tibrwp of Che theological Seminary PRINCETON • NEW JERSEY PRESENTED BY Miss M. Miller BT 96 ,D8 1836 Duncan, John M. 1790-1851 Lectures on the general principles of moral Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2010 with funding from Princeton Theological Seminary Library http://www.archive.org/details/lecturesongenera1836dunc LECTURES, '»' MAR 2 191- ON THE St, !ML 'LES S$S OF MORAL GOVERNMENT, A3 THEY ABE EXHIBITED IN THE FIRST THREE CHAPTERS OF GENESIS. BY JOHN M. DUNCAN, Pastor of the Associate Reformed Congregation of Baltimore. In the beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. — John i. 1. The Word was made Flesh, and dwelt among us; and we behold his glory, the glory as of the onlv begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth. — John i 14. Every one of us shall give account of himself to God. — Rom. xiv. 12. SECOND EDITION, REVISED AND ENLARGED. VOL. I. BALTIMORE : CUSHING & SONS 1836. Entered according to the Act of Congress, in tfte year 1836, by Joseph Cushing, Joseph Cushing, Jr. and John Cushing, in the Clerk's Office of the District Court of Maryland. PRINTED BY LUCAS AND DEAVER. PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. The public having, as is supposed, called for a reprint of the "Lectures on the General Principles of Moral Govern- ment," the Author has availed himself of the opportunity to extend his illustrations of those principles. — Trinity — the term Person — election — divine power — and the relations of infants both ecclesiastical and moral, are the principal topics, on which he offers some new observations. The reader will find this additional matter in the fifth, tenth, thirteenth, sixteenth and seventeenth lectures of the pre- sent series. Several paragraphs on the same, or on other general subjects, and which are scattered through the work, may readily be recognised as now appearing the first time. The discussion has been very much amplified ; but no change has been introduced, which would affect the integ- rity of the argument as formerly stated. Perhaps some of the illustrations of the subject of Trinity, and of the scrip- tural phrases under which it is supposed to be expressed, might have been exchanged for those which a more extend- ed investigation has afforded. But they have for the most part, and indeed always excepting in the use of the term person and its adjuncts, been permitted to remain in their own connexions ; and the reader has been left to judge of the comparative merits of both for himself. And this has been done the more readily, because the Author imagines that, if his first principles be scriptural, and if his conclu- sions be accurate, a new systematic arrangement of moral iv PREFACE. doctrines will be required. In that case, or when the com- munity shall have perceived the necessity for, and duly ap- preciated the character of, such an arrangement, a thousand pens more prompt, more able and better pointed than his own, will do ample justice to the general discussion. The Author would farther improve the opportunity now afforded, to state precisely the object of his argument, and the principle on which his argument rests. This, it was supposed, had been done with great distinctness in the Lec- tures themselves ; and even with a frequency that seemed to be almost wearisome. It would appear, however, that he was mistaken in his impressions ; as, in many instances, the argument has not been apprehended, and the difficulty thrown, as might have been expected, from the mind of the reader, is set down as the fault of the writer. He would therefore, in the hope that his preface may be read, now say, that his object is to exhibit and illustrate the scriptu- ral doctrine of personal responsibility ; and that his prin- ciple is, that man has no innate ideas — that he cannot com- prehend a pure abstraction — that he acquires his ideas by means of his corporeal senses — and that the knowledge which he may possess is conveyed to his mind by external symbols. The object is never forgotten through the en- tire discussion ; and the principle is uniformly sustained, by applying it to all the relations which man holds, in view both of persons and things, both of creation and redemption. The doctrines which are advanced in reference to Trinity, and the original government by law — to the Mediator and the remedial government by gospel — to the material universe, and to positive institutions under both the legal and evan- gelical administrations, are framed in connexion with that object, and result from the application of that principle. PREFACE. V The reader therefore, if he wishes to apprehend the doc- trines proposed, to understand the reasonings by which they are enforced, and to deal candidly with the author as a man like himself, must bear both the object and the principle in mind. The argument will otherwise be necessarily obscure to him, and his criticism will be more loquacious than ac- curate ; but the fault will be his own. No system, human or divine, physical or moral, political or ecclesiastical, can ever be fairly appreciated by the man, who overlooks its elemental points. None should be more fully convinced of the fact, than the theologians of the pre- sent day. They do not understand, or they differently in- terpret, their own creeds and articles of association ; they hold protracted controversies, and are at a loss to under- stand each other, or to say whether they have been arguing about words or things; while they unitedly charge the sceptic with dishonorably passing by the first principles of the system, which he so irreverently assails. One, who well knew the value of analysis, and who had often exposed the hasty argument of a boastful polemic, has remarked — " A free-thinker, when he hears some great doctrine of Christianity, lets off a small objection and runs away laughing at the folly, or railing at the imposture, of all who venture to defend a divine revelation ; he gathers his brother unbelievers, and they unite in wondering at the weakness or imprudence of christians. He bolts into the heart of a grand religious system ; he has never adverted to its first principles ; and then complains the evidence is bad. But the fault in neither case lies in the evidence. It lies in the ignorance or obstinacy of the objector." "Know- ledge.," says Solomon, " is easy to him that understandeth." Whatever may be the merit of the system developed in vi PREFACE. these Lectures, however novel it may be considered by some, or however much it may be censured as heretical by others, the Author again assures his reader, that he asks for nothing but a candid examination of its positions. He courts no favor but for the truth ; nor asks any indulgence from those who are capable of "looking a system through and through," saving that which every honorable mind cheerfully extends to well meant effort. With this con- sciousness, he again commits his publication to the watch- ful care of that providence, which ever throws its mantle over an honest heart — to the sympathizing care of the great High Priest, who never frowns ingenuousness from his throne, nor withdraws his Spirit from the man who fears and loves his name. Baltimore, 1836. DEDICATION. To the Members of the Associate Reformed Congregation of Baltimore : Dear Brethren — You will recognise, in the following sheets, the sub- stance of a course of pulpit lectures, on the first three chapters of Genesis, which I have just finished : — as well as of a series of biblical exercises, conducted with a class of young men, in your lecture room, two years ago. Though I neither love the toil, nor covet the honors of au- thorship, and advance no pretensions to "the art of mak- ing books ;" yet I have been induced to prepare the fol- lowing pages for the press, in consequence of having been repeatedly solicited so to do ; and in the fond hope of re- lieving some ingenuous minds, which may have been great- ly embarrassed by the technicalities of scholastic theology. I have endeavored to express myself in a clear and perspi- cuous manner ; though possibly in this I may have failed in many instances, as I seldom use my pen, and have now been compelled to write rapidly. The views which you have already heard, and which are here presented to you in a form that will afford you an opportunity for more leisurely examination, are the result of my own researches — long, patiently and diligently pur- sued. This remark is made, because I know not to what viii DEDICATION. dark age, or to what wandering, whimsical and hated er- rorist, my ideas may be referred. A hard name is the ma- gic wand, by which an angry, but feeble, disputant often metamorphoses the humblest pretensions into the mightiest misdemeanor. Already you know, if rumor utters a true report, I have been represented as worthy to bear the name and the reproach of almost every heresy which has ever appeared ; while, like the bible itself, whose paramount authority over the christian conscience, it has been my lot to proclaim and defend, I have had the singular felicity, or infelicity, of being successively claimed by all parties. The allegations, which have been thus so freely made, form no small commendation of the argument to which your attention has been invited ; for, if different parties, professedly deriving their peculiarities from the bible, can so readily discern their peculiarities in the doctrines I have advanced, those doctrines and the bible must appear quite like to each other. And if, feeling the point of this remark, critics, who have so gratuitously expressed either their praise or their condemnation, should now change their ground, they may, perhaps, discover that opinions founded on hearsay testimony, or on supposed powers of intuition, or under the force of preconceived and obstinate prejudices, will always, most probably, be inaccurate. At all events, you will have it fairly in your power to correct the misre- presentations with which you have been most painfully and unkindly annoyed, as well as to show that an honest, well meant effort to elucidate the philosophical principles of Christianity, by no means involves the abandonment of Christianity itself. Human creeds, however antique and abstruse they may be, are not in your view, synonymous DEDICATION ix with the gospel. — The one may be renounced, while the other shall appear in greater beauty and simplicity. You know well, that I never have aspired after, and there- fore, in presenting the following work to your careful and candid perusal, cannot now be seeking to obtain, a domi- nion over your faith. The doctrine which you have uni- formly heard from my lips, and which is here transcribed with my pen, has proclaimed your right to examine truth for yourselves, as the privilege and dignity of your intel- lectual existence ; while the distinct assurance has been given to you by the Redeemer, that all his children shall be taught of God. You can bear me testimony, how af- fectionately and earnestly these high considerations have been pressed on your attention. If indeed the Master, whom I desire humbly and efficiently to serve, has by his Spirit, written my "epistle of commendation" on your hearts, I hope I know how to thank him for the official honors so graciously conferred, and at the same time to rejoice with you in your joy. Most cheerfully do I inscribe this volume to you. Twenty years have elapsed, since the pastoral care of the congregation was committed to my hands. Many have gone from among you, during that short period, to meet "the Lord in the air," and rejoicing in the hope of his glory ; and many more, I fondly trust, are peacefully wait- ing the call from on high, which shall summon them home. At the same time, other events have occurred, and painful to be remembered, which were the source of the keenest anxieties ; and which are now alluded to, only because they awake the fond recollection of your uninterrupted kind- nesses ; while, from your own well formed convictions of x DEDICATION. the value of christian liberty, you cheerfully sustained the struggle, in which the acquisition of the sacred boon in- volved you. With like magnanimity, I have no doubt you will maintain the blessing so secured. Your various sym- pathies and affectionate regards are, and ever shall be, most gratefully reciprocated : Nor shall my heart cease to plead for your spiritual and everlasting welfare, and that of your children, while the hand, that records its tenderest emotions, shall be able to subscribe the name of Your brother and pastor, JOHN M. DUNCAN. April, 1832, CONTENTS. Preface, ---- 3 Dedication, 7 LECTURE I. Introductory — The divine constitutions — Value of the chapters under consideration — Present state of society — Personal re- sponsibility— Improvements — Mystery, 13 LECTURE II. Of God — Reason and nature of divine manifestations — The Elo- him — Trinity — Sabellianism— Arianism — Hilary and Augustin — Mosaic dispensation — Moses and Paul compared in view of the manner in which they speak of God — Redeemer's explana- tion of Elohim — Propriety of the term, - - - - 36 LECTURE III. Subject continued — Two-fold manifestation of God — Jehovah- Elohim or Word — Word made flesh — Form of God — Form of Man — Name — Appearances to Abraham and Isaac and Jacob — To Moses — Scriptural statements reconciled, - - - 68 LECTURE IV. Subject continued — Jehovah — The Spirit — Analogies — Trinity stated — Terms explained — Views of the divine operations in relation to the government of man, 92 LECTURE V. Subject continued — Spirit and Soul and Body — Hypostasis or Person — Elohim and Son of God equivalent — The Redeemer's explanation of Elohim — Official men called Elohim — Angels called Elohim — Political analogies, ----- 123 Xll CONTENTS. LECTURE VI. Of creation — Appropriate manifestation of Jehovah — Plural terms — Character of the creature — Man — Made in the image of the Elohim — His body — His spirit — Origin of personal re- sponsibility— Its relations — Spirit's operations — Human abi- lity, 164 LECTURE VII. Paradisiacal constitution — An external and political dispensation — Not inconsistent with personal responsibility — Tree of life — Popular view of Adam's sin and its consequences — Law given to Adam compared with law given by Moses — Redeemer's work — Analogies — Theologians reason against themselves — Force of the phrase for thy sake, 195 LECTURE VIII. Symbols — Fall — Its circumstances — Its effects — Use of the tree of knowledge of good and evil — Physical agent by which death was introduced — Nature of death — Condition of all men — Law and Gospel — Human depravity, - 226 LECTURE IX. Mediatorial constitution — Its origin — Mediator — God manifested in the flesh — Seed of the woman, 264 LECTURE X. Difficulties stated — The delivering the kingdom to the Father when the end shall come — Official analogies — Redeemer's prayers — Spirit and its various operations in application of the views developed in Lecture V. 290 LECTURES ON MORAL GOVERNMENT LECTURE I. INTRODUCTORY. The divine constitutions — Value of the chapters under con- sideration— Present state of society — Personal responsi- bility— Mystery. I have announced my intention of delivering a series of prelections, on the first three chapters of Genesis. You may, perhaps, be aware, that in executing this intention, sundry questions might arise which are of a purely scientific character. It is no part of my design to state, or answer those questions. The object I have in view is a discussion of the general principles of God's moral government in our world, to which discussion your candid and patient attention is invited. The history of man and the study of the Bible present to every inquirer after truth two great constitutions, which have been established by divine legislation — the one origi- nal, and the other remedial. They are respectively described as exactly corresponding with the intellectual attributes of human beings ; as happily suited to their earthly condition ; and as terminating in their weal or their wo, on principles of perfect righteousness* These constitutions are uniform*. Vol. I.— 2 14 LECTURES ON ly, in the scriptures, denominated Law and Gospel; and we speak of them in the most familiar manner, using those distinctive appellations without any reserve. Yet it is very evident that they are not, either politically or technically, fairly understood, A spirit of baneful controversy has . long since con verted them into topics of angry and embit- tered strife. At the present moment, the whole church has become the arena of most unhappy contention ; and I fear, too much is not said, when the description is extended so far as to sketch out a moral aceldama, where ministerial plumes lie dishonored; and where, to rob a brother of his high and holy reputation, as a servant of Jesus, becomes the boasted exploit of sectarian ambition. In undertaking to elucidate the principles of these two constitutions, I enter not the lists as a combatant. They fall under my cognizance in the regular discharge of official duty. The systematic arrangements under which I seek to detail my view;, or to investigate the philosophy of the con- stitutions referred to, may indeed require many a painful al- lusion to the state of moral science, to the present condition of the church, and to the future times, whose melancholy prognostics cro vc upon us -o thickly and rapidly; but I have no personal quart ; not any sectarian animosities to indulge. The attempt has been induced by a peculiar interest I have neon led to cherish in the chapters selected. In them a group oi interesting facts is exhibited to year view. A series f transactions, peculiar on account of their simplicity, is d I lave transpired; and there- cord of the whole is unincumbered with any difficult tech- nicalities, unembarassed by doctrinal speculations, and un- broken by so] iimenl -rising from jarring systems: or, there is no portion of the sacrefl volume, which we can so easily divesl th intages. The narrative pre- sents, so to speak, a nitd of moral inquiry which has seldom been explored. It is a part of the holy scriptures on which a lecture or a sermon is rarely heard from ourpulpits. While MORAL GOVERNMENT. 15 the general mind may have thus been unwarily led to over- look it as unimportant, the facts and phrases will have a no- velty and a freshness about them, and an opportunity will be afforded to look at divine things under other than the or- dinary forms of illustration. Like our own beloved land, which has become the welcome asylum to the advocates of political liberty ; who, tired of the oppression of some an- cient regime, would gladly escape from the misrule of a crip- pled, but infatuated desrotism; these chapters may afford, to a conscientious and independent inquirer after truth, a freedom of investigation, after which he sighed in vain amid the subtleties and mysteries of scholastic theology. Let there, however, be no misunderstanding. I have not said that these chapters have never been examined. Use has been made of them. But commonty, they are supposed to state certain doctrines, which, after a course of previous instruction authoritatively communicated, they would ap-m pear to state. From such an appearance, easily discovered when a proper medium has been provided, those doctrines are assumed as true; and then the various assumptions thus derived, are carried into all parts of the scriptures, as con- taining the true principles of all wise and accurate biblical exegesis. Now the question which will meet you at every step in the analysis on which we are about to enter, involves the truth of those assumptions. If they shall be found true, the conclusions to which they lead must of course be sustained: because the reasoning by which they have been reached i? not to be refuted. But if those assumptions are not true, the conclusions to which the}' lead cannot be de- fended. The many new premises which may be laid doAvn. must be carried through all our scriptural exposition, and will modify every subsequent view which authority may have imposed, or education engrafted. The process is not very difficult, where candor is not lacking,, or where preju- dices are not suffered to reign in arbitrary and undisputed sway. /\ mind, thus furnished for investigation, is as un- 16 LECTURES ON" likely to be deceived, as it is likely to acquire truth ; for its communion is with the God of truth, and its appeal for wis- dom is to him who "giveth to all men liberally, and up- braideth not." You may, perhaps, more distinctly perceive the propriety r and more cheerfully submit to the temporary guidance of the passage I have selected, if I plead in its behalf the ex- ample of the Master himself. When the pharisees came to him with a question which great^ agitated the schools of Sammai and Hillel, and asked, whether it was "lawful for a man to put away his wife," he answered, "what did Moses command you ?" They readily replied—" Moses suffered to give her a bill of divorcement and to put her away." True, said the Redeemer — ■" For the hardness of your heart he wrote you that precept; but from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female." Back to the beginning, and to the records contained in these chapters, he carried these disputants, when they were controverting a point of moral law. May we not do the same ? And are we not particularly, not only warranted, but induced to do so, when we discover, from his mode of explaining apparent difficulties, wherein certain things do not seem to harmonize with general and original principles, that those difficulties arise from mistaking the character and intention of some in- tervening circumstances, which were merely prudential and temporary? The Mosaic law was enacted by the divine lawgiver; yet it does not alter the original statute, when the condition of the world no longer required the contemplated indulgence, and society could return to her primordial rela- tions. Possibly there may be some other matters besides those which are connected with the subject of divorce, and about which theologians may be as much divided as the two Jewish schools referred to; and in relation to which they may be equally fastidious, without possessing superior infor- mation. Peradventure an appeal to primeval ordinances MORAL GOVERNMENT. 17 may be as clear and satisfactory in such cases, as in the pre- cedent which has been furnished.* But can we not all perceive, that, in the present day, there are special reasons, why a minister of the gospels ten- derly and affectionately regarding the heritage which the Lord hath given him, should undertake such a discussion, and in a manner most consistent with his best judgment? We live in a singular age, when many christians act, and many ministers sustain their influence, more by excitement than by any other means. It is with pain I even hint at some of the meagre operations of the day. But the state of the case is as I have described it; and the revulsion must be felt by every intelligent mind. Is not the whole church deeply agitated ? Are not religious communities every where thrown into distraction and turmoil ? The innovations that have disturbed the mahomedan imposture — the encroach- ments which have invaded papal misrule — the various as- saults against the union of church and state — the divisions between high church and low church, old school and new school, of which multitudes talk so significantly and freely — the outcry against sectarianism — the breaking up and threatened dissolution of old and established parties — the warm controversies to which voluntary associations have given rise — the social combinations which are starting up all around us, and in which the restlessness of the public mind seeks to expend its zeal — this new, this high, this varied excitement, which seems so little to regard ancient ordinances, and is pervading the whole of our moral inter- ests— what means it all ? * Bonaparte's biographer reports him to have observed — " There are so many different religions, or modifications of them, that it is diffi- cult to know which to choose. If one religion had existed from the beginning of the world, I should think it to be the true one; as it is, I am of opinion that every person ought to continue in the religion in which he was brought up — in that of his father." O'Meara, vol. 1. 127. 2* LECTURES ON Some are standing in great fearfulness, amazed at the scene before them. Others are weeping, and are trembling for the ark itself, because the fathers, who were so wise and good, so learned and holy, have lost their influence. And many are smiling with great complacency, promising to them- selves that the falsehood of Christianity shall soon be ex- posed, and that the progress of light and knowledge shall soon drive all priestcraft from the world. Though very dif- ferent in their feelings, yet are they not all alike superficial in theii views? Are not these conflicts too general — have they not approached with a pace too regular, and with an energy too powerful, to be discarded as unworthy of candid and patient examination? They must have a reason, and that reason must be commensurate with themselves. Some change must have occurred, involving the constitution of the human mind itself, to wake up all this diversified feel- to call forth all this activity ; and so deeply to interest, not only all denominations of christians, but all classes of human beings. And he who presides over the whole — the mediatorial prince who has foretold, from ancient times, the events which are to come to pass in the latter days, must be about to accomplish some glorious work. To be more : i ctilar : Li i order to approach our subject by the most accessible avenue, permit me to ask you, why is it that the political world is so much agitated ? Mankind are not more quiet as p ►liticians, than they are as religionists. The fact every one knows. Revolutions and changing dynasties are too fre- quent, succeed each other too rapidly, are followed by con- sequences too marked, and are met by too many responses prompt and loud, not to rouse the intensest anxiety. Ought the fact to be explained? Or shall we standoff wondering at the phenomenon, weeping over the convulsion, or smiling complacently at the prospect of a catastrophe, in which all civil government shall terminate ? Nay, you all know the reason of these perplexities. Your children know it. With MORAL GOVERNMENT. 19 what enthusiasm you talk about liberty ; How quickly they imbibe the spirit of independence you breathe. Not only so; but to our own American revolution, as commencing a new era in the political world, you ascribe the struggles of the nations after free institutions. How came you to know all this ? How does it happen that you so harmoniously agree as to the identity of a general cause, so mighty in its influence, so certain in its progress, and so varied in its results ? You have not speculated at haz- ard. You have not theorised at random, nor reasoned with- out premises. You sat down and carefully pondered all you heard. You respectfully listened to jTour statesmen, while they leisurely discussed general principles, traced ef- fects to their causes, and demonstrated the inappropriateness of ancient customs and laws. Your politicians were nei- ther ashamed nor afraid to declare what they thought. They courageously met, or with manly fortitude endured, the dif- ficulties attendant on their noble enterprise ; and now, when they are gone, you celebrate their deeds, imitate their ex- ample, and prize, as your richest inheritance, the freedom they left you. Grant to your ministers like liberty and boldness of speech, listen with equal patience and without prejudice, examine with similar candor and care, and you may as readily com- prehend the cause of all that religious excitement which has occurred. The cases are parallel ; for what you call politics is but a branch, and a very important branch, of morals. The law of God, James informs us, is "the law of liberty :" so that your profession calls upon you to subscribe to the doctrine of liberty, in its reference to Christ's kingdom. It is your privilege to be the freemen of the Lord. You are for- bidden to call any man master. Search then and see. Are you not under the dominion of an ecclesiastical lord- ship, which men have claimed the right to set up? Has the question of liberty been finally and fully settled by the re- formers in their contest with papal infallibility ? Do you live •20 LECTURES ON under no restrictions created by a sectarian policy, which have been boldly defended ? Feel you no oppression from the hand of ecclesiastical power? If you do, then may you easily comprehend the reason of the present excitement. If you do not, others do, and they have risen, to complain. It is no part of their object to undermine Christianity, or to de- cline into some of the heresies of which they have been so ungenerously accused. They love their Master, and bless him for his word. They delight in his law after the inner man, and live in intimate fellowship with him as their coun- sellor and their Lord ; but they demand the liberty where- with he hath set them free. Many may still suppose that this subject of moral liberty has made but little impression on the religious mind. And so far as I have yet stated the matter, the remarks which have been offered will, perhaps, not be felt as very conclu- sive. Combatants on all sides seem to be very fond of ec- clesiastical jurisdiction, and of the ancient creeds, as well as of the annual statutes, of church courts. The deceptive ostentation, the dazzling magnificence of exterior policy, together with the show of official character, make a strong appeal to the senses. There are, therefore, other matters pertaining to the subject of liberty, which must be previously settled, and the discussion of which will elevate the human mind above the glitter and pomp of outward circumstance. Or, according to the favorite maxim of the creed defen- ders,— "no man turns against creeds until creeds turn against him," which is in other words to assert, that no patriot turns against the political government of his country until he feels that government to oppress him — according to this maxim, the religious community will not lose their admiration of ec- clesiastical and sectarian control, until the discussion of some previous questions shall have elevated their moral views. But then that discussion is now going on with fear- ful intrepidity, and ecclesiastical politicians are trembling for the shibboleth of their parry. Nor must they be sur- Moral government. 21- prised, or feel themselves entitled to break out into sarcasm and invective, because that those who are outside, as well as those who are inside, of the church, are deeply interest- ed in the controversy. The matters at issue involve the interest and character of the human mind.— Let me ex- plain: On what ground may any man claim his liberty 1 God made him free, it may be answered. But on what princi- ple has his Creator constructed his liberty? Is it not on the individuality of his being, or in view of his personal respon- sibility ? And is not this same subject of personal responsi~ bility, at this very moment, under discussion every where ? If then you can rob a man of his own sense of individuality, or make him feel so inane that he ceases to regard the value of personal character ; or if you can paralyze his conscience , and dissipate his self esteem ; then you may, by mere pow~ er, call it civil or ecclesiastical as you please, prostrate his liberty. But rest assured, that in proportion as he recovers the feeling of personal character, the scale will be turned, and a crisis will come on, when the offensive statutes must be rescinded. If this is true, the day of ecclesiastical liber- ty has dawned, and is hastening to its meridian splendors. Men may hold to their creeds if they please, and talk about the value of ecclesiastical rule, and the impossibility of doing without it if they choose, but their hour is coming. Take an illustration or two. Many have been resolving religion into an exclusive operation of divine power. But now, you everywhere hear the doctrine of personal respon- sibility urged with great point and force-. Such expressions as the following, are become very common: "Men may be saved if they will: if they are not saved, the fault is their own." And when the statement is thus unequivocally set forth, multitudes, who have lived on the faith of other times, are exceedingly startled. The preacher is immedi- ately suspected of heresy — it may be pelagianism, or uni- tarianism; rumor begins her "many inventions," and puts 82 LECTURES ON forth her romantic tales; a series of heart-burnings is en- gendered, and ministers and elders learn to tamper with the conscience of their brother. It is a very curious question, and worthy of consideration — why are so many old chris- tians offended, when they hear the sinner's perdition as- cribed to his own fault? Do they mean to say, that the fault is God's? If they do not, why are they offended? Politics, I have said, constitute a very important branch of morals, and involve the principles of government. The ideas which men may have adopted in relation to govern- ment, must be applied consistently, whether to a divine or human administration: and necessarily so. Now in the common discussions which grow out of regal pretensions, a controversy has long been pending, whether the sovereign- ty of kings and the free agency of the people are compati- ble with each other? Dreary and disastrous has been the ex- periment to which this matter has been subjected. At length, among ourselves, the sovereignty of rulers has been put under wholesome restrictions. The free agency, the individuality, the liberty of the people is now, in our land, the popular doctrine; and it is carrying its reforming influ- ence into all parts of the world. So it is in the christian church. The doctrine of divine sovereignty has long been stated in a form which is supposed to interfere with human free agency. Religious doctrines are often approached with a superstitious dread, as though it were unlawful to investigate such sacred mysteries. But the political maxims which have become established, are bringing, in spite of our fastidiousness, the subtleties of scho- lastic theology into comparison with themselves. This re- sult cannot be avoided. Demonstrate the free agency of man, and on the principle of free agency he will reason eve- ry where. Show it to him first where the light is not too brilliant for his steady gaze, and after a little he will follow on to look at the same thing in more splendid connexions; nor will he be restrained by any legislative enactments MORAL GOVERNMENT. 23 which men may frame. Under the government of God, are men free agents? If they are, how can this comport with the old doctrine of divine sovereignty? If they are free agents, are they not personally responsible to God ; and then what becomes of the ecclesiastical sovereignty of men ? In whatever sense sovereignty may be ascribed, yet it may well be asked, are men entitled to dominion over the human conscience, so far that they may make authoritative creeds as standards of doctrine? and, erecting those creeds into terms of communion, may they deprive a minister or a chris- tian of spiritual privileges in the community where the pro- vidence of God%ay have located him? Carrying the inquiry a little farther, another question arises. Can a man be personally responsible for that which he does not possess ; or for that which he cannot perform ? Do the scriptures proffer to the faith of mankind a doctrine of divine sovereignty, which represents it as demanding that which a man cannot render? In political controversy, the human mind has acquired other ideas of responsibility; and wrill no attempt be made to ascertain how far those ideas are compatible with cur relations to the divine throne? Ad- mitting, as every man must freely admit, the infirmities of human nature; and moreover admitting, as every biblical reader must freely admit, that without a Mediator we can do not kino;; yet the question necessarily arises, does not divine sovereignty impose its commands on us, as on agents sus- tained by evangelic privileges ? Is it not the sovereignty of a mediator of which the scriptures speak? Are they not describing the administration of "a merciful and faithful high priest" seated on the throne ; who, having learned obe- dience by the things which he suffered, is regulating human concerns with a view to the good of men: and who, duly considering the infirmities incident to our condition, demand, nothing but that which we can render? Is not his govern- xent in morals precisely analogous to his government in 04 LECTURES ON physics, in which human effort may be most unreservedly made, with a confident dependence on divine providence? But then are we not dead in sin? Has not Adam's trans- gression defrauded us of all moral power? Is not this the condition of every man, until God makes him, in the exer- cise of his sovereignty, spiritually alive ? While a man is dead, can he be personally responsible ? If God shall not make him spiritually alive, can his perdition be referred to his own fault? These are the interesting questions which an ao*e, grown inquisitive by political emancipation, is ear- nestly pursuing. And theologians have their hands full. Adam's sin is now the grand subject of d#bate; and parti- cularly as its consequences are to be considered in refer- ence to human ability and inability. After all, the ques- tion, in general terms is, whether, and how, each man is personally responsible ? That he is so, every one is begin- ning to assert. Old systems will wither, and the arm that would uphold them will be paralyzed. The doctrines of personal responsibility, and of human liberty, are essen- tially the same; and as they stand connected, they are shaking to its centre every ecclesiastical establishment in Christendom. If I tell not the truth, believe me not. There is another matter which, in view of our present subject, deserves very special consideration. In every branch of science, men are very diligently engaged in mak- ing improvements. We can turn to no department of socie- ty where we do not observe this fact, and all the world seems to have been thrown into bustle by the literary and philo- sophical pretensions which, in every direction, are courting public respect and confidence. I am fully aware that those who are wise by hereditary statute, have caricatured "the march of mind ;" and that even ministers* of the gospel af- fect to be facetious, and try to be severely satirical, when "the signs of the times" are supposed to augur great and profitable changes. But after all abatement is made for the interesting representations of the influential, and the often- MORAL GOVERNMENT. 25 '(imes dogmatic, leaders of public disputes, the change in sentiment and feeling is imperceptibly, but surely, intro- ducing its grand climacteric. The character of the change, which is so visibly arrang- ing its important preliminaries, after all, amounts merely to a well meant and determined attempt to simplify that which before was abstruse and mysterious. In other words, men are trying to understand and explain every thing, ^.s far as their intellectual force or their varied observation can carry them. Even in your schools a very persevering effort is made, to bring down the various branches of education to the comprehension of the juvenile mind : nor is the process finished. In every direction old theories are yielding to new discoveries, and philosophers are abandoning specula- lion in pursuit of facts. And shall all this intellectual ex- penditure, various and enterprising as it is, accomplish noth- ing for the gospel, and bring no tribute to the church ? Theologians very frequently treat a reputed opponent •quite cavalierly, and very fiercely, but inconsiderately, re- vile him as a heretic. On the present point they may be so disposed to resist any application of the preceding remarks to their own science, and proudly tell us that morals are al- ways the same. But would they aver this to be the fact, in thus stating their objection? General principles maybe much the same ; but are not the principles of physics as uni- formly the same as those of morals ? Have sun, moon, and stars altered their courses, or is there any thing new under the sun ? Yet in relation to all the different departments of science, the doctrines of philosophers have changed again and again ; and may not those of moralists vary with equal ease and frequency? Can we maintain so improbable an idea, that because the principles of the divine government are always essentially the same, therefore the opinions of men, and even of good men, are always accurate? Has God himself never modified his dispensations, to meet any particular state of society ? Was there no difference between Vol. I.— 3 26 LECTURES ON Jewish ceremonies and the patriarchal ritual ? Does not the gospel dispensation differ from both, and professedly pre- sume on an increased amount of mental vigor, as though the church had escaped from childhood, and attained to full age ? To say then, in the present connection, that morals are always the same, is either ignorantly or sophistically, to get away from the subject in hand. But how stands the fact ? Is there no room for improvement in the speculative opinions which men, and good men too, have promulgated in reference to religious principles ? Are our theological systems so plain that they cannot be simpli- fied, or so harmonious that no arbitrator is required ? Will any enlightened man, belonging to any of the controversial parties, undertake to say, that in all points he alone is right? Are not all the contending sects confessedly asserting mys- teries ? And is there no danger of being in error, when they unhesitatingly admit, that in many respects, the subjects o,f their speculations are above their comprehension? Then again may not their plea of mystery be the very circumstance that betrays the necessity for investigation? What is a mystery ? The general idea, if I mistake not, is, that a mystery is a certain something, in its own nature incomprehensible to human reason ; which something is accor- dingly not to be defined. The doctrines concerning such points, may always be matter of debate ; and as no one may pretend infallibly to decide what the facts concerning them are, ought we not to be very cautious how we receive such doctrines as articles of faith, and exceedingly careful, to say the least, that they shall not be too extensively multiplied ? Our eternal all is at stake; and it is God's revelation on which we are required to meditate. Shall men rudely im- pose upon us their notions, telling us how venerable these are for their antiquity, and haughtily demand our assent, or superciliously condemn our hesitancy ? Do they not feel that their whole statement is extremely startling and for- bidding, when they apprise us that Christianity is full of in- MORAL GOVERNMENT. -27 comprehensibilities ? Are there really any incomprehensible things in the gospel — might not some humble inquirer ask, without giving; anv serious offence ? I know very well that I am treading on dangerous ground. A thousand voices would instantly and tumultuously reply, the scriptures themselves speak undisguisedly of their own mysteries, and it is in vain to object to their statement. God forbid that I should utter one word disparaging to the scrip- tures ; or breathe the most distant suspicion of their divine inspiration, or of their indubitable accuracy. But, perhaps, by a mystery they do not mean a certain something incom- prehensible to human reason. It is worth our while to as- certain ; for if they do not so denominate that which is in- comprehensible, then the spell in which our investigation may be bound is dissolved. Some few quotations, in which instances of their use of the term will be afforded, may de- -lennine this question without any great dispute : take the following: "Now to him that is of power to establish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began, but now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God5 made known to all nations for the obedience of faith."* "But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom which God ordained before the world unto our glory; which none of the princes of this world knew: but God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit, for the .Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God."t "Having made known to us the mystery of his will, accord- ing to his good pleasure, which he hath purposed in himself." X 1 ' By revelation he made known unto me the mystery, as I wrote afore in few words ; whereby when ye read, ye may *Rom. xvi. 2-5, 26. f 1 Cor. ii. 7, 8, 10. X Eph. i. 9. 28 LECTURES ON understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ, which in other ages was not made known untdthe sons of men." * So then mystery is a mere secret, which may be made known, made manifest, revealed or uncovered. In like manner the term is applied to human projects: "The mystery of iniquity doth already work." t It is also used in reference to a rite or ceremony, or emblem: "The mystery of the seven stars." X "I will tell thee the mystery of the woman and of the beast that carrieth her." § Among the heathen also, we hear of the various mysteries of their false gods. Early ecclesiastical writers used the word with the same signification ; and it may be found in the commu- nion service of the church of England in the same accepta- tion, and in reference to the Lord's supper. The term, therefore, in its scriptural use, is employed as an appellative of a mere secret which may not be, for a time, fully disclosed; and the advocate of incomprehensible things in religion must find out some other argument to jus- tify his view. Christianity, as it is exhibited in the new dis- pensation, instead of being full of mysteries, is intended to do them away, and to bring out to light, that which had been long hidden or kept secret. Supposing then, that the popular systems of theology not only assert that there are, but actually teach to us, inconceivable things, and tell us that these matters are the peculiarities of the gospel, is there no room for improvement? Ought we still to maintain mys- teries if the scriptures disown them? Or shall we adhere to matters which are incomprehensible in their own nature as in- dubitable verities, because that in any particular period of so- ciety, or in any given state of physical or moral science, they may not be explained ? But how has it happened that the term, and the thing of which the term is a sign, have been so often, and so much, misapplied ? How is it that so generally among the clergy and- *Eph. iii. 4, 5. f2 Thess. ii. 7. % Rev. i. 20. §Rev. xvii. 7. MORAL GOVERNMENT. 