to the gospel, neither believing nor disbeliving it, and the suc cession of ideas and impressions on the mind, according to the particular disposition or circumstances of the person, and so as to answer the wisest and best ends.

The mind of man is not omniscient, and cannot attend to all things at one and the same time, or to two different and opposite objects with equal clearness, and be as much impressed by the one as by the other, at the same instant; it is under the direction and control of God. And as the nature and character of God, his law, and sin, or a person's own character in the light of these, must be first understood, and the mind must be thoroughly impressed with them, and con. sent to them as true, right, and important to be known, before, and in order to the gospel being understood and approved, the ideas and knowledge of the former must first be entertained by, and impressed on, the renewed mind, so as to bring it to a hearty submission, approbation, and compliance with them, before the latter can be received or understood. And as to the length of time and degree of this impression and work of the law upon the mind, before the gospel comes into view, it is wholly determined by God, so as to answer the best ends, and with a difference and variety on different minds, and in various circumstances, by us utterly indescribable.

That such a work of the law as has been described, or some thing of the same nature, must take place in the renewed mind antecedent to understanding and embracing the gospel, not only appears necessary from the reason and nature of things, but is evident and certain from divine revelation. The apostle Paul gives a particular account of the operation of the law on his mind antecedent to his receiving relief by the gospel. "I was alive without the law once; but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died. And the commandment which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death." The law did not come to him until his mind was renewed; for it could not have the operation here described on an unrenewed, impeni tent heart. He goes on to describe his case and his feelings. The law cursed all who were not, and had not been always, perfectly holy; he therefore, being carnal, or sinful, was sold under sin, unto death, the curse of the law. He consented to the law, that it was good, and delighted in it, after the inward man, and wished to obey it; but the evil inclination which was in him was leading him captive unto sin and death. In all this, Christ and the gospel are kept out of sight. He therefore cries out, "O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?" After this, Jesus Christ is introduced as affording complete relief. All previous to this

may take place in the renewed mind, before there is any particular discovery of Christ and the gospel, though much of it may be understood as expressing the character and exercises of a believer all his days. As the eyes of the two disciples going to Emmaus were for wise reasons holden, that they should not know Jesus when he joined them on the road, so for wise and more important reasons it may be ordered that the mind of the renewed sinner shall be so attentive to the law, and his case and circumstances, as being under the curse of it, and the eyes of his mind holden so as not to, attend to, or think of, the gospel for a time, just so long as God pleases, to answer the best ends - one of which may be more effectually to subdue and mortify the selfishness of the heart in a view and approbation of the holy, just, good, and glorious law of God which condemns him to eternal death, and to form his heart to that disinterested benevolence, in the exercise of which alone he will be prepared to understand the glory of the gospel, and cordially embrace it.

And here it may not be improper to inquire, whether submitting to the death, or dying the death, which the law pronounces, and which is contained in the curse of it, so as to consent, and delight in it as holy, just, and good, does not imply a willingness to suffer the curse of it, rather than to have God and his law dishonored by his escape from this punishment. Be this as it may, we learn with certainty from this passage that, first, Paul was converted by the law first coming to his renewed mind, prepared to receive it, by which his sin revived, and he found himself dead according to the sentence of the law, before he found relief by the gospel. And that the law must thus first come, before the grace of the gospel can give true relief, seems to be asserted when it is said, "The law was given by Moses; but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ." The Mosaic dispensation was designed to exhibit the law. This was foremost and most visible, and the grace of the gospel was revealed in a more dark and hidden manner, under types and shadows. The ten commandments were revealed in the form of law, and contained the whole of it. And the curses of this law all Israel were ordered to cause to be read before them as soon as they got into the land of Canaan, and to pronounce and declare their hearty consent to them. They were ordered to say, "Cursed be he that confirmeth not all the words of the law to do them. And all the people shall say, Amen." This was done before any blessing was brought into view, or mentioned; by which the whole congregation of Israel declared their hearty consent to the curse of the law, while it cursed them all, as they were all sinners.

As to the question, whether men ought or can be willing to be damned, if this be necessary for the glory of God and the greatest general good, I refer you to my letter to Mr. Fuller on that subject, and to a MS. Dialogue between a Calvinist and an anti-Calvinist, which I propose to get transcribed and send to you with this; in which you will see a solution of the following words in your letter: "It seems strange that a man should, from love to God, be willing forever to hate God, and blaspheme him."

Before this point is dismissed, I shall make some remarks on your following words: "What call have they to be willing to be damned, when God assures them that Christ is able and willing to save them, and can be glorified more in their salvation than in their damnation?" God does not assure any one of this but them who are sure that they do embrace the gospel, and are true Christians. They who are not assured of this cannot know that Christ is willing to save them, or that he can be more glorified in their salvation than in their damnation; and of the latter you appear to be speaking, by what goes before. If such can be sure of all this, they must be equally sure that all mankind will be saved; for Christ will in every instance do that which is more for his glory than the contrary; and we are most sure that he will save every one whose salvation will be more for his glory than his damnation. I know you are opposed to the doctrine of universal salvation; perhaps I misunderstood your words, and they may be taken. in another sense.

