recommending and illustrating their message. Not only did the people give willing testimony on this appeal, but the Almighty himself was pleased to command a miracle from heaven, in the thunder and rain which were commissioned to attest the sincerity and fidelity of this his chosen servant. Happy they, whose consciences are thus supported by the evidence of an affectionate people, and sooner or later confirmed by a voice from Heaven in addition.

As the history proceeds, we hear more of the disobedient monarch whom Samuel had unwillingly anointed, than of the prophet himself, as even to the present hour we find wickedness public and aggressive, while good, and good men, are thrown into the shade; from which we may learn not to measure the portion of good which may be going on in the world at any particular season by the amount of noise which may be made in the same period by the ungodly. If any man were now, for instance, to take his estimate of the state of public life and public manners, from the most largely circulated diary of public events, what could he think of this nation but that it was a multitude of persons buying and selling, and getting gain, ignorant of God, and reckless of futurity-disgraced by every description of vice, divided by factions, and caring only or supremely for the life that now is. If our leading journalists are told of what is interesting to others, and ought to interest themselves, they would discard it, as unlikely to interest the mass. But still a great work may be, and is advancing, even in this their day, though they know and believe it not. The good that is still going on is silent and unobtrusive; it courts not public observation, but rather avoids it; while only the ungodly are heard of as the great disturbers of the creation, and, except so far as they are restrained, the chief agents of the devil, and the chief sources of sorrow in the world. Thus it has ever been; and all profane as well as sacred history bears witness to the prevalence and publicity of sin, while all that is virtuous and of good report is either not recorded at all, or related under circumstances only calculated to favour evil, and cast discredit upon truth and righteousness.

Next occurs Samuel's sharp reproof of Saul, for offering a burnt-offering, while he waited for his return. This is described as such an act of folly and disobedience united, as led the prophet to predict the fall of his empire, and the choice of David as his successor; but, instead of any repentance being displayed by Saul, we find him immediately proceeding to number the people, as if relying upon an arm of flesh. Samuel next conveys a distinct command to him in regard to Amalek; but instead of obeying it, he spares their king, and the best of their substance, and only destroys the refuse, upon which we find Samuel a whole night in prayer, under the grief he suffered from this cause. The defence of Saul, in either case, is remarkable. In the first, "I forced myself, and offered;" in the next, the

་

people spared the best;" and again, "the people took of the spoil to sacrifice unto the Lord"—" doing evil that good might come;" all which induced that memorable expostulation, "Hath the Lord as great delight in burntofferings and sacrifice, as in obeying the voice of the Lord? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams." Still Saul's repentance rather evinces a desire to reign, and the fear of being publicly disgraced, than the result of any genuine contrition for sin, or the least spiritual sense of it, though he does confess it in words. Samuel, however, so far complies with his wish as to honour him before the people ; but, after providing for the execution of Agag, he quits Saul for ever; though he does not cease to mourn for him. Samuel then fills a more delightful office, in appointing David to the throne; and the peculiar providence of God in directing the selection of a young shepherd; in bringing this stripling to the court of which he was one day to be the head; in causing him to find favour even with Saul himself, and giving him victory over Goliath, are all so many splendid instances of his might and mercy, by whom alone " kings reign," and "the beggar is taken from the dunghill." Saul now occupies, as usual, a foremost place in the history, till Samuel again appears as the protector of David from his Saul goes rage. on filling up the measure of his iniquity, in seeking innocent blood, and that notwithstanding the plainest proofs of David's desire, that he should rather live and repent, and the grossest ingratitude on his part against one who had repeatedly saved him, when he was in his power. Samuel's death is recorded in the midst of this unjust pursuit, and with no particular notice beyond the mere fact; and Saul himself soon follows, and forms the second instance mentioned in the Old Testament, of suicide. However pressing his danger might be, and however unlikely his escape, it was yet infinitely criminal to put himself to death. The word of God concerning him is, "Saul died for his trangression, which he committed against the Lord, even against the word of the Lord, which he kept not, and also for asking counsel of one that had a familiar spirit, to inquire of it, and inquired not of the Lord; therefore he slew him, and turned the kingdom unto David."

The prominent features of Samuel's history which have been noticed, are, 1st, His personal piety: 2d, His early and late denunciations of the divine wrath against sin-as in the case both of Eli and Saul, where we see his boldness and consistency in rebuking sin, whether in the high priest. or the king, when the occasion demanded it: 3d, His fearless protection and love of the children of God, in his espousing the cause of the persecuted and oppressed David and his followers: 4th, His intercessory and supplicatory character, as a powerful and constant advocate for the people, and a mourner for their trangressions and follies: 5th, His determined stand for the known laws and public decrees of the Almighty, at all hazards, and under all circumstances, so as personally to inflict the Divine wrath upon one who had made many childless, because God had commanded a temporal monarch to inflict the same vengeance, but without effect: 6th, His vindication of the honour of God, as a just and righteous rewarder of godliness, and avenger of iniquity, even in the present state of being; for although that particular dispensation was a theocracy, in which temporal good and evil more certainly followed upon human actions than since men have been placed more directly under a dispensation of grace, it still remains more or less true, that " godliness has the promise of the life that now is." "As for me, God forbid that I should sin against the Lord, in ceasing to pray for you; but I will teach you the good and the right way. Only fear the Lord and serve him in truth, with all your heart; for consider how great things he hath done for you: but, if ye shall still do wickedly,

ye shall be consumed, both ye and your king." This was a noble vindication of God's moral government. The people chose to disbelieve it, and we know the result.

