was not very systematic, nor very extensive; but they were pious, industrious, and altogether Calvinistic on the doctrine of the atonement. The character of the devotions of the western people was rather affectionate than intellectual. In many instances the sermons of the clergy, owing to the ardor of their zeal and the want of solid learning, were rather of the declamatory character.

I

In 1802, there was a great religious excitement, produced by some unknown individual, on Green Briar river, in west Virginia. It spread into Kentucky, and vast crowds of people, amounting to many thousands from distant parts, assembled at camp meetings, at which they spent many days and nights in devotional exercises. These exercises were accompanied with loud cries, groans, alarming bodily agitations and convulsions. During the first stages, it possessed all the features which characterized the Whitefieldian revival. 'It extended over the greater part of west Pennsylvania, west Virginia, and Ohio; every where possessing the same character. But in Kentucky and Ohio, a few of the leading ministers in promoting it went to lengths of extravagance, which alarmed the more sober part of those Christians who approved it, and thought it a glorious revival. The Rev. Messrs. Marshall, Stone, Dunlevi, and M⭑Nemar, were the leaders in these extravagancies. When their brethren would not go the whole length with them, they formed a presbytery, and in an exhibition of their principles which they published, renounced presbyterianism. Their first step was a rejection of the doctrine of decrees and definite atonement; their second, a renunciation of the atonement altogether; and their third, of presbyterianism. They now gave themselves up to extravagancies, which shock every feeling of decency. Had it not been for the efforts of the Rev. Dr. John P. Campbell, who published replies to their books, and refutations of their wild principles, the church in Kentucky and Ohio would have been almost overwhelmed by them. In this the doctor was aided by the ministers of all the other Presbyterian denominations who had opposed the revival from its commencement, as cha

racterized by enthusiasm, rather than by enlightened devotion.

The Rev. Mr. Marshall, the most intelligent of those who had gone to lengths so extravagant, was convinced of his errors, by reading in the Christian's Magazine, the essays on the atonement that have been mentioned before, as coming from the pen of Dr. M'Leod. He used his influence with his brethren to bring them to their right mind, and with some of them he was successful. They now made application to the General Assembly, to be restored to the communion of the church, which, after much deliberation, was granted to them.

When the revival was about subsiding in the western part of Pennsylvania, Dr. Watts' book, in which he teaches Sabellianism, was circulated and read by many who embraced this heresy. But when the excitement entirely passed away they seem to have returned to the orthodox faith. They were never brought before the judicatories of the church. A second instance in which this doctrine was brought before the General Assembly, was, in consequence of the publication of a book entitled the Gospel Plan, by the Rev. Mr. Davis. In this work, he revives the opinion of Piscator of France, and asserts that the suffering of the penalty of the broken covenant was all that Christ did in the room of sinners. He takes for granted the doctrine taught by President Edwards in his History of Redemption, that Christ owed obedience to the law for himself as a creature, and that hence his obedience can constitute no part of our justifying righteousness before God.

Mr. Davis' book was referred to the General Assembly, which appointed on it a committee, whose report, which was adopted, is as follows:

"The committee presuming that a complete enumeration of all the objectionable parts of said book is not expected, called the attention of the Assembly only to the following doctrines, supposed to be contrary to the Confession of Faith of the Presbyterian church.

"Doctrine 1st, That the active obedience of Christ con

stitutes no part of that righteousness by which a sinner is justified. See pages of said book, 257, 261, and 264; 3d corollary.

"Doctrine 2d, That obedience to the moral law was not required as the condition of the covenant of works. See pages 178 and 180. The aforesaid pages being read, it was on motion, Resolved, that this Assembly do consider these doctrines as contrary to the Confession of Faith of our church.

"Doctrine 3d, God himself is as firmly bound in duty (not obedience) to his creatures, as his creatures are bound in duty or obedience to him. See pages 164 and 166; also that God's will is not the standard of right and wrong. If God's will is the primary rule of his or our actions, he would be,-1. Entirely void of all holiness;-2. There could be no justice in God;-3. It would be impossible for God to be unchangeable;-4. If the will of God is the standard of right and wrong, then it would be no infringement on the divine character to be unfaithful to his word and promise. See pages 168, 171. These pages were read.