29 the pious, to say a word against mysterious doctrines is to be chargeable with extreme heresy, if not with infidelity itself? One great reason unquestionably is their advancing and maintaining various dogmas, which they themselves cannot explain. But I apprehend the cause lies much deeper, and is to be traced far back in the history of our race. The gloomy legends which are opened up to view by an allusion to preceding ages, many are apt to resolve into one universal, all pervading cause — human depravity. It would be folly in the highest degree not to admit the ex- istence and the potency of the reason so promptly assigned. But an inquisitive mind asks for an explanation which will not be so general. There is a necessity to be more particu- lar, and to look after the minuter operations of secondary agents. We are told that there were mysteries from the begin- ning ; or things which were kept secret since the world be- gan. Starting at a point so very remote, we must follow society down, as it begins to extend and ramify itself. We may, perhaps, thus discover the object of our search. At first, all the various powers of government, civil and eccle- siastical, so to speak, were vested in the same individual. The prince was the priest, and the priest was the prince. This political arrangement would not only be established by a divine ordinance, but resulted from the nature of the case. Adam would be naturally looked up to as fairly en- titled to all official honors, and his eldest son would as readi- ly be acknowledged as his official heir. That particular asso- ciation which is now called the church, did not arise until lonsr after, when a double trial had been made of the effi- ciency of the original system that had placed the priest on the throne, ot called the occupant of the throne to act as priest. This earlier institution, as long as it lasted, served to typify the official prerogatives of the promised Mediator, who is now a priest upon his throne. All government was at that time to have been exercised on mediatorial princi- 30 LECTURES ON jjles; — a fact which you may keep in mind, as it has an inv portant bearing on the question, whether Christ died for all men or not; and decides the point whether the heathen are under mediatorial law or not. Civil government, as it was established after the fall, was intended to wear an evan- gelic character; so that all mankind were, and are, placed as much under the mediatorial institute, as they had been under the original law. It is not necessary to trace society in the subsequent de- velopment and changes which it exhibits; to notice the union of church and state under the Jewish theocracy ; the disruption of that union under the christian system ; its re- establishment under Constantine; its continuance to the present hour, notwithstanding that nations have wept and bled under its blighting influence ; nor to anticipate the pro- bable state of affairs during the millennium, when they may revert to their primordial simplicity, and when every trace of official misrule may be obliterated from our distracted world. Enough has been done to obtain a position from which to look after the matter of inquiry. In the state of society which has been described, it must be evident to every one, that official men were apparently entrusted with a great deal of power. The exercise of power is as liable to corruption, as any other attribute belong- ing to man. A restless ambition would very soon begin to excogitate schemes of aggrandizement, and be dissatisfied with any eminence short of absolute authority. The plan of operation would be covert, and its progress insidious, as mankind would not readily surrender their liberties. Every plausible mean, every ingenious artifice, every sophistical argument would be pertinaciously employed, in order to al- lay suspicion, and to secure the object. The prince, under such circumstances, and with such designs, would not fail to use his sacred functions, well knowing the regard which men have for the holy things of the Lord, and the excite- ment into which they are easily thrown by the seeming in- MORAL GOVERNMENT. 31 terference of supernatural agents. The very moment that religion degenerates into superstition, the multitude, by ex- changing intelligence for ignorance, and becoming credu- lous instead of thoughtful, are prepared for political slavery. And so, on the other hand, as soon as they break their po- litical fetters and learn to think, superstition flies, and a pure and undefiled religion may quickly interest their feelings and absorb their souls. Under such a revolution, "a nation might be born in a day." Laying hold of these peculiarities of our nature, which a mere politician often profoundly studies, the prince, in his march after power, soon learns to conquer the human mind, by appealing to its fears. A series of mysteries preserved with sybilline care, and generating a set of popular mystic notions, would be one of his happiest and most effectual expedients. The glory of the Lord would be changed into the most degenerate representations ; the inner man would become reprobate ; and a spiritual death, so often ascribed to Adam's sin as its single and omnipotent cause, would super- vene. Every plan would then be accomplished which the despotic ruler had devised, and infatuated nations would preserve the very mysticism which defrauded them of in- tellectual resources, and converted them -into serfs, and transmit it to their children. Such I take to be the origin of the false ideas of mystery that are abroad in the world, and by which a sacred and accurate term has been grossly misapplied. * I would not be understood to say, that, comparatively speaking, while we are in this world, and are living by faith. we do not "see through a glass darkly," nor yet that there * Bishop Warburton, in his Div. Leg. of Moses, B. II. S. 4. -ha3 handled this suhject with great learning. The reader may there dis- cover how much of pagan superstition has been incorporated in the papal system, Whence protestants have derived so many of their no- tions. It was death to intrude into " the mysteries*?' How much better is it now J 3-2 LECTURES ON are no matters hard to be understood in the sacred volume, where, as Lactantius elegantly remarked, "an elephant may swim, while a lamb may wade." The point is here : if one man or one age — if many men or many ages, be in- competent to explain a certain truth, is that truth therefore, in its own nature, incomprehensible to the human mind? And if we are only emerging from a long period of darkness, in which kings reigned with unquestioned supremacy, and mon- archies as such were reputed to be of divine right ; a period in which councils determined articles of faith, and popes ruled in the temple of God as the vicegerents of "the mes- senger of the covenant:" are those matters, which could not then be satisfactorily explained, now to be viewed as beyond our mental grasp? Does it follow that what Calvin and Luther did not understand, no.one else can elucidate? Or, in the multifarious effort which human intellect, free and independent, is now putting forth, are no discoveries to be made, no new combinations to be devised, no secrets to be told ? If the theologian has risen to no higher moral ele- vation than this, it is no wonder that he feels his imbecility to control the commotions around him ; and pitifully sighs over the disasters which fill his views by day and his visions by night. Better that the church had been supplied with ministers fresh from the circle of her own families, than from theological seminaries, which thus prove themselves to be but splendid deceptions. Are not "many running to and fro, seeking after know- ledge?" Is not intelligence everywhere diffusing itself? Have not men been long discussing human responsibilities on broad, general principles? I ask not whether any men are now more learned than their predecessors, or have read and written more books? but whether the -mass of mankind are not acquiring a new intellectual character ? Children ask their parents, who never thought beyond the range of their oatechism, many appropriate questions which they cannot answer. And men, who are but larger children, looking MORAL GOVERNMENT, .33 on the world around them, may propose to their ministers, who never travelled out of the periphery of their own sec- tarian system, many questions which the word mystery will no longer answer. The inquirer is not satisfied, and will not submit to rebuke. Whatever may be the final issue, such is the present condition of society. Inquiry is ad- vancing; is growing importunate and intrepid, bold and ad- venturous ; and they who mean to meet the approaching crisis, and to save the world from the delirious misrule of infidelity, must quit their creeds and turn to their bibles. If they will not, they may calculate on consequences which will prove these present days to be "but the beginning of sorrows."" We are informed by the Spirit of prophecy that a day of great glory is to dawn upon our world.. That day cannot be far distant. A time of tribulation may, and in all probability will, intervene ; but ' ' the coming of the Lord draweth nigh.' 3 Is there any preparation to be made for his appearance? Will he do all by his own fearful judgments, or have we a part to act? Do any imagine, that the church shall remain as she now is, — broken up into parties, and distracted by in- cessant hostilities ? Shall not these sects be dissolved, and some other ecclesiastical ground be marked out, where brethren can meet in unity, and where the divine blessing shall come down like the dew on Hermon ? Are not the various parties heaving painfully, as though corroded by some mortal disease? The "power of life and death" has been taken away ; and the reputation of many a maltreated son of truth is given up to be adjudicated by the world, which, like Pilot, ignorant of, and unconcerned about, the techni- calities of sectarian law, can find no fault. Society at large is acquiring more liberal and benevolent feelings, and cares very little about the distinctions which were forged in the Master's name by the false philosophy of past ages. And what the immediate result may be, depends very much upon the official bearing of ministerial men and ecclesiastical 34 LECTURES ON courts. Their haughty mien, their demand for punctilious conformity, and their unrelenting animosities, will only in- crease the difficulties and deepen the gloom. The high concerns of Christ's house, and the destinies of immortal souls must not rest on the will of well disciplined partisans, or the majority of votes in an ecclesiastical legislature. The day for such measures is gone by. A new era has com- menced. It started well ; for benevolence was its impulse, and the dissemination of truth was its object. But how has the scene changed ! These very benevolent institutions, ap- pearing as purely voluntary, have become apples of discord ; and every heart that has preserved its kind feelings, or beats with fraternal love for dying men, is mourning at the altars of the Lord, and is sickened by the strife. But if such a day as the Spirit of the Lord has predicted is really coming ; if the time is at hand, and if a moral re- volution is shortly to extend the Redeemer's kingdom to earth's utmost bounds, how could it be otherwise than that mankind should be greatly excited ? Must not old institu- tions give place to those which a new ecclesiastical regency may establish ? What else can any man, who has not given himself up to the sensualities of the scene around him, ex- pect ? What else can any man, but the lover of obsolete ordinances, or the child of mere animal feeling, desire ? What else can a minister, who is not too superannuated to admire the energy of his children, or too juvenile to under- stand the value of official influence, or too confident to suf- fer even the Lord to work according to his good pleasure, anticipate ? Have we never read the story of the antedilu- vian world, the discomfiture of Pharaoh's host, or the tale of Jerusalem's destruction ? I protest to you, that I see not how the millennium can come, without such earthly doings as those which are now surprising the world. That they are begun and are in progress, only confirms my confidence in the elder brother, who, sitting as Lord on the throne of glory, presides over the perplexing, but purifying process MORAL GOVERNMENT. 35 which his Spirit foretold. The immediate consequences, I confess, are deeply troubling ; for society seems to be dis- solving, and it is no wonder that "men's hearts are failing them for fear." The foregoing, and such like views ever present them- selves, when, according to the ability which the Lord hath given me, I endeavor to read society. They have driven me to examine the scriptures for myself. The result of the investigation shall be presented to you in the following course of lectures. I approach you with no authoritative creed, but offer to your judgment trains of thought which have deeply interested myself. You are responsible for yourselves. You have the bible in your own hands ; you have the intellectual spirit which God has given you ; you are surrounded by the various evolutions of the times ; and you must carefully and conscientiously decide. Be not in- timidated by the outcry of those who never ventured beyond the narrow articles of their party confederation, and per- haps can scarcely tell you even what is in them. Search, on your own responsibility, for the truth as it is in Christ. I ask you to attend to no speculations which rob your Master of his divinity ; or predicate a dignity of human nature in- consistent with the indispensable necessity for a Mediator, and the gracious operations of the Spirit of God. I have no s}rmpathies with Arian speculations, nor Socinian criticism. My simple object is to declare truth as I have learned it : and all that I ask at your hands is magnanimity enough to listen to it. And if, under the hysterical excitement neces- sarily incident to a community full of morbid sensibilities, this cannot be awarded, I must leave you to the high judg- ment of conscience ; and with him to whom we must all give account, when sectarian considerations will be of no avail. 36 LECTURES ON LECTURE II. Of God. — Reason and nature of the divine manifestations — » Elohim — ■- Trinity — Sabellidnism — Arianism — Hilary and Augustin — Mosaic dispensation — Moses and Paul com- pared, in view of the manner in which they speak of God — Redeemer's explanation of Elohim — Propriety of the term. Moses has commenced his brief sketch of the early an- nals of our race, by asserting that "in the beginning God made the heavens and the earth :" at least, our translators have so rendered his language. To me, this declaration appears as a mere truism, a self-evident fact, which no man of common intellectual discernment would question. Some indeed, have affected to deny the existence of God ; or have talked about the eternity of matter, as though they really understood what they said, or whereof they affirmed. But then the scriptures have remarked, that only "the fool hath said in his heart there is no God." The apparently abstract proposition, which shows itself on the face of the text, would then seem to be uttered with a degree of for- mality altogether unnecessary. Perhaps it may not be so ; and my observation may be censured as, to say the least of it, a piece of mere fastidious criticism. The sequel will evince whether the preceding comment is accurate or not ; and whether, in the discussion on which we are entering, it has any importance. Certain it is, that theologians have considered the naked proposition, as given by our translators, to be abundantly plain, and have confidently built upon it their numerous and conflicting systems. Having presented it to their pu- pils or readers, they immediately proceed to discourse about God, as though the subject of which they treat were really MORAL GOVERNMENT. 37 within their reach. How many beautiful and elaborate es- says, detailing and illustrating the divine perfections, have appeared, awakening public interest and commanding pub- lic admiration. The human mind has thus been absorbed, and has wasted all its energies in contemplating a mere ab- straction. Omnipotence, omniscience, omnipresence, in* finity in every direction, our moralists have labored to de- lineate, when they would speak of their glorious Creator. They have confessed the subject to be incomprehensible, and seem to have thought that they have done enough to satisfy any modest inquirer, when they have stated in gran- diloquous phrase, that which they did not understand. They have thrown us to the circumference of a circle, and left us to pace an eternal round. But it may be asked, whether it is intended to deny, that omniscience, omnipotence, and omnipresence, do belong to God ? Certainly not. But I do intend to ask, what these terms mean ? Explain to me, for example, what omniscience is. It imports, some one may reply, the knowledge of all things. But then again, the question may be pressed, what are we to understand by all things ? And an answer, statins; all that theologians have labored to conceive and to express, may not be so easily framed. If indeed I should be referred to the heavens and the earth as the works of God, as we are told by Moses, that — "in the beginning God made the heavens and the earth" there would be no difficulty in comprehending omniscience, or any of the terms which have been employed, or their application. For we can easily form our ideas of Jehovah and his attributes, by what we know, or by the objects which are within the range of our perceptions, and by which he intended to teach us of himself. But have our theologians been contented with this dis- play ? Have they not stretched their imagination far, very far, beyond these limits ; and, carrying us out of our own world, begun to descant upon illimitable space, and the in- Vol. I.— 4 38 LECTURES ON finite God filling illimitable space ? And what do you know now ? You have sought to rise to the contemplation of ob- jects beyond mortal ken, and are presuming to traverse re- gions where the great Creator has furnished no guide. Worlds there may be, systems of worlds there may be, spreading themselves out in infinite space, or revolving round the throne of God as their eternal sun ; but the ques- tion is, what do we know about them ? Who can tell what God is doing in them, or among them, or describe in what manner he has revealed or manifested himself unto them ? Yet, ignorant as we are, these are the fields in which we have been speculating about Godhead. Here we suppose ourselves to have studied the divine character with the greatest accuracy ; and on abstractions of which we have in vain endeavored to form some intelligent notions, we have erected our various systems. We cannot be satisfied with discoursing about omniscience, omnipotence or omni- presence, as these relate to the world with which we are connected ; but, attaching to the momentous subject of God's moral government all our own conjectures, and bas- ing our theories on the abstract perfections we ascribe to him, we have made religion a mere tissue of most perplex- ing mysteries. Hence our continual controversies, that in- volve almost every moral principle about which the mind of man can be employed, and that even now seem to be no nearer their termination than when they first commenced. To me it appears abundantly plain, that here, where Moses commences his account, in the heavens and the earth, or those hosts of created objects of which the human mind can take cognizance, we necessarily find our limit. Beyond these we cannot go. Any attempt which may be made, is a wasteful expenditure of intellect, and must end in fruitless conjecture. Doubtless there is a great deal be- yond these limits ; but it is impossible for us to attain to that which has not been brought within our own mental range. Even our own future state of being is above our compre- MORAL GOVERNMENT. 39 hension, and is so represented to us in the scriptures them- selves. Paul informs us, that when he was caught up into the third heavens, he "heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter." And John says, "it doth not yet appear what we shall be, but we know that when he shall appear, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is." Of course, if we are not fitted to know, to see or to hear, things which are unrepresented in this material system with which our existence is connected for the time being, we must form our ideas of God from those views he has afforded of himself, and must speak of his attributes as he has manifested them. Whatever is beyond this world is mystery, i. e. is a secret to us. It belongs not to man to perceive spirit abstractedly con- sidered. We cannot perceive or know each other's spirit, excepting as it is exhibited in its appropriate form, or by some external act. And as God is a spirit, — so said Jesus to the Samaritan woman, — we cannot know him, unless he shall manifest himself by and in his works, or shall assume personal form. The necessity under which we are thus placed is found in the very constitution of our nature, and must exist so long as it shall be characteristic of us to ac- quire our ideas by means of our corporeal senses. The di- vinity of Jesus Christ, to use popular language, is not so irrational a doctrine, nor is it so destitute of evidence to be derived from the nature of things, and from the nature of man, as some have confidently pretended. The real truth is, that it is founded in the nature of things, and in the na- ture of man, and therefore the scriptures have taught it. And those who have defended this doctrine, have, I think, essentially weakened their own argument, by basing it sim- ply on the sovereignty of Jehovah. It is necessary to pursue this topic a little farther. How can any man explain to me wisdom, goodness and power, as attributes of God ? Of abstract qualities the human mind can form no idea, whether they are predicated of God, of 40 LECTURES ON man, or of any creature. The scriptures certainly occupy this ground in undertaking to teach us of God. "The hea- vens," they say, "declare the glory of God, and the firma- ment showeth his handy work. Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night showeth knowledge. They have no speech — no language — their voice is not heard, nevertheless their line is gone out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world."* "That which may be known of God is manifiest in, or among them, for God hath showed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being un- derstood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse."! "He left not himself without a witness, in that he did good, and gave us rain from heaven, and fruitful seasons, filling our hearts with food and gladness. "t Take away these out- ward exhibitions of Jehovah, in which he has, says Paul, manifested that which may be known of him, and what phi- losopher can give us any idea of God ? or explain what is meant by his wisdom, goodness or power? Undoubtedly there may be a God, good, wise and powerful ; and he may be known, loved and admired by other intellectual beings differently constituted from ourselves ; but we can have no perceptions of him. A blind man knows nothing of color — a deaf man is utterly ignorant of sound. In like man- ner we must be entirely unacquainted with the existence or character of God, unless he be manifested to us, and in a mode suitable to our nature. No reasonable controvertist will deny this. The only alternative is blank atheism : a doctrine in maintaining which, any man, even the veriest heathen, Paul tells us, would be perfectly inexcusable. If the preceding argument shall be admitted as conclu- sive, then the principle of a divine manifestation, i. e. of God's manifesting himself to man, is conceded. The neces- *Ps. xix. 1. 4. fRom. i. 19, 20. % Acts xiv. 17. MORAL GOVERNMENT. 41 sity for such a manifestation is also traced, and with equal clearness and certainty, to the constitution of human na- ture. And if the principle, so far as it has been carried, or in its application to the heavens and the earth, be correct, why may it not be equally true, if its application shall be extended ? The test in this extended application of the principle, will be the same as in its original application : i. e. if the manifestation which God made of himself in the heavens and the earth, be rational and necessary, consider- ing the peculiarity of the human constitution, then a further manifestation of him will be equally rational and necessa- ry, if the peculiarity of human nature shall call for it. On this simple view of the character of man, or of the necessi- ty arising from the constitution of his nature, must rest the whole reason for the fact, and the doctrine, of the divini- ty of the Saviour. "Such an high priest became us" — "in all things it behooved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest." God having manifested himself to us by the works of creation and providence, and that manifestation being made in such a manner as is suited to our mind in its present mode of subsistence, is there no necessity that the Crea- tor should proceed farther? Can we now be satisfied, or will we not pursue our inquiries ? Is it unnatural or ir- rational to seek after personal intercourse, or communion, with that being whose works have introduced him to our acquaintance ? Is it unphilosophic to suppose that God would make such an arrangement as to render it possible for us to have a nearer and more spiritual view of him ? If he should do so, would it not be very desirable to us ? And would not any intellectual communication which he might make be highly advantageous? We are not go- verned by mere instincts. Endowed with immortal spi- rits, which must ultimately return to God who gave them, we are formed to reflect and reason ; and, carrying our in- vestigation as far at least as our own nature affords mate- 4* 42 LECTURES ON rials of thought, we pause on the connexions between mat- ter and spirit, as the loftiest subjects which can interest us. The laws of mere physical substances, however useful or important in their own places, do not limit our intellectual view. Going beyond these, we are found to commune with persons. Having a personal subsistence, our best associa- tions are necessarily with those who subsist in a like man- ner. We could not have any very high or appropriate en- joyments, if we were surrounded by the lower orders of creatures, and had no companionship with beings of equal powers, and like affections. Adam in paradise needed a companion. His Creator said — "it is not good that the man should be alone." If then we had no higher mani- festation of Jehovah than that afforded by the substances belonging to the material universe, it is evident that he would not have employed the best symbol, nor furnished an exhibition of himself equal to our intellectual appre- hensions. Of personal subsistence we have well denned ideas; and if that were not predicated of Jehovah, our communion with him must be of the lowest description. We would either become atheistical, or, in spite of ourselves, rushing into personification, we should locate the dwelling of the great Spirit in the sun — the moon — a star — a man — an ani- mal— a vegetable. Our safest refuge, our most refined ideas, would, in those circumstances, be found in anthro- pomorphism ; for what higher notions of personal subsis- tence, or of its attributes, could we have than those deri- ved from ourselves ? There is no intermediate order of in- telligences, with whom we have any familiar intercourse, whose standard of living, or modes of operations, could originate in our minds any better speculation. And the scriptures, whenever they introduce such classes of beings to our notice, always clothe them with personal forms. Nor only so; but we are emphatically told, that man was made in the image and likeness of God. There must there- MORAL GOVERNMENT. 43 fore be a personal manifestation of God ; and the term per- son— of which more hereafter* — the term person, of which, in its application to deity, theologians tell us they can form no accurate idea, must have in that application the same import that it has every where else ; or the science of the- ology would sink as much below, as mere abstractions rise above, our intellectual level. How stands the fact as reported by the laborious histo- rian ? Have not men been continually employed and agi- tated by inquiries about God— his nature — his subsistence ? Has there ever been a nation without her Gods ? It will not avail to refer all this to priestcraft ; for whence was priestcraft derived ? How did it happen that this abused and despised system of political sophistry should have fur- nished the lofty conceptions of God and of eternity ? con- ceptions with which the philosopher's ideas of chance and annihilation compare, like matter compares with mind — a brute with a man — or a taper with the sun. And when phi- losophers abandoned the religion of their fathers, could they elude the idea of God? or eradicate it from the world ? Did Socrates — did Seneca — did Plato — did Cicero — who but, as the scriptures affirm, a fool, ever did, say in his heart there is no God ? No impression is more universal or uni- form, than this — there is a God ; nor any inference more general or natural than this — we owe him our homage, and he ought to be worshipped. But under this impression and inference the questions necessarily arise — how shall we worship him ? Where shall we meet him ? in what form shall we address him ? with with what service will he be pleased ? Take Faber's great work on the Pagan Idol, or his Mysteries of the Cabiri, or Bryant's Observations, for your guide, and see how the heathen world laboured and heaved ! Ignorant of the per- sonal manifestation Jehovah had made of himself, and in- *See Lecture V. 44 LECTURES ON competent to estimate the subsequent manifestation in the flesh which he had promised, how ingeniously, yet wretch- edly, they systematised their personifications ! The tradi- tion of Adam and his three sons, united with that of Noah and his three sons, originated the idea of a succession of worlds ; and that of the great Father triplicating himself as the head of each. Then the host of heaven being blend- ed with their divine heroes, the sun, moon, and stars call- ed for adoration. Nor has infidelity, when she talks of the great temple of nature, done any thing more than throw the whole together, in one confused, undistinguished, mass ; or, falling from the high ideas of personal existence, which the nature of man suggests, she abets mere materialism on the one hand, or is irrecoverably lost in profitless abstrac- tions on the other. Thus we have reached a point where, from the very ne- cessities of our nature, a farther manifestation of God, than that afforded by the material universe, becomes indispen- sable. There is no intermediate symbol between that gen- eral manifestation, and a personal subsistence ; and to go be- yond this last, is to pass out of the system to which man belongs. A manifestation by a personal subsistence (the Word) is the very thing we need. Withhold it, and man- kind must either sink into the grossest superstition, or be conscious of an obligation which they have neither ability nor opportunity to meet. Nor is this all ; but turning away from the evils of life, under the strongest desires after glo- ry, honor and immortality, eternity becomes a blank, and men grow frantic with wild conjecture ; or sinking into apathy, they die like the brute. The necessity for a per- sonal manifestation of Jehovah is found therefore, in the constitution of man. Again : God is a spirit, and man has a spirit. Here is similitude. Common attributes and common principles, throughout nature, lead to association. Accordingly this is the very basis on which the scriptures have erected their MORAL GOVERNMENT. 45 whole moral superstructure, depending for its strength and beauty on an endless variety of moral affinities. Man, they say, was made in the image of God, and the highest point of intellectual effort which they recommend to him, is to think, speak and act like God. The God of the bi- ble is the God of nature ; and what he has written in the bible, he has inscribed on nature. Natural and revealed religion are the development of the same essential moral principles. Christian philosophers yield half their argu- ment, as I believe, when they represent Christianity as an original system : for the characteristics of Christianity are, in fact, only the modified operation of the original insti- tute. The gospel is intended, by its remedial agency, to retrieve at last, when Jesus shall surrender the kingdom to his Father, the disaster which has been introduced by the fall, so far as that can be done in consistency with the free agency of man. I have remarked that what is written in the bible is in- scribed on nature ; particularly in view of the fact that man is made in the image of God. Hence we find, throughout the whole history of our race, that men are like the gods whom they worship. If the gods be supposed to be sensu- al, their worshippers are sensual : if the gods be cruel, their worshippers are cruel : if the gods be intellectual, their worshippers are intellectual. Even now, when men make the world the great object of their admiration, they become like it. When they contemplate the spirituality of the Re- deemer's character and government, they become spiritual : beholding or reflecting his glory they are changed into his image. The denominations of christians who view God in all the benevolence which he has written in the scrip- tures, or carried out in his providence, are observed to im- bibe like gracious affections ; while those who think him harsh or always mysterious, go down to the grave unrecon- ciled in their feelings, and doubtful as to their destiny. This is human nature. It cannot be otherwise. The 46 LECTURES ON brightest, the holiest, the most philosophical idea which the human mind can conceive, is that of resembling God. Nor is this all. Association among human beings is founded on the same principle. The child imitates his pa- rent, and grows like him ; the servant imitates his master, and grows like him ; the pupil imitates his preceptor, and grows like him ; the soldier imitates his commander, and grows like him; the subject imitates his prince, and grows like him. Whatever character a man knows to be above or superior to his own, and which he at the same time ad- mires and loves, he will not fail to resemble ; and that just so far as he contemplates it. That God should present him- self within the range of human observation, and in the way best calculated to attract our notice and excite our admira- tion, is the certain and only effectual method of either ele- vating man when innocent, or restoring him when fallen. I repeat it : this is human nature — both its philosophy and its religion. God manifested in personal form, instead of being an irrational view of the divine operations, is one of the most rational in the whole range of morals. The doc- trine of Christ's divinity is founded in human nature ; while the exhibition of his mediatorial character is the purest dis- play of every moral excellence which it is desirable for man to possess, and is exactly suited to our present state of sin and suffering. He who is like Christ, is a holy, digni- fied, heavenly, happy man. In this way human beings have always estimated the subject of God. They have uniformily recognized the ne- cessity for an image, from which they could derive becom- ing ideas of the personal perfections of their Creator. Mo- ses speaks with great frequency and familiarity of the di- vine appearances, and severely censures the image worship into which the nations around him had declined. All the heathen have preserved the early error. And Paul, while he represents Christ as the image of the invisible God, yet condemns the gentiles, not on account of the general me- MORAL GOVERNMENT. 47 diatorial principle in which they confided, but because they changed the glory or similitude — for glory is manifested ex- cellence— of the incorruptible God, into an image made like to corruptible man, &c. The later errorists have gone a great deal farther ; and, rushing into a wretched extreme, have disgusted the intelligent, and abused the ignorant, by filling their churches with pictures and images. Through- out the christian church, by the formation of voluntary as- sociations, a series of sectarian affinities have been cre- ated ; and each devotee is like, and true to his party. Each has his sectarian views of God, or, as Stillingfleet expres- ses it, "Imperious, self-willed men are apt to cry up God's absolute power and dominion as his greatest perfection ; easy and soft-spirited men, his patience and goodness ; se- vere and rigid men, his justice and severity : every one ac- cording to his humour or temper, making his God of his own complexion." Even the sceptical philosopher himself has expended all his vigor in his researches after some in- telligible idea of God ; and is lost in the immensity of an inconceivable abstraction. Having shown, as I believe, the impossibility that man- kind should form any accurate or satisfactory idea of Jeho- vah abstractedly considered ; that the constitution of human nature renders a personal manifestation of God indispensa- bly necessaiy ; that theologians, in attempting to lead us be- yond the exhibition which God has made of himself, have done nothing but entertain us with their conjectures, and confound us with their mysteries ; and that when the pro- position introduced by Moses, — "In the beginning God made the heavens and the earth," is considered as the start- ing point for such unprofitable speculations, he must be en- tirely misunderstood ; let us proceed to inquire more parti- cularly what the sacred historian does mean. If we now turn to the hebrew text, we shall find that a literal translation would very materially change the decla- ration, at present under discussion. We should then have 4g LECTURES ON the following proposition : — "In the beginning the Elohim made the heavens and the earth." The term Elohim is in the plural number ; so that plurality is thus predicated of the Creator. How ? In what sense ? The inquiry is im- portant, if for no other reason, yet because it will lead us away from those metaphysical abstractions in which theolo- gians and philosophers have so freely indulged, when speak- ing or writing of our general subject. That the proposition which is now offered may be dis- tinctly apprehended by those who have no acquaintance with the hebrew language, let it be observed, that the ori- ginal word which I have merely anglicised, has been fre- quently rendered gods, by our translators. Thus: "God doth know, that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, Elohim, knowing good and evil."* "All the gods, Elohim, of the nations are idols. "t Suppose for the sake of illustration — and let it be remembered that I make the supposition merely for the sake of illustration — suppose that our present text should be ren- dered thus: — "In the be^innino; the gods made the hea- vens and the earth." Would not this translation very ma- terially affect the character of the Mosaic proposition ? The subject therefore which we have now to investigate, is this : — what does Moses mean ? what do the whole scrip- tures mean, by the Elohim ? Our inquiry is manifestly of paramount importance, and we must pursue it very care- fully and deliberately. In the outset of our investigations we shall be met by the remark, that the peculiar manner in which Moses speaks of God, has been often observed before ; and that the fact has been as often confidently urged as a strong argument in favor of the doctrine of a divine trinity. This plea is not to be denied. But then the question starts up before us, what do theologians mean by trinity ? The word is not *Gen. iii. 5. fl Chron. xvi. 26. Ps. xcvi. 5. \ MORAL GOVERNMENT. 49 scriptural. None of the prophets, none of the apostles, have used it. It is not to be found, even in the apocryphal books. What then shall we understand by the term ? Or what is the doctrine which it is intended to express ? Have not our theologians, in using the fact to which we are now adverting, doubly perplexed moral science ? Have they not, instead of leaving us to the contemplation of one inconceivable abstraction, absolutely given us three abstrac- tions! Have they not taught us that there are three omnis- cient, omnipresent, omnipotent persons ? And yet have they not resolutely maintained that there is but one God ? We shall then be under the necessity of inquiring what is to be understood by the term person ? I do not object to its use, if it is understood in its proper sense. But if it is to be taken in an improper sense, or rather as having no deter- minate sense — the way in which theologians do employ it, imagining that in its proper sense it cannot be applied to Jehovah— if, I say, it is to be taken improperly, then, like trinity, it is unscriptural. Our translators have rendered the greek term hypostasis, used by Paul in the first chap- ter of his epistle to the Hebrews, by the word person ; and they have done right. But still our translators were theo- logians; and, as such, were advocates of the doctrine of "three persons in the Godhead." Theyhave consequent- ly attached to the term the meaning, as far as any mean- ing was given, which was ascribed to it after the council of Nice. While I do not object to the term when used in its pro- per sense, as I shall explain at large hereafter,* and as I have remarked that theologians use it in an improper sense, it is necessary to inquire more particularly what they do mean ? — or rather what they do not mean ? They do not mean to say, that there are three distinct beings, for that would make three Gods. Neither do they use the See Lecture V. Vol. I.— 5 50 LECTURES ON term, as it is employed when we speak of a man; for that would make three distinct beings, and of course three Gods. But they find, as they suppose, personal attributes and ope- rations ascribed in the bible to the Father ; in like manner they find them ascribed to the Son and the Holy Spirit ; and hence they infer, that there is a something — that there is a distinction of some kind — in the divine essence : which something or distinction they cannot express by any better term than person, while yet they profess to have no clear or well defined idea of its import ; and having thus express- ed their doctrine, in words which they acknowledge them- selves unable to explain, they give up the whole matter as an incomprehensible mystery. One of their late writers has expressed himself on this subject in the following words: " Of the precise import of the term personality, as applied to a distinction in the divine essence, or of the peculiar nature and mode of that distinction, I shall riot presume to attempt conveying to your minds any clear conception. I cannot impart to you what I do not possess myself ; — and convinced as I am, that such conception cannot be attained by any, it had been well, I think, if such attempts at explanation by comparisons from nature and otherwise, had never been made. They have afforded to the enemies of the doctrine, much unnecessary occasion for burlesque and blasphemy." * Even Augustin himself, one of the most distinguished of the Latin Fathers and who took a very active part in the discussions on this sub- ject, which were prevalent in his age, considered the phrase three persons, not as being precisely accurate, but merely preferable to silence. He viewed the subject as above hu- man comprehension, and therefore did not know how to speak about it. Thus it is estimated at the present day : and those who are not satisfied with the representations which are made, are afraid to touch it, or find a very convenient * Wardlaw's Discourses, pp. 10, 11. MORAL GOVERNMENT. 5] escape under the .general impression, that the whole affair is an inscrutable mystery. I know of no ecclesiastical matter whose history exhibits more distracting anxieties among divines, or more of that kind of speculation which men pursue under the guidance of false philosophy, while the scriptures themselves are for- gotten, than this very controversy about the trinity. I have time to state but a few general facts. This controversy appears to have followed the introduc- tion of the Grecian philosophy into the church, in the se- cond centur}'' ; and though various heresies were started, yet the christian doctors in general, down to the fourth cen- tury, appear to have " entertained different sentiments upon the subject" of Godhead, " without giving the least offence ; and discoursed variously concerning the distinctions between Father, Son and Holy Spirit, each one following his respec- tive opinion with the utmost liberty." In the third century, Noetus of Smyrna, "an obscure man." taught that the supreme God united himself to the man Christ, and was born and crucified with him. He and his followers were hence called Patripassians, as they main- tained that the Father of the universe died for the sins of men. Their idea does not appear to have been entirel}- thrown out of the church to this day ; for we often hear of a suffering, expiring, rising God. About the middle of the same century, Sabellius appear- ed, and maintained that "a certain energy only, proceeding from the supreme parent, or a certain portion of the divine nature, was united to the Son of God, the man Jesus ; and he considered, in the same manner, the Holy Spirit, as a portion of the everlasting Father." Both these views of trinity had been promulgated in the preceding century — one by Praxeas "a very distinguish- ed man and a confessor at Rome ;" and the other by Thep- dotus, "a tanner, yet a man of learning and a philosopher, and by Artemasor Artemon, from whom originated' the Ar- 52 LECTURES ON \ W temonites." Still, historians feel it to be very difficult to state with precision what the sentiments of these individu- als were. The latter view, under the name of Sabellianism, has figured most conspicuously in controversial theology ; and though no two writers agree in their account, or pretend accurately to define what Sabellianism was, yet the epithet is very freely used, and very dogmatically applied to a re- puted heresy, and even by those who have never been dis- tinguished for their enlarged acquaintance with ecclesiasti- cal antiquities. By this means, the community, who have no opportunity of ascertaining what Sabellianism was, are led to imagine that it was a hateful something, full as bad as, if not worse than, unitarianism itself. The account which I have just given, has been taken from Mosheim' s ecclesiastical history. I have preferred his state- ment to that of any other, because I believe that the author is fully entitled to all the praise he has received, as the best writer in his department with whom the public are, or have the opportunity to be, acquainted: — Because Arius, whom every one acknowledges to have been a very acute and subtle reasoner, charges Alexander, whom the orthodox, would uphold, as promulgating Sabellianism : — and because that Alexander himself, in repelling the charge, asserts that Sabellius taught £he doctrine of "separations and effluxes of parts." His view then, as Arius supposed, was not materially different from the orthodox statements ; because it involved a distinction in the divine essence itself — or, I should rather say, in Jehovah as a self-existent Being. When these "separations or effluxes of parts" take place, or are presented, what matters it whether you call those parts by the inadequate term portions, or by the term persons, which no one professes to be able to explain ? If therefore, there is any Sabellianism countenanced in the church, it is by the trinitarians themselves. They are the Sabellians of the present day; and if Sabellianism be heresy, they are the heretics. Permit me then, most distinctly and MORAL GOVERNMENT. , 53 pointedly, to throw off an imputation which no speculations of mine have deserved, and to refer it in honest appropria- tion to those to whom it is due. * While the doctrine of Sabellius was frequently condemn- ed, the church, so far as any general facts can be stated, appears to have been divided in sentiment, even when a formal decision was attempted. In the east the trinity was explained as being one essence and three substances : and in the west as one substance and three persons. At last a crisis occurred. Alexander, bishop of Alexan- dria, "on a certain time, in presence of the priests that were under him, and the rest of the clergy," as Socrates the historian informs us, began to discourse somewhat ' ' more curiously of the holy trinity and the unity to be in the trinity. Arius then being one of the priests placed in order under him, a man very skilful in the subtleties of so- phistical logic, suspecting the bishop to have brought into the church the erroneous doctrine of Sabellius the Africk, and being kindled with the desire of contention, set himself opposite against the opinions of Sabellius -the Africk, and as it seemed directly against the allegations of the bishop." An ecclesiastical war was thus commenced ; the whole church was thrown into fearful commotion ; council after council was called ; creed after creed was"*framed ; the civil arm was employed; and from that day to this we have the doctrine of the three persons on the one hand, or that of Arius and its consequences on the other. So then on both sides, the controvertists must trace their origin to the fourth century ; and their unceasing strife is as fair a comment as could be desired, on the value of creeds and confessions of faith. In this review, unitarianism can boast but little ; for the most part she is shorn even of the little glory that Arius left her. * See Letters ef Alexander and Arius — Mosheim, Murdoch's Trans, vol. i pp. 3-13 — 4. Note ; and my Essay on Creeds, chap, viiu ft* 54 LECTURES ON It is really painful to read the account given of those times by Hilary, who was perfectly familiar with their con- tentions, and whose authority is not to be disputed. Thus he writes — " It is a thing equally deplorable and dangerous, that there are as many creeds as there are opinions among men ; as many doctrines as inclinations ; and as many sources of blasphemy as there are faults among us ; be- cause WE MAKE CREEDS ARBITRARILY, AND EXPLAIN THEM as arbitrarily. And as there is but one faith, so there is but one only God, one Lord, and one baptism. We re- nounce this one faith, when we make so many different creeds ; and that diversity is the reason why we have no true faith among us. We cannot be ignorant, that since the council of Nice, we have done nothing but make creeds. And while we fight against words, litigate about new questions, dispute about equivocal terms, complain of authors, that every one may make his own party triumph : while we cannot agree, while we anathematize one ano- ther, there is hardly one that adheres to Jesus Christ. What change was there not in the creed last year ! The first coun- cil ordained a silence upon the homoousion ; the second es- tablished it, and would have us speak ; the third excuses the fathers of the council, and pretends they took the word ousia simply ; the fourth condemns them, instead of ex- cusing them. With respect to the likeness of the Son of God to the Father, which is the faith of our deplorable times, they dispute whether he is like in whole or in part. These are rare folks to unravel the secrets of hea- ven. Nevertheless it is for these creeds about invisible mysteries, that we calumniate one another, and for our be- lief in God. We make creeds every year ; nay every moon ' Ave repent of what we have done, we defend those that re- pent, we anathematize those that we defended, So we condemn either the doctrine of others in ourselves, or our own in that of others ; and reciprocally tearing one ano- ther to pieces, we have been the cause of each other's ruin." MORAL GOVERNMENT. Jk 55 Even Augustin himself, describing his own times, sa3's — ' ' That the yoke once laid upon the Jews was more sup- portable than that laid on many christians in his age — For the christian bishops introduced, with but slight alter- ations, into the christian worship, those rites and institutions by which formerly the Greeks and Romans, and others had manifested their piety and reverence towards their imagi- nary deities ; supposing that the people would more readily embrace Christianity, if they perceived the rites handed down to them from their fathers, still existing unchanged among the christians ; and saw that Christ and the martyrs were worshipped in the same manner as formerly their gods were. There was, of course, little difference in these times between the public worship of the christians and that of the Greeks and Romans. In both there were splendid robes, mitres, tiaras, wax tapers, crosiers, processions, lus- trations, images, golden and silver vases, and innumerable other things alike." * Such is the account given of those deplorable times, whence the contending parties on the subject of trinity have derived their doctrines. A modern writer, whose candour may be highly admired, and whose literary pre- eminence none will question,! has, in a very short para- graph, described the deep and dreadful fall of ecclesi- astical men. — " In about three hundred years after the ascen- sion of Jesus, without the aid of secular power, or church authority, the christian religion spread over a large part of Asia, Europe and Africa, and at the accession of Constantine, and convention of the council of Nice, it was almost every where throughout these countries in a flourishing condition, n the space of another three hundred years, or a little more, the beauty of the christian religion was greatly cor- rupted in a large part of that extent, its glory defaced, and its light almost extinguished. What can this be so much * Murdoch's Trans, p. 331, vol. i. f Lardner 56 LECTURES OK owing to, as to the determination and transactions of the- council of Nice, and the measures thus set on foot, and fol- lowed in succeeding times?'3 Is it not a melancholy and tearful tale ? In what, I pray you, may the advocates of creeds, or the idolaters of these early saints, so enthusias- tically glory ? Surely the generality of christians, who cen- sure so severely their heretical brethren, eulogize so highly the virtues of the fathers, and so confidently talk of the good old ways, cannot have the most distant idea of the facts in the case ; — facts which they may all know by reading a few pages of ecclesiastical history. The controversy has never yet been settled. Though men in power have been able to fling obloquy upon the ec- clesiastic who dared to question the popular dogma, and to fill the public mind with the most appalling suspicions of his integrity, yet the reader of ecclesiastical history well knows, that the subject has been often canvassed, notwith- standing the fearful risk incurred. He will readily remem- ber the contests occasioned by Peter, surnamed the Ful- ler, and the formula of concord offered by the emperor Zeno, commonly called his Henoticon, in the fifth centu- ry:— The agitated questions in the sixth, "whether it could be properly said that one of the trinity was crucified ?" and, "whether it was proper to say, Christ's person was compounded ?" As well as the sect of the Tritheists, head- ed by John Ascunage, who " imagined there were in God, three numerically distinct natures, or subsistencies, all per- fectly alike and connected by no common vinculum of es- sence ;" — The mandate of Hincmar concerning Me trine God, which the Benedictine monks refused to obey, in the ninth : — The notion advanced by Joachim, abbot of Flora, who "denied that there was in the sacred trinity, a some- thing, or an essence, which was common to the three per- sons : from which position it seemed to follow, that the union of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, is not a simple or na- tural union, but merely a moral union, like that of several MORAL GOVERNMENT. 