immediately the objects of Divine care, will have their path decorated with flowers-will enjoy an exemption from the losses, the afflictions of life. No, Sir; there are a variety of ways in which God steps forward to the aid of these, under the severest exercises, while the wicked are frequently abandoned to themselves, or, in his own language, "lightly esteemed."

If Mr. Wainewright will insist upon the Methodists using the phrase-an extraordinary Providence, as distinct from a particular one, they would probably define it thus, viz. That which is either extremely rare in its occurrence-unaccountable in its nature, but evidently marked as an immediate interposition of God-or highly important in its results, whether it regards religion or human life. Mr. W. admits that the Jews were under "an extraordinary Providence,”* but contends, as you have seen, Sir, that it "ceased with the age of miracles."+ In support of the last member of the sentence, we have, to use his own words in the case of the Methodists, only "confident assertions." There are three rocks on which he seems to split, and which it will be prudent to remove, to prevent further injury.

First, he establishes a necessary connection between an extraordinary Providence and the introduction of religion

"the revelations of the Divine will from the patriarchal age to the advent of Christ," as though it were not equally necessary during its establishment. Admitting the solidity of this, for the sake of argument, Christianity has yet to be introduced among the heathen, to whom it is perfectly novel. We plead for no miracles-for no extraordinary gifts of the Spirit; yet the bare preaching of the word will not be sufficient evidence for their conviction-that they ought to embrace the gospel. The power of God must accompany it. This is it, its power to the heart, which constitutes its evidence, that it is Divine. And though a completely established religion, though revelation received the finishing hand hundreds of years ago, no man can read the hair-breadth + Page 63.

*Page 67-8.

+ Page 64.

escapes of pious Missionaries, without seeing extraordinary interpositions of God, unless he be among that class of people who "have eyes but see not." It is true, Mr. W. admits that when Judaism was an established religion, the Jews, nevertheless, had God's visible displays in providence." But though Judaism was not only introduded, but perpetuated, by signs and wonders, he strangely confines every thing of an extraordinary nature to the first propagation of the gospel he carries through one dispensation, that which terminates with the commencement of the other. The Old Testament, it will be conceded, is properly a history of God's dealings with his church, and with the world, in which is recorded his continual interposition, by way of judgment or mercy, according to their moral conduct or behaviour. And will it be denied, Sir, that the New Testament, as a whole, contains on the other hand, a history of the primitive Christian Church; while the Apocalypse in particular, furnishes us with an account of God's dealings with that Church, and with the world, to the end of time? In the book of Revelation, the most extraordinary things are recorded, many of which, according to our best chronologists, historians, and commentators, have actually taken place, while others, equally extraordinary, have yet to be accomplished. To notice but one, it must be an extraordinary Providence, that will bring the Jews to their own land; and an extraordinary display of the power of Divine grace, that will bring them to a profession of Christianity. If" an extraordinary Providence ceased with the age of miracles," what extraordinary Providence, now that miracles have ceased, preserves them a distinct people? With the Apocalypse before us, an extraordinary Providence meets us full in the front, in every direction. "The book of the Apocalypse," says Dr. Adam Clarke, "may be considered as a PROPHET continued in the church of God, uttering predictions relative to all times, which have their successive fulfilment as ages roll on; and

* Page 63-4.

thus it stands in the Christian church in the place of the suc CESSION OF PROPHETS in the Jewish church; and by this especial economy PROPHECY IS STILL CONTINUED, is always SPEAKING; and yet a succession of prophets rendered unnecessary." Is it not fair to infer, Sir, that what was necessary under the establishment of one religion-the Jewish, and of one people-the people of God, is equally requisite for the well-being of the other? We behold the same God--the same church, though under different names, and in different dispensations--the religion of both established— the people equally dear to God-equally exposed as creatures. Considering the subject thus, it is impossible to yield assent to the declaration of Mr. W. where he remarks, "That signal instances of the Divine interposition have occurred in distant ages, and on occasions involving consequences of general concern, cannot be allowed to justify the conclusion that similar cases exist in the present condition of mankind."* It will be difficult to give weight to any argument which goes to prove, that the same extraordinary Providence, continued through the whole of one dispensation, should not be continued through the dispensation succeeding; especially when the moving cause, the reason, and the necessity of the case, are the same. This may be deemed presumptive evidence, at least, in favour of its perpetuity.

