denial of the existence of Matter would, at first sight, appear to do. Yet 
here we have Mr. Spencer, the prince of materialists, actually carrying 
Berkeley’s views to an extreme never contemplated by their pro- 
pounder. 
Mr. Ground has done good service in pointing out the distinction between 
the metaphysical and the theological doctrines respecting the human will. 
As in the one, so in the other, there are various shades of opinion, the theo- 
logians believing that their views are in accordance with the Scriptures, 
while the metaphysicians consider theirs to be such as reason discovers. 
The various views prevalent among theologians divide conveniently into 
three primary ones: — 1, that of the Pelagians, who deny that the descendants 
of Adam and Eve are born with a nature prone to sin, and who, conse- 
quently, look upon all mankind as morally free, requiring no spiritual aid to 
counteract the allurements of “ the world, the flesh, and the devil ; ” 2, that 
of those who believe that all are born with the taint of original sin, and 
Avithout moral freedom until divine grace confers it upon them by restoring 
them to that “ image of God” which was lost to man through the Fall ; and 
that, when they are thus restored, they are free either to yield themselves to 
the divine influence or resist it, as their will may determine ; and, 3, that of 
those who, agreeing with the last-mentioned class in denying moral freedom 
to those unaided by grace, yet differ with them as to the effect of grace on 
the minds of those to whom it has once been imparted. Instead of holding 
that men are free to accept or reject spiritual influences, they believe that 
grace, once given, is irresistible, and that they to whom it is imparted, 
although still subject to sins and imperfections, will never be allowed to fall 
away finally and be lost. And inasmuch as the world, and even the Chris- 
tian Church, contains many who show no symptoms of that improvement of 
character which is a mark of divine grace, it is almost a necessary corollary 
from this third division ©f doctrine that grace is not offered to all, and that 
many are left in that helpless and enslaved state from which nothing that 
they can do will save them. And such, accordingly, is the view adopted by 
most of those who hold grace to be irresistible. 
The question. Which of these three theological views is the most conform- 
able to Scripture, is one of pure theology, and it would, as I conceive, be out 
of place to discuss it in these pages. It is more to the point to observe that 
that they all belong to a region quite apart from the metaphysical question. 
The most strenuous asserter of free-will in the theological sense, — the 
Pelagian, — might, without inconsistency (however untruly), deny it with Mr. 
Spencer in the metaphysical sense. All that the Pelagian cares to assert is 
that all men are born free from original sin, and do not require divine aid to 
keep them from offending God. It is enough for him, therefore, that the 
will should be uncontrolled, either by sinful propensities on the one hand, 
or by spiritual infiuences on the other. This conceded, it is a matter of 
indifference to him whether, as a metaphysical tenet, the relation of the will 
to the brain- molecules be held to be that of master or slave. He denies 
original sin. To the metaphysician of Mr. Spencer’s school it is a matter of 
