did; nor that he preaches as many thousand sermons, and with as overpowering an eloquence, as Whitefield did. But that he preaches the Gospel clearly and earnestly, though perhaps with subordinate powers of impression.

And what is meant by his being successful? Not that all his impenitent hearers will be converted under one sermon; nor in one year; nor in the whole course of his ministry. Let us decide how faithful we mean, and how successful; and then say what is the ground of certainty that so much fidelity, will be attended with so much success. We must find this certainly either in the state of the human heart, and the nature of truth, or in the promise of God. But it is to be found in neither. All we can properly say is, that the general current of the Bible, and of divine Providence, holds out a high probability, that decided faithfulness in preaching the gospel, will be attended with a good measure of success. It is a probability, such as is deemed an adequate encouragement to earnest endeavors, in husbandry, in medicine, in all cases where means are to be employed. The faithful preacher then may labor in hope;-nay, it is his duty to labor in high and animated hope that God will bless his efforts to the salvation of some perishing souls. Still his hope is in that sovereign mercy which has promised to render the gospel effectual to the conversion of multitudes of our lost race, but has not promised to convert all his hearers, or any of them. This places him between despondency and presumption—just the condition to call forth the powers of a Christian minister to the best advantage. If he supposed himself able to convert his hearers at any time, or at any time able to bring God under the obligation of a promise to convert them, he might sink into remissness. But while the question is, "can these dry bones live?"—and the only answer is, “O Lord God, thou knowest," the faithful pastor, in his deep solicitude for dying sinners, will proclaim the warnings of the Gospel with no less earnestness, and with much more hope of success, than if his sole reliance for their salvation were on himself.

The Gospel is the power of God to salvation, just so far as he is pleased to render it so by his Spirit. To many it is "the savor of death unto death," not through any fault of the preacher, but through their own stubborn depravity. The wicked man may be faithfully warned, and yet die in his iniquity; but his blood will be upon himself, and not upon the watchman. Though Israel be not gathered; the faithful prophet will have his reward; every syllable of truth that he utters will glorify God as really "in them that perish," as in "them that are saved.” My second remark, which stands in close connexion with

the foregoing, is, that the special blessing of God usually attends only that kind of preaching which exhibits in due connexion, the accountability of sinners, and their dependence on divine grace.

This is a grand characteristic of revival preaching, that it bears down upon the conscience of the sinner, with the solemn. claims of the Gospel to "work out his own salvation with fear and trembling," while it shows him, that it is "God who worketh in him to will and to do, of his good pleasure." The preaching that does neither of these, or that does one and not the other, is radically wanting in pungency and power. And this is just the defect which renders nugatory a large proportion of pulpit discourses.

You are soon to become embassadors for Christ. Suppose you should tell sinners that they are under a law, modified and mitigated now from its original strictness, to suit their fallen condition, that the gospel regards men as wretched rather than as guilty; that it is their duty to exercise godly sorrow, not for their depravity, but for their deplorable impotence to do anything which God requires. You tell them to do the best they can; to wait God's time relying on his help when it is sincerely sought. You put them on a round of external duties, in each of which there is confessedly no obedience of the heart, and in respect to each of which, they may comply with your directions in every punctillio, and yet perish eternally. Now, who has authorized you to instruct dying sinners in this manner?--to represent their dependence on God, as being such, that if they do perish, the blame will be upon him, and not upon themselves? If there is no preaching in our time which avowedly takes this ground, there is too much which approaches it so far as to neutralize the force of obligation to immediate repentance, by administering a deadly quietus to conscience.

But suppose you fall into another extreme, (for there is another,) and devote one half of your time in the pulpit to prove that sinners have power to repent. Is it preaching the whole Gospel, to inculcate so laboriously, what Christ and the Apostles never preached, but always took for granted? Look through the sermon on the Mount, and the Pentecost sermon of Peter, and what proportion of either is occupied with this discussion? Not one word. You convince a man by conclusive argument, (what indeed he knows by his mere consciousness, without any argument,) that he is a free agent,-is he therefore a Christian? Not at all. You have not instructed him in the great truths of the Gospel; and he may believe all you have said, and perish; nay, may perish because he believes, contrary to your intention, that this is the whole Gospel. For though he admits fully your

main proposition, that he is a free agent, and has power to repent, his own false logic of heart, infers, that it is as easy, for just such a sinner as he is, to repent, as to remain impenitent; and thence again, that just such a sinner, (notwithstanding his utter aversion to holiness,) is as likely, of his own accord, to repent, as to remain impenitent; nay, much more likely, as an infinite preponderance of motives on that side, must prevail with a free, moral agent. Of course, he need not be anxious; for a work so easy to be accomplished at any moment, may be safely postponed for the present. This belief, therefore, is a practical falsehood,-because the Bible says, and experience says, that multitudes throng the broad way, against light, and evidence, and warnings; while few enter the narrow way and live. His belief is also a fatal falsehood, in its result. It leaves him to rest in impenitence because he believes but a part of the truth.