Secondly, Mr. Wainewright improperly associates an extraordinary Providence with miracles, as though necessarily connected, or in any wise dependent upon each other; and hence affirms, that, since miracles have ceased, "we have no authority for expecting its revival before the dissolution of the world."+ Thus, Sir, whatever reveries we may indulge ourselves in respecting an extraordinary Providence in another world, we are to abandon ourselves to despair relative to any thing of the kind "before the dissolution" of this. So strong is the colouring in which Mr. W. paints the subject before us, that the Methodists would be afraid of its

adoption; and it is apparently depicted thus, either with a view to prevent their future use of it, or for the purpose of rendering them ridiculous. Let them explain their own meaning, and not any thing objectionable will appear. What is Mr. W.'s definition of an extraordinary Providence? "A marked deviation from the usual course of these general laws," that is, the general laws of nature. And what is

a miracle? The general opinion is, that it is "An extraordinary operation of God, against the known course, and settled laws of nature, appealing to the senses."+ Where then is the difference between Mr. W.'s extraordinary Providence and a miracle? Though he speaks particularly of God's government over man, yet he does not confine himself to it; but extends his remarks to "the constant energy of the Supreme Being, exerted throughout every part of his works, and never withheld even for a moment from the

* Page 77.

+ Fleetwood on Miracles, p. 2.

An infidel of some celebrity has nearly made the same mistake, relative to occasional or extraordinary interpositions of Providence, only positively affirming them to be miracles. "Such," says he, "they would be strictly, whether they were contrary to the established course of nature or not; for the miracle consists in the extraordinary interposition, as much as in the nature of the thing brought to pass: That the miracle would be as real in the one case as the other: and the reality might be made evident enough by the occasion, by the circumstance, by the repetition of it on similar occasions, in similar circumstances; and, above all, by this circumstance, that the assumed particular Providence was a direct answer to particular prayers and acts of devotion offered up to procure it."-Bollingbroke's Works, vol. v. p. 458, 459.

The principal difference between Mr. W. and Bollingbroke seems to lie in the design; the one confounding them, perhaps innocently, and the other wickedly. Leland's reply to his Lordship is short, but explicit. "Here he takes upon him to give a new and arbitrary definition of a miracle. Though a thing hath nothing in it contrary to the established course of nature, yet it is to be regarded as a miracle, if there be supposed to be any special agency of the Divine Providence in it, suited to particular occasions and circumstances; and, above all, if it be supposed to come in answer to prayer. But if the occasional interpositions he refers to, be perfectly agreeable to the general laws of nature and of Providence, and be only special applications of general laws to particular occasions, I do not see how they can be properly said to be miraculous at all; or how their being supposed to come in answer to prayer can make them so."-View of Deistical Writers, vol. i. p. 467, 468.

M

minutest and the most insignificant objects of his creation;" and considers an extraordinary Providence, "a marked deviation from the usual course of these general laws."* Now, Sir, the Methodistical definition of an extraordinary Providence, which I trust I have hit upon, makes the distinction between it and a miracle, obvious to every discerning mind. If the two subjects be so distinct, what necessity is there, as intimated by Mr. W. in the same page, for "the powerful evidence of miracles" as a support? Where is the necessity of miracles in this instance? Is not an extraordinary Providence itself an appeal to the senses? a case in which God speaks to the eye and the ear? In the case of any doctrine purely speculative, the propriety of miracles is at once apparent; because in that instance, there is an appeal made to one sense for the conviction of another; or, in other words, an appeal to the eye for the conviction of the mind. But here it is otherwise; for God intends, by every remarkable Providence, to render his agency strikingly visible to man. Should the interposition be so dubious as to render a miracle necessary to produce conviction, it immediately destroys the right of that Providence to the epithet extraordinary. What is extraordinary must be convincing; or, at least, accomplish its end in the hand of God.

Thirdly, In the views of Mr. W. an extraordinary Providence is confined to religion alone, while any separate portion of its possessors are denied as its objects. "By an extraordinary Providence," says he, "we understand a marked deviation from the usual course of these general laws, for effecting some design of the highest concern, not to the prosperity of individuals, or the interests of a party, but to the advancement of the only true religion, and the ultimate

* Page 77.

+ Though both an extraordinary Providence, and miracles, may be considered as an appeal to the same senses, it may be argued that the latter carries a higher degree of evidence for the satisfaction of the spectator, than the former. This will be allowed in a Methodist, but not in Mr. W.'s case, because his extraordinary Providence approaches so near to miracle as to render the vidence almost the same.

t