57 persons all having the same views and opinions," in the thir- teenth : — The imputations thrown on Calixtus, in the seven- teenth /—and at a later period the discussions which were started, and the fears that were excited, by Burnet, Maty, Clarke, Waterland, and even by Dr. Watts — whose psalms and hymns have been so long popular ; and yet, whose sanity, as well as orthodoxy, has been questioned by many, who would deserve a great deal of praise, had they imitated his candor, or displayed his intellectual power. The preceding sketch,, though rapid and imperfect, is en- tirely sufficient for the purpose for which it has been in- troduced. It serves to show what consequences have fol- lowed the reverence that has been paid to the Grecian phi- losophy , and the surrender of individual liberty to ecclesi- astical dominion. And what has been gained ? A dogma which no man ever pretended to explain ; expressed in terms which all admit must be understood in a sense both unique and improper ; and from which so many are revolt- ing so rudely, or to which they bow so reluctantly. Timi- dity and superstition seal many lips in silence, while litera- ry objectors forget the dignity of the subject in the inge- nuity of verbal criticism. And is it then a criminal and presumptuous feeling which prompts researches beyond the period when this series of evils commenced ? May we not go back and ask what was believed concerning Jeho- vah, when the only inquiry was, whether there were more Gods than one ? Controversy existed, but assuredly the ques- tion was not how many persons there are in the godhead ? This question the scriptures have not discussed, though they have most freely remarked on the iniquity of idolatry. And should we ascertain what that doctrine was, when prophets and. apostles wrote, are we to be censured as the abettors of innovation ? Rather do we not discard innovation, and obey that good old direction, which has been so often quoted amiss, and with a very sanctimonious air — "Thus saith the Lord, stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old 58 LECTURES ON" paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls." # I object then to the popular doctrine on this subject, be- cause the terms in which it is expressed are not scriptural ; because they came into the church long after the apostles had gone to their rest, and are the technicalities of a most de- generate and contentious age ; because they required more synodical force and civil authority to bring them into the church, than can now be obtained to keep them there ; be- cause no man can even pretend to explain them ; because they never have done any thing but engender strife, and prevent the lover of the Son of God from understanding his gospel ; and because we are explicitly commanded to speak the things which "are freely given to us of God, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Spirit teacheth, comparing spiritual things with spiritual."! Objecting to these terms and phrases, for the reasons which have been stated, I propose to throw them all aside, and to examine the scriptures on this subject for myself. Can any of my brethren condemn my purpose ? Why should I not see truth with my own eyes ? Will God refuse to give grace and wisdom to a man who honestly intends to "search the scriptures" for himself? Or is it impossible for a pray- erful student to acquire a knowledge of God from the bible, when God is revealed in the bible ? I apprehend that there must be some mistake about this matter ; and that the idea of an inscrutable mystery has alarmed us all. by a great deal, too much. Is it not humiliating that we should be speaking of God in unintelligible language ? and when we see so many driven from the altars of our Master by this very fact? Brethren, I must examine this subject, if in the end I fail. But I address myself to the task with a manly, yet humble, confidence,' that I shall not be unsuccessful. Is not this the province in which we are all called to exer- cise FAITH. *Jer. vi. 16. t 1 Cor- »• 12> 13, MORAL GOVERNMENT. 59 The question returns upon us — what does Moses mean by Elohim? Let us carefully and patiently pursue this in- quiry. In the progress of ages, terms not unfrequently change their import entirely ; and even when they do not, yet their illustration may be very much modified by a new combina- tion of circumstances to which they may be applied. It is therefore one of the best methods of ascertaining the force of any term, which a writer may use in any particular age, to consider whether that term had any special import or re-- ference in the age in which he lived. Moses appears in his official character and relations, when writing this history. We must read his historical chapters, as those of the old testament apostle, commissioned to establish the Jewish commonwealth; a measure on which Jehovah had resolved for particular reasons. The object for which he wrote may throw a great deal of light on the terms he em- ploys. And as he thought a brief history of the preceding state of the world to be necessary to accomplish the end he had in view, perhaps the general prefatory facts which he records may be equally relevant in our present researches. By referring to his account, we find that Cain and Abel, a few years after the fall, are introduced to our notice. Cain is represented as being exceedingly offended — perhaps because for some misconduct, he had been despoiled of his birthright, and disrobed of his official honors, as his father's successor. The scriptural facts and comments certainly place the character of Abel in bold relief, and show that Cain was a dishonored, and a dishonorable man. He resents the affront by murdering his brother, and finally departs from the presence of the Lord, to dwell in the land of Nod. His going out from the presence of the Lord, is a very peculiar phrase, and imports, as might be readily shown, his aban- donment of the ceremonial establishment which God had erected, when he placed the cherubim of glory in a taberna- cle, at the east end of the garden of Eden. The service 60 LECTURES ON required by the law of this mediatorial dispensation, it id very evident from the story, he had first despised or corrupt- ed. His departure to the land of Nod, was a virtual, if not a malignant, rejection of the ritual which had been given to his father. In other words, he denied the doctrine, and disowned his allegiance to the authority, of the Mediator. After Abel's murder, and Cain's apostacy, Seth becomes his father's official heir. From him proceeds a race of official men, known in the history as the sons God. These sons of God, in process of time, so far lose their integrity as to marry the daughters of men, or the daughters of Cain. The result was official infidelity, and most lamentable degenera- cy. At last Noah stands alone as officially righteous ; and Jehovah, entering into covenant with him, brings the flood upon the earth. The crime of the antediluvian age appears, then, to have been the rejection of the Mediator — it was INFIDELITY. The mediatorial constitution was renewed in Noah, and a farther promise was given that the Lord would not again curse the ground any more for man's sake. But mankind corrupted their way a second time before the Lord ; and though their crime was not precisely the same with the an- tediluvian rebellion, yet it was so fearful in its character, and so degrading and desolating in its consequences, that something must be done, or truth would be driven from the earth. They did not deny, but they corrupted, the media- torial institute. They changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like unto corruptible man. They did not sink into sheer infidelity, but they declined into idolatry. And it was in order to counteract this state of things, or to preserve the knowledge of God as revealed in the Mediator, that Jehovah entered upon that new and pe- culiar course of legislation, which is called, in the scrip- tures, the mystery of his will; and which commenced with the call of Abraham from the midst of his idolatrous family. To carry out this general benevolent purpose, his descend- MORAL GOVERNMENT. 61 &nts were first elected, as the gentiles were afterwards. It is in this very connexion that Moses receives his commis- sion. He was sent to bring the children of Abraham from Egypt, and to conduct them to their official station in the land of Canaan, as the elect of the Lord. Of course the specific object for which Moses was consecrated, and for which the nation was chosen, was to proclaim the know- ledge of the true God, in opposition to polytheism. " The law was added because of corruptions."* There is not the least indistinctness in the conclusion we have reached. Moses never loses sight of his object, but most solemnly and emphatically charges the people respect- ing it.— " Hear, O Israel, Jehovah, our Elohim, is one Jehovah."! In this connexion then, we must consider and explain the term, after whose scriptural import we are in- quiring. Observe, Moses says — our Elohim ! Were there any other Elohim ? Yes : many, very many. The gods of the heathen, which were innumerable, were called Elohim : — "all the Elohim of the nations," says the psalmist, "are idols." And this is the contrast which Moses would pre- sent;— "Jehovah, our Elohim is one Jehovah," or God : the Elohim of the nations are many. But more than this : the nations imagined that there was " a great universal Father, himself one and many," and that from him "a divine emanation proceeded; who, assuming the form of a man, has descended from heaven for the pur- pose of reforming and instructing and reconciling the hu- man race. Nor, according to the speculations of the gen- tiles, has this descent been accomplished once only : on the contrary it has often been accomplished, and at each de- scent, the emanation is in some sort esteemed a new per- son, and is distinguished by a new title. This is paganism as explained and received throughout the east ; and to this *Gal. iii. 19. t Duet. vi. 4. Vol. L— 6 62 LECTURES ON . day prevails among the Hindoos."* Thus the Elohim, among idolaters, included many gods, and many emana- tions, descending in the form of man, for mediatorial pur- poses: but our Elohim, says Moses, is only one Jehovah. Why then did Moses use the term Elohim at all ? Would it not, instead of counteracting idolatry, rather countenance and perpetuate it? Or does he intend to convey the idea of a divine emanation, proceeding from heaven, and assum- ing the form of a man, for mediatorial purposes ? Or if the term emanation is altogether unscriptural, and entirely dis- proportioned to the magnitude of the subject, did he design to teach any analogous doctrine ? It evidently appears that the idea of plurality, in some form or other, is to be predi- cated of God, or the word could not have any other than an injurious tendency; as all the idolatrous nations most abun- dantly testify, by the use they have made of it. Could Mo- ses then jeopard so carelessly the character of the dispen- sation he was commissioned to introduce ? While he was professedly condemning polytheism, could he so inconsid- erately establish it among his own people ? Or was it im- possible for him to impart the knowledge of the true God, and give a detailed account of the works of Jehovah, with- out making this representation ? Is it then necessarily true, that there has been an emana- tion from Jehovah, or something analogous to it, appearing among men, and in the form of 'man? I see not how an af- firmative answer can be avoided. On the contrary, if we proceed with Moses, in his history, we shall find that he ac- tually, unequivocally, and more than once, states the fact, that God did appear in the likeness of man. Read the short sketches he has given of Abraham's life and of Jacob's life.t There is no escape from a testimony which is so clear and explicit. And if there can be no escape, then in the fact of a divine manifestation unto men, we have the reason for * Faber's Three Dis. vol. 2, p. 395. tGen. xviii. 1—33; xxxii. 24—32. MORAL GOVERNMENT. 63 the use of the plural noun Elohim, and its various adjuncts. From the nature of the case, this ancient apostle could not speak in any other way ; and the doctrine which the phrase- ology implies was indispensably necessary, both to correct the aberrations into which idolaters had fallen, and to an- nounce to mankind the one Jehovah. It is-worthy of special notice that Moses, when he reca- pitulates the account of the creation with a view of dis- playing the political relations in which Adam was placed, employs the compound term — Jehovah- Elohim — as the offi- cial title by which God was designated ; and this title is used throughout the last two chapters under consideration. It is, as I understand it, equivalent with Logos, or Word. And had our translators made us as familiar with the he- brew term Jehovah-Elohim, as they have with the he- brew term Jehovah ; or had they marked the distinction between the two titles, as they have in the new testament distinguished between God and Word ; or had we noticed the difference between Jehovah, and Lord God, which the translators have made, the subject of trinity would be, I apprehend, better understood at present. — We shall have occasion to observe this peculiarity hereafter. The foregoing argument may be illustrated and confirm- ed, if we call up a similar representation made by the apos- tle Paul, in his first epistle to the Corinthians. Like Moses, he had occasion to condemn the idolatry around him ; and to oppose to it the revelation of the true God which had been made. In arguing on the propriety of eating meat offered in sacrifice to idols, he remarks, "There be gods many, and lords many : But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him ; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him."* As though he had said, — "The heathen have many gods, and many lords proceeding from them in the likeness of men ; but we have only one God, and one Lord proceed- *Ch, viiL 5, 6. 64 LECTURES ON ing from him — the lord from heaven, in the likeness of man."t Is this not the plain and evident meaning of* what he has said ? It might, in reading this passage hastily, or for sectarian purposes, be imagined that the apostle had no intention to ■ represent Jesus Christ as any thing more than a mere man. But where would be the point of the contrast? The hea- then did not think their lords to be mere men, but consid- ered them to be so many emanations from the gods ; which, having accomplished the object of their descent, returned and were re-absorbed in deity. This is the doctrine which Paul was opposing. And what would an ingenuous hea- then understand him to mean by the one Lord Jesus, but one emanation from the one God, and the only one that could be acknowledged? Here then we have Moses and' Paul in the same attitude. Though they lived in very dif- ferent ages, and were official men under very different dis- pensations, yet they state precisely the same moral problem. Moses says — "Jehovah our Elohim is one Jehovah," and records the fact of his appearing in the likeness of a man r and Paul says — "we have one God, even the Father, and one Lord Jesus Christ," who did appear in the fashion of man, and denominates him the lord from heaven ; and all this too in an argument against idolatry. Evidently this Lord of whom Paul speaks, belongs to the EL'OHiMof which Moses speaks ; and in both cases there is but one Jehovah : — one god, of whom are all things, the heavens and earth and all their host, and we in him ; and one lord, by whom are all things, the heavens and earth and all their host, and we by him. The two inspired writers give us the very same ideas. The Redeemer himself explains the term Elohim, in the same manner in one of his arguments with the Jews, when; he asks — <*'If he called them Elohim, (Gods) to whom- fl Cor. xv. A7. MORAL GOVERNMENT. 65 the word of God came, say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified and sent into the world. — Thou blasphemest, because I said — I am Elohim (the son of God)."* This being the imp'ort of the term under consideration, Moses must use it in its own official sense; and so we will' have Jehovah and Jehovah-ELOHiM ; or as Paul says — God and Lord. Hence it is we hear of the voice of Jehovah- Elohim ; because whenever Jehovah, by the assumption of form, shall be recognized as Elohim, his word is com- municated to us by that form, as his ministerial organ, in the same way that the form, of man was afterwards his ministerial organ. And hence it is that John, instead of using the hebrew official term jEHOVAH-EiroHiM, takes the most significant greek term Logos, or Word. — But to this particular illustration we shall hereafter return ; and in the mean time, merely remark, that the term Elohim is used in reference to the Creator as manifested to his creatures — to the Redeemer, as God manifested in the flesh — to angels, and to men, as secondary agents whereby Je- hovah would manifest his truth, and reveal or execute his purposes. Elohim is the title of magistracy, and belongs to the official organ, by which God, who is a Spirit, com- municates his word, or will, to men. Our discussion conducted thus far, has enabled us dis- tinctly to perceive that the scriptural representation of Je- hovah offers to our consideration Jehovah and Jehovah- Elohim, or one God and one Lord. Such has been the biblical fact from the beginning ; and such it is now ; — equally characteristic of creation and redemption. Would it not be difficult, nay impossible, to express the whole of this fact, without plural nouns, pronouns, verbs and adjec- tives ? Is there any alternative, except it shall be to em- ploy more nouns than one, and say, Jehovah, and Jeho- * See Lecture V. John x. 34, 35, compared with Psalm LXXXII. 6. * 6 ffi LECTURES ON vah-ELOHiM, or God and Lord ? Such is in truth the pro- per use of the plural form of a word ; it saves repetition, and would never be more needed than in an infantile state of society and of language, when words couM not be very numerous, and distinctions could not be very minute. But when the fact is thus ascertained, that the scriptures speak so freely of Jehovah and Jehovah-Elohim, or of God and Lord, and when the necessity for plural words so im- mediately follows, what inference shall we draw ? Are there two Gods equal to each other ; or one supreme God, and another subordinate God ? By no means, all the inspir- ed writers would reply. There is no truth about which they are more positive, than that there is but one God ; nor any in which reason would more promptly or entirely sustain them. Polvtheism too, as it has existed in the world, has ever given the rein to the most licentious fancy, degraded the individual character, and desolated the social joys, of man. It has been the very desecration of the human spirit, in the temple where Jehovah has called it to minister to his glory. But what shall we do with this scriptural exhibition of our Creator ? Can any doctrine of trinity be more perplex- ing than this duality which is thus demonstrably asserted in the bible ? Jehovah, Jehovah-Elohim, and Spirit, are not more embarrassing to the philosophic moralist, in view of the unity of God, than Jehovah and Jehovah-Elohim, or Father and Son, are : nor would it be more easy to explain the one mode of expression than the other, on any received hypo- thesis. To say that there are two persons in one case, or three persons in the other, is only to change the terms and keep the difficulty. Let it be remembered, that in human nature itself there is a necessity- for a manifestation of Jehovah in personal form, if the preceding argument be at all accurate or conclusive. If man cannot perceive spirit, abstractedly considered, and if God be, in and of himself, a spirit, then either God must MORAL GOVERNMENT. 67 manifest himself to us, or we must remain entirely ignorant of him. Suppose that Jehovah should manifest himself in personal form, according to the condition of our nature — would we not speak of him as God, and God manifested! In this second view, would there be any impropriety in the application of a term, or a title, which would express the object of that manifestation, or the relation in which Je- hovah would consequently stand to us ? Suppose that term, or title, should be Lord : — would there be any im- propriety in the phrase God and Lord ? Would the phrase imply that there are two gods, or two persons in Godhead ? Would there be any thing difficult or abstruse about such a use of terms, under such circumstances ? Is it not precise- ly what our nature calls for ? And to our view, who are in- formed that God is a spirit, would it not create all the dis- tinction which, after all, we can perceive ? Suppose still farther that, amid the many philosophic or re- ligious errors which have been taught in the world, it should have been maintained, that there had been many such mani- festations, and that these had been proclaimed to us as so ma- ny different lords ; would it not thereby have become neces- sary to inform us that there is but one God and one Lord ;— ONE INFINITE SPIRIT, AND AN APPROPRIATE MANIFESTATION of that spirit ? Certain it is, whether the explanatory suggestion just made, be correct or not-, it contains the very thing that human beings need ; and expresses those very peculiarities which are ascribed to the Lord. He does come to manifest God unto us ; and on the principles of law which he thus announces, are we governed. He is an image of God to us: he is our king. Under these two distinct views is he continually represented, in both the old and new testaments. Beyond this manifestation of Jehovah we can- not go. Immediately, on making the attempt, we launch into the region of pure spirit, which we are not competent to perceive or to know. Beyond the law, thus derived, we have no duties: and any discussion of moral obligation 68 LECTURES ON which would carry us above the administration of this en- throned Lord, would finally plunge us into mystery, and leave us to perish amid our own vain conjectures and su- perstitious apprehensions. Thus far, it appears to me, that our way is clear, and the explanation distinct and unobjectionable. If any impor- tant particulars are supposed to have been left unnoticed, or not to have been exhibited with sufficient variety of illus- tration, let it not be forgotten, that I have merely commen- ced the discussion; and given the details of the subject in their own order, as they liave been suggested by the pro- * gress that has been made. Here then I pause for the pre- sent. May God give us "the Spirit of power, of love, and of a sound mind," and finally bring us to his heavenly glory, that we may see him as he is. LECTURE III. Jehovah- Elokim or Word — Two-fold manifestation of God — - Word made flesh — Form of God — Form of man — Name — Appearances to Abraham and Isaac and Jacob — To Moses — Scriptural statements reconciled. Some have maintained that, in the Mosaic system, no- thing can be found that could have been designed to exhi- bit in its purity the doctrine of a Messiah, or even to pre- serve it at all.* This position is one of the most inaccurate, not to say inconsiderate, which a philosophic moralist could advance. It has already been shown, that both natural and r.evealed religion, as they have been distinguished, are based * Michaelis' Com. on the laws of Moses. MORAL GOVERNMENT. 69 upon the constitution of human nature ; and that therefore the doctrine of Jehovah and Jehovah-ELOHiM, or of one God and one Lord, is essentially characteristic of both. Mankind can have no other idea of Jehovah; and never have attempted to advance any other, without winding up their speculations, either in sheer infidelity or fulsome idol- atry. In fact Moses appeared in the midst of a period when the world had lapsed into idol worship ; and was pro- fessedly engaged in erecting a system designed to restore to the earth the knowledge of the true God ; i. e. of Jeho- vah and Jehovah-ELOHiM. Hence he uses the plural noun Elohim. And though, in common with other official agents whom heaven has employed to proclaim to us the truth, he states a double view even of this doctrine of Jeho- vah, as shall presently be evinced; yet, while his legal economy rests on the primary idea of God, as known from the beginning, and as stated in these three chapters, his whole system was expressly intended to lead the people to the Messiah. "The law," says Paul, "was our school- master, to bring us unto Christ;"* i. e. Moses was officially occupied in teaching to mankind the elementary principle of God's moral government among men, on purpose to con- vince them of the necessity for its mediatorial ajjjjlicalion. Or, showing the peculiar character of the original manifes- tation which God had made of himself, he intended, or Je- hovah intended by him, to prepare the world for another manifestation in the flesh ; which is the sum and substance of the mediatorial scheme. There may be some apparent novelty in the preceding statement. The idea of a double manifestation of Jehovah — designed to be accommodated to our intellectual nature, and for the purpose of our holding fellowship with him — r may at first sight, seem to be, at least, exceedingly equivo- cal. Yet the fact exists, and is clearly stated in the scfip- *Gal. iii. 24. 70 LECTURES ON tures. It has been overlooked, and a great deal of confusion has resulted, both in the general interpretation of the scrip- tures, and on the subject of the trinity. For, as has alrea- dy been remarked, Christianity has been represented as an original system ; the remedial principle has not been clear- ly exhibited ; the argument on the subject of Christ's divini-> ty has been very defective ; and the analogies of nature com- mand little confidence. But on this point, something more is necessary than mere assertion. I then resume the analy- sis, and, returning to the records which Moses has furnished, call your attention to a particular circumstance which he has stated, and to its general illustration. In the third chapter, speaking of Adam and Eve, after they had eaten the forbidden fruit, he remarks — "They heard the voice of the Lord God," — Jehovah-Elohim it is in the hebrew — "walking: in the garden in the cool of the day."t The question naturally arises, what does Moses mean by Jehovah-Elohim ?" And to many it may seem to be a question that can be very easily answered. But perhaps they may not have attended to it very closely, and may not be aware of its general bearing on the moral go- vernment of God. Faber, in his Horse Mosaicce, and in his treatise on the three dispensations, considers the being,.thus manifested, to have been "the anthropomorphic Word ;" or a corporeal man- ifestation of Jehovah — the only begotten Son in human form. Mr. Scott remarks on the place — "Some visible tokens of the Lord's presence, 'perhaps in human form, seem here in- timated, of which we shall hereafter find undeniable instan- ces ; and which should be considered as anticipations of his incarnation, who is called the Word of God, though the word rendered walking may be referred to the voice, and not to the Lord." There is evidently a great deal of indistinctness in the preceding statements. Perhaps, says Mr. Scott, in hu- t Gen. iii. 8. MORAL GOVERNMENT. 71 man form. Mr* Faber has the very same impression ; the only begotten son in human FORM, he says, but leaves the whole matter very obscure. Now, it appears to me, that the firstdifficulty with which we meet in an investigation like the present, will be the cause of all the other difficulties which may follow : and that 'our great effort should be, to remove from our way that which first involved us in embarrassment. I therefore de- ny that Jehovah-Elohim, whom Adam and Eve heard walking in the garden, was the "anthropomorphic Word" — the only begotten Son in human form — or the Lord's pre- sence in human form. I may be considered to be exceed- ingly adventurous : but the following argument requires that I should take this stand. Let my reasons be carefully ex- amined. They are the following: 1. Whoever Jehovah-Elohim was, Adam and Eve, it is evident, were quite familiar with his voice. They knew his voice when they heard his approach ; and betrayed no fear, but that which necessarily arose from their knowledge of his character. On the contrary Adam says, — "I heard thy voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked." He then knew the voice of Jehovah-Elohim, and the reason of his fear was, simply that he was naked. Un- der other circumstances he would not have been afraid. In like manner, Jehovah-Elohim refers to previous in- tercourse, or to former occasions when he had appeared. "Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof /commanded thee that thou shouldst not eat?" To which Adam replies, — "The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat." If by Jehovah-Elohim we are here to understand the an- thropomorphic Word, or an appearance in anticipation of his incarnation, it will certainly follow that every previous appearance was perfectly similar in its character. The ^Creator, as such, was then not revealed or manifested in personal form to Adam at all, on this hypothesis ; nor was 72 LECTURES ON there any manifestation which would have correspond- ed with his unsinning obedience to the law. As a matter of course, he must fall, and so one half of the divine con- stitution is left entirely out of view. For, supposing that Adam had kept the law, would there have been no personal intercourse between him and his Maker ? Or would that in- tercourse have rested on mediatorial principles? — Most as- suredly there must have been a distinct manifestation, which Jehovah made of himself, to our first parents ; and which was suitable to their condition in their original probation, or as being under law, and not under gospel. And when Moses undertakes to give an historical sketch of these early transactions, his reference must be to that first manifesta- tion ; nor could any thing be known of the second, until the promise of "the Seed of the woman" was given. Hence it is that he uses the official title Jehovah-Elohim, which sounds so strange to our ears, because theologians have not used scriptural language. Any other exposition would be a mere supralapsarian subterfuge, which would involve the divine proceedings in the grossest inconsistency. 2. The supposition, that by Jehovah-Elohim we are to understand the anthropomorphic Word, i. e. an appearance in human form, and in anticipation of his coming in the flesh, would be a burlesque on the judicial character he as- sumes. For such an appearance would proceed upon the fact that Adam had sinned : whereas that was the question to be tried. "Who told thee," said the Lardj "that thou wast naked ? Hast thou eaten of the tree whereof I com- manded thee that thou shouldst not eat?" These hasty judgments, these decrees of condemnation, laid' up amid the councils of eternity, from which there is no escape, and of which we hear so much, may suit the abstractions of some sectarian theologues; but they belong not to the ju- dicial policy which the scriptures have acknowledged. God does nothing on arbitrary principles ; nor does he govern us by laws, or condemn us by sentences, which are beyond MORAL GOVERNMENT. 73 eur comprehension. The very reason why he manifests himself in personal form is, that whatever may be interest- ing to us in his character and proceedings, shall be brought within the range of our perceptions. Take as an example, in which the remarks just made are unequivocally sustained, the conversation which Jehovah had with Abraham before the destruction of Sodom : "Because the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great, and because their sin is very grievous, I will go down now and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it, which has come unto me ; and if not / will know. If I find fifty righteous men — if I find forty and five — if I ^md thirty — I will not destroy the city."* Take away from us this view of the divine administration, and there may be justice in it; but there is no possibility that we should perceive its justice. Evidently the hypothesis, which has been commonly received, throws away, as un- worthy of the slightest attention, the whole individuality of man ; or exchanges it for some inconceivable abstraction, with which it is no intention of our heavenly Father to tor- ture our little faculties. Theologians have thus inconsider- ately abandoned personal responsibility at the outset. 3. The indistinctness with which the terms — Voice and Jehovah-Elohim — have been presented to the christian mind, is the cause of all the embarrassment that has existed on the subject of the trinity. For, finding that the Logod or Word was known from the beginning ; taking the term Logos (Word) as equivalent with Voice, instead of ex- changing it for Jehovah-Elohim ; and discovering that by the Logos all things were made, and that the divine distinc- tion, expressed by the term trinity, existed before the incar- nation ; it has been confidently affirmed that this distinction belongs to the divine essence ; and, moreover, that as Fa- ther, Son, and Holy Spirit ore the peculiar terms expressive of that distinction, as it is precisely stated to us in the new ♦Gen.xviii. 20—33. Vol. I.— 7 74 LECTURES ON testament, then Father, Son, and Holy Spirit exist in the divine essence. Hence the doctrine of three portions, or three substances, or three persons, in the divine nature. Hence also the doctrine of the eternal generation of the Son, and the eternal procession of the Holy Spirit. These doctrines, while their own advocates do not pretend to ex- plain them, have ever been the occasion of irreconcilable controversies. But if Elohim is only in a first manifesta- tion of God, what the Son is in the second, the subject of Godhead, or rather the embarrassment which theologians have felt in relation to that subject, is greatly relieved. For then they would be under no necessity to run up their specu- lations so high; or to infer, from the previous existence which is ascribed to the Word, that a threefold distinction is predicated of the divine essence itself. The distinction would result from, and be characteristic of, the manifesta- tion which Jehovah made of himself at first, and for the pur- pose of intercourse with man ; which manifestation is called Jehovah-Elohim. And thus a very little reflection or scrip- tural research, I conceive, would make the whole matter as intelligible to us, as any other part of divine revelation. 4. The apostle John, referring to these very transactions of which Moses writes, observes — "In the beginning the Word was, or subsisted, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God; — all things were made by him, and without him was not any thing made that was made." Of course the Word of which John speaks, and Jehovah-Elo- him of which Moses speaks, are identical. But the Word, according to both, was not man, but was God. After- wards, the apostle continues; "The Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us." This quotation appears to me to afford positive and decisive testimony in favor of the doctrine advanced ; i. e. that there have been two distinct manifestations, in which God has exhibited himself to man- kind— Jehovah-Elohim and the Word made flesh — both equally resulting from the constitution of human nature ; MORAL GOVERNMENT. 75 and suited, the one to man as he was originally created, and the other to man as he is a sinner. They seem to be so pre- cisely analogous, that the mind which recognizes the truth of the Mosaic account of the fall, and perceives the proprie- ty of, and the necessity for, the one, can be at no great loss to perceive the propriety of, and the necessity for, the other; but will sensibly feel, that if either be scriptural or rational, the other must be equally so. The christian will thus have the divinity of his Saviour demonstrated; while the dissent- er on that subject will have a new and difficult task thrown Into his hand, in an attempt to perform which he may pos- sibly be convinced of his palpable and mischievous error. 5. The apostle Paul, in his epistle to the philippians, star- tles us by making a similar statement Speaking of the Lord Jesus, he describes him thus: " Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God ; but made himself of no reputation; divested or emptied him- self, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men."* Here we have this double exhi- bition again, — the form of God, and the likeness of men ; nor only so, but Christ Jesus is represented as divest- ing himself of one form, and taking upon him the other. At the same time it must be evident to every one, that the form of God does not mean the essence of God, seeing that Christ could not divest himself of the divine essence. There is then a form of God, and there is a likeness of men, in which God has exhibited himself to human view ; — in other words, there have been two distinct manifestations of Jehovah ; and Moses is referring to the first when he tells us of Jehovah- Elohim walking in the garden, and of our first parents' hearing his voice. 6. The apostle John, whom we have already quoted as furnishing us with very clear testimony on this point, fur- ther remarks; "No man hath seen God at anytime; the ^Ch,ii,6,8. 76 ' LECTURES ON /■ only begotten Son which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him :"* and again in one of his epistles, "No man hath seen God at any time."! He also represents the Redeemer as observing — "The Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape, or form, or visible appearance. "t "Not that any man hath seen the Father, save he which is of God, he hath seen the Father." § " He that hath seen me hath seen the Father." || These declara- tions or expressions may be compared with another remark Matthew reports him to have made, when speaking of his "little ones :" " Their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in Heaven."^ These varying phrases and differing statements may be readily reconciled upon the principle of a twofold manifestation ; particularly when the subsequent references to the old testament shall be duly considered. But the allusion to form, other than that which is mediatorial, is too frequent and striking to be explained in any other way. 7. When the ceremonial institutions of the former dis- pensation were in the progress of their proclamation, a very singular interview between God and Moses is described. Moses prefers the following petition : "I beseech thee, show me thy glory." To this, perhaps, inconsiderate prayer, God answers; "I will make all my goodness pass before thee, and I will proclaim the name of Jehovah." "Thou canst not see my face, for there shall no man see me and live. And the Lord said, behold there is a place by me, and thou shalt stand upon a rock, and it shall come to pass, while my glory passeth by, that I will put thee in a cleft of the rock, and will cover thee with my hand while I pass by ; and I will take away my hand and thou shalt see my back parts, but my face shall not be seen."** In the book of Numbers also. * John i. IS. t 1 John iv. 12. % John v. 37. § Ch. vi. 46. || Ch. xiv, 9. IT Mat. xviii. 10. ** Exod. xxxiii. 18, 20—23. MORAL GOVERNMENT. 77 when Aaron and Miriam had spoken against Moses, Jeho- vah appears in behalf of his servant, declaring: "With him will I speak mouth to mouth, even apparently, and not in dark speeches, and .the similitude of Jehovah shall he be- hold." Here then again we have the similitude or form. not of man, but of Jehovah — i. e. Jehovah-ELOHiM; I say not the form of man, because God says to Moses— Thou canst not see my face; for there shall no man see me and live. In connexion with the preceding facts, two or three others are recorded which seem to be of a totally different charac- ter. It is said that Jehovah appeared to Abraham and con- versed with him, yet Abraham did not die. Jacob also, be- fore he had met with Esau on his return to his own country, called the name of a particular place Peniel ; observing, I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.* Thus then God was seen. But in both of these cases he appear- ed in the form of a man, as the history explicitly states ; for; as "the gospel was preached beforehand to them," the di- vine appearance was necessarily mediatorial in its character. We have then again this double manifestation of Jeho- vah very clearly asserted ; nor only so, but Moses is placed in circumstances which distinguish him as an official man from all other men. The occasion had some peculiarity about it, which belonged exclusively to itself, or to no other period which has transpired since the fall. Accordingly in his charge to the people he so speaks of it: " For ask now of the days that are past, which were before thee, since the day that God created man on the earth, and ask from the one side of heaven unto the other, whether there has been any such thing as this great thing is, or hath been heard like it ? Did ever people hear the voice of Elohim speaking out of the midst of the fire, as thou hast heard, and live?"t And what was the peculiarity? We know of none other than that the Sinai covenant was a dispensation of law. Its * Gen. xxxii. 24—32. f Deut. iv. 32, 33. 78 LECTURES ON principles were, do and live ; — transgress and die. Now it is evident that the very same thing was promulgated to Adam before the fall, and constituted the great character- istic of his original probation. As, therefore, Jehovah was now reviving the principle of law, as it is distinguished from that of gospel, which belongs to the christian dispen- sation ; he appeared in the character of lawgiver, and not of mediator ; in the form of Jehovah, and not in the form of man ; and hence it was, that he spake from the midst of fire, which was in regard of the first manifesta- tion his appropriate emblem ; for Paul says, when writing to the Jews, "Our God is a consuming fire." The pro- priety of this view would fully appear, if the nature, design and operation, of the two dispensations were fully under- stood. It will devolve upon us to look at them hereafter. On the other hand, the appearances to Abraham and Jacob were purely mediatorial. The law was not given to these patriarchs. On the contrary, Paul assures us that, " the scripture foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached the gospel before to Abraham, say- ing, in thee shall all nations of the earth be blessed. "* The reason of this also will hereafter be considered. In the es- tablishment of the Sinai covenant we have something anal- ogous to the original institute given to Adam ; and in the Abrahamic covenant a repetition of the subsequent pro- mise— " the Seed of the woman shall bruise the head of the serpent." And with the two, the double manifestation of Jehovah precisely corresponds. On a particular occasion God is represented as speaking unto Moses in the following manner: — "I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of Al- mighty God ; but by my name Jehovah was I not known unto them."t This seems to be exceedingly singular lan- guage, to any one who is familiar with the previous history : * Gal. iii. 8. t Exod. vi. 3. MORAL GOVERNMENT. 