I come now to that which is to you the most puzzling point -the divine agency in respect to sin. You think we spend too much time, and take more pains, in explaining and vindicating the divine agency in the existence of moral evil than in proving that God is the Author of all moral good. Perhaps this is not strictly true. I appeal to my system, where, perhaps, I have said as much on this point as any writer, in the chapter on the Divine Decrees, yet not exclusive of any other important doctrine. It is of importance that the divine character should be vindicated in the existence of sin under his government, as well as in other events. And is it not proved to every candid mind that the divine will and agency is as necessary for the existence of moral evil as of any other event, and that it is abundantly asserted in Scripture; and that they who attempt to account for the existence of sin in any other way will find it is attended with as many difficulties and great absurdities?-that the divine character may be vindicated, and his holiness and infinite benevolence or goodness is not sullied in the least, but gloriously manifested and displayed,

and sin as criminal, and the sinner as blamable, as if God had no will or agency respecting the existence of it? You say, the evil consequence which men will draw from this doctrine, to their own hurt, will be fixed on their minds so as not to be removed by any thing we can say; therefore it were better not to mention it. May not this be as truly said of many, if not all the most important doctrines of divine revelation? and the mouths of objectors cannot be stopped. The same consequences which you have mentioned, and worse, have been, and now are, drawn by millions from the doctrine of predestination, of the decrees of God, particular election, etc.; yet you believe and preach up, and labor abundantly to explain and vindicate them, let who will violently oppose and abuse them by drawing the worst and most destructive and blasphemous consequences from them.

You want to know how we would obviate the consequences which the Hindoos in India infer from this doctrine, that God is the Author of all sin. We answer, we do not know the particulars of their doctrine, and that it is the same with ours, but presume it is quite different and absurd. But if it be the same which we hold, we have already shown, and abundantly proved, that the inferences which they or any one else make are wholly groundless and unreasonable. Witness President Edwards on Freedom of Will, Dr. West on Moral Agency, and the chapter on the Divine Decrees, before mentioned.

But you wish us to make the matter so clear as to be easily understood by the most unenlightened mind, and made obvious to every Sooder and Hindoo in India. You have set us a hard task indeed, but we take leave to set you another, which when you have performed, we promise to do ours. The inferences from the doctrine of the decrees of God, and many other doctrines which you hold and preach, which have been and are now made by the millions of British Hindoos and Sooders, from the highest lords, bishops, doctors of divinity, and the clergy, down to the lowest and most ignorant peasant, are wrong and absurd, and the inferences you make from these doctrines are right, and agreeable to Scripture. Now, if you will make the matter so clear and plain as to be easily understood, not only by the learned, judicious, and attentive, but the most unenlightened mind, and to become obvious and plain to the lowest and most stupid and ignorant person in Britain, then we shall think it an easy matter to perform what you request.

I can give no information concerning the MSS. of President Edwards, which were in the hands of Dr. Edwards when he died. I had not seen him for a number of years before his

VOL. II.

64

death, and fear they have fallen into hands who will let them sink into oblivion.

I have just entered on the eighty-third year of my age, and do not expect to preach or live much longer. Wish you may live many years, and do much good in the cause of Christ. Hope after that to meet you where Christ will abundantly reward his faithful servants.

I remain your assured friend and fellow-servant in the gospel,

REV. DR. RYLAND.

S. HOPKINS.

P. S. December 3.- Since the above was written, Dr. Hopkins has been very sick, so as life was despaired of; is now recovering, but unable to write or to read a word. He has had the above transcribed, and desires me to add, that he wishes the Rev. Dr. Ryland, Rev. Mr. Fuller, and Sutclif would consult together, and write and send the result. And, if they have no objection, perhaps the correspondence may be printed. Dr. Hopkins recommends Dr. Hart, of Preston, and Dr. Strong, of Hartford, as correspondents with whom you will be pleased. With very great respect, I am, reverend sir,

REV. DR. RYLAND.

Your friend and servant,

ELIZABETH HOPKINS.

SAVING FAITH.

[The following is one of the letters referred to in the Memoir, p. 222, etc., which were addressed by Dr. Hopkins to one of his English friends. It is one of the many proofs that Hopkins did a great work in enlightening the minds of men on the subject of saving faith.]

REV. AND DEAR SIR: I have lately been reading Hervey's Dialogues and Letters, which I some time ago heard you speak favorably of. I have been entertained and well pleased with the performance. The doctrines of man's depravity, and the sinner's justification by the imputed righteousness of Christ, are, I think, set in a strong and convincing light. The ingenious author has a peculiar talent at expressing his sentiments in elegant and charming language, suited — so far as I can judge to the taste of this polite age; and the lively and entertaining descriptions of nature interspersed will, I hope,