ON THE DOCTRINE OF IMPUTED RIGHTEOUSNESS.

To the Editor of the Christian Observer.

A CORRESPONDENT, in the last Number of your miscellany, brings forward Mr. Wesley as characterizing the doctrine of imputed righteousness as imputed nonsense. While perusing this statement I was strongly inclined to suppose that your correspondent was mistaken in ascribing such a form of expression to that eminent servant of God, it being so remarkably different from his usual style. Your correspondent, therefore, will not think it too much trouble to establish his quotation, by a reference to that part of Mr. Wesley's works in which it may be found.

The assumption of the unquestionable truth of this charge, which is implied in the mode of its introduction, led me to refer to my copy of Mr. Wesley's works on the subject, and I beg leave to lay before your readers the result of my investigation. It was natural to advert to Mr. Wesley's Sermon on Imputed Righteousness, grounded upon that well known passage in the prophecy of Jeremiah, xxiii. 6. In this discourse he gives the following summary of his own views on the point in question. If we take the phrase of imputing Christ's righteousness for the bestowing, as it were, the righteousness of Christ, including his obedience, as well passive as active, in the return of it; that is, in the privileges, blessings, and benefits purchased by it; so a believer may be said to be justified by the righteousness of Christ imputed." Again: "The righteousness of Christ, both his active and passive righteousness, is the meritorious cause of our justification, and has procured for us at God's right hand, that, upon our believing, we should be accounted righteous by him." Mr. Wesley was therefore fully justified in asserting, in reply to his impugners of that day, that "he no more denied the righteousness of Christ than his Godhead;" and he immediately subjoins the following decisive words: "Neither do I deny imputed righteousness; this is another unkind and unjust accusation. I always did and do continually affirm that the righteousness of Christ is imputed to every believer." Mr. Wesley then proceeds to specify the various classes of persons who deny the doctrine, which in this discourse he so clearly defines and strongly affirms. "It is well known," says he, Mr. Law absolutely and zealously denied the imputation of the righteousness of Christ; as did Robert Barclay, who scruples not to say, imputed righteousness-imputed nonsense.""

"that

During Mr. Wesley's long career, as himself most strikingly denominates it," of glory and of shame," he had frequently to complain of" unkind and unjust accusations." The same treatment has more or less pursued him during the forty years which have now elapsed since he finished his course. And yet how important a share in the revival of genuine Christianity in the British Isles, which distinguished the latter half of the eighteenth century, is unquestionably attributable to the life and labours of this much calumniated servant of God. In that part of Grecian history which relates to the invasion of Xerxes, it is reported of a celebrated Athenian, that, while each of the allies claimed for its own division of the fleet the primary part in the decisive victory of Salamis, the second was unanimously allotted to Themistocles. And one is forcibly reminded of this observation, in adverting to the degree of usefulness which all parties, however differing in other respects, agree in allotting to the instrumentality of Mr. Wesley,

in bringing about that improved state of evangelical profession and practice, the benefits of which, all serious Christians now happily realize in the British empire. It cannot, therefore, be unreasonable to claim for him justice at the hands of those to whom his unexampled labours have, whether directly or indirectly, been productive of so great advantage.

You will perhaps give an opinion whether Mr. Wesley's view of imputed righteousness, or that which "W. D. V." quotes with so much approbation from Dr. Owen, is more conformable to Scripture and the doctrine of the Church of England. They both appear to me to involve the substantial truth of the Gospel on this subject.

PHILALETHES*.

A LITTLE BOOK NOT A GREAT EVIL.

To the Editor of the Christian Observer.

A CORRESPONDENT, in your Number for November, under the signature of "A Tract Distributor," has directed the attention of your readers to the class of little books designated Religious Tracts, many of which, he assures them, "" are and others, he says, mere trash; are dressed up in the attractive form of narratives, abounding in rather romantic incidents and in religious sentimentality." So far as religious tracts come under these descriptions, I readily concur with your correspondent in condemning their circulation; but surely he should have been a little more definite in his charges. A man who feels no interest for the souls of his fellow-creatures, who loves to live to himself, will be glad to find some reasons for discontinuing his support to one of the best modes of diffusing Divine truth; and

The above statement has been shewn to the writer who made the remark objected to, which was in truth not a part of " W. D. V.'s " paper, but a parenthesis in the manuscript by another hand, in reply to Dr Owen's statement there quoted. "This is the doctrine of the Church of England; " ("so asserts Dr. Owen," &c.) The writer says, that, retracting the offensive charge of "levity," he is still not convinced that Mr. Wesley did not use the phrase in question, having received the statement thirty years since from one who knew Mr. Wesley well, and conversed much with him fifty years ago, and who has since followed him to a world where there is no strife or misconception; but that he feels assured, after reading the passages adduced by "Philalethes," that if Mr. Wesley did so speak, it was not with an intention of disparaging the doctrine of the imputation of Christ's righteousness in the sense in which he explains it, but only in reference to what he considered an unscriptural view of it.