79 for the word Jehovah occurs in it, with great frequency, not simply as an epithet which the superior knowledge of the historian enabled him to employ, but it is used by the very individuals who, according to the text, we might has- tily suppose, were entirely ignorant of it. For example : while Abraham was on the mount, whither he had been called to offer his son in sacrifice, and after the solemn cere- monies of that interesting scene were over, he called the name of the place jehovah-jireh. Critics have found considerable difficulty in adjusting the seemingly contra- dictory statements. It is farther evident from the observation of Eleazar — "Blessed be Jehovah- Elohim of my master Abraham" — that Abraham knew this peculiar title which Moses uses in two of the chapters before us. By this, I should suppose. we are to understand that Abraham knew that Jehovah- Elohim, who was in the beginning, appeared to him in the form of a man; in the same way that the new testament disciple knows, that the Word, which was in the beginning. has been "made flesh." It would be then equally true, that Abraham no more saw Jehovah-Elohim in his own pro- per person, than the new testament disciple saw the Father. The declaration — I am Almighty God — would be equiva- lent with the declaration — "The Father is in me,- and I am in the Father," or with this — " All power in heaven and in earth is given unto me." Dr. Shuckford considers the translation of the passage before us to be faulty; and observes, that the "best and most accurate writers have remarked on the place, that the latter part of the verse should be used interrogatively, thus : By my name Jehovah was I not known unto them?"* It is the more objectionable, that this author should have so readily and entirely adopted this explanation ; because, he himself observes — " That it is remarkable, from the writings * Shuckford's Connexions, vol. 2, p. 400,. 80 LECTURES ON of Moses, that there were two different and distinct per- sons known and worshipped by the faithful from the days of Abraham ; God whom no man hath seen at any time, and the Lord who at divers times appeared unto them. The Lord who appeared to them is allowed by the best and most judicious writers, to have been the same divine per- son who afterwards took upon him the seed of Abraham, and was made man, and dwelt among the Jews."* In correspondence with the observations made by Dr. Shuckford, Dr. Watts remarks — "Trypho, the jew, in his dialogue with Justin Martyr, maintains that there were two present in the appearance made to Moses in the burning bush, viz : God and an Angel ; that the angel appeared in the flame of fire, and that God in the Angel spake with Moses." To which Justin replies, that that may very well be granted according to the christian doctrine. And indeed Trypho' s opinion seems to have been generally received and approved amongst the more ancient jews; for Stephen teaches us, 'twas an angel who appeared to Moses in the bush, yet that God himself spake these words to Moses — " I am the God of thy fathers."! Bishop Warburton gives a different interpretation. He observes that — "The religion of names arose from an idol- atrous polytheism," and that on the part of Jehovah, a "com- pliance with the religion of names was a new indulgence to the prejudices of the Jews, as is evident from the fol- owing words : And God spake unto Moses, and said unto him, I am the Lord: and I appeared nnto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name Jehovah was I not known to them. That is, as the God of Abraham, I before condescended to have a name of distinction: but now, in compliance to another prejudice, I condescend to have a name of honour. This seems to be the true interpretation of this very difficult text, * Vol. 2. pp,. 401—2, t Watts' Glory of Christ Dis. 1. sec. 1. Justin Martyr lived in the second century. . MORAL GOVERNMENT. 81 about which the commentators have so much perplexed themselves."* It is very evident to an attentive observer, that both the difficulty and the explanation arise from considering the term name to refer to the mere word Jehovah ; which reference would be the more readily made by the reader of our English version, because it represents Jehovah as saying, in the first clause of the text, — " I appeared by the name of Almighty God." Indeed our translators have ital- icised the words which are not in the original, intending thereby to admonish us of the fact. But might they not, when seeking for explanatory terms, with equal propriety have rendered Nthe passage thus — "I appeared in the form of Almighty God" — or as Almighty God? An appear- ance is spoken of, and that must have been in form of some kind : and the history of the facts reports it to have been in the form of a man. The term name means the representative of a being or thing. TJius it was accordingly used. So God speaks of the angel that went up before his people — my name is in hirnA So also in later times he spake by his prophets, con- cerning his people and their habitation — " I will bring them unto the place that I have chosen to set my name there." t In like manner baptism is now administered, not in the names oi, but in the name of, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Name is therefore a term particularly referring to some ex- ternal manifestation which Jehovah makes of himself. The meaning of the passage then would be this — " God appear- ed to Abraham, to Isaac and to Jacob, in the form of, or manifested as, Almighty God, which was the form of man : but in the form of Jehovah, which Paul tells us was the form of God, he was not known unto, or perceived by, them. The ideas conveyed are precisely those which have * Div. Leg. of Moses, vol. 2, p. 287, B. 4, sec. 6. t Exod. xxiii. 21. % Neh. i. 9. 82 LECTURES ON already been noticed, in the apparently contradictory phrases — " I have seen God face to face," and — " no man can see my face and live." The whole is perfectly plain upon the principle of a double manifestation of God. This interpretation of the text which has been quoted is confirmed by the accompanying circumstances, and I would paraphrase it in the following manner: — In the form of man I did appear to Abraham, to Isaac and to Jacob, but in the form of Jehovah I never was manifested unto them. But now I will manifest myself to thee in the form of Je- hovah. It is my purpose by thy ministry to bring the people out of Egypt, and to put them in a peculiar relation to my- self, as my elect people, and to do among them such things,. as well as to display myself among them in such a manner, as no other nation has ever witnessed. In the form of Je- hovah, or as Jehovah-Elohim, I will deliver to them the law ; that they, being placed under it, and by its oppressive operation being shut up to the faith of a Mediator, may be a standing monument to ail nations, that no man can be saved by the works of the law. 8. The last circumstance which I shall notice in proof of this double manifestation of God, is derived from the con-, versation which Satan is reported to have held with Eve. The adversary does not appear accurately to have under- stood the moral position which our first parents occupied in paradise :— at least Eve felt herself to be under a necessity to explain, after hearing his remark. Yet he makes no mis- take in speaking of God himself; for he denominates him the Elohim, just as Moses does. How should he be com- petent to express himself with so much exactness in the one case, and under such apparent embarrassment in the other ? The whole subject of angelic agency, many theologians hold as an exceedingly equivocal matter. Why they should thus discard from their consideration an interesting analogy, derived from the intellectual world in illustration of moral MORAL GOVERNMENT. 83 science, it may not be worth while, at present, to inquire. If God has created one race of intellectual beings, there is nothing unphilosophical in the idea that he should have created another. If the animal and mineral worlds are full of varieties, there is no unanswerable argument against like varieties existing in the intellectual world. And if sin is discovered in one part of God's intellectual empire, there is nothing so exceedingly repulsive, as some men af- fect to consider it, in the supposition that sin may be found in some other part of his intellectual empire. "He," as Mr. Locke observes, " that will not set himself proudly at the top of all things, but will consider the immensity of this fabric, and the great variety that is to be found in this little and iuconsiderable part of it which he has to do with, may be apt to think, that in other mansions of it there may be other and intelligent beings, of whose faculties he has as little knowledge or apprehension, as a worm shut up in one drawer of a cabinet hath of the sinews or understand- ing of a man, such variety and excellency being suitable to the wisdom and power of the maker."* Accordingly Moses introduces Satan to our notice, not only as using a common term with himself in designating Jehovah, but as speaking with perfect familiarity on the subject of the knowledge of good and evil, to which Jehovah-Elohim afterwards refers, as actually belonging to other parts of his dominion : — " Behold," says he, "the man has become as one of us, to know good and evil" The Redeemer too has explicitly informed us, that in the resurrection, when all the natural relations are done away, we shall be like the angels. There is then a similitude between these higher orders of intel- lectual beings and ourselves. The point of dissimilarity between us appears to consist in the natural relations which distinguish our present mode of existence, and belong not to them ; and of course, in their not having been placed * B. II. ch. 2, sec, 3. 84 LECTURES ON under any thing like that form of political government which has been called federal representation. They seem to stand simply on their personal responsibility ; hence all of them have not fallen. Some have rebelled, while others have retained their integrity. And it would be very difficult to assign any philosophical reason, why we should not take the deepest interest in contemplating and under- standing this mode of intellectual and moral existence. But if this analogy can be thus traced, both scripturally and rationally, the reason why Satan uses the term Elohi?n is very apparent ; for then there is a manifestation which God makes of himself to them, as well as to us. This cannot be supposed to be in the form of man. Of course, there is a double manifestation of Jehovah, agreeably to the doc- trine I have advanced. In fact, singular as the circum- stance may seem, we find that the angels were themselves called Elohim. Satan could therefore use the term intel- ligently. Hence, in the book of Job, Satan and the sons of God are represented as presenting themselves before the lord. The occurrence is stated to have taken place on a certain day; to have been repeated on a subsequent and similar occasion ; and the incidents are described with considera- ble minuteness. The whole scene, in view of the phrase- ology employed, is very much like that drawn out in the fourth chapter of Genesis, where Cain and Abel appeared at the door of the antediluvian tabernacle, within which were the cherubim of glory — the emblem of the invisible God. Isaiah also with most thrilling interest depicts a vision with which he was favored in the year that king Uzziah died, when he says, " I saw the lord sitting on a throne, high and lifted up, and his train filled the everlasting tem- ple. Above it," he continues, " stood the seraphim ; each one had six wings ; with twain he covered his face, and with twain he covered his feet, and with twain he did fly. MORAL GOVERNMENT. 85 And one cried unto another, and said, holy, holy, holy is Jehovah of hosts ; the whole earth is full of his glory. And the posts of the door moved at the voice of him that cried, and the house was filled with smoke. Then said I, wo is me, for I am undone, because I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips ; for mine eyes have seen the king, Jehovah of hosts."* In like manner Jesus says, speaking of his "little ones," — " their angels do always behold the face of my father which is in heaven. Surely the testimony of a twofold manifestation in ex- ternal form, which Jehovah has afforded of himself — the one in the form of God, or as Jehovdh-Elohim, and suit- ed to man in his state of innocence, as well as to angels in heaven; and the other in the form of man, or as the Word made flesh, suited to us in our state of sin — is clear and undeniable. According to the usual ideas of the trinity, what can theologians do with the fact ? But after all, you may, perhaps, inquire what this mani- festation was ? It has been supposed that the Word, or Son, was the second person of the trinity, and that, in the rela- tions between God and his intelligent creatures, established by the personal exhibition contemplated, the' second person is the representative of the whole deity. Sabellius, in pre- ferring to say, a certain portion, or energy, advocates essen- tially the same view, and merely changes the term. Arius violently breaks away from the whole subject, and talks about a lesser god ; thus teaching the doctrine of two gods, while he complains of his opponents because they taught that of three. The heavens and the earth are said to be a manifestation of Jehovah, in which his character is displayed with great beauty and brilliance. Whom do they manifest ? The second person of the trinity — or God himself ? Certainly the scrip- * Isaiah vi. 1, 5. Vol. I.— 8 86 LECTURES ON tures do assure us that the heavens and the earth were framed by the Word of God. This is the doctrine of faith which they teach. But, at the same time, do they not as clearly assert, that the Godhead is thereby set forth to our view? — " The invisible things of him are clearly seen by the things which are made — even his eternal power and God- head J ' In like manner, we are informed that in Christ Jesus " dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily."* A dis- tinction, a portion, a person, separate from other portions or persons, as belonging to Godhead, is not even hinted at. Jill the Godhead — all the fulness of the Godhead — dwell- eth in him bodily. Any distinction which is supposed, subsists merely between God himself and the bodily resi- dence in which he dwells. And any other view, his apos- tle would inform us, is mere ''philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men/'* Again — Christ is said to be the image of God] — the image of the invisible GodX — the brightness of his glory , and the exact image of his person, And God is declared to be "in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself." Hence the gentile world is condemned for changing the glory of the incorruptible God, into an image made like to corruptible man. Jesus speaks of himself in a manner equally explicit: — " The Father is in me :" — " He that hath seen me, hath seen the Father ; and how sayest thou then, shew us the Father. Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me ? The words that I speak unto you, I speak not of myself, but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. Believe me that I am in the Fa- ther and the Father in me;"|| The original manifestation in the form of God is describ- ed in like terms. " Show me thy glory" or grant me a * Col. ii. 8, 9. t 2 Cor. iv. 4. X Col. i. 15. II John xiv. 9, 11. MORAL GOVERNMENT. 87 "view of thy personal appearance, said Moses ; to which he received for answer — "thou canst not see my face, for no man can see me and live." God himself is then invisible — yet the similitude of this invisible God, Moses was per- mitted to behold. Isaiah also, in vision, saw the king — Je- hovah or Hosts. And Christ speaks of "the face of bis Father which is in heaven.'' The mediatorial appearances with which Abraham and Isaac and Jacob were indulged, had the same general cha- racter. Jehovah conversed with Abraham before the de- struction of Sodom. Jehovah appeared to him again, and said, "I am Almighty God; walk before me, and be thou perfect5 ' He afterwards told Moses — " / appeared to Abra- ham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, as Almighty God ; but by my name Jehovah, or in my form as Jehovah-Elohim, was I not known unto them."* Can proof more ample or explicit be desired, in order to show that in all these cases the being who was manifested was God himself 1 A distinct appearance there was ; — various appearances there were ; the exterior form was different, according to circumstances ; but that form was always in- habited by God himself. And indeed what is there impro- bable, unnatural, or incredible in such a view ? Or was there not evidence enough of the fact, when the heavens and the earth started into being — when the bush on fire re- mained unconsumed — when the mountain burned to the midst of heaven — when Christ wrought his wondrous mira- cles ? Is there the least necessity to waste our ingenuity in framing some perplexed and abstruse hypothesis ? What more can be gained or desired ? Perhaps these various appearances may be charged with bruising; a sreat deal of confusion into this branch of moral science. But let it be remembered that this confusion is not the result of the argument now advanced : for, whether that argument be true or false, these appearances are all * Exod. iji, 14. 88 LECTURES ON matters of historical fact, which I have not created, but simply arranged. And why should they introduce any confusion ? Are not the circumstances to which they re- spectively belong, sufficiently distinct to account for the variety which has occurred ? Two systems of moral go* vernment are delineated — Law and Gospel- — the first con- sistent with the form of God, and the second with the form of man; or the revival of law and the prophetical annuncia- tions of gospel, are described, each sustained by its own appropriate divine manifestation. In the mere fact of change of form no difficulty can ex- ist ; because every one must know that change is the pro- perty of form, its susceptibility for which is apparent in every direction, Our bodies pass through endless changes, from infancy to manhood — from manhood to the grave — from a natural into a spiritual state. Christ was transfigur- ed— metamorphosed — changed his form on the mount ; ap- peared in more forms than one after his resurrection ; talk- ed of his flesh and bones, while his apostles speak of his glorious body in heaven. The glory of the Lord of old was a flaming fire in a bush — a pillar of fire in a cloud- — an " infolding" flame over the cherubim. The Spirit was re- cognised at one time in bodily shape, like a dove ; at ano- ther in cloven tongues like as of fire. Angels have been viewed as men ; and again, with a countenance like light- ning, and raiment white as snow. But all this change of form, which some corresponding change in external cir- cumstances may call for, does by no means involve or imply the destruction of identity ; the same intelligent agent may still be officiating under all these exterior changes. In relation to the subject under consideration, the iden- tity is most carefully and scrupulously preserved.* He *It was to explain and illustrate this identity, that Dr. Watts wrote his fanciful treatise, entitled "the Glory of Christ." He taught in that treatise the pre-existence of Christ's human soul ; hut evidently was not entirely satisfied with his own theory. MORAL GOVERNMENT. 89 '-made himself of no reputation — laid aside, divested him- ielf of the form of God, and took upon him the form of man. The Word which was God was made flesh. The second Adam is the Lord from heaven. My Father is in me — the angels behold the face of my Father which is in hea- ven. The Son is the brightness of glory, and the exact image of his person. Now can they who have been in the habit of viewing Jehovah as filling illimitable space, as every where present, as manifested alike, and at the same time, to both angels and men, feel any difficulty in the idea, that he sustains two distinct manifestations, suited to two distinct orders of intelligences, who are for the time beino- in different circumstances ? Or can there be any great la- bour of imagination required to conceive the fact, that, when this difference of circumstances shall be obliterated, or when human beings shall be "like the angels," the original mani- festation which Jehovah made of himself in the form of God — the name Jehovah — shall be equally suitable to all, and Christ shall surrender the kingdom to his Father, so that God shall be all and in all ? May not he, who co- vers himself with light as with a garment, assume or lay aside external form, as may be most advantageous to his creatures, without leading those creatures into polytheism, or inducing them to suppose that in his own nature there must be three persons 1 On the received hypothesis of the trinity, or viewing the Lord as the second person, how will the identity be sus- tained, when the scriptural fact is under consideration, that the Word, which in the beginning was God, in the fulness of time became man ? Or on the Arian hypothesis, that the Word was God, but not the supreme God, how shall the identity be preserved in view of his becoming man? Nei- ther of these systems can in the least degree relieve the apparent embarrassment into which we are thrown by this change in exterior form. But if Jehovah, with a view to the exhibition of himself to the creatures he intended 8# 90 LECTURES ON to call into being, should assume external form, and before their creation should determine so to do, where is there any difficulty ? And if any event should occur in the history of any portion or class of those creatures, in consequence of which that personal exhibition of himself should be too glori- ous for them to behold ; is there any difficulty then brought in, if he should be graciously pleased to condescend to the infirmities of those creatures, and manifest himself in ano- ther form, better suited to their capacities? Or must we - believe that the one cannot exist when the other is pro- posed, without contradiction or collision ? There does not appear to me to be any very distressing mystery in the prin- ciple of such a theory. On the contrary it would seem to proclaim an act of grace, as interesting and intelligible as it is suitable and needful. But I would go a step farther, and observe, that there is not only an identity carefully displayed in view of the di- vine appearances; but an identity of legislative principle is as distinctly retained. The object in both the cases which have been described is precisely the same. The intellec- tual perfection and the spiritual blessedness of man are avowed as the design of both law and gospel. Any rep- resentative character which may be ascribed either to the first, or to the second, Adam, looks to the same result. That is, the children of men under the operation of either the paradisiacal, or mediatorial, constitution, can attain to the joy of the celestial kingdom only on the principle of their personal holiness. Whether they be called to do or to believe, the consummation to which they look forward must be their likeness to God. And when the end shall come, their final position shall be such as was originally contemplated, and as has just been stated : they shall be as the angels of God, the peculiarities of their earthly exis- tence shall be past and gone, and God shall be all and in all. But these remarks anticipate the views which proper- ly belong to the mediatorial constitution. MORAL GOVERNMENT. 91 And now, perhaps, the question may be asked, what was this form of God ? In attempting to meet this question, I think it necessary to remind you, that it is no part of my ob- ject to start an original speculation on the subject of God- head. My intention is to endeavor, irrespective of the scholastic and mystified explanations with which contend- ing sects have filled the church, to present what the scrip- tures themselves have said of the divine manifestations. It would seem then, that the form of God is not, according to their report, the essence of God: else the Lord could not have laid it aside. Nor only so : but when humbled to be found in the likeness of man, we still hear the language ap- propriate to indwelling godhead "In him dwelleth all the "fulness of the godhead bodily." — "My Father is in me." — "The Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works." Neither was this form the angelic nature : for it is ex- pressly called the form of God. Nor yet was this form that of man; because the assumption of human nature is the very object, for the accomplishment of which the form of God was laid aside. The corresponding phrases which are used are — simili- tude of God — face of God — name of God— appearance, or shape of God — presence of God — God dwelling in. So that there seems to be no alternative. It is the form in which God manifests himself to both angels and men, viewing the latter as they were originally constituted ; in which the an- gels constantly behold him; and in which we shal^at last see him, when the interests and concerns of this system shall l>e wound up. Would you press the question any farther ? Then the scriptures add. "God is light;"- — "Our God is a consuming fire." Ask you more? Pause and reflect. Remember, Mo- ses could not look and live. Remember, Isaiah bowed his head and cried — I am undone — mine eyes have seen the king, Jehovah of Hosts : Remember, that Paul, caught up into paradise, heard unspeakable words, which it is not law- 9-2 LECTURES ON ful for a man to utter. "Jehovah dwells in light which no man can approach unto ; no man hath seen him, nor can see him." We must be satisfied with contemplating the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ. Hereafter, we shall see, and know, and be like to, God as He is. There I leave this momentous theme. The scriptures carry me no farther than simply to exhibit Jehovah-Elohim, by whom the divine communications were originally made. By him "the word of God came," LECTURE IV. Of Q0d — Jehovah — The Spirit — -Analogies — Triniiy stated — Terms explained — Views of the divine operations in relation to the government of man. Thus far the discussion has merely delineated, as I sup- pose, the scriptural view of the Word of God, or Jehovah- Elohim. Theologians have denominated him the second person of the trinity. The preceding argument exhibits him as*God himself 'manifested in personal form ; and so manifested, because that the human mind having no in- nate ideas, but deriving its impressions from external things through the medium of the corporeal senses, cannot see Jehovah, or acquire the knowledge of him in any other way. I speak, of course, of the human mind in its pre- sent condition, or as dwelling in an animal body, and sur- rounded by the almost endless varieties of a material sys- tem. It may now be asked — what shall we understand by Je« MORAL GOVERNMENT. 93 hovaii ? and by the Spirit,* as distinguished from Jeho- vah-Elohim ? And unless these questions can be distinct- ly answered, it were vain to proceed in our discussion ; nor could we hope to explain the corresponding terms — Father and Holy Spirit — which are used in relation to the me- diatorial manifestation. These terms in connection with the term Son, are inconsiderately employed by biblical critics, to express the whole subject popularly called trini- ty ; and, carried back without any reference to the import of Jekovah-Elohim as a divine title, are applied to the di- vine essence. Hence the mystery of the Trinity, or of a triune God. Let us then try to meet these questions. 1. What are we to understand b}7" Jehovah? No one who has bestowed even common attention on the varied, yet continuous, argument which has been given in the preceding lectures, can be at much loss to answer this question. Jehovah is of course God himself : — the self-existent spirit, whom we cannot see, and who has been pleased to manifest himself to his creatures, in appropriate and personal form. The Father, the Redeemer said, is ix me : — the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. In Christ, at one time says Paul, "dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily ;" and at another, "God is in Christ, re- conciling the world unto himself." It wasjEHOVAH who appeared to Abraham, and said, / am Almigldy God. The king, Whom Isaiah saw, was Jehovah of Hosts. The voice which Adam and Eve heard in the garden, was that of Je- hovah-Elohim. The Word, in the beginning was God. The idea is very simple. There is a God, all nature harmo- niously and loudly speaks. And if he should manifest him- self in external or personal form, by what obliquity of mind *In the first edition I used, in this part of the discussion, the terms Father and Holy Ghost ; stating, at the time, that I did so on ac- count of their familiarity. Apprehending that, what I supposed to be an indulgence to general feeling has contributed to a misunder- standing of my views, I have in the present edition taken the terms used by Moses. 94 LECTURES ON can the fact be so grievously misunderstood, as to lead to the supposition that there are two- gods ; or to involve the subject of his unity in the least difficulty? By what prin- ciple of fair or philosophic ratiocination, can it possibly follow that there are the supreme, and a lesser, God — distinct and separate beings? And above all, — where is the pro- priety of the speculation which, supposing it to have be- come necessary that this manifestation should be made in the flesh, pertinaciously maintains that no other preten- sions are set forth, than those which belong to mere — it may be frail and peccable — humanity? In all such evasive theories, however rational they may be supposed to be, I can discern nothing but a fragment of the ancient idolatry. To illustrate the subject by analogy: — If we were dis- coursing of a mere human being, what should we consider to be the man ? Is it not the mind — the intellectual spirit? Is not this evidently Paul's meaning, when he says — "If / do that / would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. I find then a law that when /would do good, evil is present with me ; for I delight in the law of God, after the inner man; but I see another law in my mem- bers, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin, which is in my members. So then, with the mind I myself serve the law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin."* The mind is the man; but the mind is not a person. If the apostle's expressions should, by any ingenious con- trovertist applying them to some favorite speculation, be wrested from us, then what shall be done with the Redeem- er's argument on the resurrection? Jehovah had proclaim- ed himself to be the God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Ja- cob : but said Jesus, "God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.'" These patriarchs are therefore still living, notwithstanding their bodies have long since been commit- *Rom. vii. 14—25.. MORAL GOVERNMENT. 95 ted to the dust. Or, again to return to the apostle Paul, how shall we understand him, when, with a heart full of heavenly anticipations, he writes — "We are always confi- dent, knowing that whilst we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord : we are confident, I say, and will- ing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord."* The body is not the man; but the home, the tabernacle, in which for the present the man resides. Have we then two distinct men, or persons — one supreme man, and one lesser man, — or are we all body — a mere ma- terial lump? Assuredly the spirit is the man ; and when that spirit is clothed with external form, without which we could have no knowledge of or intercourse with him, he is still the same intelligent agent. And now we have a person — Thus God is or subsists. The fact of a double manifestation on the part of God, which has been abundantly proved, neither weakens nor perplexes our analogical argument ; but on the contrary, affords us an opportunity of extending its application. For there is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body ; and the changes which man experiences, in view of those differ- ent modes of existence, does in no way affect his identity, however they may modify his personal form or exterior appearance. So, when the lord, who made all things, and who was God, laid aside the form of God, and took upon him the likeness of man, no argument can arise from the glorious transaction against the fact that it is still the same infinite and eternal Spirit, manifesting himself. Here then I may safely leave this interesting topic, as having been amply illustrated ; — nothing, that I can perceive, is left to torture an humble and honest inquirer. To proceed : 2. What shall we understand by the Spirit ? Moses in- forms us, that in the beginning, "the earth was without form and void ; and darkness was upon the face of the deep, and the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters." * 2 Cor. v. 6— S. 96 LECTURES ON I shall not stop to meet the representations of those who would tell us that the word here translated Spirit signifies wind; and that the appended words, of God, are merely in- tended to express a mighty wind ; — as when it is said, trees of God, and mountains of God, the meaning is tall trees and great mountains. It is sufficient to observe, that in these remarks we have a very good specimen of what theologians, who glory much in their literature, call criticism. Many sectarian theologians repose a great deal of confidence in criticism; and not unfrequently, though unintentionally, indulge in their nice philological distinctions at the expense of every thing which can be valuable to them as accoun- table beings. Whether there was a great wind employed at the time or not; or whether the Spirit derives an ap- pellation from the air, as the best symbolic representation of his varied influences, I shall not delay to inquire — nor would it be worth while. If the following argument does not exhibit the great matter itself, very little could be gain- ed by exposing the imbecility of a mere verbal subterfuge; but should the scriptural doctrine be fairly set forth, any honest reasoner would readily dispense with his philology for the sake of his morals; or rather, he would discover, that by mistaking the one, he has learned to misrepresent the other ; and would quickly succeed in adjusting any dis- crepancy which may be apparent, but is not real. The o-eneral argument on which I am about to enter, re- quires some preliminary observations, which may render it more acceptable, and add not a little to its force. 1. That the operations ascribed to the Spirit are to be referred to an intelligent agent, cannot be reasonably deni- ed, if the following and such like scriptural passages are deliberately considered: — "When he, the Spirit of truth is come, he will guide you into all truth : for he shall not speak of himself ; but whatsoever he shall hear that shall he speak ; and he will show you things to come. He shall glorify me : for he shall receive of mine, and shall show it MORAL GOVERNMENT. 97 unto you."* — "While Peter thought on the vision, the Spirit said unto him, behold, three men seek thee. Arise therefore, and get thee down, and go with them, doubting nothing; for I have sent them."j " As they ministered to the Lord, the Holy Spirit said, separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto / have called Mm.— So they, being sent forth by the Holy Spirit, departed unto Seleu*- cia."t •2. That the Spirit is God is equally clear from these texts ; — "The Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works:"— "If I by the Spirit of God cast out devils." — And "Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart, to lie unto the Holy Spirit ? Thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God." — " Now the Lord is that Spi- rit ; and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty. "|| 3. The Spirit is never represented in the scriptures in any personal form, or in a distinct personal manifestation. On the banks of Jordan he descended on Jesus "in a bodi- ly shape like a dove." On the day of pentecost, when the disciples were filled with the Holy Spirit, there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them." But in neither of these cases was personal form assumed. Such events may indicate the class of se- condary agents he employs, as originating nothing concern- ing himself, but taking of, and ministering about, the things that are Christ's. They go no further. 4. As the Spirit is never said to have assumed personal form, he is never for that reason recognised in the scrip- tures as a distinct object of religious worship. The rea- son is very evident. God is not the object of religious wor- ship to man, excepting as he is manifested, By the Spirit, and through Christ, we come to the Father. The necessi- ties of the case, as has already been shown, call for a man- * John xvi. 13, 14. % Acts xiii. 2—4. t Acts x'. 19—20, |j 2 Cor. iii. 17, 18. 98 LECTURES ON ifestation of God in personal form. Without it we must seek him in his works, and worship him in them ; which has been sufficiently exposed as idolatry. As then the Spirit is not to be viewed in personal form, so, if we were to re- cognise him as a distinct object of worship, we should be left to a like result, and must bow to him in a bible, a cru- cifix, a consecrated wafer, or a saint, which is the most heartless of all idolatry. The ordinance of baptism re- cognises the matters in which we are to believe ; and the apostolic blessing refers to the several characteristics and operations which have been set forth as distinguishing Father, Son, and Holy Spirit ; but in neither case is a di- rect act of religious address to the Spirit, as such, either expressed or implied. Nor yet does the Redeemer hint at such a service, when he tells the Jews, that all men are required " to honor the Son even as they honor the Father.'5 No, nor yet Paul, when contrasting Christianity with the heathen mythology, in view of their respective objects of worship: — "To us," says he, "there is one God, even the Father, and one Lord Jesus Christ" And even the heathen, though they had many gods and many lords, yet had but these two classes of objects of worship; seemingly inti- mating that the fact has been from the beginning just as I have stated it. — I presume it is distinctly remembered, that in these observations reference is made to the Spirit as officially distinguished from Jehovah ; or that I am ex- plaining the relative use of official terms. Having offered these preliminary remarks, I proceed with the question before us — what is the Spirit ? I must, how- ever, be indulged with the liberty of taking what may seem to be a circuitous route, in order to answer it. As the idea, which I shall offer in solution of this universally con- ceded mystery, may be treated as my own, I must be per- mitted to choose my method of representing it. When the apostle Paul wrote his first epistle to the Corin- thians, he noticed in connexion with other things a particular MORAL GOVERNMENT. 99 case of crime which had occurred among them ; in reference to which they had not conducted themselves either discreetly or faithfully. This case he undertakes to adjudicate : — "I verily," he says, " as absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged already as though I were present, concerning him that hath so done this deed, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, to deliver such an one to Satan." * What is the import of this singu- lar language ? In what way could Paul's spirit be in the Corinthian church, when his body was absent ? The common-place idea, that a man can translate his thoughts thousands of miles in an instant, will not explain the apostolic phrase ; because those distant objects which might interest his feelings, could not, in that case, be in any manner conscious of his intellectual operations. The fact would be quite different in the Corinthian church : it would be. to use the apostle's own language, "as though he were present." The whole assembly would have felt " as though he were present;" and the disciplinary process would have been conducted, "as though he were present.'1 From the force and feeling of his official authority, there was no escape. His individuality was recognised, though he was not personally, or really, present. Yet a second or a dif- ferent person is not implied in the phraseology which the apostle uses. A similar idea is advanced by the same apostle when he reports the faith of Abel. — "By faith xlbel offered unto God," he says, "a more excellent sacrifice than Cain; and by it, he being dead, yet speakefh.n So one age lives on the thoughts excogitated by the spiriis of some preceding age. The spirits of the fathers hover around the summit of Zion, and are conjured at pleasure into our sanctuaries and ecclesiastical courts, to frown on every man who dares to * l Cor. v, 3--5. 100 LECTURES ON think for himself; and to visit on his guilty head the sad consequences of heresy. By creeds and catechisms, and ponderous tomes of lofty pretensions, those fathers, being dead, yet speak. It is perfectly astonishing how far such influence is exerted, and with what easy credulity men sub- mit their own immortal minds to its destructive control. — * " Whatsoever time, or the heedless hand of blind chance," says Milton, " hath drawn down from of old to this present, in her huge drag-net, whether fish or sea-weed, shells or shrubs, unpicked, unchosen, those are the fathers." A friend writes a letter, or publishes a book. His spirit is recognised, is felt, in every sentence, in every line. The reader discerns the attributes of his character, and not un- frequently fancies that he hears the tones of his friend's voice. An individual of political, literary, or official merit, may be so distinctly felt in the community to which he belongs, as to command universal admiration for some signal service he has rendered. Or he may be envied for his superior at- tainments and standing ; and be reproached and maligned by multitudes, who had not graCe enough to acknowledge their obligations to him. But when the rude hand of death shall have dissolved the tie that bound him to an ungrateful world, envy retires, suspicion sleeps, and his voice is heard with deliberate and respectful attention. His spirit speaks. A prince, screened from public gaze within his own pa- Lace, or seldom leaving the metropolis of his empire, yet exerts a powerful influence — legislative, military, or other- wise— to the utmost extent of his dominions. His spirit pervades every department in his administration ; and mil- lions who never saw him respectfully mention his name, submissively bow to the symbols of his authority, and en- thusiastically eulogize his virtues. They would fight, they would bleed, they would die, for his honor ; and for his gratification would chant the praises of a victory, that leaves to many a bereaved widow and houseless orphan, their tears MORAL GOVERNMENT 101 as their meat night and day. Social influence is one of the most powerful springs of human action, productive, at one time, of a thousand blessings ; and at another, the parent of as many ills. Yet in none of these cases is a new per- son supposed to be present. But we must take another and a farther view of Paul's spirit. He gloried in a hope beyond this life, and in scenes of bliss amidst which his spirit should dwell, when his mar- tyred body should rest in the dust. How he exulted, when this subject occupied his thoughts and employed his pen ! " I kilew a man in Christ fourteen years ago," he said, " and of such an one will I glory — I knew such an one caught up into the third heavens ; how that he heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter." Whether "he was in the body I cannot tell, or whether he was out of the body I cannot tell." In what way these unspeaka- ble words were communicated to him, or what was the mode or manner of action in which his spirit was employ- ed, he could not explain. Perception by means of our cor- poreal senses he could readily have stated ; but perception in the case described, or when the spirit reaches its celes- tial atmosphere, he was unable to define. Ardently did he desire to depart and be with Christ. Amidst all his earthly troubles, his spirit rose into commu- nion with his beloved Master, and coveted to be absent from the body and to be present with the Lord. Then, like Abra- ham, Isaac and Jacob, of whose etherial essence and celes- tial destiny the Stfdducees seemed to be so stupidly ignorant, he should live and behold and praise his glorified Redeem- er. In heaven, independent of this material tabernacle beyond whose powers the spirit now perceives no objects, hears no melody, and accomplishes no designs, it shall ex- ert all its faculties. What then if the spirit of Paul, which had been burdened with the care of all the churches while on earth, should even now hover over our altars, and feel the deepest, but a melancholy, interest in our distractions ? — 9* 102 LECTURES ON Though invisible to us, we would in such a Case speak of his presence and individuality. But if this cannot be, still we know that angels, acting out a celestial character, living, moving and operating on the principles of celestial existence, are appointed to a ministry on account of the heirs of salvation. They encamp round them that fear the Lord, and watch over many a timid, trembling, desponding child of grace. How far their agency may extend, or what various concerns may fall within their range, no one can fully tell. It is the fact that I wish to be distinctly noticed, and which is my reliance in following out my subject. Having stated the scriptural facts in relation to intellec- tual creatures, so far as they are relevant to the object of our present inquiry, I shall next endeavor to ascertain, whether Jehovah offers any analogous representation of Himself I For if we shall find that a train of influences or operations correspondent with those which have been predicated of created spirits, is ascribed to him, while at the same time his actual, though invisible, presence is distinctly and unde- niably affirmed, nothing farther can be desired. Man, it is said in the bible, was made in the image of God. There can, therefore, be nothing either extravagant or im- probable in the idea, that God is Me man. In fact, "our ideas of the divine character are all taken from archetypes found in our own, because we have none other wherefrom to describe any thing conceivable to our imaginations." More particularly will it seem to be rational and satisfactory., when we recollect that the special doctrine of a Mediator is, that he "who was in the form of God, was made in the likeness of men ; and that it behooved him in all things to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest." The point of resemblance be- tween God and man has been supposed to be purely intel- lectual and moral. Hence the image of God, as man was created in it, has been said to consist in "knowledge, righteousness, and true holiness." Admitting this view to MORAL GOVERNMENT. 