The Democratic sentinel. [volume] (Cadiz, Ohio) 1852-1853, 1853-07-27


very good. txeeptibe last. and what's tha,?
SEE Page (s-l 1T Is your duty to employ
sour time in the manner in which are direct;
in preaching and visiting from house to
house, in reading, medi;sIiOn, and prayer"
We inyOlunIarily exelaim admirable
whatcould be more scHP-ural and excellent
But, alas; the very nexlsenienee was dead
hy in the ointment ABcvE ALL. if you labor
with US in the Lords vinyard il is reedful
you should do b,O, part OF the work which
s0s advise, at those times AID places, which trs
Judge mostfor his glory" AJOrs all Abors
preaching, and visiting, aHd reading, and
meditation, and prayer! Above spending
and being spent for Christ, and holiness, and
the salvation of sOulsl Ajors oil Msse "rev-
emily OBEY your chief ministers" Does
this loSk Ike as if the bishop was no! an
order adOrg a priest or elder?
There i but one other point now wish
TO NOTICE; viz; the extract yoa have made
from the Docirinal TRACTS. "You quote
IRON it 50 largely" YOU say. that the
readers Of The Sentinel may fully nnder-
stand this matter" l nm glad You have
done SO. It gives the an opportunity m'rs
fully and clearly to prove the misrepresen.
Iations Of Mr. Wesley. It is little sur
prisjng that he General Conference should
sanction the publication of this extract con-
tanned in their Doctrual Tracts which is
replete with Misrepresentation. And yet
yoN haYe the assurance to say Of What you
quoted, "This is no misrepresentation Of
old school Calyini,m." Surely you must
think Mr.. Wesley inlalible, and impIicitey
receive what he says, without douotins Of
its truth or the correctness of the reasoning.
Look at the mode of reasoning throughout
the extract you have quoted. A sentence
is taken from Toplady'S tract, and the
question asked. WHO can deny the con
sequce? Another question, land it follows
or she consequence follows &c. Where is
the reasoninl here? there is scmblcnce of
reasoning which may deceive the iii ierate,
but not a singl+ argument, 10 sustain the
conclusion. l will now quote paragraph
which has more appearance Of reasoning
than any other, AMI show the failagy Of it
Mir Toplady says" God has positive
will to destroy the repro5ate for their sins. "
(chap. 1.) For their sins! Hoy can that
be? l positively assert, that ION this chemrl
they have no sins at all. They never had;
they can have none. For it cannot be a
sin in a spark to rise, or i'll stone to fall.
And the spark q the stone is no: mere
necessarily determined either to rise, CT fall
than man is to sin, 10 commit rape, or adul-
terry, OF murder
Look at this reasoning. The proposition
is. that the reprobate are destroyed for their
sins. This is denied, and how it the denial
supported? Why, because there is no sin
in spark rising, or in a stone falling.
We will throY it in the form OF sYllog-
ism, which will more readily detect the fall
lacy. The reprobate have no sins at all
1t is no sin in spark to rise, or in to fall
Therefore the reprobate have no sins at all.
The error in this reasoning is, that the
minor proposition is not one of The class Of
facts, which areincuded under the Major. A
moral. intelligent, and accountable being,
with an inanimate object, and
therefore the conclusion is false.
Again look at the inconsistency Of the
argument. He here argues that man has
no sin, and in the same breath, declares that
they are under greater necessity Of sin
ming than, is stone to fall. Admirable
consistency.
But / have said that he misreprescn-
ted Mr.. Toplady end proceed now to Sub
stantiate the charge. He says, II positively
assert, that on this scheme) they have no
sic at ALL" on what scheme? The doctrine
of Divine Dicrees. Now the chief fallacy
in lis reasoning on this subject consists, IN
dstorting the doctrine, by leaving out of
,iew, most important fact; fact that leads
o afar differen! conclusion. This is the Doc.
rine of mans free ogsncy. Herein consists
he misrepresentation
Now Mr.. Wesley held the doctrine of
Mans free agency, and he also knew that
sr. Toplady held the same doctrine: ssdoes
Every Calvinist. What are we to under
stand by Mans free Agency.
Ais nothing more n0r less than acting
n;tEout compulsion, and in accordance soith
me: desires and iecIinations. The mind is
rec, if it is capable of considering the mo-
ives to action which may be placed before
t, and of chosing its own course. All the
.ffections of the human heart are in their
cry nature free.. The idea of compelling
nan either to love, or hate an object, is
perfectly absurd We hold then thata man
) from the very nature Of his mind, free
norar agent, and if so he is accountable for
II his actions. Now this every man feels.
lie is conscious ofacting, in all he does, as
free agent. His conscience yeproves him
he acts contrary to the law Of God. He
,els that he is sinner, and dying such is
..ot.... IL e.. La ninr Innrn thn dnntrinn