on becoming a Catholic, but what Protestantism is, as understood by those who profess it?"

“ But, if you were not fully informed as to what Protestantism really was, how could you know that in abjuring it you were not abjuring the truth »

“ He who has the truth has no need of knowing the systems opposed to it, in order to know that they must be false. But suppose you proceed with your definition. You profess to be a Protestant, and so able, experienced, and learned a man cannot be supposed to profess to believe he knows not what. If you know what it is, you can easily tell me.”

“I will give you Dr. Owen's definition. I dare say your brother has never read Owen's works, nor Boston's, nor those of any other man who was in breeches fifty years ago. It is a shame to think how the old worthies are neglected. Nobody reads them now-a-days. The study of school divinity is wholly neglected. Our theologians are frightened at a folio, tremble at a quarto, can hardly endure even an octavo. The demand is for works, "short, pithy, and pungent.” It is the age of petty Tracts, Penny Magazines, Peter Parleys, Robert Merrys, trash, nonsense, and humbug."

" “ And yet it is the glorious age on which the glorious sun of the glorious Reformation beams in all its effulgence. If the Reformers were here, they would exclaim, Et tu, Brute !"

“I hope Mr. Wilson will not heed my brother's sneer ; but proceed with his definition.”

“ Brother Milwood, have you Owen's works? No? No, I dare say not. But I presume you have Dowling, D’Aubigné, and the last new novel.”

" I do not read novels."

“ The best thing you have said for yourself yet. Well, I see I must quote from memory. Protestantism, - remember I quote the great Dr. Owen, one of those sound old English divines who cared as little for Prelacy as for Papacy, and would no more submit to king than to pope. They were the men. It will be long before we shall look upon their like again. They were God's freemen. The pomps and vanities of the world could not dazzle or blind them. They cared not for crown or mitre, and the blood of a king was to them as the blood of a common man. They went straight to their object. England was not worthy of them. The Lord directed them here. Here they laid the foundations of a noble empire. This is their work; this land is their land, and their children's after

them, and a crying shame is it, that a miserable, idolatrous Papist should be suffered to pollute it with his accursed foot." "But you are thinking of the Independents, rather than of the Presbyterians. The Presbyterians were for king and covenant, and pretend to have disapproved of the execution of Charles Stuart." "No matter. The Independents only completed what the Presbyterians began, and soon sunk into insignificance when left to struggle alone. In the glorious war against Prelacy and Papacy they were united as brothers, as I trust will always be their children."

"But the definition."

"Remember, I quote the words of the great Dr. Owen, great and good, notwithstanding he left the Presbyterians and became a Congregationalist ;- excepting in matters of church government, rigidly orthodox, and as much superior to the degenerate race of ministers in our day, as a huge old folio is to a modern penny tract, and whose works I recommend to both of you to read. Protestantism is, 1. What was revealed unto the Church by our Lord and his Apostles, and is the whole of that religion which the Lord doth and will accept. 2. So far as needed unto faith, obedience, and salvation of the Church, what they taught, revealed, and commanded is contained in the Scriptures of the New Testament, witnessed unto and confirmed by the Old. 3. All that is required, that we may please God, and be accepted with him, and come to the eternal enjoyment of him, is that we truly and sincerely believe what is so revealed and taught, yielding sincere obedience unto what is commanded in the Scriptures. 4. If in any thing they [Protestants] be found to deviate from them, if it [what they teach] exceed in any instance what is so taught and commanded, if it be defective in the faith or the practice of any thing so revealed or commanded, they are ready to renounce it.' What do you ask more clear, brief, comprehensive, and precise than that?"

"Did our Lord and his Apostles reveal any religion which they did not reveal to the Church, or which God doth not and will not accept?"

"Of course not."

"Then Mr. Owen might have said simply, Protestantism is what was revealed by our Lord and his Apostles unto the Church."

"Perhaps he might."

"What was so revealed is the true religion, is it not?"

"It is."

"Then he would have said all, if he had said, Protestantism is the true religion."

"Be it so."

"If you will now tell me what is the true religion, you will tell me what Protestantism is."

"Mr. Owen tells you in his second article." "I beg your pardon.

He tells me in that where the true

religion is, so far as needed; but not what it is.” "In his third article, then."

"Not in that; for in that he simply tells me, that, if I believe and obey the true religion, so far as contained in the Scriptures of the New Testament, I have all that God requires of me."

"Well, in the fourth."

