Precisely the process which The General thus describes in his own case
must of necessity follow any thoughtful and prayerful consideration of
the mission and Gospel of Christ. Either we must reject the whole Bible
story or we must admit that "all we like sheep have gone astray," taking
our own course, in contempt of God's wishes. To be convinced of that
must plunge any soul into just such a depth of sorrow and anxiety as
left this lad no rest until he had found peace in submission to his God.
No outside influences or appearances can either produce or be
substituted for the deep, inward resolve of the wandering soul, "I will
arise, and go to my Father." Whether that decision be come to in some
crowded Meeting, or in the loneliness of some midnight hour is quite
unimportant. But how can there be true repentance, or the beginning of
reconciliation with God, until that point is reached?

And whenever that returning to God takes place, there is the same
abundant pardon, the same change of heart, the same new birth, which has
here been described. What can be more simple and matter of fact? Take
away the need and possibility of such "conversion," and this whole life
becomes a delusion, and the proclamation of Jesus Christ as a Saviour of
men inexcusable. What has created any mystery around the question
amongst Christians, if not the sacramental theory, which more or less
contradicts it all? In almost all Christian Churches a theory is set up
that a baby by some ceremonial act becomes suddenly regenerated, "made a
child of God, and an heir of His Kingdom."

If that were the case, there could, of course, have been no need for the
later regeneration of that child; but I do not believe that an
ecclesiastic could be found, from the Vatican to the most remote
island-parish where children are "christened," who would profess to have
seen such a regenerated child alive. There is notoriously no such change