103 be correct, the analogy, of which we are in quest, would exist in the intellectual operations, or in the action of spirit, ascribed to God and man ; of course the influences of the spirit of man, which have been so particularly detailed, would lead us to infer similar influences exerted by Jehovah. And the fact of those influences, analogically traced, as far as the representations previously made of the spirit of man would allow us to go, would explain the whole scriptural doctrine of the Spirit. But let us hear Moses himself on this subject of the di- vine image ? He reports the matter thus : — "And the Elo- him said, let us make man in our image, after our like- ness." It is not God abstractedly considered, it is not Jehovah viewed in and of himself a pure Spirit, whom man resembles; but he is made like the Elohim. What then is meant by the Elohim ? First, God is a Spirit ; so also is man. Secondly, God has manifested himself, or, as a Spirit, he dwells in external form. The fact is the same with man : his spirit inhabits a body. Thus we have a double resemblance. And may there not be a third? May not God as a Spirit, considered as manifested in external form, act independently of that form, as the spirit of man does ? and may not a doctrine of influences, large, impor- tant, and varied, which he shall really superintend or sus- tain, ensue ? Should this be the fact, would it not explain, would it not in truth be, the very doctrine of the Spirit ? Can any thing farther be desired to place the whole subject in clear and intelligible exposition ? Let us appeal to the law and to the testimony. The apostle Paul evidently states, and with considerable preci- sion, the view of the Spirit of God which has been infer- red by analogy. — "The Spirit," he says, " searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God. For what man know- eth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him ? Even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.'"*. This is certainly writing in terms which are * 1 Cor. ii. 10, 11. 104 LECTURES ON very plain and positive ; and the very analogy, by which I have endeavored to illustrate our subject, is thus employed as the best, if not the only one, by which the inspired writer could explain himself to the apprehension of his readers. The spirit of man, within him, carefully reflects on the purposes he has formed, and the circumstances un- der which those purposes are to be developed. In like man- ner the Spirit of God — within the form that he has assum- ed, shall I say — reflects upon, carefully considers, and oft- times reviews, the various designs of mercy he has pro- claimed ; as well as their most gracious and effectual ap- plication to the -changing condition of human beings. The same general doctrine is taught by the Lord himself, when he promised to his disciples, that he would send them the Spirit, " Howbeit," said he, "when he, the Spirit of truth is come, he shall guide you into all truth ; for he shall not speak of himself, but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak." Hearing and reflection, both of which are ascribed to the Spirit of God, may well go toge- ther, and are very happily sustained by the analogy which is selected. I shall be chargeable with no presumption, nor yet with a puerile yielding to an errant fancy, if I now call up and apply the particular cases of intellectual operation in which the spirit of man is known to act, independently of its bodily form. We now no longer know Christ after the flesh. " The heavens must receive him until the times of the restitution of all things." But his spirit is with us. — I mean not his human spirit; though even in that application the principle of our argument would be sustained. But he is God manifested in the flesh ; and therefore the reference is to the Spirit of God. The Spirit of truth is abroad, con- vincing the world of sin, of righteousness and of judgment. And who does not perceive the fact ? Whose heart does not feel the attractions of his grace ? Whose soul does not tremble, under the denunciation of his wrath ? MORAL GOVERNMENT. 105 Nor only so. Jesus, while on earth, though felt through- out Judea, in the synagogue, in the temple, in the sanhe- drim, in Herod's court, in Pilate's chamber, vet was an ob- ject of envy, of reproach, of malignant revenge. His fol- lowers were few. The fickle multitude, easily assembled, were as quickly dispersed. One disciple betrayed him ; another denied him ; the r£st forsook him and fled. A few devoted females wept at his cross, or were early at his se- pulchre. An astonished centurion confessed his power ; and an expiring robber sued for his mercy. But what more ? He said himself to his disciples — ': it is expedient for you that I go away ; for if I go not away, the Comfort- er will not come." He went and the Spirit came. With what power the apostles spake ! What mighty works they performed ! What land did they not penetrate ? What phi- losophy did they not confound ? What mitred priest did they not humble ? What idol god did not totter on his base ? Do I say more than the facts in the case will warrant, in remarking, that a much greater amount of practical moral influence was felt after the Redeemer's death, than while he lived r Books, as the instruments of intellectual power, have also been adduced in illustration of this subject. Holy men of God have written the bible. They have written it as they were moved by the Spirit. And what honest mind does not perceive and feel the Spirit of God, in eve- ry sentence, in every line ? Or can there be any thing more unseemly than to be heard praying for the Spirit, while we put the scriptures out of the way, traduce them as unin- telligible, seek not to be intimately acquainted with them, or substitute in their place, avowedly or virtually, the books of controversial and embittered theologians? What a spec- tacle in an age of revivals ; — in a period when every sect has bosomed within itself the principles of its own disso- lution ! In like manner the Son of God may be viewed as an ex- 106 LECTURES ON - alted Prince, seated on his throne — in glory — at. the right hand of the Majesty on high — far out of our sight — not personally seen on earth. But his Spirit is in all parts of his mediatorial dominions. Every old testament prophet — every new testament apostle — every humble saint has the Spirit of Christ in him : all the world is under his tuition, and every unbeliever resists his grace, and foolishly courts his wrath. But all this argues, it may be said, mere influence ; and may be resolved into simple emanation, without evincing the presence of any individual agent. Suppose that such be the fact. Is there any thing in the scriptures, or in the systems of popular theology which men laud with so much fulsome adulation, to forbid us to speak of the Spirit's in- fluence 1 But has our schedule of familiar analogies yet run out ? Was not the spirit of Paul traced to its heavenly habitation, "shining in full glory," really enjoying his Saviour's love, though his bod}*- is in the grave ? Have not angels been ad- duced, as ministering spirits, acting on the principles of the celestial world ? And above all, may we not thus speak of the Spirit of God or of Jehovah himself — who is every where present, invisibly, yet really, superintending all the widely diversified interests of the mediatorial empire ? To this point it has been my object to carry this discussion ; and it has never been lost sight of for a single moment. The spirit of the believer, singing the praises, and shouting the alleluias of redeeming love, while yet his bodily lips are sealed in death, is not a mere emanation from an annihi- lated or mouldered being. It is the man himself, in spot- less robes, and with his golden harp, fully conscious of his own identity. It is here worthy of observation, that Moses, when speak- ing of the agency of the spirit in creation, denominates him the Spirit of "Elohim." If then Jehovah-Elohim was a divine hypostasis, or person, as man is while dwell- MORAL GOVERNMENT. 107 ing in the body, it is very clear that the phrase, " Spirit of Elohim" is analogous with "spirit of man;" and it is equal- ly clear that, as the phrase, " spirit of man," does not express a distinct person, but is applied to man's intellectual ope- rations irrespective of his bodily presence, we have no mode of explaining the phrase, " Spirit of Elohim," but that which implies corresponding operations. The scriptural view of God which, if I mistake not, has been very distinctly ascertained, is simply this : — Jehovah, is God himself, considered as he is in his own being — an infinite, invisible, eternal Spirit : The Word, or Jehovah- Elohim, is God himself, .as he has assumed, and is revealed in, persojial form, with the view of manifesting himself unto his intelligent creatures, that they might enjoy per- sonal intercourse with him. The Spirit, is God himself, acting invisibly, or not in personal form, yet really, in his providential superintendence over his works. Every one can distinctly perceive in this delineation, that there is but one God ; and no one can feel any necessity to advance the inexplicable dogma, that there are three persons in one ' God. No philosopher would ever describe man as three persons, and but one man. Or if any sophist, vain of his power of philosophic refinement, should so represent the human being, the world would leave him to his self-com- placency, and mind their own business under the guidance of their own common sense apprehensions. Yet the same threefold view, which has been taken of God, maybe very consistently taken of man. But the subject of Godhead has been so mystified by the ancient philosophy, either oriental or grecian ; and so obscured by men, who, offend- ed with the grossness of the vulgar idolatry, diverged into most extravagant speculation ; or so uniformly represented as incomprehensibly mysterious, by theologians who were deceived by a false philosophy, and who scarcely ever thought of breaking away from its trammels ; that man- 108 LECTURES ON kind have helplessly mistaken their unintelligible state- ments for good sense and scriptural truth. But if we had not reached a conclusion so rational and simple, yet it is evident, that the threefold view of God which the scriptures so clearly state, arises entirely from the manifestation which he has made of himself to his creatures. As to God, considered in his own being, he is, said Jesus, a spirit. There are not, there cannot be, three persons in a Spirit. Predicated of the human spirit, the absurdity of such an idea would immediately appear : and no analogy could be pointed out in any direction. Nor is the notion of Sabellius a whit better ; while that of Arius must be condemned by its own terms. For which of the phrases — three persons — three portions — a supreme God and a lesser God — would be most appropriate, in comment- ing on the scriptural view which has been presented ? The precise use of the terms, however, that have been employed in the scriptures on this subject, has not yet been pointed out : and there may be a necessity that this should be done, in order to possess a full apprehension of the whole matter. Then suffer me to call up to your recollec- tion the fact, which has been so variously illustrated, that the bible has noticed two distinct manifestations, which Jehovah has made of himself. One in the form of God, and the other in the form of man : one as Creator, and the other as Redeemer. When agents derive their names from the operations they conduct, from the object they have in view, or from the circumstances under which they act, those names may change ; or they may not be equally ap- plicable to, or expressive of, every mode of operation, 'or every phase of character, or every class of social relations, in which we may be required to contemplate these agents- Man is a generic term. But all men are not magistrates, bishops, civilians, or physicians. So here. The terms which are used in reference to God as manifested to us, are not equally appropriate to eyery view in which his charac* MORAL GOVERNMENT. 109 ter, work, or official relations, are set forth. Word, King, Lord, Image, Glory, are appellations which belong to both manifestations ; because the general principle they are in- tended to express is equally characteristic of both. The phrase form of God, can be properly applied only to the first. The phrase form or likeness of man, with the words Jesus, Christ, Saviour, Prophet, Priest, Captain, can only be properly applied to the second. So also the terms Father, Son, Holy Spirit, arise from or belong to the mediatorial manifestation, and not to the ori- ginal view which God gave of himself, excepting so far as the term Father is a general political title. This observa- tion ma}" not at first appear strictly accurate ; because such passages as the following may seem to be in direct hostili- ty to it: — "God hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, by whom also he made the worlds:" — "Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, to-day, and forever." I have not been careful in the selection of examples in which the supposed conflict with my remark may apparently exist ; because I intend, at present, to make but one explanatory observation : and it is this ; — that the scriptures evidently show great concern to preserve in our minds the idea of a political identity* in view of the twofold manifestation of which they speak. This consideration, highly important in itself, and affording an irrefutable argument in favor of the divinity of our Saviour, would readily explain and remove such seeming discrepancies. The Word, which was in the beginning, was made flesh : — the second Adam is the Lord from Heaven. You never hear Jesus say, referring to the divine nature, as characteristic of his mediatorship, — - "The Son' of God who dwelleth in me, he doeth the works ;" though he does make such a remark of the Far- ther dwelling in him. You never hear him say, alluding to his divine nature, — "If I by the Son or God cast out de- vils ;" though he does say, that he did cast out devils by the * See Lectures V. and VIII. Vol. I.— 10 110 LECTURES ON Spirit of God. — On the contrary he says, "The Son can do nothing of himself: — I can of mine own self do nothing; as I hear I judge." The terms Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, I feel perfectly safe in repeating the remark, are strictly applicable to, or are used in view of, the second manifes- tation alone ; and arise from the following circumstances : Jesus had no earthly father ; God was his father : hence the relation of Father and Son. Any farther idea, convey- ed by the use of these terms, is purely official, or political; as we shall hereafter see. — Again. There is an evil spirit which reigns in the hearts of the children of disobedience ; — the God of the world — the prince of the power of the air. In opposition to whom, and in reference to the better, to the heavenly and purifying influence exerted in the divine providence, the Spirit of God is denominated the Holy Spi- rit ; or it may be, and more probably is, that as God has erect- ed a church, which is a community of saints, or a holy nation, the Spirit takes his official epithet from his opera- tions in that church, and is hence styled holy, or "the Spi- rit of holiness;" as he has been called "the Spirit of bon- dage and fear" under the Mosaic dispensation, and "the Spirit of adoption," or "of love, of power, and of a sound mind," under the new economy. The term Ghost is ap- plied to disembodied spirit, but is a very improper appella- tion in this connexion, and is borrowed from Saxon super- stition. In regard of the first manifestation, the terms which are used are, Jehovah, Jehovah-Elohim or Word, and Spirit. And they are as demonstrably expressive of the scriptural doctrine which has been advanced, as the terms Father, Son and Holy Spirit can be. The opponent, who may be offended because his own ideas are not sustained, may criti- cise my use of terms, but the principle is preserved in all its distinctive force and character. I have farther, to observe that, in view of this twofold manifestation, there are two distinct wo?*ks ascribed to God • MORAL GOVERNMENT. HJ — creation and reconciliation ; there are also, in the same connexion, two different conditions spoken of, in which man is personally exhibited — innocence and sin; and there are two distinct forms of government described, under which man has been placed — law and gospel. These several par- ticulars I would class thus : 1. Jehovah, Jehovah-Elohim or Word, and Spirit — creation — man in innocence — law. '2. Father, Son and Holy Spirit — reconciliation — man in sin — -gospeL Before this lecture is closed, we may call up again, for the purpose of farther illustration, the object which Jeho- vah designed to accomplish by these manifestations of him- self. Some things have been brought to light in the re- citation of the biblical texts that have been quoted, which I have omitted to notice, intentionally reserving them for a separate argument in the conclusion of this exercise. It has been rendered very evident, as I think, that the ne- cessity for such divine manifestations is to be traced to the constitution of human nature. God is a Spirit, and man can- not see him. Yet that we should have personal intercourse with him, is an idea equally natural, rational and desirable. As intellectual beings, material agents cannot possibty be the ultimate object either of our thought or feeling. We rise to the intellectual world, and to the moral relations which belong to it, by the impulse of our being. Atheism is pure absurdity all round. Then it results, that Jehovah must occupy such an attitude with regard to us. as will make this personal intercourse practicable and pleasant. And as he denounces idolatry as highly criminal, while its own his- tory betrays it to be degrading in the very extreme ; he has not taught us, either by the attributes of our own nature, by the analogies of his works, or by any scriptural or oral reve- lation, that his object can be obtained in any other way than by his assuming personal form. And even then if this per- sonal form, so assumed, has no correspondence with our in- dividual powers of perception, the object in view cannot be 112 LECTURES ON attained; the aspirations of our immortal nature remain unsatisfied; and we are driven back to degrade ourselves amid the sensualities of the material world. Admitting such a personal form to have been assumed, and with the explicit design of placing the knowledge of God within our reach, can our knowledge of God 2:0 be- yond that exhibition ? If we can pretend to more than con- jecture, when we attempt to transcend such a manifestation ; or if, in making such pretensions, our views should be either distinct or accurate, would it not follow that the exhibition itself is incomplete, or is not commensurate with our na- ture? Again the object in view would be lost. But phi- losophers and divines have trifled with the human mind, by mistaking the terms in which Deity speaks of himself; or, disregarding the application in which he employs those terms, they have, by a series of incomprehensible and un- profitable abstractions, converted into pure mystery "that which may be known of God." They have talked about, and reasoned from, omniscience, omnipresence, omnipo- tence, goodness and justice, as though they could judge of these attributes otherwise than by "the things which are made," or which, in the kind providence of God, have be- come "visible." And all this they have done at the same time that they were conscious they could not have accu- rately judged of the intellectual powers of a fellow man, but by his woi'ks. Some scriptural declarations which the preceding argu- ment has thrown in our way, appear to me not only strongly to bear upon, but most happily to illustrate, the important topic thus again called up. I refer to them with consider- able confidence, because they seem to be peculiarly appro- priate. 1. God says to Moses, — "I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, as Almighty God." Again he says — "By my name, Jehovah, I was not Joiown unto them." Now the facts in the case are, that God did appear to Abra- al iitical application it runs through the whole of society, as- cending from the lowest to the highest, or descending from the highest to the lowest officer. In every instance, and under every form of government, the principle is the same — spirit is clothed with form for certain practical purposes which are contemplated. Perhaps you may ask — What is the spirit of the commu- nity ? But in so doing, you carry me out into the region of abstractions. Spirit is brought to my knowledge by be- ing embodied in the political officer. That officer thus in* augurated brings to my view the political hypostasis or per- son. You dismiss the officer, and then ask me what that thing is which has no hypostasis or person ? The object which is sought lies beyond the range of the human senses. and of course beyond our power of perception. You have assigned me a task above human nature, and until some new or different method of acquiring ideas is conferred up- on us, it would be folly to attempt explanation. In like manner, if you ask what is spirit in view of the divine nature, I answer — No one can tell. The subject is beyond our range. There must be a divine hypostasis or person before we can have any ideas on the subject. Je- hovah must be revealed or manifested. This done, the form which he has assumed, if it be appropriate to our fa- culties of perception, will enable us to perceive and under- stand something about him. This is precisely what he has done, and the personal manifestation which he thus made, appropriate to man's powers of perception as they originally were, and as again they shall be when the redeemed shall see God as he is, is denominated, by Moses Jehovah-Elo- him — by David The Lord — by John The Word and God as he is — and is referred to as the hypostasis or person of Jehovah of which the Son is the image, which no man can now see and live ; but which shall be seen when the Son 14* 16-2 LECTURES ON shall surrender the kingdom to the Father, and Jehovah- Elohim shall be all, and in all. This manifestation, whose principle we have been con- templating in such various forms, having been mistaken by theologians in their pursuit after abstract philosophy, has given rise to the doctrine of Trinity; which so many rep- robate as untrue, which no one pretends to explain, and which is so often represented as a sublime mystery, neces- sarily and naturally incomprehensible. But if our subject has been explained up to that point where spirit becomes to us a mere abstraction, if the false constructions in theo- logy, which prevented you from coming up intelligibly to that point, have been removed out of your way, and if you may thus understand what a hypostatical or personal mani- festation is, you can ask no more. A second manifestation, in which an image of the first is presented, may indeed have some peculiarity. But the principle by which even that peculiarity may be explained, as we shall see hereafter, is fairly secured, and this is all we could desire. A Lord — the chief magistrate of the universe — is thus constituted in a manner we can understand, and from the very begin- ning. And as "the form of God" then assumed was not the essence of God, neither did it affect that essence, though a distinct individual hypostasis or Person, which did not subsist without that form, is brought before us. And as the chief magistrate of the United States, who did not sub- sist until the spirit of the community selected and assum- ed its own form, is the 'people, and yet with the people, so John represents that — "In the beginning the Word was; and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." I cannot accuse myself of offering any ideas derogatory to Jehovah, or prejudicial to the views we should entertain of him, in tracing out such a simile. He has employed it himself. The official titles which he appropriates corres- pond with it. He is Lord — King — Lord of Lords — King of Kings — Father — Lawgiver— Judge; and his church is MORAL GOVERNMENT. 163 his KINGDOM, his NATION, his PEOPLE, a COMMONWEALTH, a city, &c. As has already been remarked, I am not re- sponsible for the accuracy of the political theory which has been quoted, nOr concerned with the question — whether the spirit of the community be an entity or a mere figment ? That question, I apprehend, is likely to become as inter- esting as trinity itself; and, if the apostle Paul has taken the true ground when he asserts that the ruler is a minis- ter of God, it is likely to be settled on corresponding prin- ciples. The man of sin may possibly be revealed as of more gigantic stature, and as the head of a more extensive empire, than is generally suspected. The spirit of the com- munity, and the spirit of the magisterial office, may then be discovered to be the Spirit of God, bringing liberty wherever he shall rule. This last view will make the il- lustration still better than it at present is, and entirely scrip- tural. But in either way the principle is the same. Spi- rit, assuming form, is the secret, and spring, and life of all visible action, human or divine. And in the multitude of examples which are to be found in society, in which men are said to personify, or to clothe a mere abstraction with personal attributes,- the result is the same. Idolatrv itself originates here ; and, by carrying a genuine principle of in- tellectual philosophy into improper associations, it has illus- trated the general laws of humanity by a host of fearful and desolating analogies ; so that an inspired apostle, when he would describe "the true God and eternal life," felt it necessary to exhort the disciples, — "Little children keep yourselves from idols." Civil and ecclesias- tical despotism arise from the same source. The one is a perversion of the doctrine of Spirit in its political connex- ions ; and the other is a perversion of the same doctrine in its ecclesiastical connexions. Hence in both relations, phy- sical power has taken the place of moral influence — intel- lectual operations, divine and human, have all been meta- physically misrepresented, and practically misapplied. 164 LECTURES ON Here for the present this particular illustration must be left. The mediatorial manifestation will call it up again, and lead us to look at it in minuter details. I only remark in conclusion, that to object to an effort to explain the char- acter and operations of Jehovah to the whole extent of the images which he himself has selected, to reject the linea- ments of the one when we would ascertain the lineaments of the other, and then to perplex and distract ourselves by a vain effort to grasp a mere abstraction, is the greatest of all intellectual mistakes. How, I pray you, can wise men — above all, how can ministers of Jesus Christ — call such an intellectual process, either science or revelation ? The Stagyrite might know no better, or a Platonic sophist might offer such subtleties for philosophic refinement ; but the in- spiration of the saint ought to have brought him nearer the throne of God. Even the politician who, falling in with ** the march of mind," has talked so much and so long, and so loud about power, and sovereignty, and majesty, and li- berty, might have promulged a system of vastly greater verisimilitude. LECTURE VI. Of Creation — Appropriate manifestation of Jehovah — Plu- ral terms — Character of the creature — Man — Image of the Elohim — His body — -His spirit — Original reponsibili- ty — Its relations— ^Spirit's operations — Human ability. Having spoken of the two different manifestations which God has ma'de of Himself, in view of the character and powers of mankind ; the first, with its appropriate associa- tions, now comes up before us. Agreeably to the classifi- MORAL GOVERNMENT 165 cation stated in the last lecture, the arrangement of our subjects, as they must be considered in order, is as fol- lows : — Jehovah, Jehovah-Elohim, or Word, and Spirit — Creation — Man as he was originally made — and Man under Law. Our first question, of course, is — How did God create the world ? If, instead of this question, I should ask you how does Cod reconcile the world unto Himself, you would readily reply in scriptural language — "God is in Christ, recon- ciling the world unto himself." In explanation you might go on and say, that in order to reconcile man, he assumed a human form, and appeared in the likeness of men ; by which means he became qualified, so to speak, to act for our benefit, in a manner consistent with the laws of our being, and the necessities of our condition. Or again, to use biblical language, you would say — "Forasmuch as the children were partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same, that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death." In like manner I would say, that in the beginning, God in the Word, or as Jehovah-ELOHiM, created the heavens' and earth : and going on to explain, I would further remark that He, having purposed to call into being this system, and to place an intelligent creature in a presidency over it,, did assume an appropriate form ; and that, acting in this form, the whole work was done while he Himself, stood. as manifested, Jehovah-ELOHiM, or Lord of the whole. Certainly the scriptures do entertain — do clearly set forth — this simple view of the whole matter. Moses an- nounces to us that — "In the beginning" Elohim made the heavens and the earth:" and again, that Adam and Eve "heard the voice of Jehovah-Elohim^ walking in the garden." John tells us that in the beginning the Word was, or subsisted ; all things were made by him ; and with- out him was not any thing made that was made. He was 166 LECTURES ON in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not." Paul, quoting from the book of psalms, testifies to the same fact — " Thou Lord, in the be- ginning, hast laid the foundation of the earth ; and the heavens are the works of thine hands." The original word in the psalms, which the apostle renders Lord, is the singular of Elohim; and is the same used by Jehovah, when he informs Moses that he had appeared to Abraham as Almighty God ; and used by Jacob, when he remarks — " I have seen God face to face," and denominates the spot where the sacred interview was enjoyed, Peni-EL. Both these appearances, you remember, were in the form of man. — Lord is the emphatic or distinguishing title of Je- hovah as manifested in a personal similitude. — The apostle, speaking for himself, would say concerning his Master — " By Him were all things created that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible." God then, or Jehovah in personal form, came down to cre- ate the heavens and the earth, as he came down to give the law to Moses from Mount Sinai ; or as he appeared to. Isaiah, when in a vision he saw the Lord upon a throne, high and lifted up. He came down in human form to reconcile man, when he appeared as the babe of Bethlehem, and an- gels sang — " Unto you is born this day in the city of David, a Saviour whois Christ the Lord." So also he came down, in the form of God, to create the heavens and the earth ; when, as he himself informs Job, "the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy." Having assumed external form, in which he would per- sonally act, God impresses upon this system, which is sum- marily denominated the heavens and the earth and all their host, a corresponding character. I mean to be understood as intimating, that his intelligent creature man, whom he designed to create, was to be an intellectual spirit, inhabit- ing a bodily form ; and that a material structure was now framed, to subserve the various purposes which such a state MORAL GOVERNMENT. 167 of being, as has been predicated of man, would involve. By this series of outward agencies God manifested his own character, together with the principles of his actions, in a manner correspondent with the constitution of the human being; inasmuch as it is evident that man, being destitute of what have been called " innate ideas," must acquire his information by his corporeal senses, and from exterior sources. At the same time, while this external system af- fords to him the range of his observation, it also prescribes the sphere, and furnishes the means of his individual and responsible actions. Hence it is said — "the heavens declare the o;lorv of God. and the earth showeth forth his handy works :" — " The in- visible things of him are clearly seen, being understood by the things which are made, even his eternal power and god- head. That which may be known of God is " thus" man- ifested among men ; for God hath thereby showed it unto them." So that the whole material fabric is intended to subserve a principle of symbolic, or scenic representation, suited to the present mode of man's existence. And our future concern will necessarily be, to watch and describe the development of this principle. Jehovah pronounces his work to be very good. He in- tended to exhibit himself to mankind as good. Just as he has done in the gospel, or in the work of reconciliation, so he did at the beginning : — he sought to leave the best im- pression of his own character upon his creatures. God is love. He has no pleasure nor satisfaction in any injury which his creatures can sustain. He does whatever the nature of the case will permit him to do, to promote their welfare ; or he multiplies his blessings, employs his re- straints, and exerts his influences for their benefit, and as far as is consistent with their free-agency. To go farther, and interfere with, or take away from them their free-agency, is no part of his law or of his providence. To do this would be to despoil man of his glory ; and to inflict upor 168 LECTURES ON him the sorest evil which he can possibly suffer. God's government is, and always has been, a government of Love Such is the view which he designed and desires to give of himself; and our first parents wrere placed in the happiest circumstances, from which such an impression of the di- vine character could be derived. All the different parts of creation were most wisely ad- justed and carefully adapted to each other. A series of causes originated a corresponding series of effects ; a sys- tem of reciprocal relations, exceedingly multiform and di- versified, wTas instituted ; and the whole was so accurately framed, so well proportioned, and so bountifully supplied, that the entire combination could be sustained in unbroken order, and undisturbed harmony. God always acts right. The most laborious research, the most scrutinizing analysis, the most minute experiment, can detect nothing wrong in any of his works. The farther our investigation is carried, the more our admiration is excited, and our confidence se- cured. All men, even now that evil has been introduced by the fall, live by faith in the divine providence, and grow wise by studying his stately and consistent movements. If the laws of nature were erroneous, if nothing could com- mand our eulogy by its wisdom, or instruct us by its recti- tude, goodness could not have been displayed ; we could have had no motive to act, no incentive to hope, no sub- ject for praise. The divine character could not have been an object of contemplation to an intelligent being, nor a pattern for imitation to a creature of moral obligation. Place these two views together, or consider the finished work of creation as both right and good, and we shall have the very matter exhibited which has been specified in the di- vine law ; which every intelligent being must approve ; and which the Redeemer has set before us in the gospel ; and that is — righteousness produces happiness. This is the elemental principle of all government, and is the philoso* MORAL GOVERNMENT. 169 phy of life. Accordingly, the great Creator has most mag- nificently and gloriously displayed it in his own work. But in reviewing this original work of the Creator, we are bound to contemplate more than the exhibited charac- ter of the Creator himself. The distinguishing features of the creature also, and the principles which belong to its in- dividual being or action, require our most deliberate atten- tion. Here the question of power and responsibility arises — a question, the debates on which occupy so much space in theological controversies ; and a misapprehension of which may lead to the most fearful mistakes. Now it must be evident, on the face of the Mosaic account, as well as from the nature of the case, that each creature was formed in view of a particular design, which it was made competent to ex- ecute ; that the laws of its being were impressed upon, or incorporated with, its own nature ; or that the material body which is presented to the eye, is the mere visible organi- zation under, or within, which certain principles or laws were put into operation ; and that no creature could be ex- pected to act above, or contrary to the laws which belonged to its own constitution. Hence Moses represents every living creature as made after its kind ; and speaks of the herb yielding seed, whose seed is in itself; and the fruit tree yielding fruit, whose seed is in itself. He states facts in their own simplicity, and as though he were altogether unconscious of the difficulties which more modern writers have discovered in relation to ability and inability. He looked upon the whole scene before him with an unpre- judiced eye ; and his observations are made with all the familiarity of the first and simple impression he had re- ceived. Jesus uses the same style of remark, when he compares the kingdom of heaven to a man casting seed into the ground — " the earth," says he, "bringeth forth fruit of itself" Each individual creature, it is evident, must act, or ope- rate, according to the laws of its being. Beyond these laws Vo*., I.— 15 170 LECTURES ON ft cannot go. Whatever power might be predicated of it, must exist within the range of those laws. Destroy those laws, and its power is destroyed : interrupt their operation, and the exercise of its power is interrupted. A fig tree cannot produce grapes ; neither can figs be gathered from the vine. No intelligent or consistent moralist would carry his ideas of power any farther ; would attempt to tax the providence of God beyond the laws which divine legisla- tion has established ; or, depending on omnipotence, would defend the wisdom of a prayer that besought the Eternal to cover the fig tree with grapes, or the vine with figs. Nei- ther should any wisdom be manifested in a hypothetical exposition of power, which should destroy the fig tree or the vine, and then piously refer to Jehovah for the figs or the grapes. If we may conceive of a case, in which the 'action of the laws belonging to the constitution of any creature, should be suspended or impaired, so that the effect contem- plated by the existence of that creature did not and could not follow, and then inquire what the remedy must be — the answer is at hand. Every one can see that the remedy would consist in restoring the suspended action of those laws. Can any good reason be assigned why, in such a case, we should prefer to confide in the mere omnipotence of God, working without means ; when the universal cha- racteristic of the material system is, that he works by means ? Can any one tell us, why the fruits of the summer should be produced by the immediate power of God, rather than by the intervention of secondary causes, which the season itself affords ? — But this is a very plain matter ; yet the principle of divine operation, or the view of a creature's power of operation, so simple in this connexion, becomes a puissant affair in the metaphysical theology of learned sectarians. To proceed. Moses next introduces man to our notice, and apprises us of some very peculiar circumstances con- nected with his creation. MORAL GOVERNMENT. ' 171 1. The Elohim are again presented under that plurality of view, which has already been the subject of protracted discussion in the preceding lectures. The Elohim said, "let us make man in our image, and after our likeness." How shall we understand this language ? You are all aware, that this is not the only instance in which this kind of phraseology is employed. You remem- ber, that after the fall, the historian represents Jehovah-Elo- Aim as remarking, — " Behold the man is become as one of us." And again, when he descended to the plains of Shi- nar to confound the language of men, he said — " Go to, let us go down and there confound their language." — Other instances might be adduced : but the foregoing are suffi- cient. The question is, where is their propriety ? In re- ply, I remark, (1.) That as we have had exhibited to us two distinct manifestations of God, with only one of which it is possi- ble for us to have any familiarity in our present lapsed con- dition; we must obtain our principles of explanation from the one, and apply them to the other, so far as our minds .can carry them. Now when the Redeemer said — "If a man love me, he will keep my words ; and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him and make our abode with him,"— who feels any difficulty? But here the doc- trine of a divine manifestation in an outward form — while Jehovah, considered, in himself as a Spirit, is no object of our vision — or the scriptural exhibition of one God and one Lord, is so palpable and distinct, that no inconsistency is suspected ; or it readily vanishes. The original manifesta- tion constructed on the same principle, and holding out to human observation one God and one Lord, may well be con- ceded to have been as clear when it was afforded; and would be so to us now, were it as possible for us to see as it was for Adam. If that concession be made— and I can- not conjecture why it should be withheld — all the difficulty prising from the use of such language is removed. 1^2 LECTURES Otf (2.) The noun, by which God is designated to us, is ill the plural number : so that, on grammatical principles, other words which would be grammatically connected with it must be modified so as to correspond. And as the mani- festation is personal, the personal pronouns readily fall un- der the same philological rule. (3.) Other scriptural expressions, and applied to man, re* quire the same indulgence in interpretation— if indulgence it may be called. Such are the following :— " Return unto thy rest, 0 my soul, for the Lord hath dealt bountifully with thee." "Bless the Lord, Omy soul," again and again re- peated by David. — " For that which / do, / allow not : for what / would, that do /not; but what / hate, that do /. Now if / do that / would not, it is no more /that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. / know that in me, i. e. in my flesh, dwelleth no good thing." Such is Paul's language. And it becomes if possible more striking, when speaking of himself, as having been caught up into paradise, he says — "Of such an one will I glory; yet of myself I will not glory, but in my infirmities." All these different modes of expression are, as applied to the same person, under the same personal view, highly improper ; but they are both correct and beautiful, interesting and necessary, when ap- plied to the same person under different personal views. (4.) While these expressions may be illustrated on the distinction which has been stated, we* are forbidden to carry that distinction so far as to overthrow the doctrine of the di- vine unity. Not only are we explicitly informed that there is but one God, but in the very passage from which these plural pronouns have been taken, singular pronouns are used with equal familiarity: for it is said — "So Elohim created man in his own image : in the image of Elohim created he him ; male and female created he them." And after- wards Elohim said — " Behold /have given you every herb." " Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof / commanded thee that thou shouldst not eat?" While then the distinction MOKAL GOVERNMENT, 173 stated is, on the one hand, necessary to explain the phrase- ology ; on the other, the phraseology itself restricts us from going beyond the distinction. (5.) On the supposition that our physiology in explaining Spirit, Soul, and Body as belonging to the human hyposta- sis or Person, has not been a mistake which mere fancy has substituted for science, and supposing that Spirit, Soul and Body are ascribed to God, these expressions, both as sin- gular and plural, are easily defended. For if, when Soul exists, a distinct subsistence is presented, or an hypostasis or personis formed; and if Soul is not to be predicated of God, considered as he is in himself a pure Spirit, any more than it can be predicated of our spirits after they shall have left our bodies : and if, in this view it is a proper declaration- — " In the beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God," then these expressions are strictly accurate in either grammatical construction. The Spirit of the people resides in our chief magistrate as its visible or personal form. He is the people, and yet is with the people. Is he guilty of any impropriety in incorporat- ing either singular or plural verbs, nouns, adjectives, or pro- nouns in his official communications ? What politician would criticise the phraseology of his prince, as theologians have criticised that of their Lord ? or affect, as they have done, not to perceive the propriety of terms belonging to of- ficial documents ? In what language would our hypercri- tical theologues wish an official agent, who must necessa- rily be considered both as a person and a representative, to express himself so as to offend neither their physiology nor their philology ? A common author feels himself to move imong official men, and unhesitatingly uses singular or plu- ral epithets as he. may find most convenient, or suppose 3 limself to be uttering; the sentiments of his readers. I am fully aware that others have considered the lan- guage, on which we are remarking, as official. But then it s supposed to be the invention of earthly princes ; and the 15* 174 LECTURES ON inspired writers are said to borrow it, that God may seem to speak with appropriate condescension. And did these princes borrow the official title also, and out of mere conde- scension designate Jehovah as ElohIm ? Is the political doctrine of representation, and of official images a like loan ? or is not civil government an ordinance of God ? Has he not established the political as well as the natural relations of mankind? and is not man, viewed officially, made in the image of, or like unto, God ? Here then a licentious criti- cism has not only overreached, but reversed the fact. — Is it any matter of wonder that the world is full of theological strife and sectarian animosities, when such modes of inter- pretation become popular, and the human mind is so readi- ly fascinated by any hasty comment that is seemingly in- genious. 2. The Elohim are sard to make man in their own image, and after their own likeness. This image is supposed to consist in "knowledge, right- eousness and true holiness."* Now that God is character- ized by knowledge, righteousness and true holiness, there can be no doubt; and when man possesses these attributes, there is as little doubt that he is like God. But that they cannot be included in the record, at present under consid- eration, is evident: because, ( 1 .) Knowledge, righteousness and true holiness, suppose intellectual and moral exercises, in which man could not have been engaged until he was created and put on his pro- bation. He obtains his knowledge from the sphere of ob- servation that is opened to him. Not having any "innate ideas," he must depend upon his external resources; and, until as an intellectual being he was put on those resources, he could not possess the ideas which were to be derived from them. Righteousness, in like manner, is conformity to law ; and he could not, therefore, have righteousness until he had conformed to law. — How is the fact, or how should have * The idea is taken from Eph. iv. 23, 24.— Col. iii. 10.. MORAL GOVERNMENT. 