gressive than is a change of purpose, which every day's observation and experience prove may be sudden and immediate.

We are saying nothing now in defence of the current notion of miraculous conversion. There need be nothing miraculous in such a change of purpose and of will as involves a change of character, more than in a change of purpose in regard to matters morally indifferent. Both proceed from causes, and may be brought to pass by a single new truth, or by perceiving a truth already familiar in a single new aspect. It is so in common life. A young man, doated upon by a widowed mother and affectionate sisters, whose presence, sympathy, and support are necessary to their daily comfort and peace, is burning with a desire for adventure in the modern land of Ophir. His mother and sisters have pleaded with him in vain that he would consider their need, put away his adventurous spirit, and remain with them to solace their days. He is deaf to their entreaties, and seems bereft of filial and fraternal affection. To-day he meets with one who has had five years' experience in that land. One fortunate word from his lips sinks into the heart of that young man, and with the quickness and power of lightning changes his entire purpose, and sends him home a devoted son and an affectionate and faithful brother. Now, we do not present this case as an example of Christian redemption; but we do present it as an illustration of the suddenness with which such redemption may take place. It does not meet the point to say that, ordinarily, it does not transpire thus suddenly. It is sufficient for my present purpose, that it may transpire thus suddenly, and that new truth, or new phases of old truth, are the procuring cause thereof. Even if the immediate evil be a wrong direction of the affections, we must still rely upon a clearer presentation of truth for its correction. That clearer truth may reach the heart through a formal statement, a providential illus. tration, or the bitter experiences of evil itself. But reach it howsoever it may, the revolution of all that is wrong in character may be entire and at once.

In thus depending upon Divine truth as the efficacious instrumentality in human redemption, it is believed we not only conform to sound philosophy, but to the testi

mony of revelation. Peter speaks of "being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth forever. .. . . And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you." Paul, also, calls the gospel "the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth." 8 And Christ himself, after having said, "it is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing," pointedly adds, "the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life." 9 They communicate to the soul that understands them, the very spirit of God-his affection towards it,—and his purposes concerning it,-and thereby awaken it into a holy and divine life.

From what has now been submitted, it will be seen that we cannot affirm that absolute permanence is a quality of character. We cannot affirm that character has a certain momentum which will carry it forward unchanged to any given period. Say what we will of the strong laws of character, the truth of God is infinitely stronger; and until we have determined what measure of that truth shall be addressed to the soul tomorrow, or next year, or in the morn of the immortal day, we cannot determine what revolutions shall then be experienced. That character has its laws, there can be no doubt. That uniformity, at some periods, and under certain influences, and revolution, at other periods and under other influences, result from those laws, there can be no doubt. If, however, there is a general uniformity in individual character through a given period, it is because there is a general uniformity in the moral influences affecting character through that period. Special causes here, as everywhere else, produce special results. Of this we have a notable example in the conversion of Saul of Tarsus. We do not regard this conversion as miraculous, although a miracle was wrought in furtherance of it. It was most natural that such a display of the Divine glory as was presented to Saul, should send conviction to his soul. It did so, suddenly, momentarily; and, speaking from the Christian stand-point, it revolutionized his whole character. All his abilities, personal endowments, and

7 1 Pet. i. 23-25.

8 Rom. i. 16.

9 John vi. 63.

rare energy, which had till then been arrayed against Christianity, were now made to subserve the cause of the Master. The purpose which moved him, and which gave character to him, and to all he did, was a new purpose. Hitherto unchristian, it had now become Christian. had seen his sinfulness, and experienced Divine forgiveness. He who before was the "chief of sinners," now "rejoiced with joy unspeakable and full of glory."

Now, it is worthy of remark, that this is not a case of progress, or simple growth, strictly speaking; it is a revolution. Morally, Paul is another man than Saul of Tarsus. Saul was out of Christ-was an enemy to him. Paul was "in Christ," and was therefore "a new creature." He had something still to learn; but this revolution, as a preparatory step, was necessary to his learning it. Some would have us believe that Paul's case was one of mere developement, or at all events of "gradual progress," and that he was characteristically the same after his conversion as before." If judged by the current impression made by his personal abilities, he was much the same. The current impression which a man makes, depends mainly upon those qualities which form the visible contour of the man. One's clearness of perception, justness of discrimination, tenacity of thought, strength of purpose, ardency of temperament, depth of emotion, commanding presence, and physical vigor-these are among the qualities most readily recognized, and which, therefore, enter largely into each individual picture. But, resting in these, we can affirm neither good nor evil of a man. His moral expression depends upon the inner life of these qualities-their direction, object, and aim.