"Resolved, that without deciding on the question, whether these sentiments are contrary to our Confession of Faith, the Assembly consider the mode in which they are expressed as unhappy, and calculated to mislead the reader.

"Doctrine 4th, That God could not make Adam, or any other creature, either holy or unholy. See page 194, compared with 166.

"Doctrine 5th, Regeneration must be a consequence of faith. Faith precedes regeneration. See page 352.

"Doctrine 6th, That faith, in the first act of it, is not an holy act. See page 358. The pages above referred to being read, it was on motion, Resolved, That the Assembly do consider the three last mentioned doctrines contrary to the Confession of Faith of our church.

"Doctrine 7. That Christians may sin wilfully and habitually. See pages 532 and 534. These pages were read. "Resolved, That the Assembly consider the expressions in the pages referred to, as very unguarded; and so far as

they intimate it to be the author's opinion, that a person may live in habitual sin and yet be a Christian, the Assembly considers them contrary to the letter and spirit of the Confession of Faith of our church, and in their tendency highly dangerous.

"Doctrine 8th, If God has to plant all the principal parts of salvation in the sinner's heart, to enable him to believe, the gospel plan is quite out of his reach, and consequently does not suit his case; and it must be impossible for God to condemn a man for unbelief; for no just law condemns or criminates any person for not doing what he cannot do. See page 413. This page and several others on the same subject, being read,

"Resolved, That the Assembly do consider this last mentioned doctrine contrary to the Confession of Faith of our church.

"On the whole, Resolved, That this Assembly cannot but view with disapprobation various parts of the work entitled "The Gospel Plan," of which William C. Davis is stated in the title page to be the author.

"In several instances in this work modes of expression are adopted, so different from those which are sanctioned by use and by the best orthodox writers, that the Assembly consider them as calculated to produce useless or mischievous speculations.

"In several other instances, there are doctrines asserted and vindicated, as have been already decided, contrary to the Confession of Faith of our church, and the word of God, which doctrines the Assembly feel constrained to pronounce to be of very dangerous tendency; that the preaching or publishing them ought to subject the person or persons so doing to be dealt with by their respective presbyteries according to the discipline of the church relative to the propagation of errors."

In this business, the General Assembly acted with a noble firmness and decision, which we hope they will always display on similar occasions. Had the Reformed church in France used as much faithfulness, their affairs would not

have been reduced to such a state of desperation as they soon were by a contrary course.

Twenty years ago, there was scarcely one Hopkinsian minister connected with the General Assembly, and now we are astonished and alarmed at the rapid increase of them. In Kentucky, it is said that more than one half of the ministers belonging to the General Assembly are Hopkinsian, at least in part. The Boston Unitarians have their missionaries in that state, who are making some progress, but not among the Presbyterians. In the synod of Pittsburgh there are probably not more than three or four ministers who hold the doctrine of general or indefinite atonement; and of these one is a thorough disciple of Hopkins. But were the great question brought to a decision before the Assembly, the weight of that synod would be found in the orthodox scale; and it is a powerful body. Nearly all the presbyterian clergy in the state of Ohio, are anti-Hopkinsian. It is about twenty years since Hopkinsianism became known in the state of Tennessee. The Rev. Hezekiah Balch from that state, spent some time with Dr. Emmons, embraced his errors, and taught them both in the pulpit and in private. Many of his brethren soon imbibed them. The most distinguished of his converts is, the Rev. Gideon Blackburn, who was settled in the congregation of Maryville, in east Tennessee, where his ministry had been remarkably successful. Soon after he embraced Hopkinsianism, disturbances arose in his congregation, and he migrated to west Tennessee, where he opened a school, and was settled in the pastoral charge of a congregation. Dr. Coffin too, the principal of Washington College, came from Newburyport warm with the sentiments of Dr. Spring, and has taught them from the pulpit and the press. There is still in east Tennessee much opposition to Hopkinsianism. The Rev. Mr. Doak, principal of Greenville college, is a sound, sensible divine, and has educated a considerable number of clergymen, who unite with him in defence of the truth. Through the instrumentality of Mr. Doak, Mr. Balch was brought before the General Assembly at its sessions of 1798,