In reply to the request of " Philalethes" in his concluding sentence, we think it better to leave the discussion in the hands of our correspondents. "Philalethes " considers that the views both of Dr. Owen and Mr. Wesley involve "the substantial truth of the Gospel on this subject; " and yet, if he will look at the passages adduced, he will find Dr. Owen affirming, that " in this imputation the thing itself is first imputed unto us, and not any of the effects of it; but they are made ours by virtue of that imputation: " whereas Mr. Wesley says, that the imputation is "in the return (effects) of it, that is, in the privileges, blessings, and benefits purchased by it." Dr. Owen says, that God "makes an effectual grant and donation" of the righteousness of Christ to us, in such a manner that it becomes our own, and then acquits us because we are thus righteous: whereas Mr. Wesley says, that God imputes to us the righteousness of Christ only "in the return of it," that is, in our acquittal; not first making it our own, and then treating us as if it were so. Owen says in substance, that God justifies the believer because he views him by imputation as righteous; and Wesley, that he justifies him, not because he views him as righteous, but because he accepts the righteousness of Christ on his behalf. Owen, it is clear, embodies more in his notion of the imputation of Christ's righteousness than Wesley does; and whether the latter used the express word "nonsense " to characterize the opinion of the former, or did not, it is indisputable that he accounted it an unscriptural and extravagant notion. He imputed only the effects or return of Christ's righteousness; whereas Owen imputed the righteousness itself.

the Christian, who too often tires in the work of the Lord, may justify his lukewarmness by reference to the sentiments contained in the remarks of the "Tract Distributor." When any religious tracts are designated “mere trash," surely there ought to be a few guarded remarks. I have long been attached to some of the societies which issue tracts both in England and Ireland, and of those to which I allude I can truly say that wise and holy men have always had the management of them; and I should be sorry if they had been the means of sending out publications which deserve the sweeping condemnation of your correspondent. Many of these tracts are records of actual facts; and I hope that important religious truth, though conveyed in the form of narrative, does not merit the description of "trash." The Holy Spirit speaks to the church by inspired tracts; and history, narratives, and parables form a very large portion of the Divine word. Permit me, however, to reply to the two leading objections stated by your correspondent.

The first is, that the distribution of these works " has been carried to a greater extent than is consistent with the good of the receivers." This is an assertion without proof. Your correspondent possibly founds his remarks on the circumstances of some favoured spot where he happens to reside, and which he has himself perhaps long cultivated with watchful care; but is he acquainted with the general wants of the country, particularly of the manufacturing districts? Is he aware that in many places religious tracts are the only means by which access can be gained to a Sabbath-breaking population? I know a town in the north of England, where the population amounts to 78,000 persons; but the average attendance upon all the places of worship, including the Roman Catholic, is under six thousand. What is to become of the awful number who never visit the sanctuary of God? The only way of doing them good, except by praying for them, and such slight occasional personal intercourse as may be practicable, is by a constant diffusion of small religious publications. There are many thousands of our countrymen who will never read at all, if they do not read small books; and unless small books are distributed, where are we to obtain the needful funds for gratuitously distributing large ones? The reports of some of the Religious Tract Societies contain numerous facts illustrative of the benefits which, by the blessing of God, have resulted from the small books which have been distributed; and the very short tracts have often been the most useful ones. Literary and scientific knowledge, and even works of an injurious tendency, are now circulated to an astonishing extent in small portions, and should not religious information flow to the poor in the same form?

I submit these remarks to "A Tract Distributor;" and I hope that, because in small books, as in most human things, there may be found imperfections, he will not impede the progress of religious knowledge, in a form which God has so frequently blessed. "Mere trash" may justly characterize many large books, and ought not to be confined exclusively to small publications.

The second objection urged by your correspondent is, that the distributor loses much valuable time in reading the works before he can conscientiously venture to distribute them; since even the tracts which are " found to be useful and instructive, are not so much so to ourselves as to some poor neighbour; for the subject has no reference to our case and circumstances, and the time occupied in reading them is lost." Now many of the little books issued by some of the religious tract societies are the matured and condensed thoughts of the greatest men our country has produced, including not only many of our holy reformers and venerable bishops, but also the productions of the most eminent Nonconformists, as, Howe, Owen, Flavel, CHRIST. OBSERV. No. 374.

N