175 been the fact, with regard to infants? Do they know any thing before or when they are born ? or are their actions either righteous or sinful ? (2.) The image of God has not always the same meaning in the scriptures. — "A man indeed," says Paul, "ought not to cover his head, for as much as he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of the man." Was not the woman made in the image of God ? See the record. It has also been asserted, that by the fall of Adam, all mankind have lost the image of God. Neither can this as- sertion be sustained by the scriptures. For when God re- newed the mediatorial constitution with Noah, as " the heir of the righteousness of faith," he assigned as the reason of a statute in relation to murder, then promulgated — " For in the image of God made he man ;" which reason is still good, or the statute cannot be sustained. In the text just quoted from the pen of the apostle Paul, it is expressly asserted that the man is the image and glory of God. And James, speak- ing of the tongue, observes — "Therewith bless we God, even the Father ; and therewith curse we men, which are made after the similitude of God." All these things are readily explained by the fact, that as Elohim means Jehovah, who is a spirit, as manifested in personal form, and acting independently of that form in his continual providence ; so man, being made in their image or after their likeness, was similarly constituted : i. e. man has an intellectual spirit, dwelling in an external form or body ; which spirit may exist and exert an influence independently of his bodily presence. — The allusion which the apostle makes, in describing the man as the image of God, and the woman as the glory of the man, is not to this primary view, but to official standing and authority. Adam was our so- cial head. Eve was not. The first circumstance which we are required to notice concerning man— the general matters being settled — is 176 LECTURES ON that he has a body. God has created him with an animal nature. And this body, like every other creature, has its own laws impressed upon, or incorporated within itself: all of which laws are necessary to its well being. It is a beau- tiful piece of divine mechanism, ''fearfully and wonder- fully made;" displaying the divine wisdom in one of its loveliest efforts ; and putting to the blush the absurdity of atheistical speculation. It must act according to its own laws — not contrary to them — not above them. Nothing else, nothing more, can be expected from it : nor can we imagine that the divine power will be exerted to sustain it in a train of operations, for which it is not constitutionally fitted. The body of man, it is necessary further to remark, was produced from the dust of the ground. It originates in, and from, this material system, or is a component part of it. This fact in relation to the origin of the body, as traced to the laws of the material system, is never lost sight of in the scriptural representations concerning it: in proof of which assertion, let the following texts be submitted. — " In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return to the ground ; for out of it wast thou taken : for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return." " Remem- ber, I beseech thee, that thou hast made me as the clay : and wilt thou bring me into dust again ?" "All flesh shall perish together, and man shall turn again to dust" " He knoweth om frame, he remembereth that we are dust." " Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was." " We have had fathers of our flesh, who corrected us, and we i gave them reverence." The next circumstance that is observed concerning man is, that he has an intellectual spirit. Without this he could not resemble Elohim. This spirit is the immediate gift of God, and did not spring from the dust, nor is it the . offspring of the material system. God breathed into man's nostrils, when his body was brought forth from the ground, MORAL GOVERNMENT. 177 the breath of lives ; i. e. both animal an intellectual life. The same idea is preserved throughout the scriptures. — " The spirit shall return to God who gave it." " We have had fathers of our flesh — shall we not much rather be in subjection to the Father of spirits and live." " 0 God, the God of the spirits of all flesh." " None of them can by any means redeem his brother, nor give to God a ran- som for him, for the redemption of their soul is precious." " There is no man that hath power over the spirit, to retain the spirit." " The burthen of the word of the Lord, which stretched forth the heavens, and layeth the foundation of the earth, and formeth the spirit of man within him." " Fear not them that kill the body, but are. not able to de- stroy the soul; but rather fear him, which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell." To God, then, immediately and directly, are we indebted for our spirits. They have no earthly father. I am aware of the argument that has been employed, and by no secondary men, to disprove the origin of the human spirit, as it has just been declared. But I must be permitted to leave their argument on this subject unnoticed; as it is advanced principally to sustain a doctrine, which we shall hereafter have opportunities enough to demon- strate to be unscriptural. It may, however, be remarked, that the question itself is old ; and gave rise to much litigation in those ages which moulded theology into the stately forms that sectarians so much admire. Tertullian and Origen and Jerome and Augustine and Pelagius were alike interested in it. But the doctrine of the trinity, which so fully discloses the ig- norance of the physiologists of those times, evinces that the real difference between soul and spirit entered not into their ratiocinations. Had it, the fact that man is made like God, coupled with the assumption of human nature by the divine Spirit, would have settled the question. In the constitution of a divine person, spirit and form are 178 LECTURES ON not the same. Then it appears that spirit may exist inde- pendent of form, and that the two belong to different or- ders of being. So in man, spirit may exist indepen- dently of his body — the one being mortal and the other im- mortal, they are thus evinced to belong to different orders, because governed by different laws. Augustine pleaded igno7'ance, i. e. he could not establish the very plea which was the turning point of his system. If any one can prove that we derive our spirits, as well as our bodies, from those who are styled "the fathers of our flesh," or that God, to whom it returns, did not give the spirit, the doctrine of temporal and spiritual and eternal death, as the legal and necessary consequence of Adam's sin, would be irrefuta- ble. It may have been very pious and candid in Augus- tine to have remarked — " When the bible gives no decisive testimony, human presumption must beware of determin- ing either for one view or another. Had the knowledge of such things been essential to salvation, the scriptures would have contained more respecting them."* But the know- ledge of " these things" was essential to his doctrines. Tq have been able to affirm the human origin of the human spirit, would have incontrovertibly settled his system ; or had he demonstrated his dogmas, that demonstration would have proved the human origin of the human spirit. But he hesitated, and charitably warned us against the pre- sumption of inquiry. Is it not equally presumptuous to affirm doctrines, whose evidence we dare not touch? There is " a polemical," as well as " a purely scientific, interest," in the exhibition of ecclesiastical tenets, which needs to be sustained by the influence of great names. In this con^ nexion Augustine is quoted, and it is well to know what such quotations are worth. The spirit of man, like every other creature, has its own laws impressed upon, or incorporated within itself. Paul has expressed my idea thus : — "The gentiles do by na- * Bib. Reper. 1833, p. 10S. Neander trans, by Woods. MORAL GOVERNMENT. 179 ture the things contained in the law — which show the work of the law written in their hearts" Like every other creature then, the spirit of man is under a necessary obli- gation to act according to the laws of its own nature : — not contrary to, nor above, but in perfect correspon- dence with them. Nor is the power of God to be expect- ed either to legislate for, or to act by the human spirit, in any manner that is not consistent with its nature, nor pro- portioned to its faculties. Neither is it to be supposed, while these faculties are suffered to lie dormant, or are not called out into action to the whole extent of their force, that God will gratuitously supply the deficiencies by an effort of his own omnipotence. Here, therefore, or in the constitution of each individual human being, is laid the basis of his personal responsibility. Whatever may be his social relations, or however his earth- ly condition may be modified, he yet has an individuality, which must be his essential charactertstic while his spirit exists. His body may be enthralled, but his mind must be free ; and he must give account for himself to his Creator. No one man can eat or drink for any other man ; but the organs of each animal system must possess their own vitali- ty, and sustain their own functional operations ; in like manner, no one man can think for any other man ; but each individual spirit has its own characteristic faculties, and these must sustain their own personal operations. It is this individuality of being, with all its appended rights and primordial privileges, that mankind are now waking up to consider ; and which, with such spasmodic effort, they are pleading against both political and ecclesiastical misrule. Nor will the controversy terminate until the vic- tory is acheived ; and the aristocracy of the dark ages falls disfrachised, before the banner of intellectual freedom. The assumed principles of political and ecclesiastical des- potism are contrary to both nature and revelation. 180 LECTURES ON The Son of God himself, while upon earth, could not think for his hearers. Hence he asked them with so much point, "Why do ye not understand my speech;" and re- plied with so much plainness — "because ye cannot hear my word." Their prejudices — their sluggishness — their deeply seated errors — their familiar, but inaccurate, techni- calities— tfteir sectarian dogmatism — their crude, but ste- reotyped maxims, derived from the traditions of the elders, and sustained by the commandments of men, prevented them from hearing either candidly or correctly. Hence they misrepresented his doctrines, traduced his character, reviled his ministrations, and upbraided him under the harshest epithets. " This people's heart," said he, " is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed ; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should under- stand with their hearts, and should be converted, and I should heal them." And again, in his last hours and in full view of his cross, contrasting his own benevolent feel- ing towards them with all their unkindness to him, he said, " 0 Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them that are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen ga- thereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not." Let the human spirit then be either holy or sinful, it must, from its own nature, think for itself :— -no other being can think for it. It is unquestionably true, that one man may express his thoughts to other men ; and that they, taking up those thoughts, may professedly and habitually act upon them. — There is a great deal of this species of intellectual opera- tion in the world ; and there necessarily must be. It is one of the finest and best views of the social character of man ; but when abused, it leads to the most direful and disastrous consequences. It affords ample room for the two extremes attendant on human concerns — good and evil. On the one MORAL GOVERNMENT. 181 hand, it is the very soul of the creed-making system ; is the only support of political or ecclesiastical despotism, when it connects an approval of the dogmas of past ages with civil or religious privileges ; and can alone account for that idolatrous reverence for the fathers, which eulogizes so highly their talents, their learning and their piety, and smiles so sarcastically at the pigmy pretensions of their children ; while, I fear, it has actually made pigmies of us all. It al- ways has been, and it would seem that it always must be so, that men who are too timid, or too indolent to think for themselves, should perpetually detail the thoughts of others. And then again, many who pretend to think for themselves, are all the time meditating upon the ideas of those who have been long numbered with " the pale nations of the dead." How important is the question now-a-days, what Calvin, or Luther, or Owen, or Edwards, and a host of others, meant in their writings ? Can any one conceive a more humilia- ting intellectual spectacle, than when whole denominations of religious men — the old in their dogmatism, and the young in their intemperate zeal — are biting and devouring one another, while professedly arguing out such an unpro- fitable question ? But look abroad — hear, see, read, and de- cide for yourselves. On the other hand, this principle of intellectual opera- tion, by which the human spirit takes cognizance of sur- rounding objects that are presented to its contemplation, is incorporated in the divine government over man. When Jehovah created the world, he made an exhibition of him- self, with the view of arranging subjects of thought for his intelligent creatures. The fact is abundantly evident. The divine works furnish to us the matters of our varied inves- tigation. But the knowledge which they are intended to impart cannot be acquired without effort or reflection. The Redeemer did not ask the credence of his hearers to mere assertion, but appealed to every variety of evidence of which the subject was susceptible — to creation— to provi* I Vol. I.— 16 182 LECTURES ON dence — to the scriptures — to reason — to his own miracu- lous works. The Holy Spirit is not given to control or subdue us by repeated emanations of resistless power, nor to preclude the necessity for personal inquiry ; but he is sent to convince the world of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment. Jehovah no more deals with the spirit of man irrespective of its own high faculties, than he sustains our animal life by a providence that gratuitously dispenses with daily labor. The very principle of intellectual improve- ment is to be found in our intellectual effort. A debased mind must be regenerated ; a corrupt life must be reformed ; the being who has gone astray must be brought back ; and personally to attend to and achieve this momentous change, is the matter of moral obligation which the scriptures pre- scribe. Personal responsibility is therefore the necessary result of our personal existence; and no institution or ope- ration of God is intended to set it aside. Every man must give an account of, and for, himself to his Creator. This intellectual spirit, Which Elohim breathed into man, is made for the time being a tenant of the body that had been formed from the ground. The body then is the in- strument by which the spirit acts. This acquires its ideas by means of the bodily senses ; and applies the ideas thus obtained to the various purposes of life, or, in the discharge of its responsibilities, according to the measure of ability which belongs to the body. Weaken the powers of the body, and the spirit's ability to act is necessarily diminished. A man cannot act in sickness as he can in health. A blind man can have no idea of colors, and a deaf man can have no idea of sound. A child has no maturity of thought, and in old age " the silver cord is loosened and the golden bowl is broken." And hence Paul complains, that when he would do good, evil was present with him — that the law in his members warred against the law of his mind. — Nay, how easily might he, or any other man be disturbed ! ' ' Mar- vel not," says Pascal, " that this profound statesman is just MORAL GOVERNMENT. 183 now incapable of reasoning justly ; for behold a fly is buz- zing round his head. If you wish to restore to him the power of correct thinking, and of distinguishing truth from falsehood, you must first chase away the insect, holding in thraldom that exalted reason and that gigantic intellect which governs empires and decides the destinies of man- kind." I apprehend that the animal part of man is but little con- sidered in discussions on moral science ; and that, as some one remarked on contemplating the splendid anatomical museum at Florence, — " Philosophy has been in the wrong, not to descend more deeply into the physical man. There it is that the moral man lies concealed." The theologian appears promptly to despatch any reference which might be made to it ; and, thinking that the question — can matter $in7 — shuts out all necessity for illustration, he hastens away to speculate about abstract spirit. In like manner he had reasoned about God ; and now merely pursues his own mode of reasoning, in thus treating man. Having contemplated the Creator, enthroned in his own inscrutable perfections outside of the world himself had made, it was natural and necessary to carry his intellectual creature in search of him ; and, if possible, to ascertain some points of communion in which the two could meet. Here, as a matter of course, the theologian fails ; and hence the very virtues of the chris- tian, like the attributes of Godhead, have become profound and inexplicable mysteries. For example : — Who can tell us what faith is ? No one. To be sure, definition upon definition has been afforded by systematic divines. But they only throw the difficulty one step forward : and when pursued, the answer is — Faith is the gift of God. Still, it may be asked, what is the thing which is given? and in what sense is it a gift ? Does God bestow faith upon us, as he gives us our daily bread ? Or are these as different in the manner of their acquisition, as in their nature ? Must we believe what we do not see, do not hear, do not 184 LECTURES ON understand ? Or is it as John says — " That which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled of the word of life, declare we unto you ?" If it be, then we receive our ideas through our corporeal senses, acting upon material objects of which our spirits take cognizance, and judge, understand, are convinced, and believe. But in that case there is no difficulty or mystery about the matter. For in this view, faith is the gift of God, as our daily bread is the gift of God : i. e. we secure our daily bread by a divine bles- sing upon our daily labor ; and so we obtain faith by a divine blessing upon our honest and patient investigation after truth. And can it be otherwise ? How can we believe in him of whom we have not heard ? and how can we hear without a preacher ? In other words : — By throwing out the animal part of man from any interest in the great matter before us, and considering spirit as a pure abstraction, theologians seem to have forgotten all the peculiarities of soul. In fact the subject of soul they have altogether mistaken ; or so far mistaken, that in attempting to explain the scriptural phrase — " Spirit, Soul and Body," they have very gravely told us that man has two souls ; and then have endeavored to govern him as though he had none. Both their metaphysics and their politics have been but the relics of the admired age which gave birth to creeds, and inaugurated Constan- tine as the best umpire that philosophical theologians could find. It is here where the doctrine of " original sin" has been perverted ; and which, notwithstanding the varied profile with which it has been pencilled, has never yet re- conciled the common sense of mankind ; and never will, until controvertists learn to state the difference between, and accurately to define the separate interests of, soul and SPIRIT. In the same manner many reason when they reject all typical ordinances. All is spirit with them. Others run MORAL GOVERNMENT. 185 to the opposite extreme, and are ever busy in formalities be- yond what is written. All is body with them. Sermons, prayer-meetings, and consecrated days, seem to command their entire confidence ; and they justify themselves to their own consciences by calling the excitement, which is thus produced or revived, heart-religion ; as though the heart was intrinsically different from mind, or as though Chris- tianity did not require, but was unfavorable to, intellectual cultivation. How absurd that system necessarily is, which does not enact and sanctify outward institutions, as the means of mental illumination ? Out of this peculiarity of our present mode of existence, viz : that our intellectual spirit dwells in an animal body, arise all our natural relations. Take away that fact — let the spirit return to God, while the dust returns to the dust — and these natural relations cease ; for, says the Redeemer — "in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage." How much more evident it must be, that all the political relations of life, from the paradisiacal consti- tution down, are limited in the same way, and confined in their action to the same material organization. Through this material organization, and by means of its senses, any objects connected with the political, as well as those belonging to the natural relations, may be present- ed to the human spirit, and form the matters of its careful revision, or its deliberate judgment. It is the nature and province of mind so to act ; nor is the case altered by the character of the objects so presented. Whether they shall be good or evil, the mental exercise remains the same in principle. The spirit, sustaining its own free agency, and deciding by its own power of conscience, chooses between good and evil, and must meet the consequences of its own determinations. All that can be required in order to origi- nate, and carry through to its issue, such an intellectual pro- cess, is information; afforded or acquired according to the established laws of human nature. And the various rela- 16* 186 LECTURES ON tions of life, whether considered to be natural or political, are intended to aid and facilitate, not to nullify nor impede, such a train of mental action. " He that is called in the Lord, being a servant, is the Lord's freeman." Personal responsibility is the high and distinguishing characteristic of our personal existence. Having now traced up personal responsibility to its con- stitutional and necessary connexions, let us next inquire after the law to which the spirit was made amenable. From the whole view of creation, it must be very evident that, while every other creature served definite objects suited to its own capacities, the spirit of man was made to contem- plate, to obey, and to enjoy God. Righteousness, as pro- ductive of good, is the high object it was formed to gain. In obtaining that object, it would act according to its own nature, and meet its own responsibility ; !>ut discarding that object, responsibility is violated, and condemnation una- voidable. In other words, it is as much the nature of mind to contemplate, obey, and enjoy God, as it is the nature of the fig tree to bring forth figs ; or the moral results pre- scribed to the human spirit, as naturally follow from its con- stituent principles, as it belongs to the earth to bring forth fruit of herself Hence the law is said to be written on our hearts ; and the gentiles are described as " doing by nature the things contained in the law.M And indeed, would it not be strange that the mind should be called to obey a law which is not coincident with its own nature, or which it had no capacities to obey ? As well might it be expected that men should gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles. The law itself, as it has been summarily expressed in the scriptures, requires of the human mind simply to do and live. That which must be done, is the thing which, as either enacted by a wiitten code or inscribed on nature, is both right and good, and is perfectly within the reach of the human mind. A man cannot believe in him of whom he has not heard ; neither can he fulfil a duty which he has no opportunity of knowing. This doing was as much MORAL GOVERNMENT. 187 within the range of Adam's abilities, as believing is now within the reach of our capacity ; and he was personally as accountable under law which required him to do, as we are under gospel which requires us to believe. — Let it here be distinctly understood that I am not speaking of the paradisiacal constitution ; but of the law impressed upon, or incorporated with, the nature of every human being : — the law of spirit as spirit, viewed in its own individuality, and as existing for a brief period in this world. It may be both seasonable and instructive to call up to recollection, that God himself, the great pattern of imita- tion, had been doing also. He had created the heavens and the earth and all their host. This work which he wrought, is both right and good. So clearly was this the fact, that Adam could distinctly perceive it, and make his observations in the most intelligible and unequivocal man- ner. In other words — God did, in his work of creation, exemplify the connexion between righteousness and life ; or show that the thing which is right is the thing that is good. But this righteousness of God did not in any way interfere with the personal responsibility of man, so as to cover any deficiencies belonging to his nature, or any improprieties of which he might be guilty. It was an ex- ample to illustrate the divine character, and explain the di- vine designs ; from which man might learn his personal duties, and derive the necessary inducements to perform them. But it was no part of Jehovah's intention to impute this righteousness, thus exhibited in his works, to Adam or to any of his posterity : it was not a robe which his hand had wrought as a garment of justification — it served not as a final plea in judgment. The law to man was, do and live : and his obedience to this law would present him as justified by his own works. Wherever, therefore, a doctrine of imputation may be scripturally or rationally argued, it cannot be sustained in any respect, as a substi- tute for personal responsibility. 188 LECTURES ON There is, and necessarily must be, a limit to personal re- sponsibility. Man is not infinite, and the law of his nature could not be infinite. The law could not transcend the powers of his nature, nor be stretched beyond the sphere of action in which he was placed. Accordingly, on the one hand, I cannot accede to the lofty, yet undefined, no- tions which have been entertained of Adam's superiority, as though he were something more than human ; nor, on the other, can I believe, that the paradisiacal institute was either the only law under which he was placed, or an arbitrary statute, enacted as a solitary test of his obedience. For, as we have seen, the law of his personal being was written on his heart, or incorporated in his nature ; and must be obeyed throughout the entire extent of his agency, and in reference to all the relations belonging to the system with which he was connected. Whatever was the nature or the intention of the paradisiacal law, that institute could not set aside the law written on his heart; nor supersede its ob- ligation in those circumstances to which it would naturally and necessarily apply. And those circumstances were nei- ther few nor unimportant. For observe — The marriage in- stitution was established, from which the various natural relations would unavoidably follow : — 'The sabbath day was sanctified, which would seem, as being a positive institution, to prelude a series of religious ceremonies as belonging to the service due to God ; — The dominion over the creatures was entrusted to Adam's judgment, and they were after- wards named and classed according to his judgment: — He was put into the garden "to dress and to keep it," and was thus engaged in all the operations of an active life ; — gold and precious stones, &c. are also enumerated, along with whatever was pleasant to the sight, or good for food, or con- tributive to the comforts and conveniencies of life, as items in the bountiful provision his Creator had made. A scene of operation and a condition of existence, entirely like that which the world now presents, with the exception that evil MORAL GOVERNMENT. 189 had not been introduced, is thus minutely described by the inspired penman. Here then, we have the sphere of man's personal responsibility, when he was originally created — the parts as well arranged, and the boundaries as extensive as those of the corresponding system are at this day, or have been since the fall. It is moreover abundantly evident that this state of things, thus set up at the beginning, was to have been perpetuated until the Creator's intention of framing it should be answered ; while at the same time some ulterior purposes were distinctly held up to view. It may perhaps be objected, that the preceding view in- volves the possibility of the commission of sin by Adam or any of his children, irrespective of the paradisiacal consti- tution ; and at any point in the whole range of their per- sonal responsibilities. Reminding you, in the first place, that the preceding argument has been drawn from the na- ture of the case, and that the detail which has been pre- sented is the historian's account of the facts in the case, I readily admit the accuracy of the objection, and concede its implication. What then ? Is there any incongruity in the concession ? Is any scriptural principle overlooked, or put at defiance ? Did not Adam sin when he ate of the for- bidden fruit? Did not Eve sin? and, as she- was not our social head, did she not sin in violation of personal respon- sibility? Was she not "first" in the transgression? Did her sin become impossible before the social head hzd eaten ? Have not angels sinned ? Does not God himself speak of good and evil in other parts of his dominions?— Any dif- ficulty which may arise here, proceeds from the assumption, that the existence of sin argues a previous corrupt nature. I say assumption — because neither Adam, nor Eve, nor the angels, had a previously corrupt nature. That such a concession may be safely made, is farther evident from the nature of personal responsibilit}r itself. This could not be absorbed in any social institute. The mediatorial righteousness of the Son of God himself has not 190 LECTURES ON absorbed it : but he commands every man to believe ; and on a compliance or non-compliance depends the issue. By his own nature, every man is in a state of personal proba- tion. Good and evil are placed before him. And every where throughout the scriptures, his final destiny is con- nected with his own responsibility. Spiritual and eter- nal life, on the one hand, and spiritual and eternal death on the other, are respectively attached to the facts given in an- swer to the judicial inquiry, whether he has done good or evil? Who ever heard of any man's being condemned at the bar of God for Adam's sin? or of any other judicial in- quiry, than that which embraces the deeds done in the body, and binds one to answer for himself? Ah! much do I fear, that multitudes are slumbering on an awful precipice, in relation to this momentous matter. Rouse up, I beseech you, and search the scriptures, that you may ascertain whe- ther you must not be judged in the great day of retribution — each for yourself ? It may now be very fairly asked, what would have been the consequence, if Adam or any of his posterity had sin- ned in violation of personal responsibility ? Should such a transgressor have died ? To answer this question, it must first be settled, what kind of death it means ? If it be tem- poral death, to which the question refers, I unhesitatingly answer, that thus the transgressor would not have died: because temporal death is uniformly connected with Adam's sin. In Adam all die. It is very true that death may be inflicted as the penalty of a municipal statute : — but that occurs only because death has been brought into the world, as the consequence of Adam's sin. And it is also true, that death was inflicted as the penalty of the Mosaic law; but that resulted from its typical purposes and character. Nei- ther fact disturbs our general argument, but rather confirms it ; because the provisions established in both cases were purely political. However righteous any man may become, he cannot escape death : — "It is appointed unto all men once MORAL GOVERNMENT. 191 to die." In such a case, therefore, as the inquiry contem- plates, personal responsibility would have left a sinner to the divine favor for pardon on the principle of repentance ; or to "the decisions of the day of judgment, when every man must give account of himself to God. Again it may be asked, what would have been the final issue under such circumstances, if the transgressor had not died ? In what way should he have been brought into judg- ment ? These questions are entitled to a distinct answer, whether the case of transgression shall be admitted or de- nied. It could not have been intended that man should live here forever, if the paradisiacal law had not been viola- ted : and personal probation must necessarily lead to a judi- cial investigation. There were evidently two sides to the constitution under which mankind were placed ; and if sin were followed by penalty, obedience must secure reward. How then snail we decide this interesting matter ? Are there any scriptural principles, unequivocally set forth, whose truth is indisputable, and on which we may confi- dently rely? I think there are such principles very distinct- ly stated ; and that they fully meet the whole case. The apostle Paul, in his argument on the resurrection, addressed to the Corinthians, very explicitly assures us, that "flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God." Now Adam had this very flesh and blood which cannot inherit the kingdom of God: so that he could not inherit the king- dom of God; or he must, some how or other, part with flesh and blood. — Again the apostle observes, "there is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body. "And also," he adds, it is written, "the first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit." The doc- trine of these two kinds of bodies, he does himself apply to the primordial, as well as to the remedial, state of man ; and observes, that their order was — "that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural ; and afterward that which is spiritual." The doctrine of the resurrection, as 192 LECTURES Oft connected with the christian system, he argues on these original principles. A natural body is not the mere off- spring of a fallen nature, but is all that was produced from the ground, or that belonged to Adam before he fell- and is strictly analogous with the material system, of which it forms a part. On the other hand, a spiritual body is not a mere appendage of Christianity, presented as analogous with the resurrection, but was contemplated from the begin- ning ; for which reason it is incorporated with Christianity. Again, the apostle says, "we shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed; in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet : for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.'' Temporal death is therefore not indispensably necessary to our putting off the natural, and putting on the spiritual, body : a change may be accomplished in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye ; of which the facts that occur- red in the history of Enoch and Elijah are bright and in- teresting examples. Any supposed difficulty in the case before us is thus readily and entirely removed. So that death itself is neither so unique nor monstrous a matter as it is generally represented to be ; but it is, according to the representations the apostle has made, analogous to an event which should have occurred, if Adam had not eaten the for- bidden fruit; and which should have pressed home the per- sonal responsibility of every human mind with equal force. Thus, by a change which would have taken place, not so painful nor dishonorable as temporal death, yet still by a change from a natural into a spiritual body, should mankind, whether.they had personally done good or evil, have been introduced to the judgment seat. We have now reached the paradisiacal institute. But wishing to consider that matter by itself, I shall postpone it to the next lecture ; and in the mean time anticipate our dis- cussion, only so far as to take up the following question:— Was Adam left to fulfil his various duties in his own strength 1 MORAL GOVERNMENT. 193 This question, in an age when there is so much contra- dictory and unsatisfying argument on the subjects of di- vine power, and human ability and inability, may perhaps serve to throw these litigated matters into a novel shape, or one which has not been defaced by scholastic technicalities. Let us see what reply may be obtained from the facts, as they are detailed in the scriptures. Moses instructs us that on the seventh day God rested from all his work. And what did he mean by God's rest- ing? Paul, illustrating the mediatorial system as an eccle- siastical constitution, compares it with this early frame of moral government which Moses describes ; and remarks — " He that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own works, as God did from his." An analogy is evi- dently intended to be asserted. In the latter case, we learn that Christ, as to his bodily presence, is now removed from our view, and that in place thereof the Spirit has come. The analogy then would be, that God, having finished the work of creation, entered into his rest; or, that in personal form he was removed out of Adam's sight, and the spirit came. It may perhaps be considered as a breach upon this an- alogy, that Jehovah-ELOHiM, or God in personal form, did afterwards appear in the garden. But so also the Redeem- er appeared to Paul, when he commissioned him to go to the gentiles. So he appeared to Abraham, Isaac, and Ja- cob, when he would make or renew his covenant with them. So he appeared when he came down to the plains of Shinar, and to Sodom, to execute his judgment. A like occasion had now occurred ; something out of the course of ordinary rule was to be adjudicated ; and, viewed as the facts alluded to are to be estimated, the seeming discrepan- cy is done away. Then the Spirit came, as he comes now. We are wont to refer every issue to the single agency of the Spirit; and many feel warranted to wait, when they are called to be- Vol. 1—17 194 LECTURES ON . lieve the gospel, until the Spirit shall renew their hearts. Others, who have tasted that the Lord is gracious, are con- tinually representing the Spirit's influence in such a light, that a sort of irresponsible state is supposed to exist, and an inability on the part of man is inferred ; with all which the doctrine of a personal election and reprobation most exactly fits. They plead for the use. of means, it is true ; — but then any one may see that their doctrine of divine power and human inability renders the means ut- terly useless. Multitudes of sinners thus excuse them- selves from believing ; and multitudes feel themselves to be in a most fearful predicament, while the penalty hangs over them — " he that believeth not shall be damned ;" and while the scriptures unequivocally declare that the sinner perishes by his own fault. Theologians cannot reconcile these contradictory views, and the cry of mystery will no longer avail. How stood the matter at first ? Can we speak of Adam's inability, because divine providence was then the "minis- tration of the Spirit?" Do the scriptures report him as indo- lently waiting for the Spirit of God ? Or do they refer his fall to any other urgency than that exerted by the sinful emo- tions of his own bosom ? None of these incongruities can be affirmed with confidence in relation to him. And why should they be affirmed of man now ? Man, it may be re- plied, is now encompassed with infirmities. True. But the divine government has proportioned its operations to his infirmities. He is not now under law, but under grace. And where is the difference in principle ? There is none. It is now as much within the compass of our ability to be- lieve, as it was within the compass of Adam's ability to obey. Not that there is no divine power now, or was no divine power then. For in both instances the Spirit's operations belong to the divine government. The simple fact is that, in its present relations the subject has been ob- scured and misrepresented by scholatic subtlety : while, in MORAL GOVERNMENT. 195 view of its original connexions, it has been habitually over- looked ; and by referring yourselves to the display of una- dulterated truth as at first afforded, you may more quickly and more accurately understand the interest which you 3rourselves, and all men, have in the influence of the Spirit of God- Here, beneath the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, the ministry might lay down their fetters, and go forth, untrammelled and unabashed, to preach salvation by " the Seed of the woman," to all the world. LECTURE VII. The Paradisiacal constitution — An external and political dispensation — Not inconsistent with personal responsi- bility— Tree of life — Popular view of Adam's sin audits consequences — Law given to Adam compared with law given by Moses — Analogies — Theologians reason against themselves — Force of the phrase for thy sake. If the argument elaborated in the preceding lecture be accurate and conclusive, and if the historical details have been neither misrepresented nor exaggerated, then the pa- radisiacal statute must not be so interpreted as to destroy personal responsibility. In other words — It has been shown that" personal responsibility belongs to the very nature of man, or is the necessaiy accompaniment of his personal existence : — that each man is accountable for himself and for himself alone, at the bar of God : — that no one man, not Daniel, nor Noah, nor Job — and may I not add — nor Adam — can be a substitute for any other man, or deliver either son or daughter by his righteousness ; and that where- ver a doctrine of imputation may be maintained, or of 196 LECTURES ON whatever political compact it may constitute a part, it can- not contravene this great law of our personal being. It has also been shown, that the spirit of man proceeds immediately from God himself, while the body is referred to a secondary, agency, belonging to the material system. No man can have power over the spirit ; but each one, according to the instructions delivered by the Redeemer to his disciples, has it in charge to live above the fear of his fellows ; and to direct his movements, under the solemn consideration that God alone is the arbiter of the immor- tal spirit. Of course the paradisiacal institute must direct its agency to that which it can reach : and cannot terminate in the destruction of spirit. To this view may be added the fact, that the mediatorial system itself does not destroy, nor set aside, personal re- sponsibility. On the contrary, that system has been intro- duced, because " the one offence" of Adam, limited in the devastation it brought about, left in personal responsibility the opportunity for a remedial operation. Permit me to illustrate my meaning by an analogy. — You have entrusted your funds to an agent, in whom you thought you had just cause to confide. He has been unfaithful, and squander- ed your means. You are involved in consequent suffering ; but you have contracted no guilt. Personally, you have not sinned. This is a social transaction which every one understands. No one complains of its injustice, objects to its philosophy, or emblazons it as awful or unapproachable, on account of its mystery. Every one perceives, that while personal responsibility results from personal exist- ence, so social responsibility results from social existence. Each is necessary, justifiable, and philosophical in its own connexions. But in the case contemplated, another question arises. The infidelity of your agent and the consequent suffering in which you are involved, lead to the inquiry, whether you can meet your own personal obligations ? Your charac- MORAL GOVERNMENT 197 ter is unhurt, but what are your mea?is? If your means are wasted, your creditors must then look to }'our personal cha- racter ; and their future conduct must be regulated* not by pressing the principle of social responsibility, with a sort of Shylock pertinacity and cruelty ; but as one system has been brought to its extremity, the remedy must be sought for in a higher system ; and all future operations must be framed in coincidence with the remedial principle thus derived. Such a course would be as wise as it is humane. So in the case before us. The one offence of Adam has pushed the system of social responsibility to its extremity : the remedial principle must be sought for in the higher system of personal responsibility. Evidently we are in- volved by Adam's sin in suffering ; and as evidently we have no means of meeting our personal obligations or of obeying law ; but as clearly our personal character has not been forfeited. The fact that we were not then born, ren- ders the idea of the forfeiture of personal character per- fectly unreasonable and absurd. And when a philosophic theologian undertakes to maintain that idea, it is no wonder that he is lost in mystery, and is unable to defend his sys- tem by scripture, by analogy, or otherwise, to the common sense of mankind. I have said, that the limited effect of the paradisiacal in- stitute afforded the opportunity for the introduction of the mediatorial system. The preceding analogy was intended to illustrate that position, by evincing that, in personal re- sponsibility while unviolated, the remedial principle must necessarily be sought. If a remedial principle could not be thence derived, it could come from no other source — as appears from the two following scriptural considerations. 1. Speaking on the subject of the resurrection, the Re- deemer informs us, that "in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage." Of course all the other natural relations will be done away ; and our social existence, whatever may be the form under which it shall 17* !98 LECTURES OK be maintained, shall not be regulated by those principles which are essentially characteristic of it here. But further the Redeemer adds, that they who rise shall be "like the angels of God." The angels are not bound together by social ties, analogous to those which subsist among men upon earth. Their condition in their own sphere of action, and our condition in the flesh differ — in what ? Certainly in this, that social responsibility is not found among them, as it has been established among Adam's race. When, therefore, angels sinned, they sinned on their personal re- sponsibility. Amid the varieties of creation, and while this difference has been stated, it would appear that the his- tory of these intelligences has been given to us, on purpose to show the results of personal responsibility. If Adam had not sinned, that purpose would have been highly important. His fidelity would have afforded an ex- hibition of the connexion between righteousness and life ; and his posterity would have been thrown on their personal responsibility, in view of their ultimate destiny. The his- tory of fallen angels would, in that case, have afforded an appropriate exhibition of the connexion between personal sin and spiritual death. I say an appropriate exhibition, because, while it would illustrate the issues of personal re- sponsibility, the human being, free from the infirmities that now encompass him, would have been fully able to have estimated it. If now our intellectual vision does not reach so far as distinctly to embrace so lofty and so luminous a demonstration, the reason is — we are fallen. Our indis- tinctness of view on the general subject is a proof of our fall ; but argues no more against angelic agency, than death- proves that it was not originally intended that we should be immortal. Our infirmity in the flesh no more militates against the existence and agency of these spiritual intelli- gences, than the fact, that we cannot see God and live, proves that there is no God ; or that he did not originally MORAL GOVERNMENT. 