"But that simply informs me, that, if Protestants have mistaken the true religion, if they contend for more or for less than is contained in the Scriptures, they are ready to renounce it; although whether by it is to be understood true religion, the mistake, the excess, or the defect, he does not inform me. So, you perceive, I am not as yet told what Protestantism is." "But you are told where it is, and that is enough."

"That may or may not be. The cook knew where the teakettle was when it fell overboard, but nevertheless he could not get it to make the captain's tea."

"It is in the New Testament, witnessed unto and confirmed by the Old. You can go there and find it for yourself." "Has it any mark by which I may recognize it when I see it ?"

"If you seek, you shall find.

shall find. Our Lord himself says that, and I hope you will not dispute him."

"Does he say, if you seek in the Scriptures of the New Testament, you shall find ?"

"Not expressly."

"Do all who seek in those Scriptures find?"

"All who faithfully study them and rightly understand them."

"Do all who attentively read them rightly understand them ?"

"No; some wrest them to their own destruction, and bring in damnable heresies."

“You have faithfully studied and rightly understand them?"

" I think so.

« Lest I should be one of those who wrest them to my own destruction, suppose you tell me what is the true religion which they contain, or which I ought to find in them."

“ If you are one who would wrest the Scriptures to your own destruction, you would do the same with my statement of what they contain. I should do you no good by complying with your request. If you believe not Moses and the prophets, neither will you believe me.'

“How, then, am I ever to know certainly what this thing you call Protestantism, and say is the true religion, really is ? »

“ Read your Bible, Sir, with humble submission, without any reliance on yourself, with sincere and earnest prayer to the Holy Ghost to enlighten you, and you will be led into all truth."

" Perhaps so. But our question is not, What is truth? but, What is Protestantism ?

• Have I not told you Protestantism is the true religion ? He, then, who is led to the truth must needs be led to Protestantism."

“I stand corrected. But since some do wrest the Scriptures to their own destruction, and bring in damnable heresies,' how do you determine infallibly that you may not yourself be one of them ? "

“ I am accustomed, Sir, to being treated with respect, and I trust you mean me no insult.”

“ They who are accustomed to be treated with respect are, in general, slow to think themselves insulted. If Mr. Wilson does not know infallibly that he rightly understands the Scriptures, he cannot deny that it is possible he may be wresting them to his own destruction."

“ Through God's distinguishing grace vouchsased to me, for no worthiness of mine, I have been enabled to see and know the truth.”

“ Is that same grace vouchsafed to all ?"

" To all whom God has preordained unto everlasting life ; but those whom he has from all eternity reprobated to everlasting death, for the praise of his vindictive justice, he leaves to their reprobate sense, to their own blindness, and even sends them strong delusions, that they may believe a lie and be damned."

" And these never had it in their power to come to the knowledge of the truth and be saved ?"

“ If they had willed.”
“ Were they ever able to have willed ? "
“ Naturally, yes; morally, no.”
“But actually ?”

“No. Those whom God ordains to everlasting death he ordains to sin, that they may be damned justly.”

" That is a hard doctrine, Brother Wilson. It was taught indeed by the great Calvin, whom God so highly favored, but it is not now generally taught by Presbyterians. The doctrine of God's decrees is, indeed, full of secret comfort to the elect, but it needs to be handled with great prudence, and is to be meditated in our closets rather than made the basis of our instructions to others. Sinners do not and cannot understand it. They only make a mock of it, and it proves to them the savor of death unto death."

“ There it is! The time has come when the people will no longer hear sound doctrine, when it is imprudent to declare the whole counsel of God. Hence the race of weak and puny saints, who must be fed on milk, and that diluted. Very well, I must leave you to manage the discussion in your own way ; but be on your guard. The time is not far distant, if things proceed as they have done for a few years back, when you will have no Protestantism to define or defend, but each man will have a gospel of his own. Good morning, gentlemen.'

IV. The conversation was not resumed for several days. James found it a less easy task to define Protestantism than he had imagined. He had been accustomed to take the word in a very loose and indefinite sense. As chief of the Protestant League, he had meant by it little else than the denial of Catholicity ; in his warfare against Socinians, Rationalists, and Transcendentalists, he had made it stand for doctrines and principles which logically implied the Catholic Church ; in his own pulpit, addressing the people of his charge, he had understood by it simply Presbyterianism, with a slight leaning, perhaps, towards Arminianism. But he had never given the term a clear, distinct, and uniform meaning, which he was willing to stand by in all places and on all occasions. He saw that to define it in a negative sense, and make Protestantism merely a protest against Rome, was not necessarily to distinguish it from paganism, Mahometanism, Judaism, deism, or even atheism ; and to restrict it to simple Presbyterianism, if not against his