Now give him true instruction that he cannot misunderstand by showing him the simple distinction between natural and moral inability. Preach to him his own complete powers of moral agency, and his obligation to immediate repentance. Then show him another truth, which does not extenuate his guilt, but aggravates it to immeasurable criminality, namely, that he is opposed to God, and never will submit, unless sovereign grace shall interpose, to subdue his opposition. The man now feels himself to be in solemn circumstances. You load him down with responsibility, guilt, danger,-a triple weight that crushes him, and makes him cry out. Conscience shows him that his wickedness is to be charged, not upon Adam, or Satan, or God, but upon his own single self. Conscience kindles a hell in his bosom; and the Bible shows him a hell flaming beneath his feet. Preach both obligation and dependence, then, if you would transform careless sinners into anxious, trembling inquirers.

My third remark is, that any system of means for the promotion of religion, which will supersede, or essentially impair, the influence of a regular, local ministry, must ultimately be deleterious to the churches.

In the Apostolical age, it was indispensable that the few men, to whom was committed the work of evangelizing the world, should be travelling preachers. Their first object, however, was to establish local churches, with permanent pastors. On the benefits of this system, so worthy of divine wisdom, so adapted to attach the preacher's affections to his hearers, and theirs to him, and to promote a discriminating, profitable discharge of his duties, I cannot dwell. The happy results of this system have been most conspicuous in those parts of our country where re

vivals of religion have most prevailed; and where many an anxious sinner has valued beyond all price, the privilege of opening his heart in private to a beloved pastor.

No organization, though devised by God himself, can be expected to operate in our depraved world, without some difficulties. These are so obvious, in the present case, that they need not be suggested. But that will be a day of calamity to our churches, should such a day come, when they shall be willing to exchange a stated pastorship for itinerant and occasional ministrations. It would sacrifice what the Head of the church has established, as the vital principle of her prosperity. It would strike away the main pillars of the edifice, that incidental props may occupy their place. Just see what would become of ministerial responsibility, when the same man should preach but once or a few times to a congregation. How could he know their spiritual wants, or secure their affections, or feel the full obligation of watching for their souls, when his only intercourse with them is the transient sight of their faces from the pulpit? What would become of the whole machinery of Sabbath schools, and Bible classes, and benevolent associations, which can be kept in operation only by the influence of a constant, pastoral supervision?

What would become of the pulpit? If it were practicable that itinerant ministrations should secure for it in all our towns a permanent and perpetual supply, yet the plan would transform the whole character of public preaching. Hearers would become fond of novelty, fastidious, and capricious in taste. Preachers would cease to be men of study; and instead of being instructive, would become disversive, an declamatory in their serOf necessity, their preaching must be, not appropriate but indefinite and general.

mons.

Perhaps you may ask me, to what extent may evangelists be employed as assistants to stated pastors, or as substitutes for them? I answer;-in a large congregation, where the ordinary labors of the ministry are as great as one man can possibly sustain, a failure of his health, or a revival among his people, may render it indispensable that he should have help in his work, for weeks or months successively. Such help has often been furnished by the occasional labors of other pastors, who have had a short leave of absence from their own flocks. But perhaps the only adequate provision for such emergencies, would be, that a few men, of rare endowments for this particular service, men of God, distinguished for judgement, fervor of piety, and suavity of temper, should be held in reserve, to labor where they are most needed, as assistants to stated pastors.

These men of course should be ordained ministers, and hold themselves accountable to some regular ecclesiastical body.

1

About the close of the period which I attempted to describe in former lertters, the Rev. ASAHEL NETTLETON devoted himself to the work of an evangelist. With his eminent qualifications for this work, and usefulness in it, I presume you to be already well acquainted. The fact, however, which it is especially to my present purpose to mention, and which probably many of you do not know, is, that this distinguished itinerant, found no difficulty to labor, as an assistant of stated pastors, without making himself their rival. If in any instance he could not. conscientiously coincide in the views, or co-operate in the measures of a pastor, among whose charge he was invited to labor, he did not sow dissension in that church, nor seek to detach their affections from their minister; but quietly withdrew to another place. The consequence was, that the visits of this devoted servant of Christ, were always sought, and never dreaded nor regretted, by ministers or churches. But the signal success of his ministrations has called forth many others to labor in the same department, concerning some of whom, if we must admit that they have done good, we cannot but doubt whether they have not done much more harm. When invited to assist a stated pastor, or thrusting themselves forward, without invitation, they have been heady, sanguine, censorious; have aimed to subvert the influence of a Christian pastor, with the restless spirits of his own church, and perhaps in a few days have planted the seeds of mischief, that have sprung up in years of subsequent calamity. If I must say when and where a radically indiscreet man should preach the Gospel,-I would say never, nowhere. But if he must preach, then confine him to one spot, (where, if he kindles a blaze, it may perhaps consume his own hay, wood, and stubble,) instead of sending him to scatter fire-brands in all the churches.

As to the substitution of evangelists for stated pastors, I have already expressed the opinion that it is always undesirable, when it can be avoided. Candidates for the ministry are a kind of evangelists, and their services must be employed by vacant churches, in search of pastors. Churches may be so feeble too, that they must be satisfied with occasional ministrations of the word, because they cannot have stated pastors.

Perhaps you may farther inquire, how far may occasional or extraordinary means of religious excitement be relied on as a substitute for the regular, divinely appointed means of grace?