199 manifest himself in "the form of God," which is too glorious for us now to behold. On the other hand, as our political relations are different, the Adamic constitution developes the issue of social respon- sibility. No Mediator has been provided for the one ; while for the other a Mediator has appeared. Why is this ? It is a sovereign act, it may be said. But why refer an act to sovereignty, when a reason good and sufficient is at hand ? And is not that reason at hand in the present case, when the fact is so plain and distinct, that there is a whole race of intelligent beings who had not personally sinned, but who were involved in disaster and sorrow by the fault of another? Does not the justice of the case, does not the goodness of God, point to the reason ? But 2. Adam's children, in consequence of the righteousness of the Mediator, are nowT so far extricated from the embar- rassment in which they were involved by Adam's sin, as to be fairly and consistently put on their personal responsibili- ty. As b}T the offence of Adam they became sinners, so by the righteousness of Christ they have become righteous; and as by the offence of Adam they have been brought in- to condemnation, so by the righteousness of Christ they are now in a state of justification. If now they despise the rule of faith, under obligation to which, and on their per- sonal responsibility, they are placed, "there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins ; but a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the ad- versaries." The issue of personal responsibility is the same in both cases. So that in the limited effect which I have ascribed to the Adamic institute, arises the opportunity for a remedial dispensation. If personal responsibility had been violated, and the sentence of the law in this con- nexion had been passed, the above scriptural facts evince that a Mediator could not have been provided. If any then have been apprehensive, that the present argument is likely to issue, either in a " socinianised" corruption, or 200 [LECTURES ON infidel rejection, of the mediatorial principle, they may perhaps be satisfied by the preceding observations, that this principle is introduced by the very door which our argu- ment throws open: and furthermore, they may, peradven- ture, perceive, that the popular representation on this sub- ject shuts out that principle. Hence it is, that theologians so often resort to sovereignty in their various lucubrations ; for they can have no other reason, when personal respon- sibility is so unceremoniously, yet inconsiderately, fore- closed. I consider the paradisiacal constitution to have been noth- ing more than a political or external dispensation, like the Mosaic law, by which in fact it was afterwards illustrated. Its sanctions were temporal in their character. It promis- ed temporal reward; it threatened temporal penalty. It grew out of the social relations which had been created, and could not go beyond them, as they formed a part of the general system which God had set up. And the ob- ject was to display, under a visible or symbolic form, the connexion between righteousness and life : just as God had displayed the same general principle in creation itself; as every man must do in all his actions, and in every relation in which he stands ; and as in fact is done, by contrast, in the various consequences of Adam's offence. The con- nexion between sin and death is now, not only written in the bible, but it is inscribed on the material system and in- corporated in the animal nature of man himself. Such is the doctrine which I would advance on this subject ; which results, as I think, from the very nature of the case ; and which, as I believe, the scriptures will most plainly and lu- cidly exhibit. Before, however, I proceed directly to the argument, by which I expect to establish the doctrine advanced, there is one circumstance belonging to the general subject which requires particular attention. It is generally supposed — and no wonder, for our translators so represent the fact-—- MORAL GOVERNMENT. -201 that there was a symbolic tree of life, placed in the midst of the garden ; and for a purpose analogous to that for which the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was similarly situated ; — a kind of sacramental pledge of life, as the other was a sacrament al pledge of death. If so, then the tree of life must have been an appendage to the paradisiacal con- stitution; and must necessarily be found there, in connex- ion with its sacramental companion. But how does the document read? — " And the Lord God" it is written "com- manded the man, saying, of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat : but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it ; for in the day thou eat- est thereof thou shalt surely die." Here you perceive is a distinct reference to the one tree, while its character is care- fully discriminated ; and yet not one word about a particu- lar tree of life. Nay more— Adam receives express and unrestrained permission to eat of every other tree of the gar- den, and nothing still is said about a particular tree of life. Still farther. — Eve gives to Satan a distinct and minute ac- count of the circumstances under which God had placed her partner and herself, and speaks of the tree in the midst of the garden as the very one of which they were not per- mitted to eat; but says nothing of a tree of life. Now if there was any distinct tree of life planted in the midst of the garden, and made symbolic of life, these omissions are wholly unaccountable. And thus, it would seem that one of the most prominent and favorite points of allusion, which they might and do make, who suppose that eternal life was promised in the covenant, is rendered very equivocal in the outset. There are but one or two considerations, which can at all be urged in favor of the prevalent notion, that there was a particular tree of life. The first is derived from the se- :ond chapter, and from the account which Moses gives of ;he planting of the garden. He says — "and out of the •ound made the Lord God to grow every tree that is plea- 20-2 LECTURES ON sant to the sight, and good for food ; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil."* This seems to be as strong proof as could be desired in support of any proposition ; for it is nothing short of direct and positive assertion. Yet our surprise, instead of being abated, must only be increased, when we recol- lect that there is not one word about such a tree in the par- adisiacal constitution itself. And any hebraist will tell you, that the language, in which the historian wrote, has but few adjectives: and that in a case where an adjective is not at hand to complete a description like that under considera- tion, the noun would be repeated. Calling in this philolo- gical peculiarity to our aid, and translating the passage ac- cordingly, Moses would then make the following statement : — "And out of the ground made the Lord God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food, and a tree of life ; and also, in the midst of the garden the tree of knowledge of good and evil." The phrase tree of life would be equivalent to — tending, or conducive to life : — every tree pleasant to the sight, good for food, and con- ducive to life, the Lord God made to grow out of the ground. The same form of speech is used in the first chapter — uthe tree of fruit bearing fruit after his kind." Such a transla- tion removes all discrepancy, and corresponds with the ac- tual fact; for all the trees which were given for food, were really trees of life. Another plea may be set up in favor of the popular no- tion, and which would be derived from the third chapter; where God assigns the reason why man was put out of the garden: — "Lest," said he, '"he put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever y But all the trees were trees of life; and the word may be, and ought to be, so rendered here; unless it can be shown that there was one particular tree, specially denominated the tree of life. That the term is in the singular number, ar- * Verse 9. MORAL GOVERNMENT. 203 gues nothing against our position ; because the fact is the same in the second and eighth verses of the same chapter, where our translators themselves have rendered the word as plural. — Neither can any thing be obtained in favor of the common notion on this subject, from the circumstance, that it would seem from the phraseology, that if Adam, af- ter his sin, had eaten of the trees of life, he would have lived forever; because the term rendered forever, is appli- ed to any period whose termination is concealed from view. For this reason it is applied to express eternity : for the same reason it is used in reference to the period of a man's natu- ral life ; as also when a prospective view was taken of the Jewish dispensation, by Moses himself.* And to make it apply to eternity here, without assigning sufficient reasons for so doing, is to beg the question. In truth there was no necessity for such a symbolic tree, inasmuch as all the trees were trees of life ; nor can the shadow of a reason be offered, as furnished by the constitu- tion itself, why any such symbol should have been set apart. This will further appear when we come to consider the pre- cise use of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. But let us turn to the constitution itself And, that no mistake may be committed, I shall state the doctrine, as it has been held on this subject, in the language of another, whose ability and accuracy, in such a case, will not be doubted. — :"The death," says Dr. Edwards, "which was to come on Adam, as the punishment of his disobedience, was opposed to that life, which he would have had as the re- ward of his obedience in case he had not sinned. Obedience and disobedience are contraries : and the threatenings and promises, that are sanctions of a law, are set in direct oppo- sition; and the promised rewards and threatened punishments, are what are most properly taken as each other's opposites. But none will deny, that the life which would have been Adam's reward, if he had persisted in obedience, was eter- * See Exod. xik 14^ xxi. 6. — 1 Sam. i. 22. See Kennicott*s dis- sertation on the tree of life. •204 LECTURES ON nal life. And therefore we argue justly, that the death which stands opposed to that life is manifestly eternal death, a death widely different from the death we now die." "If Adam, for his persevering obedience, was to have had everlasting life and happiness, in perfect holiness, union with his maker, and enjoyment of his favor, and this was the life which was to be confirmed by the tree of life ; then doubtless the death threatened in case of disobedience, which stands in direct opposition to this., was a being given over to everlasting wickedness and misery, in separation from God, and in enduring his wrath."* This venerable and highly esteemed author, whom many seem disposed to place along side of Calvin and Augustin, indubitably asserts in the foregoing paragraph, that on the one hand, life, temporal, spiritual, and eternal, would have been the reward of Adam's obedience to the paradisiacal statute; and on the other, that death, temporal, spiritual and eternal, has been the punishment of his disobedience to that stat- ute. This doctrine, I understand to have been generally re- ceived, as a true exposition of these early transactions. That it has been denied at times, I will readily admit ; but then the denial appears to have been, for the most part, if not uni- formly, connected with the rejection of some other matters of vital importance. I suppose that the doctrine in view has been strenuously maintained, because it has been conceiv- ed that those other important matters necessarily depend upon it. Yet it appears to me, that while many hold those other matters as demonstrably true, this doctrine they feel to be contrary to their own common sense. They therefore would not controvert it, equivocal as they may think it, be- ing afraid of the consequences which they imagine must necessarily result. I am sure that such has been the con- dition of my own mind ; but now, not fearing the supposed consequences, because, I do not think that they would oc- cur, I unhesitatingly deny the doctrine which our author has advanced. * Edwards on Original Sin. — Part. II. ch. i. sec. 2. MORAL GOVERNMENT. 205 Yet if we grant unto this writer his premises, his conclu- sion must irrefragably follow : i. e. if life, temporal, spirit- ual and eternal, was the reward of obedience to the Adamic law, death, temporal, spiritual and eternal, must have been the punishment of its transgression. How does he prove his premises ? His remark is, " none will deny that the reward was eternal life." But suppose that some one should deny that the reward was eternal life — what then ? Very possibly he might be set down as insane : so universally have theolo- gians and sceptics taken this exposition of the brief record for granted. It is, however, no new thing that one half of the world should think the other half to be crazy : or that, -in the religious controversies which men conduct with so much confidence, and while they have forgotten the scrip- tural injunction to " speak the truth in love," they should resort to the use of such epithets. The Redeemer was thought to be beside himself, and Paul was reproached with madness. — But suppose that some one should deny our au- thor's position. You see he assumes it : and from mere as- sumption draws his conclusion. His assumption, though it may seem to be adventurous, I deny. Then it will follow, by his own argument that, if life, temporal, spiritual and eter- nal, was not the reward of obedience; death, temporal, spiritual and eternal, cannot be the punishment of disobe- dience. It has already been abundantly evinced, that there was no one particular tree symbolical of life ; and that all the trees of the garden were conducive to life. It deserves now to be further remarked, that even life itself is not mentioned in the constitution. And if so important a re- sult as eternal life, involving the destiny of the immortal spirit, should be depending, its it not singular that not one word should be said about it in the institute, in execution of which it should occur ? How can this be ? Is there not room to suspect some mistake, or to demand an explanation ? But perhaps it might be answered, that the promise of life Vol. I.— 18 206 LECTURES ON was implied. How can this be made to appear ? On the sup- position that Adam had obeyed the law, and did not die, the terms employed would be fully complied with ; for the threatening should be neither incurred nor executed. Any thing farther must be expressed. If nothing farther is ex- pressed, we have reached the limitation of the statute. But it may perhaps be rejoined, that if man did not die, he must live forever. The paradisiacal constitution does not say so. How can it be otherwise you may ask? Why, when we have reached the extremity of one rectoral prin- ciple, we must refer to another. So here : when social responsibility runs out, we must refer to personal responsi- bility, and ascertain its issues ; or we shall be involved in a difficulty from which there is no avenue of escape. Now we have seen that if Adam had obeyed the law, each hu- man being would have been put on his own personal obli- gations : and a change from a natural into a spiritual body being contemplated in the general system, each one should have rendered an account for himself — and in this con- nexion alone is eternal life to be obtained. From the na- ture of the case, therefore, eternal life could not have been the reward of Adam's obedience to the law he received in the garden : and an assurance, that he should not die tem- porally, is all that could be implied. If eternal life was not, and could not be, the reward of his obedience ; why, agreeably to the argument which has been quoted, eternal death could not be the penalty due to his disobedience. On the supposition that life had been promised in the covenant, as it has been called, and that a symbolical tree of life had been planted in the garden, yet the argument we are considering would fare no better. For while personal responsibility remained behind, eternal life and eternal death would still be associated with it; and the political dis- pensation which clothed Adam with his official character, could not have appropriated the sanctions which belonged to another system. The term life then, had it been ex- MORAL GOVERNMENT. ->0T pressed, could have imported nothing more than temporal Life, and the tree could have symbolized nothing else. Nay, if the hebrew word, rendered in the next chapter, forever, had been appended, nothing further could have been de- signed ; because that term, signifying any period whose ter- mination is concealed, may be, and often is, applied to a man's natural life, as well as to eternity. In no way can the doctrine under consideration be inferred from the terms of the constitution itself; — either as to their direct or im- plied assertions. On the contrary, that doctrine cuts up by the roots every interest that belongs to the subject of per- sonal accountability ; and presents to view a judicial policy which is in everyway, and in the highest degree, repug- nant to justice. It is no matter of wonder that the veil of mystery has been thrown over the whole affair ; and that men, professing Christianity, walk in darkness, and live in doubts all their days. The aTgument in favor of this doctrine cannot be derived from God's interpretation of his own institute, when he comes to execute' its sentence. He utters not one word about spiritual or eternal death, in his address to Adam. The whole process terminates on man's animal body, and the material system of which that body forms a part. I know it may be, and has been said, that the sentence exe- cuted was not of "equal extent" with the evil threatened; and that that apparent inconsistency is to be accounted for by '-the intimations of mercy" which had just been given. Nothing is more easy than to make assertions. Where is the proof of such a strange commentary ? The tree plant- ed in the garden was symbolical of the knowledge of good and evil, as the original terms describing its objects dis- tinctly specify. Did the execution of the sentence fail in this respect ? The threatening was, " in the day thou eat- est thereof, dying, thou shalt die;" and the execution of that threatening was — "dust thou art, and unto dust thou shalt return." Where is the difference? There is none. 208 LECTURES ON No eye can see, no mind can perceive any. But it is very apparent that spiritual and eternal death cannot be predi- cated of the last ; and therefore it is said not to be of equal extent with the first, in which spiritual and eternal death is supposed to be implied. And what is still more strange . while the sentence executed is asserted not to be equal in extent with the evil threatened, yet, theologians will have it that all mankind are spiritually dead in Adam. The evil then has actually come on mankind, far beyond the limits of the sentence, as declared to be executed ; and that, not- withstanding the " intimations of mercy" which had just been given. In other words — All that God professedly visits upon man for this one offence is, in so many words, declared to be temporal death ; and yet theologians have solemnly and unreservedly proclaimed it to be spiritual death. — u. Dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return" — what intelligent or candid mind can, or would, by any tor- tuous course of reasoning, turn such language into a de- scription of spiritual death ? If then, from the very fact itself, as it is told in language so plain and simple, spiritual death, even though it had been intended in the original sentence, is not executed upon man, is it not abundantly evident, that amid the wreck which Adam's sin produced, the spirit is unhurt? and th^t per- sonal responsibility is the very resource to which the medi- atorial system refers ? So we have again reached this same conclusion, by simply exhibiting scriptural facts. The deficiency of argument thus drawn from the original facts, is variously supplied by quotations of scriptural texts, that are derived from the old testament, and belong to the Mosaic economy, which was itself the administration of law ; or from the new testament, which exhibits the finished work of the Redeemer, and by which all are made right- eous, and are brought into a justification of life ; so that this latter class of texts is connected with the results of personal responsibility. For example — I should be far from MORAL GOVERNMENT. 211 death reigned from Adam to Moses." These points are here stated : — There was a period when there was no law : — during that period sin could not be imputed ; because, where law is not there is no transgression : but notwith- standing this, all the way down from Adam to Moses, death. which comes by sin, reigned, even over them who had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression. Ad- am's transgression was committed against law / sin like his transgression must be sin against law ; so that death reigned over them to whom sin could not be imputed, be- cause it reigned, over them who were not under law. If there was a period when law was not, then they who lived during that period could not sin like Adam. According- ly Paul had said, sin is not imputed where there is no law ; and yet adds, until the law sin was in the world : and again, that death reigned from Adam down to Moses, even over them that had not, like Adam, transgressed law. The plain meaning of all this is— that wherever you find death, it is the consequence of sin : now from Adam to Moses you do find death ; but during all that period you do not find law, and therefore cannot .find sin : how then is death thus reign- ing to be accounted for ? Why plainly by a reference to Adam's sin — all men are sinners by Adam's one offence: — by him sin entered into the world, and death by sin, and so death passed Upon all men, because that in him they have all sinned. It follows, that they, on whom death has come by his offence and not by their own, are the very ones who did not sin like Adam; had they sinned like Adam, death would have come by their own offence. Again. The reason why death did not come by their own offence was simply this, that they were not under law. Now though there is a sense in which such a state may be predicated of infants and idiots — to whom the passage has been applied — yet no reason can be assigned why the apos- tle should single out the infants and idiots who lived be- tween the time of Adam and Moses. And moreover, if -21 > LECTURES ON during that period there were any others who were not un- der law, the reference must necessarily include them. Now in the very outset of his argument, the apostle had declar- ed that the gentiles were not under law ; but that the jews were. It follows that the gentiles did not sin like Adam; — yet death did reign over them. Moreover, the jews them- selves were not under law till Moses came ; and yet death reigned over them. Hence the apparently singular remark which Paul, judging from the difficulties of commentators, so indistinctly makes — " I was alive without the law once, but, when the commandment came, sin revived and I died." The doctrine of the apostle is the same taught by the pro- phets, viz.— that the jews under the Mosaic law did sin like Adam. Then the two dispensations, the law under which the jews were placed, and the paradisiacal statute, were the same in character : — both of them had temporal sanctions. But farther, the apostle in this very argument informs us that there were "many offences,'' or that the offence had abounded: i. e. while there were some who, not being un- der law, did not, and could not, sin Me Adam; there were others, who, being under law, did sin like him. Hence he remarks — " The law entered, so that the offence hath abounded''' — "the commandment came and sin revived." This is merely the opposite side of his argument. The facts are, that the law entered, or was given by Moses. If law was introduced, sin might be imputed, or the offence might abound. Accordingly such has been the fact; and the Mo- saic law proved itself to be the ministration of death and condemnation. So then the jews did sin like Adam, and like him were brought into death. Accordingly there was a necessity that the righteousness of the Redeemer should go beyond the -'one offence," and cover these "many of- fences" of the jews. This was done, and he is, by means of death, the Mediator for the redemption of transgressions MORAL GOVERNMENT. -209 denying, or even doubting, that " the wages of sin is death, and that the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord." But any one can see, that all these judicial results meet a man on his own personal accountability : — For " he that belie veth on the Son of God hath everlasting life ; and he that belie veth not the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abideth on him." Such disjointed extracts taken, not only out of the local connexions in which they are found, but, from the system to which they belong, are poor adjuvants of the cause they are employed to uphold. They all work in the opposite direction ; and serve to evince that, under the mediatorial system, God is dealing with man as an intelligent and responsible being, put on his personal obligations, and called to answer for himself. I have had frequent occasion to refer to the Mosaic in- stitute as being an administration of law. God introduced it as the lawgiver. Moses, you recollect, could not see his face and live. Accordingly, Ezekiel describes the whole house of Israel under it, as an assemblage of dead and dry bones. The sons of Jacob were thus set forth, not as existing in this state in consequence of Adam's sin, but as sinners against law which had been given to themselves by Moses. It was ordained, it is true, in the hand of a Mediator : bein£ designed to subserve a sreneral mediatorial purpose, but still it was law. Hence Paul describes it as "the ministration of death and condemnation:" and, in his general reasonings on the relative position of works and faith, it furnishes him with the means of demonstrating the insufficiency of works. Its sanctions were purely of a temporal character ; as I presume any one may know, with- out having any great amount of biblical scholarship. It is a singular fact, much as it may have been overlook- ed, that the transgression of Adam and the transgressions of the Jews are said in the scriptures to be alike. The psalmist savs — " Ye shall die like Adam, and fall like one 18* 210 LECTURE S^ON of the princes."* The idea intended to be conveyed, as is very common in the old testament, is expressed in the form of a couplet. To die like Adam, and to die like one of the princes, is much the same thing. The whole psalm relates to official character. The fall of Adam was the fall of a prince, and is to be interpreted on official princi- ples : but not as the execution of a fell sentence, which sweeps all nature to destruction, without pausing to con- sider, whether no remedial agent is at hand. And as all the Jews constituted a nation of official men, were God's kings and priests, this kind of death might be predicated of them all. Hence Hosea, speaking of Ephraim, says — " They, like Adam, have transgressed the covenant, or dispensation."! Here the sins or the offences of the Jews are declared to be like Adam's offence ; and not only so, but the dispensations Under which they respectively sinned are compared together. If so, Adam's offence was committed against a law whose sanctions were of a temporal character. The apostle Paul furnishes, in his elaborate argument on justification, the same general idea."t In that argument he refers to some who " had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression." The prophets, as has just been evinced, speak of the Jews as sinning like Adam : but Paul speaks of those who did not sin, like Adam, leaving the impression that there were some who did sin like him. Let us look at the different parts of his argument. But let it be remembered that, when sin is denied of any of those who lived between Adam and Moses, the meaning is not that they had no personal unholiness, or were chargeable with no personal transgression ; but that their sin was not committed against law. Please to bear this in mind when you attend to the following exposition. " Until the law," he says, "sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed where there is no law. Nevertheless,. * Ps. lxxxii. 7. t "Ch. vi. 7, J Roin. v, 12—20. MORAL GOVERNMENT. 213 that were under the first testament* It must be very clear that the dispensation under which Adam was placed, and the economy afforded to the jews by Moses, were the same in character; and that if spiritual and eternal death can- not be referred to the one, neither can it be referred to the other. This context, however, furnishes us with an illustration of a different kind, in view of our general subject. The apostle lays down the doctrine, that Adam is a figure of Christ : and, in correspondence with it, remarks, that as by one man's offence the many, i. e. all men were made, or constituted, sinners, so by one man's righteousness the many, i. e. all men shall be made, or constituted, righteous: And again — as by the offence of one, judgment came upon all men to condemnation ; even so the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life. I know full well, that some would make the words all men refer to the elect. When- ever they shall be able tc make this out, they will be fairly entitled to their system. But why should they attempt it when the plain fact is before them, that all men go down to the dust, in consequence of Adam's sin? and that all men shall be raised from the dead, in consequence of Christ's righteousness? This simple fact explains and justifies all the apostle's terms, and gives them a very beautiful and im- portant signification. The difficulty of those theorists lies here : — It is very evident, that by Christ's righteousness all men are not made personally holy : but somehow or other, in their estimation, all men are made by Adam's offence per- sonally sinful. And as the two results do not correspond, theologians must invent a mode of explanation which will preserve the assumption with which they start. Now it is very evident that the same terms may be, and in the scriptures often are, applied both to the symbol and to the object which the symbol represents. When the jew brought his victim to the altar, and when Christ offered up * Heb. ix. 15. •214 LECTURES ON his own life, the term sacrifice was unhesitatingly applied to either oblation — Aaron was spriest, and Christ was & priest. — The term saint, or holy one, may be veiy properly ap- plied to an individual, in view of his personal holiness; but it is equally applied to the nation of the jews, or to chris- tian nations, in view of their being God's peculiar people. — In like manner the term unclean may be applied to an individual, in view of his personal defilement; but it is equally applied to the gentiles as not being God's peculiar people. — You remember that Peter was prepared by a vision to receive the messengers of Cornelius ; in which vision a great sheet wTas let down before him, containing all manner of beasts, clean and unclean. When commanded to kill and eat, he answered, "Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean" The answer he re- ceived was — "What God hath cleansed that call not thou common." All this he himself explains in the following manner : — "Ye know that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath showed me that I should not call any man common or unclean; therefore came I unto you without gainsaying, as soon as I was sent for." The terms saint and unclean, are not here applied, excepting in a sym- bolic sense. You also remember that Paul, speaking on the subject of divorce, in his first epistle to the Corinthians, has the fol- lowing observations: — "The unbelieving husband is sanc- tified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband ; else were your children unclean; but now are they holy." Personal sanctification, personal clean- ness, or personal holiness, is not meant by the apostle ; for in the first place it is an unbelieving husband or wife that is sanctified, while the children might not have known the right hand from the left, nor have done either good or evil : and in the second place, he is giving directions to a church in view of constitutional or political principles. MORAL GOVERNMENT. 215 In like manner he represents the Jewish economy as a ministration of law — of condemnation — of death. Of course they who were under it were sinners. On the other hand he describes the new testament as the ministration of the spirit — of righteousness — and of life. By parity of reason, they who are under it are in a state of justification, or are righteous. Not that all the jews were personally sinful and condemned ; nor yet that all who live under the new testament are personally righteous. — Hence he also says to Peter — "We are jews by nature, and not sinners of the gentiles." So then there is a double sense in which the terms righteous and sinner must be viewed. If prima- rily they refer to personal qualifications, secondarily they are merely official. Take this second, official sense, and the apostle's argument stands out clear and satisfactory. But as the Redeemer's work has been thus brought up before us, let me ask, whether he was not made under the law ? Was he rationally under the law, or was he not put there for an official purpose ? Did he not bear our sins in his own body; but did he thereby become personally a sin- ner ? Did he not die for our si?is ; but did he die because he was personally a sinner ? Did he not redeem us from un- der the curse of the law, by being made a curse for us ; yet did he die either spiritually or eternally ? If spiritual and eternal death is the curse which the law denounced on us, and he did not die spiritually and eternally, then did he die in our room, or as our substitute! or did he endure the curse of the law ? Do not the scriptures say that he was put to death in the flesh ? In fine, can any one assign the reason, why, when Paul declares — " Christ has redeemed us, being made a curse for us" — he should prove it by a quotation from the Mosaic law, saying — "For it is written, cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree ?" Understand me. These questions are asked, not with any intention to throw any doubt over the mediatorial cha- racter of our Redeemer, as though he had not been made 216 LECTURES ON a curse on our account ; but merely to show, that as he did not die spiritually and eternally, spiritual and eternal death could not have been included in the penalty of the Adamic statute. And as his being a curse — not for the jews alone, but as prefigured by Adam — has been proved by the Mosaic law, the Mosaic law and the paradisiacal constitution must be the same in principle, in their reference to life and death. As Christ died in the flesh, Adam by his sin, brought death in the flesh : and as the Mosaic law pro- nounced temporal death, the Adamic institute could do no more. In this connexion it may be also asked, what does the baptist mean, when he says — " Behold the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world!" His view appears to be precisely the same taken by Paul, when he speaks of the one offence, by which all men are made, or constituted, sinners, and are brought into condemnation. The sin of the world is this one offence ; and Christ comes to take it away. Should this sin lead to temporal, spiritual and eternal death, then Christ, by his righteousness, must take away temporal, spiritual and eternal death from all the world; which, it will be admitted by all, is not the fact. For while the baptist speaks about the world, the apostle speaks of the many, or all, on whom Adam's offence has entail- ed its disastrous consequences. To all men therefore the baptist refers, when he says that Christ takes away the sin of the world ; and there is no room left for any interpreta* tion, but that which would be established by the fact of the resurrection of the dead ; in which all men are shown to be brought into a justification of life, by the righteousness of Christ. There are some analogies, afforded in the scriptural his* tory, which cannot be explained, excepting on the princi- ple by which I have now interpreted the original law ; an- alogies to which no one would ever think of ascribing any other than a secular or external agency. In consequence MORAL GOVERNMENT. 217 ci the flood, the life of man has been very much short- ened ; and by the same physical instrumentality employed after the fall — a curse upon the ground. Yet no one would ever suppose that spiritual or eternal death was thereby introduced. An effect is produced on the whole material system, and on the animal powers of man ; the common use of animal food became necessary ; the universal depra- vity, as it had been betrayed in the preceding ages, is re- ferred to with grief; and God places his bow in the clouds, as a testimony that he would no farther curse the ground for man's sake. But notwithstanding these facts, no one would ever think of referring spiritual and eternal death to the curse, then pronounced on the ground. Such an effect, therefore, as has been contemplated in our exposition of the Adamic dispensation, involving simply the animal na- ture of man and his secular associations, has been actually produced in our world, and by a divine judgment. In supposing then the effects of Adam's transgression, when God cursed the ground for his sake, to be similar in their character, the principle of exposition, thus adopted, has nothing objectionable or derogatory in itself For as it is sustained by scriptural fact, and admitted to be on an equal- ly extensive scale, the very course of judicial policy adopt- ed by Jehovah in a subsequent case, unless there can be something indubitably and demonstrably clear, to show that the divine judgment was of a different kind in Adam's case, the interpretation now given is unassailable. More- over, the ground, having been cursed for Adam's sake, this very course of policy, developed as succeeding the flood, whether there was any farther action included or not, was pursued in the event of the fall. If there be any other proceedings involved in the execution of the threatened calamities, they who advocate them have the burden of proof upon themselves ; while the explanation now given, -and so far as it goes, cannot be rejected without impeach- ing the wisdom and providence of God. % Vol. I. — 19 218 LECTURES ON And that such a mode of divine administration might be conducted in common with the remedial scheme, is also il- lustrated by analogy. For, when the ground was cursed for Adam's sake, God yet gave to him the promise of " the Seed of the woman." So, when further temporal calamities overtook the human family by means of an additional curse on the ground, God entered into covenant with Noah ; who appears, as Paul explains his official character, as " the' Heir of the righteousness of faith." This covenant in- cludes all mankind, as its own particulars abundantly evince. Yet a mere external condition is described, and spiritual and eternal life is left in its own original connexions — a matter belonging to personal responsibility. In like manner, God made a covenant with Abraham, in which the patriarch sustains the official character of Heir of the world ; yet nothing more than external advantages or privileges were secured. Spiritual references abounded — the scenic display was appropriate and beautiful — the righteousness of faith was brilliantly set forth — the Spirit of the Lord wrought out, in his providence, a most magnificent " allegory" — but each individual under it has his own eternal life re- served as the object of his personal responsibility, to be sought, secured, and enjoyed, by intercourse between God and his own spirit. Nor has the analogy yet run out. — The actual transgres- sions of mankind have been very much modified, in con- sequence of the external position created by these symbo- lic systems respectively. After the fall, men became infi- dels; after the flood, they became idolaters; under the Jewish economy, the children of Abraham became formal- ists; under the christian dispensation — what are we, but the advocates of Jewish dogmas, intermixed with gentile philosophism ? And yet shall we sternly reject our exter- nal associations, in which good and evil are so variously and uniformly intermingled, as accounting for the depravi- ty of mankind, who derive their ideas from external spec* MORAL GOVERNMENT. 219 tacle, and by their external senses ? — But this subject will present itself hereafter. Having these analogies, we may speak with some confi- dence as to the accuracy of our principle of exposition. And the more so when, descending to the details afforded by the new testament, we hear Paul declare — " In me, i. e. in my flesh, there dwelleth no good thing. — I see ano- ther law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. — With my mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin. 0 wretched man that I am, who shall deliver me from the body of this death ? — But I keep my body under, and bring it into subjection? lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a cast away. — What the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sent his Son in the likeness of sinful flesh to do. — Mortify therefore your members, which are up- on the earth." A thousand other like expressions might be quoted ; and they would all be sustained, as philosophi- cally accurate, in the view now given. But this matter also must be reserved. Unless I am greatly mistaken, the doctrine which I have advanced is necessarily, but covertly, admitted by theolo- gians against themselves. For not only do their comments upon regeneration imply the principle for which I contend, and put the christian into the very state I have described : but they strenuously maintain the necessity for the Spirit's operations, to accomplish such a change in the human con- stitution, that man's spirit may be able to understand the gospel. And when the change is effected, so that with the mind the believer really does serve the law of God, yet they cannot get sin and death out of the believer's flesh. What then is the real difference between us ? I have an- nounced that the offence of Adam did not produce that, which they say the Spirit of God must remove. And what 220 LECTURES ON advantage do they really gain ? Can more glory redound to God by saying, that one divine constitution removed a difficulty, than by saying, that another divine constitution did not produce that difficulty ? What benefit do they se- cure, by supposing that God does away by supernatural means, that which he had done by natural means ? There must necessarily be a sophism in their speculations. And it arises, I imagine, from some conceit they have enter- tained of the superior value of that which is supernatu- ral— a conceit derived from mistaking the precise use of miracles. The mere display of divinity would appear to be all and in all with them ; and the object of that display nothing. But there is another way by which they covertly employ the principle here set forth. In preaching the gospel to men, do they not address the conscience ? All men have conscience. Paul tells us that among the gentiles, "their consciences are continually accusing or else excusing one another." And what is conscience ? Is it matter ? Is it mind ? Is it neither? — It is very common to represent it as the vice-gerent of God in the bosom of man ; an idea borrowed, I presume, from the book of proverbs, in which the philosophic moralist says — " The spirit of man is the candle of the Lord." But if conscience be the spirit, or a property of the spirit of man, is conscience dead? Or if the spirit of man be the candle of the Lord, is the spirit dead? Do any appeal to conscience, as though it were be- reft of all animation or power — a mere cold fragment of death ? Or in those appeals, does not every one try to bring forward views, of whose truth the mind is, or may be, conscious? And is it not in this very connexion where conscience is found, being in itself, that very measure of spiritual illumination and life, which any individual may possess ?— May not conscience be denied — seared as with a hot iron — loaded with dead works ? And when such is the case, is that its natural state ? or is it the result of a MORAL GOVERNMENT. 22f course of actual transgression, in consequence of which God gives a man up to " a reprobate mind ?" Either then it is folly to talk about mankind having conscience, or in- consistent to maintain that they are spiritually dead by Adam's sin ? In a state of spiritual death, as that phrase is figuratively used, men may be, when degraded by the long established habits of loathsome vice, or malignant hos- tility to truth ; but then conscience goes too — defiled — sear- ed— shrouded in death. But now it may be asked— Even admitting that the par* adisiacal constitution has been correctly set forth, what was its use ? Did not God unnecessarily expose his creature to the fetches of temptation, by an arbitrary institute en- danger his standing, and so sport with his constitutional weakness ? By no means. You might as well ask, what is the use of civil government, of the parental relation, or of the divine righteousness exhibited in the works of crea- tion and providence ? We are informed that it was not good that man should be alone. A companion was accord- ingly created, and an enlarged condition of social existence was thus contemplated. Social responsibility then arose, and its results would be of the most diversified and extend- ed character. The young must learn from the old, and the inferior from the superior. Parental influence, derived from parental example, would be most decisive ; and a moral impression would be left, which would be good or bad. according to the character of the influence. This is human nature ; which, in no view, could sustain an operation more important, nor lead to issues, either more diversified or ex- tended. Here then the paradisiacal constitution comes in. The head of the race held an official connexion, by the re- sults of which, the relation between righteousness and life on the one hand, and between sin and death on the other, is put into the most splendid form, and made to subserve most decisively its intended purpose. Nor could Adam's- 19* 222 LECTURES ON official character be regulated by any other law ; or, being as it was, terminate in any other consequences. And if mankind would calmly reflect on the origin of temporal death, or duly estimate the moral influence of the varied afflictions of life, they would neither so severely censure the providence of God, so listlessly refer to the effect of Adam's sin, nor talk so ignorantly and spasmodically about dying. At the same time, when Adam was put under this parti- cular institute, it deserves to be specially noticed, that he was taken from the place where he had been created, and put into the garden, which must have been planted with some special design. What was that design r Whatever it may have been, it is evident that such a change of posi- tion would introduce its own peculiarities ; and would throw Adam under an economy which must have its own limita- tion. Unquestionably some advantages were conferred, some privileges were to be enjoyed, and some new obliga- tions were imposed. But no explanation, it seems to me, can be given for this movement, unless it be that in this new location we must look for the circumstances of Adam's official action. Nor is there any thing equivocal or derog- atory in that explanation ; for official character always con- fers honor, and enlarges the sphere of useful and dignified services, in reference to him on whom it is bestowed ; as well as promotes the welfare of those who are subjected to its control. It is no degradation to a child that he should be subject to his parents, nor to a nation that it should be subject to its prince. On the contrary, the intellectual faculties of children are most happily evolved under a pro- per parental superintendence ; while a nation enjoys peace, and gains renown, under the discreet legislation and be- nignant providence of a wise prince. So, if Adam had obeyed the law under which, in his official character, and in his new position, he was placed, all his offspring would have MORAL GOVERNMENT. 