It is plain, then, a man's moral character may be quite transformed without affecting materially the lineaments of the picture alluded to above. Every noticeable element of his individuality not pertaining strictly to the moral domain, remains the same; and to the casual observer there may seem to have been the slightest possible change. But in the displacing of selfishness, ambition, or sensuality, by loyalty to conscience and to God, the revolution of character is marked and entire. Such a man has 11 Univ. Quar., vol. ii., p. 571.

become virtuous by a proces in no wise analogous to the acquisition of knowledge. When, therefore, it is said that virtue, like knowledge, is "acquired gradually," 12 there is a want of discrimination. If reference is had to the condition of the soul in regard to its spiritual subordination, which constitutes essential virtue, there are cases, certainly, in which it is not true. But if it be meant that the loyal soul, in its general perception of fitness and outward acts, grows into conformity to highest law with its growth in knowledge, it must be granted. Virtue, however, does not inhere in the act, but in the spirit dictating the act. Such cases, therefore, are not so much examples of growth in virtue as in knowledge.

Observe, further, that all growth is not necessarily in a right line, or by the most legitimate means. When an adult has just begun to cherish the Christian life, he is not an infant in his power to do good, nor, let me add, in his power to be good. Though the loves of his soul have hitherto been unholy, his emotional and affectional natures are no more in their infancy, than are his intellectual and physical natures. And when by the attuning power of Divine truth, or of any peculiar providence, he comes to be actuated by the Christian's purpose and motive, it does not follow that the manifestations of his new life will be feeble or infantile. It is asked, "Was even Paul as morally capacious as if he had not been Saul?" 13 We answer, unhesitatingly, yes; much more so. Suppose

Saul stricken out, and Paul the infant, and Paul the Christian, brought into close juxtaposition; and the fact will be perfectly manifest. Saul's experience undoubtedly developed, in a measure, his moral powers. Otherwise there would have been no correspondence between hating Saul's efficiency in evil and converted Paul's efficiency in good. It is at least an open question, whether the vigor of Nero's hate does not imply a vigorous emotional and affectional nature, and therefore an ability vigorously to love. But, however this question may be decided, it is idle to affirm that an adult unchristian man comes to Christianity with an affectional nature wholly unexercised, and therefore undeveloped. It may have found exercise in a wrong direction, and upon rela

12 Univ. Quar., vol. ii., p. 256. 13 Univ. Quar., vol. ii., p. 270.

tively unprofitable or sinful objects; nevertheless, there may have been gained an increase of power, and a more comprehensive grasp. Who can doubt that Kepler became a greater astronomer for having been an astrologer, though it now be proved that astrology is no science?

It may be granted that a legitimate exercise of these powers would prove most favorable to their growth. An enlightened worship of the true God is undoubtedly better fitted to impart strength, than is a superstitious worship of idols, or reverence of cardinals and popes; but it does not follow that the latter adds nothing to the strength of the powers it calls into exercise. If, by the question already noticed, it was only intended to apply this principle to Paul's case, I should have little to object. Much of the reasoning on this point, however, implies that a course of evil leaves our moral powers dormant; while a misuse of a power decreases the power itself. By such a rule, the ability of a child to love, whose early training was in hatred, would begin at nothing and grow immediately less. But numerous facts show that desperate characters, whose early training was almost wholly in evil, and who were ignorant of the bliss of being loved, often respond to the first sunshine of affection with a richness of nature far above the average. This much, at least, must be conceded. There is no scientific and necessary agreement between the growth of powers and the quality of character.

But, it may be replied, it is not contended that all growth raust be in goodness; but that all goodness comes by growth. This assumption is virtually what we have felt constrained to deny. The denial, however, is not that there is some connexion between what the unconverted man was, and what the converted man is. It is not that all the personal characteristics of the man, not directly moral, may remain and make up much of the same visible contour as before. But what we deny is, that goodness is a simple developement or growth; that a man adds virtue to his qualities in a manner at all analagous to that in which he adds an inch to his stature. What we affirm is, that there is such a thing as conversion; that conversion is not a developement, but a revolution; that