eousness and true holiness. The production of this internal effect, the introduction and exercise of the purifying and sanctifying influences by which it is wrought, the implanting of such religious affections, dispositions and principles, the commencement of such a devout and holy life, as Christianity, from its very nature and design, requires,-is, using a Jewish mode of expression, being born again;' a new birth, a spiritual birth, inasmuch as it is an effect wrought in the soul, the spiritual part of man, and is as strictly prerequisite to the enjoyment of the benefits which the gospel proffers, as the communication of animal life with human senses and faculties, is prerequisite to the enjoyment of the common blessings of existence in the present state of being; it is no less material, nor of less moment, under the Christian dispensation, than natural birth was deemed under the Jewish; and is as truly the proper and necessary mode of admission to a participation in the benefits of the former, as was the being born of the seed of Abraham, or an outward adoption of the religion of Moses, to the latter. The kingdom, or reign of Christ, consists in the operation of his own spiritual religion; and if a man would become the subject of that kingdom, he must become the subject of this spiritual religion; in other words he must have generated within him the spiritual mind and affections and principles, which that religion enjoins. The second birth, then, or the new birth, is, so to speak, the birth of religion in the mind, of a religion requiring purity of heart and holiness of life, and forming the soul by the energy of its operation to that moral excellence it requires. It is an internal effect independant of our mere existence in the world as rational beings; it makes us more than we are by nature; it is a different life, superadded, if we may use the expression, to the natural life. As the Christian religion is designed to make men more than they are, more than they could become, of themselves; so in every instance in which it accomplishes its design, it effects a new creation, a moral, spiritual creation, in the soul of man. In the strong figurative language of Scripture, it gives birth to the inner man, which lives by faith, and brings forth fruit unto everlasting life. It is in this sense we understand that to all men, whom Christianity addresses, it asserts the necessity of being 'born again,' regenerated, 'born of the spirit,' or spiritually born. Having thus explained the meaning of these terms, and the extent of their application at the present day, it may aid the general purpose of these observations to advert to some of the circumstances which have favored a misconstruction of the passage, and given currency to a misapplication of it, or have conduced at least to confused and erroneous notions of its import. The first I shall mention, is the very peculiarity of the language itself. Every one knows, or ought to know, that the New Testament is not only pervaded with a national phraseology, but with references and allusions to things in themselves temporary, and peculiar to individual characters, occasions, or the age; and these almost necessarily throw some obscurity over a part at least of the instructions of Christ and his Aposiles, till, by careful attention and study, we learn to distinguish the substance of the doctrines they taught from the form in which they are expressed, and the coloring which they took from the circumstances that gave rise to them. This exercise of the judgment upon the pages of Scripture is, in some cases, very readily made, and without difficulty, by most readers; but in others, it is strangely neglected. It has been sadly neglected in the case before us; and this has been one cause of a misconstruction of the passage. And yet the very fact that this language was used by our Saviour, so far as we know, but once, and that on occasion of a private interview, might have prevented, we should suppose, any material perversion of it, by im mediately suggesting the probability and even justifying a strong presumption, that nothing is here taught altogether unlike the instructions dispensed at other times, and to other persons. use The confusion, moreover, and indistinctness existing in most minds perhaps respecting the doctrine of regeneration, appear to have extended themselves to this passage, in which it is acknowledged to be directly and explicitly inculcated, and have hindered an obvious fact from being used for the correction of this confusion of mind, which might have prevented much error-1 mean the fact, that there is language in common among us, and perhaps in every tongue, so much resembling that in question, that no one, we should think, need misinterpret it or stretch its meaning beyond the import which, uninfluenced by theological opinions, we should naturally affix to it. Thus, to be conversant in new scenes, is said to be a new life to us; and one may speak of having begun his intellectual life at a certain period, or of dating his religious life from a certain epoch. A person removed into a new sphere of society, and brought under new influences, soon becomes a new man; one who has long enjoyed the advantages of foreign travel returns a new character; and especially those who have undergone a remarkable reformation of conduct and habits are said to have become new creatures, to have been regenerated. These are common instances of figurative modes of expression, which are never misunderstood, nor conceived to be attended with any obscurity; and the familiar use of such among all readers of the New Testament, might be supposed to assist in lessening, if it could not remove, the difficulty of entering into the meaning of our Saviour in the passage under review. Another circumstance which has tended to obscure the true sense of this passage, and to create some embarrassment in the use and application of it, is to be found in the almost inseparable connection which ap : pears to be formed in many minds between the necessity of being born again,' and the doctrine of innate, hereditary depravity, as though the former presupposed and established the latter, and this in turn was the true explanation of the other. Whereas in truth there is no such connexion between them, and no ground for it. For though we assert in the most unqualified terms, that to become a disciple of Christ, and be admitted into his kingdom on earth or in heaven, a man must be born again;' this by no means implies or supposes that man is by nature depraved, and that the inborn corruption of his nature, is the ground of this necessity. If to be 'born again,' mean, as the phrase has been explained, to be born in a spiritual sense, to have the temper and principles of a spiritual religion formed in the mind, the necessity of this spiritual birth may be affirmed with as much propriety of those who are supposed to come into the world destitute alike of holiness and of depravity, as of those who having lived in habits of sin, are confessedly depraved in mind and character. They who believe in the absolute innocence of the infant soul, that is, that it is neither stained with impurity and sin, nor yet possessed of holiness, are by no means obliged, in consistency with that belief, to except even infants from the necessity of being born again. These, as well as adults, before they can become Christians, must have the temper and spirit of Christ's religion formed in them; in other words, must be born again. It does not, however, follow from hence, that they have sins to be forgiven, or a sinful nature to be reformed, nor that they are regarded otherwise than with perfect complacency by their Maker. I cannot conceive of sin, or of a sinful nature, in a human being, prior to the commencement of moral agency in the Innocence may exist without Christian holi For innocence is freedom from guilt; but holi ness, in the Christian sense, is an acquisition as Christian character is an acquisition, the growth and fruit of same. ness. the indwelling power of religion. Now it is as impossible for children as for adults to become possessed of this acquisition, (and without possessing it in some degree, they cannot be Christians in the proper sense of that term) till, in the language of scripture, Christ be formed in them, till they have the operative principles of Christ's religion effectually implanted in their minds; and this is a spiritual birth. Hence the language of the text may, with as much propriety, and the same extent of application be used by those who reject the doctrine of original sin, as by those who receive it; for it respects the birth of a spiritual religion in the mind; it is as compatible, it harmonizes as well with the Unitarian system of belief, as with the Calvinistic creed; it forms as essential a part of the one, as of the other. Another religious tenet, so closely connected in many minds with the doctrine of being born again,' as to have a similar tendency with that which we have noticed, is, that this all-important effect is wrought by an immediate and irresistible act of the Divine Spirit. Several circumstances concur to associate this idea,though without reason, with the doctrine and phrase in question. It is too commonly taken for granted, and chiefly perhaps because it is very improperly so printed in our English Testament, that the synonymous phrase, born of the spirit,' means of the Divine Spirit. This, it has been shown, is not the case. It refers to the spiritual part of man, and is used in opposition to the flesh,' and born of the flesh.' Our Lord does not once, in the whole passage, as I understand it, allude expressly to the Spirit of God. In the next place, as the necessity of being born again, is so confidently represented to arise from the inborn and entire depravity of man's nature, the inference is immediately drawn, and is in itself very plausible, that if such be the fact, so thorough and radical a change of man's whole nature as is required, can only be wrought by the direct in erposition and the omnipotent operation of God's |