223 been deeply indebted to, and highly benefitted by, his fideli- ty. And even as the fact has turned out, the connexion be- tween sin and death is so fully and undeniably established by the official consequences of his sin, that infidelity, which affects to laugh at the inspiration of the bible, must cower to the analogous demonstration of nature. — The politician too may remember, that many an empire has faded away, like the garden of Eden, under the withering and blasting influence of official sins. Such is the most philosophical view which can be taken of the results of official character. They may be seen ex- emplified in every department of social life. And is it not the scriptural view in the case before us? " Cursed is the ground," said God to Adam, " for thy sake." Did he curse anything else for Adam's sake? Or would a curse on the ground, transcending all its affinities, produce, not only temporal, but spiritual and eternal death ? What is the meaning of this phrase, for thy sake 1 Have we any analogous cases in which this language is used, from which its meaning may be ascertained ? The following ex- amples are offered — If, said God, I find in Sodom, fifty — forty and five — thirty — twenty — ten righteous men, I will spare all the place for their sakes. — I will multiply thy seed for Abraham's sake. — In thy days I will not do it, for David thy father's sake. — I will give one tribe to thy son for David, my servant's sake, and for Jerusalem's sake, which I have chosen. — For my name's sake will I defer mine anger. Ex- pressions of this kind abound in the scriptures. What is their meaning? What kind of legislative, or providential operation, are they intended to intimate ? It is here where theologians begin to talk to us about merit and demerit, and finally run off into a sort of com- mercial account; until they affect to strike an accurate balance, when they make the elect depend on Christ's righteousness ; and at the same time suffer Adam's sin to come in by wholesale, as though a correct arithmetical calcu- 2-24 LECTURES ON lation were entirely unnecessary. But the terms merit and demerit are not scriptural. They sustain a sectarian dog- ma, or a piece of false philosophy; but distort, while they profess to advance, moral science. The object of the in- spired penmen evidently is, to refer to the practical influ- ence of the agent, to which they ascribe the effects contem- plated. Ten righteous men might have exerted an influence powerful enough to have regenerated the city of Sodom ; — even as the preaching of Jonah brought the city of Nine- veh into sackcloth and ashes. They might not, it is true. But our God acts not from omniscience abstractedly consid- ered. His judgment is according to facts ; and his long suffering waits on the development. And so the ar- gument might be made out, in view of the other cases quoted. Such would have been the effect of Adam's righteous- ness. Such ought to be the effect of Adam's sin. That is — Each individual would have been instructed by Adam's obedience and its consequences, that eternal life depended on obedience to the law inscribed on his own nature ; or was indissolubly connected with personal holiness : as by Adam's disobedience and its consequences, it is now demon- strated to every one, that eternal death will be the re- sult; if, as personal transgressors against the law of our own nature, we are not regenerated and sanctified. The law written on the heart requires us to do and live ; and the Adamic constitution was intended to afford a symbol, by which that law, and its operations should be visibly illus- trated. Sceptics have been not a little sardonic in their witty ob- jections on this subject; but they have forgotten their phi- losophy in their love of pleasantry. Would God, say they, have brought upon mankind their present amoynt of suffer- ing, because Adam ate an apple ? But then the question is, can official sin detail a general calamity ? Or, going back MORAL GOVERNMENT. 225 to the original state of our being, could a different or a more appropriate test have been provided ? If by the nature of law, the least offence incurs penalty, so that "he who of- fends in one point is guilty of all," the smallness of the transgression in question made the symbol so much the more perfect; and the effects of sin entering the mind, were the more happily set forth. "A little leaven leaven- eth the whole lump." The type is transparent — the objec- tion is puerile. — "It is not all gold that glitters." Presuming that our subject has been sufficiently eluci- dated, I might pause for the present. I only delay to re- mark, that the popular doctrine on the Adamic constitution is not now assailed for the first time. You may go back, discovering many similar attempts at different times, until you would find the early fathers contending about the mat- ter, and Chrysostom and Augustin taking different sides. They have passed away to the generations of the dead ; and others have again and again occupied their places. Now our turn has come. We have the bible in our hands, and must decide for ourselves. What did they say ? It is imbecility to ask. Read, judge, decide for yourselves. iTheir talents, like their rights, were no better than your bwn. And if you will only examine, you may decide, even with superior accuracy. I leave the merits of the ar- gument with you : — and may God Almighty bless your orayerful deliberations. 226 LECTURES ON LECTURE VIII. Symbols — Fall — Its circumstances — Its effects — Use of the Tree of knowledge of good and evil — Physical agent by which death was introduced — JVature of death — Condition of all men — Law and Gospel — Human depravity. In the last lecture I described the paradisiacal constitu- tion as a political institute ; and as intended by its results to serve a symbolical purpose. This principle of hierogly- phical display, carried out with a view to intellectual or spiritual benefit, belongs to the whole material system ; and explains the relation between matter and mind. The hea- vens and earth, in this way, declare the glory of God ; or by visible representation manifest the invisible things of his nature. Legal ordinances typified moral privileges. The natural relations were artificial means of accomplishing spiritual objects. Hieroglyphics were mere representatives of something; else. — While language was circumscribed, and possessed few words, its terms were taken out of their natural, and applied in a tropical, sense. — Prophecy is the language of signs and figures, and speaks more by pictures than by sounds. — In fact, all language is full of figure, and is so from absolute necessity : — not that this circumstance, as might be supposed, is a mere peculiarity of the orientals ; but it belongs to the primitive state of society, and attends it, even when advanced to the greatest degree of refine- ment. To exemplify more minutely : — A tiger would represent fierceness; — a lion, courage; — an ox, strentgth; — a serpent, wisdom; — a mountain, firmness; — a palm-tree, the righteous man; — a green bay tree, the wicked man. In the chapters MORAL GOVERNMENT. £>7 before us, a tree in the midst of the garden, was the symbol of the knowledge of good and evil ; — the garden itself typi- fied a condition of great external blessedness, under a right- eous political administration — the bruised head of the ser- pent signified the broken power of the god of the world — the sacrifice pointed to the offering of life, which Immanuel should make ; and illustrated the mortification of the lusts of the flesh, which is an important and imperative duty binding on all men — the cherubim, at the east end of the garden of Eden, manifested God as dwelling among men — Adam himself, as having the dominion, was the image of Jehovah as Lord of all. In later times, the prophet, priest and king, with their respective services — Melchizedec and Moses, distinguish- ed as they were in the peculiarities of their own official re- lations, and the carnal ordinances with which they were re- spectively concerned, were only vivid emblems of the Son of God, in view of his mediatorial character and action. Abraham, as a covenant head, was constituted a pattern of the righteousness of faith ; while in his family history, we are furnished with a series of most beautiful allegories. The Sinai covenant was "the ministration of death and condem- nation," showing that it is impossible to be saved by law ; and the new testament is "the ministration of righteousness and life," evincing that the sinner may attain to everlast- ing life by faith in a Mediator. Christ is the image of the invisible God, the brightness of his glory, to which we are predestinated to be conformed. A husband is an image to his wife — a parent is an image to his child — a ruler is an image to his subject — a superior is an image to his inferior. The principle which I am thus pressing on your consideration, ramifies itself through all society ; follows human life in all its sinuosities, and leaves no social relation, natural, political nor religious, free of its control. The paradisiacal institute, in the view which has been given of its nature and objects, is only conformed by our argument to the whole course of •>28 LECTURES ON divine legislation among men. He, who would plead for the exception of that original statute, or hesitate to admit that where Christ is an image Adam must also be, must show the reason why. In the primitive state of society, when mankind would slowly imitate the hieroglyph ical system, by which God of- fers through our corporeal senses, the subjects of our intel- lectual perception, their first efforts would necessarily be very defective. But as population enlarged, as the objects of thought became varied, and social interests grew multi- form, as society advanced in refinement, and intellectual men devoted their leisure to educate the general mind, oral tradition would give place to historical record, and hiero- glyphics to the more extended system of alphabetical lan- guage. If then God, who had originally taught men ac- cording to the principles of their own nature, and had car- ried these principles as far as their circumstances required, should make any further communication, would he not adopt their later modes of imparting instruction ? Is there any irrationality or impropriety in the idea, that in the advance of society, when the accumulation of labor should call for ^division of that labor, and other classes of official men should be needed, that God should make known his communica- tions by official men, specially appointed? Or is the notion offensive and unphilosophical, that such official men should speak, or write, as the nature of the case or the cir- cumstances of society might demand ? Where then is this tax on human credulity, which the doctrine of the preach- ing of the cross, or the inspiration of the holy scriptures is declared to impose ? — But you admit those doctrines ; and see you not that external means are thus multiplied ? that ministerial men are examples, whose moral influence must necessarily be extended and powerful ? and that the scriptures themselves, are but a transcript of the divine character ? MORAL GOVERNMENT. 229 It deserves farther consideration, that even when the of- ficial men, who were employed at any particular time, were permitted to use the written language of their country, yet the ancient symbolical method of communicating truth was not abandoned. Moses wrote his roll of the judaic history and constitution, and God himself wrote the law on two ta- bles of stone. But the history which Moses wrote, while it gathered all the ancient symbols into a good and safe keeping, recorded also the circumstances under which origi- nated a whole series of new symbols ; or a whole range of carnal ordinances, made up of the elements of the world. The prophets wrote ; but they incorporated an extensive system of hieroglyphics and symbols in the communications they made. The apostles and the evangelists wrote ; but the Master, by the institutions he set up, the Lord's day, preaching, baptism, and the supper, secured, by symboli- cally representing, the great points of his mediatorial en- terprise. The reason of all this is evident. The condition of society might call for writing; but the meaning of sym- bols is more fixed and uniform, while an alphabetical lan- guage is both local and changeable. And under this view, it is not a little strange, that multitudes, who profess to re- gard divine truth, so carelessly consider, or so habitually neglect divine ordinances. It would seem then, that the principle adopted in expo- sition of the Adamic dispensation, betrays no hasty nor im- mature speculation ; but runs through all nature, and gives character to all God's institutions. In fact, if the paradisia- cal law be not interpreted on that principle, it will stand alone ; as contradictory to the whole course of divine le- gislation, as it is destructive of personal responsibility, and therefore contrary to the nature of man. — But waving any farther general remarks, let us proceed with our analysis. How did the fall occur ? Is it to be accounted for by na- tural means ? or must we refer it to a supernatural agency, which Adam was unable to resist? Was there any secret Vol. I.— 20 230 LECTURES ON influence exerted by Jehovah, in pursuance of his own eter- nal and irreversible deer eel Did he permit an intelligent being: to exert a superior power, which Adam had no capacity to oppose ? Or did man commit transgression when he might have avoided it? These questions are of paramount im- portance ; and it is presumed they may be very fairly and distinctly answered. Certainly the historian professes to give us an account of the whole catastrophe : and there is as certainly a wide difference between a crime that is com- mitted from compulsion, and that which results from the ex- ercise of a man's own free agency. I must here call up to your recollection the fact, which has been the basis of the whole of the preceding argument, and of every theoretic view that has been developed : viz. that man has no innate ideas. I am aware that this fact has been, in various ages, a matter of harsh and protracted con- troversy. A field of conflict has been marked out in which have appeared such men as Aristotle, Plato, Descartes, Hume, Reid, Locke, and I know not how many more, as combatants. But my impression is, that this subject has been finally and satisfactorily elucidated by Locke ; and that, notwithstanding the opposition he met with, every one who is at all acquainted with the philosophy of mind, would freely concede the doctrine I have stated. And certainly, any man who is governed by candor and a love of truth, or who is not infatuated by the conceits of false philosophy, or the prejudices of an illiberal sectarianism, has only to observe the peculiarities of his own constitution, and the daily operations of his own mind, to be fully satis- fied in relation to the point in question. But if the general fact thus averred cannot be disputed, its truth cannot be affected by the character of the ideas which a man may have. Whether those ideas shall be good or bad, they cannot be innate. He may have an innate capacity to make a choice ; or he may labor under outward difficulties in making a choice ; but his choice is neither MORAL GOVERNMENT. 231 holy nor sinful, until it is made. If his ideas are not innate, but are derived from exterior sources, they can be neither good nor bad, until so derived ; because they do not exist. Knowing the character of external objects, or the difficulties in which he may be involved, you may anticipate what the character of his ideas will be. But if those objects be of a mixed character, and good and evil are thereby presented to an intelligent and free agent, with the intention that he should make a wise and deliberate choice, you can readily see what ought to be the character of his ideas. And if yrou can perceive this, yo\i have apprehended the principle of personal responsibility, and can be at no loss to explain its philosophy. There is a very common notion, that our actual transgres- sions cannot be explained, but by admitting that our intel- lectual nature is previously corrupted. If by this, it is in- tended merely to assert, that a man commits transgression, because he has cherished erroneous impressions derived from sensual objects ; or that, when good and evil are pre- sented before him as an intelligent and a free agent, he has chosen evil, this view is scripturally correct. For — "As a man thinketh in his heart, so is he. Out of the heart pro- ceed all evil thoughts. Every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin." But if, transcending these limits, it is intended to advance the doctrine, that the intellectual nature of man is sinful before it has derived any ideas from surrounding objects, or before lust has conceived, then I demur, not being able to understand how this can be. For, if lust has not conceived, there can be no ideas: and if lust has conceived, independent of sensible objects, there must be innate ideas — which, from the principles alreadv elucidated, there cannot be. But that such an exhibition of the human mind, as that which I reprobate, cannot be true, if there be no innate ideas, and if the spirit comes from God, is still farther evi- 232 LECTURES ON dent from the facts in the historical sketch before us, Sin may be explained without maintaining such an unscriptu- ral and unphilosophical view of the human mind. Adam and Eve had no corrupt nature when God formed them, or before lust had conceived. Neither mind nor body was previously corrupted in their case. The fact was the same with regard to fallen angels. They had no previously cor- rupt nature, unless it can be supposed that God created them sinners — which no man in his senses can suppose. Nor is this all. Moses goes on circumstantially to relate how it happened that our first parents did sin ; and instead of referring the fact to their innate depravity, he ascribes it to ideas which they derived from local circumstances. The serpent beguiled Eve. She saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise. Having eaten, she gave of the fruit to her husband ; and he hearkened to the voice of his wife. This is the whole account ; and it is not unlike a thousand other occurrences which take place in every age, and which we may see every day. Evidently, as the apostle James explains the whole subject of sin, in relation to every human being, and when considered as personal transgression, lust had conceived, and then sin was brought forth. If there had been a corrupt nature, previous to the entertainment of the ideas acquired, it would seem that sin could scarcely have been committed more promptly. It farther deserves your consideration, that we have a general subject illustrated here, by more than a single or insulated fact : — there is a great variety of circumstances. The fallen angels had been very differently situated, and fell under the operation of personal responsibility, exhibit- ing a range of intellectual aberrations as varied and exten- sive as their number or their individual characters, unless theologians can cany out and establish their system of a dull and impracticable uniformity in the invisible world. Adam was a social head, Eve was not. The one fell un- MORAL GOVERNMENT. 233 der social, the other under personal responsibility. The one was male, the other female. The one was tempted by the serpent, the other by his wife. The one brought death into the world and all our woes ; the other entailed conse- quences peculiar to her own condition. A greater variety of circumstances cannot be presented in the whole extent of human existence : for all human life is to this day de- veloped in the issues of social and personal responsibility ; in the influence of male and female character ; and in the mingled operations of different beings of diversified talents. Yet a previously corrupt intellectual nature is not at all ne- cessary to account for the multiform results. In stating the facts of the case, Moses informs us that a serpent talked with and beguiled Eve : and this apparent- ly strange matter requires our attention. Concerning it I remark, 1. That Moses means to inform us that a literal serpent was employed as the agent in this transaction. Because — (1) he compares it with the beasts of the field ; with which he would not have compared an intellectual spirit (2) God says to the serpent — " Thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field ; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life," which could not be predicated of an intellectual being. (3) God farther said to the serpent — " I will put enmity between thee and the woman, between thy seed and her seed ; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel" — which is a universal fact in the history of the serpent. (4) The subtlety of the serpent is proverbial ; hence Jesus says to his disciples, "be ye wise as serpents." (5) Paul tells us that the serpent beguiled Eve. (6) " No part of an- cient mythology is more curious, though, in some respects, more intricate and perplexed than the worship of the ser- pent. Nearly allied to that of the cherubic symbols, it ri- vals it in point of universality, and closely resembles it ia 20 • .234 LECTURES ON point of application."* (7) The curse pronounced on the serpent constituted a visible and suitable emblem — on the same principle on which every other subject is represented to man, i. e. external symbol — in illustration of the pro- mise that the Redeemer should break up the dominion of the god of the world, or " destroy the works of the devil." And this curse it appears to me, would be accomplished without changing the serpent's form. His eating dust is enough. 2. That Moses intends to inform us, that the serpent was the mere agent of an intellectual spirit, is also evident : because — (1) There is very superior intelligence discover- ed.. The address was made to Eve, rather than to Adam. Adam was " the image and glory of God," and on him rested the official responsibility. "Eve was the glory of the man;" and therefore might be the more easily assailed, not feeling the full force of that responsibility. The speak- er talks of the Elohim, a term which expresses the whole mode of the divine manifestation to us ; and at the same time remarks, concerning the knowledge of good and evil, in a manner which shows him to be acquainted with the peculiar circumstances of the, to us, invisible world. — And the very choice of his agent was as deep laid an artifice as the nature of the case would admit of. (2) Satan in the new testament is described as "that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveih the whole world." (3) One part of the Mediator's work was to condemn, judge, or cast out the prince of the world. " For this pur- pose was he manifested, even to destroy the works of the devil:" — to "destroy him that had the power of death, that is the devil." * Faber's Orig. of Pag. Idol. vol. I. p. 439. It is also said that " in the orgies of Bacchus Maenoles, (or the mad) his worshippers were crowned with serpents, and yelled out Eve, Eve, even her by whom the transgression came." Parkhurst's Heb. Lex. MORAL GOVERNMENT. 235 I am aware, as I have before remarked, that this whole subject of Satanic influence, and that of the fall, or even the existence of angels, has been disputed ; and that an at- tempt has been made to resolve all the scriptural allusions to such matters into mere metaphors. But why, or what advantage is to be gained, either in scriptural exposition or philosophical speculation, I cannot see. If, in addition to what has been said, intellectual beings here can influence each other, or modify the forms -of matter, is it unphilo- sophical that intellectual beings, though of another and a higher order, should modify matter, and thereby influence us ? Does not God affect us by such means, both in com- municating good and inflicting evil ; and do we not there- by affect each other ? If there be such a race of intellec- tual beings, as our argument contemplates, how else could they affect us than through the instrumentality of matter ? Admitting the fact of their existence, and remembering the peculiarity of our being, as obtaining our ideas through the medium of our corporeal senses, is not every other circum- stance in perfect good keeping with the whole subject ? Conceding the doctrine of spiritual agency, still there does not seem to have been any very unmanageable diffi- culty in the temptation stated. For whatever may be the supposed intellectual superiority of the deceiver, yet the sphere of his action, in that case, as well as in all other temptations to which we may be subject, was circumscribed by the laws of the material system. There is no evidence, that the literal serpent actually spoke. Such might have been the appearance ; but as the scriptures unequivocally ascribe the power of death to the devil, and as it is his king- dom which the Redeemer came to overthrow, the power of speech, manifested on the occasion, was only farther proof of the presence of an intellectual agent. Eve was deceived. The appearance was false. On the other hand, Adam was tempted by his wife, and was not deceived.* * 1 Tim. ii. 14. 23G LECTURES ON Many a lying wonder and sign, and much deceivableness of unrighteousness after the power of Satan, has the world seen since that day ; in view of which aberrations we can now discern nothing but a scene of human guilt, followed by its natural and merited consequences. Take a glance at the other side. The Creator had placed our first parents in the midst of the happiest circumstances. Blessed in each other's society — surrounded by every thing good and excellent, redolent and lovely — the countenance of their Lord radiant with smiles and beaming with love — their access to him free and unrestrained — themselves dis- tinctly warned against the evil which overtook them, and so- lemnly forbidden to do that which they did do — what more could an intelligent being desire ? An intelligent being asks for information : — information they had. A depen- dent creature seeks for happiness : — they possessed all the various blessings that could make them happy. The pro- vidence of Jehovah presided over the whole scene ; — his Spirit dwelt with them. God had done for them whatever their nature required, or the peculiarity of their situation demanded. He could not have gone farther without de- stroying their free agency. He could not have thrown farther restraint upon the subtle adversary, than that under which the temptation itself shows him to have been placed : for there was no appeal made to them but through sensible circumstances ; nor could they else have been overcome. .What more would they have had ? Or can any one imagine, that a righteous Lord made them responsible for an amount of power which they never possessed ? Theologians, however, have put this whole affair in such a light, that every one must feel that there is a sophism lurking in some part of their exposition. From their pre- mises, the conclusion, that God is the author of sin, to many a mind appears unavoidable ; and perhaps some would ad- mit the conclusion, rather than abandon the premises. Here theological science and the common sense of man- MORAL GOVERNMENT. '37 kind are at utter variance. The argument, whose conclu- sion appears so offensive to some, and which I apprehend all would gladly explain away, is derived from the abstract perfections of Godhead, about which we can know nothing, God has manifested himself, and beyond that manifestation our inquiries cannot be carried, without becoming involved in perplexing conjecture. The argument would run thus : — Nothing can be fore- known as certain, which is not fixed as certain ; therefore, according to the order of nature, predestination is the basis of foreknowledge. Or thus; — whatever is foreknown must certainly come to pass ; therefore — w7hat ? Fore- knowledge is as sure a basis on which to rest the doctrine of fate, as predestination itself can be. Then Adam fell because it was foreknown or predestinated that he should fall. If this conclusion be admitted, is not God the author of sin ? — If it be denied, how came Adam to fall'? He fell as a free agent, it may be replied. But how could he fall as a free agent, when it wTas certain and necessary that he should fall, and all contingency is shut out from consider- ation? Here is a mystery. For how can these two state- ments be reconciled ? — Perhaps it might be offered as an alleviating circumstance, that God intended to do mankind a greater good by introducing the gospel. But then wre may answrer that, independent of God's being thus repre- sented to do evil that good may come — a course of action which he forbids to his creatures — this notion does not re- lieve the original argument ; because it still makes the fall to be necessary, in pursuance of a divine determination. But is it not evident that we have in the present case a constitution with two sides 1 Was not obedience contem- plated, as well as disobedience 1- Was not penalty opposed by reward 7 And did not Jehovah foreknow what would occur in one view, as well as in the other? If then fore- knowledge necessarily implies predestination, it must have been predestinated that Adam should fall, and that he should 238 LECTURES ON not fall. As this cannot be, it follows that foreknowledge does not necessarily imply foreordination ; and that God might foreknow a train of circumstances which he did not ordain, but which are to be traced simply to the responsi- bility and agency of the creature. This conclusion is not derogatory to the character of Jehovah, nor can it in the least degree detract from the wisdom or righteousness of his lordship over our world ; and yet the free agency of the creature is thereby entirely relieved, and stands forth sus- tained in all its individuality of operation. Certainly the scriptures do so exhibit the divine charac- ter. God takes no pleasure in the death of his creatures ; he does for them whatever, consistently with their nature, he can do ; he would gather them, as a hen gathereth her brood under her wings, but they will not. — "Let no man say, when he is tempted, / am tempted of God; for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man : but every man is tempted when he is drawn away of his own lust, and is enticed." Language cannot be plainer, nor more to the point ; it seems to have been framed on purpose to meet the speculations of the day, which either di- rectly or indirectly charged God with being the author of sin. . Cleaving to a false mode of reasoning, some may say — still it is evident that Adam fell by divine permission ? But then the question comes up, what is permission ? Does it imply, that any extraneous and irresistible force was al- lowed, under which Adam could not avoid sinning ? If this is meant, the fatalism thus asserted, is no better than the fatalism resulting from predestination. Is it not evident, from the fact of the temptation, as well as from the divine declaration in reference to the fall — "Behold, the man is be- come as one of us to know good and evil" — that good and evil are intermingled elsewhere than in our immediate world ; and consequently, that it is over such a condition of things that Jehovah presides ? Does the existence of evil in our world imply, that when one human being tempts MORAL GOVERNMENT. 239 another, he who is so tempted, is by a divine agency led into sin ? Or would you infer any injustice in the divine administration which does not paralyze the arm of every wicked man ? and house the righteous, so that they should neither see nor hear the evil that is around them ? Would you have the great Governor of the world to break up all the relations of life, reverse the law of probation, and make you holy by force ? If not, then extend the same rectoral principle to the relations of mind, and to the circumstances attendant on those relations, and where is your difficulty ? Under such a view, permission does not imply force ; the divine government appears to be regulated according to the intellectual character of his creatures ; and the free agency of man is preserved in its own distinctness, and occupies its own appropriate place. Take an example. Satan was permitted to tempt Job ; and, as you all know, sore and heavy were the patriarch's calamities. Far more severely dealt with, it would seem, than Adam had been — for Job was bereaved of all his out- ward comforts, which Adam was not — and well nigh reduced to that solitude which Adam, it would appear, apprehend- ed ; yet Job held fast to his integrity. Nay, he seems among the other subjects of his glorying, to glory over Adam. " Did I cover my transgressions as Adam, by hiding mine iniquity in my bosom ? Did I fear a great mul- titude, or did the contempt of families terrify me, that I kept silence, and went not out at the' door?" True, God found reason to condemn Job, but did not find fault with all he had said. On the contrary, his criticising and carping friends were censured, while he was consecrated as a priest to minister in sacrifice for their sins ; and was most abun- dantly blessed in the end. — This divine permission then, which may be supposed to have been granted when Satan found his way to the garden of Eden, does by no means imply that any necessity to sin was imposed on Adam ; but refers to a course of administration necessarily belonging to 240 LECTURES ON a train of circumstances in which good and evil are inter- mingled. I have been the more particular in an effort to elucidate Adam's transgression, because it is an epitome of all that follows in the varied and melancholy history of mankind. If the argument pursued does not shake the harsh preju- dices of some determined sectarian, it may perhaps rescue some ingenuous youth, who, dissatisfied with the metaphy- sical subtleties he cannot unravel, is hovering on the verge of dreary infidelity. And many a young man, in this day of free and unrestrained inquiry, like the youth in the garden of Gethsemane, is wistfully looking to the end of all these distractions, in hope that the clouds will be scattered, his own mind relieved, and his way to eternal glory made bright and clear. — To the prayerful and candid attention of such an one, I offer my exposition of this momentous subject: while, at the same time, I do seriously and earnestly wish, that ministers and christians, forgetting the past or learning from its misdeeds, would look more to the intellectual and independent character of the coming generations. We must now turn to consider the effects which eatinsr of the forbidden fruit produced upon our first parents. These effects have been represented as of the most fearful char- acter:— nothing less than that this guilty pair became "dead in sin, and ivholly defiled in all the faculties and parts of soul and body." How wise men, with their bibles in their hands, could make so broad and unreserved a statement as this, it is very difficult to explain ; unless that they careless- ly, and without investigation, copied the errors of preceding ages. There are many dogmas which have been derived from the fathers instead of the bible ; dogmas which have formed a chaplet of immortality around the brows of Au- gustin and his compeers, but which have nothing to do with the testimony of the prophets and apostles. The facts as the scriptures report them, afford a very different case. Look at them — MORAL GOVERNMENT. 24 L 1. Jehovah says — " Behold the man is become as one of us to know good and evil /" Can the doctrine which is taught so confidently concerning man, be at all advanced in reference to God, either in view of Adam's fall, or of any like, but prior, event ? Yet a similarity of condition is as- serted. Man knows good and evil, as God knows good and evil. You would not, you cannot, predicate a corrupt nature of the great Creator. Why then deduce a corrupt nature as characteristic of man, when this divine comment is so plain and distinct ? You will not reply, that God is a Spirit; for — while man is also an intellectual being, and it is of spiritual corruption we are speaking — you would deny the recorded fact that there is a similitude. I cannot see any way in which the likeness can be discovered, un- less it be, that God as Lord of all, and man as having this world put under his dominion, respectively preside where good and evil are intermingled. So far as personal nature is concerned, you may not even breathe a suspicion con- cerning Jehovah, unless it be that "the form of God has become by the fall inappropriate to the present condition of mankind ; and a necessity has consequently occurred for a second manifestation, and that in the flesh. If you sup- pose the address we have quoted to have proceeded from the lips of the Mediator, and to be prophetic of his future sorrows, still it was in the flesh he was put to death. In no way can the doctrine so strenuously maintained, be made to correspond with the divine comment; while each, and all of the suppositions, whether you refer to dominion or personal form, would sustain the principle of exposition I am advocating: — Our doctrine, remember, is, that the ani- mal nature of man is made subject to change by death, and that the whole material system, as it is connected with our present mode of existence, is exposed to the same dele- terious influence. 2. Adam's sin was conventional. He fell as an official man. And certainty it is not the fact now, that the trans- Vol. I.— 21 242 LECTURES ON gression of an official man forthwith desolates all his pri- vate character. Many men do in their places as members of a corporate body, what they would shrink from doing as individuals. They may understand a duty in their own little circle, while general principles which may embrace society at large they do not comprehend. In the one case they may be righteous according to their knowledge ; in the other they may sin through ignorance: — like Paul, blame- less as to the institutions under which he lived, but igno- rant of the revolution which was to bring in "the new cov- enant." An officer may, in such a case, ruin his personal reputation forever; but it does not necessarily follow that he should. In his personal responsibility the remedial prin- ciple must be sought; and it may be — for it often is — found there. 3. Even if Adam's sin had not been official, but, like Eve's, had been merely personal, such a fearful disaster as we are considering would not necessarity follow. For though the scriptures have said, that " whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all;" and though the principle of law may be — "the soul that sinneth shall die" — so that there can be no recovery by law; yet it does not follow that a remedial operation may be utterly impracticable under another system of govern- ment. The mediatorial principle of the gospel, viz. — "if any man confess his sin, God is faithful and just to forgive him his sin, and to cleanse him from all unrighteousness," might very naturally and readily be introduced. The very fact of his confession may indicate a fragment of moral character j^et remaining ; like as in Sodom, when ten right- eous men should have saved the city, or like " a little leaven that will leaven the whole lump ;" or it may be, that that fact might evince a general state of good feeling. On such a fact, a government that is both wise and gracious, may very safely extend pardon, and thus save a transgressor who vTould otherwise, according to the progressive course of sin. MORAL GOVERNMENT. 243 become utterly base. — And if one sin could not, or did not, so desolate the moral character of Adam, how should it so utterly desecrate all the moral energies of his children? 4. The history charges him with but one sin. God ar- raigns him for but one sin. Paul traces the consequences which have come down on all mankind to one offence. What ingenuity is required, and wasted, in an attempt to show that Adam violated each command of the decalogue, and that death has come on all the world because that he be- came spiritually dead and wholly denied ! What is the proof by which such a fearful indictment is established ? 1. Adam was so stupid, it will be said, as to think of hid- ing himself from an omnipresent God. But such is not the historical fact. For he heard the voice of Jehovah- Elohim walking in the garden, and he hid himself from the manifested or personal presence of Jehovah. In connex- ion it may be asked, was Moses spiritually dead and wholly defiled when he exceedingly feared and quaked? % It is said that Eve "laid the blame upon the serpent;" and Adam " laid the blame upon his wife, and even on Je- hovah-Elohim himself." But did they not relate the cir- cumstances as they had transpired ? Did the}' not tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth ? Did they not with great simplicity, frankness, and candor, confess their sin ? And is it not consistent with the most enlisrht- ened and liberal views of human nature, to interpret that confession as repentance? — But Adam said to God — " The woman whom thou gavest to be with me." And is this any thing more than a pleonastic mode of speech, in which more words are used than may seem to us to be absolutely necessary ? and which may well be employed when a lan- guage could have but few words ? Can the proof adduced sustain the charge which has been so confidently tabled ? Or does any more appear on the face of the record, than an act, by which evil was 244 LECTURES ON brought into the world ? — evil which the unhappy pair had begun to experience in their own persons, but which had not destroyed the refinement or delicacy of their feelings ? — and an act, which was perfectly consistent with their love of truth— with candor — with confession — with repentance — and which, in reference to Adam, is ever recognised in the scriptures in its own insulated character? Jehovah in- terpreted the case very differently from the popular notion, which scholastic theology has so injudiciously and harshly promulgated. He pitied the condition of his fallen child- ren ; averred that they were now brought to know, not evil alone, hut good and evil; and that all their earthly relations were entirely changed. So far from being spiritually dead, they were not even temporally dead ; nor does it appear that the tree of whose fruit they had eaten, was capable of pro- ducing death in either sense. Nay more. They were not condemned, their sentence was not passed, until their kind Lord, retreating into that personal responsibility which be- longed to their nature, and availing himself of their moral character as it was displayed at the time before him, pro- claimed the mediatorial constitution — adapting it to their actual circumstances. God is love — his gospel is, "if any man will confess his sins, God is faithful and just to for- give him his sins ;" and one of the most beautiful and lu- minous proofs of both is afforded by these very transactions- I have just remarked, that it does not appear that the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was the cause of death in any sense. This intimation may, perhaps, star- tle you as contrary to ail your impressions. My reasons for the remark follow : — 1. It is not said that this tree was a tree of death. It is said that, in the day when Adam should eat of its fruit, dy- ino- he should die; but it is not said that the fruit should be the agent by which death should be executed. Its agency was much more confined in its physical action, and might have been temporary. The terms by which its effect was MORAL GOVERNMENT. 245 described at first were — the knowledge of good and evil ; and those employed in stating the fact, after the covenant was violated, were — their eyes were opened, and they knew that they were naked. Nothing farther is asserted con- cerning it. 2. While the principle of any constitution is preserved entire, any case which may oscur under it must be provided for ; either by special statute, or by the law of another con- stitution to which such a case may more properly belong. According to the paradisiacal institute, Adam was our social head; and to his offence the introduction of death is refer- red. But Eve was first in transgression. If Adam had not sinned — and the case might have occurred — then, either the tree was not the physical agent of executing death ; or, contrary to the principle of the constitution, death would not have come by Adam's offence ; or, Eve would not have died. Eve violated her personal responsibility, and her sin was considered and punished irrespective of Adam's offence. Or if the fact, that her daughters have shared with her in herpenalty, should seem to make hersin official like Adam's, its official character m List be altogether secondary. Or rather, I should say, that the fact in her case evinces, that the prin- ciple of social responsibility belongs to the nature of society, and is identified with all our social institutions. Conse- quently the Adamic constitution is not an arbitrary insti- tute, unkindly engrafted on nature, but was a mere regu- lation of the political relation in which Adam stood to his posterity ; and therefore could only result in political, or external advantages or disadvantages. — In the subsequent parts of the scriptural history, instances are not wanting, in which the peculiar character and deportment of children are traced to maternal, as well as to paternal influence. 3. If the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was the physical agent by which death was introduc- ed, how did death, so introduced, pass upon the lower or- ders of creation. Evidently some other cause, more gene- 21* 246 LECTURES ON ral and more efficient, is necessary to explain the extent to which death has been executed. 4. We have seen in a previous lecture, that Moses, when on mount Sinai, could not see the face of God, and live. No such difficulty is even hinted at in Adam's case. He seems to have been capable of the most perfect familiarity, and of the most free intercourse with God. Moses was under the sentence as passed, and the force of the physical agen- cy by which the sentence was executed. Adam was not yet under that sentence, nor had he felt the power of the deleterious agent, which was pointed out to him after- wards. 5. Death is appointed unto all men. — "I create peace, and I create evil" saith the Lord. The execution of the penalty was not put out of his own hands, but is left as a matter of his own just administration. Then it may be asked, what was the precise use of the tree of knowledge of good and evil ? To which I answer, that its use is disclosed b}^ the transactions themselves. Its effect on the animal constitution of our first parents was the proof of their guilt. There was no equivocation possible in the case. But can it be supposed, it may further be asked, that, un- der such circumstances, Adam would have dared to equi- vocate ? To which again I answer, that while others have represented him as dead in sin, and wholly defiled, they can hardly censure a conjecture, which merely supposes that a sinner would hide his transgression if he could. Nor can they justly condemn an interpretation, which is founded on a common judicial principle, that every man is to be held innocent until he is proved to be guilty. In their lofty speculations on the abstract perfections of Godhead, they may indeed scout such a simple idea. But they would forget such facts as the following.- — When the cry of So- dom's iniquities came up before the Lord, he descended to inquire after the proof in the case. When Cain replied MORAL GOVERNMENT. 247 to the Lord — am I my brother's keeper? the Lord answer- ed, thy brother's blood crieth to me from the ground. When Saul pretended that he had fulfilled the command- ment of the Lord, and made his strong asseveration before the prophet, Samuel asked him, "what then meaneth the bleating of the sheep in mine ears, and the lowing of the oxen which I hear?" When Abraham took the knife to slay his son, the angel of the Lord said unto him — " Lay not thine hand upon the lad, neither do thou any thing un- to him : for now I know that thou fearest God, seeing thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only son, from me." On the day of judgment, the wicked are represented as pleading their cause thus — " When saw we thee an hun- gered, and did not feed thee?" The answer returned is — " inasmuch as ye did it not unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye did it not to me." — The objector to our interpretation would forget, that we must appear before a judge ; that the judge is the son of man ; that every one must give account of himself in the day of judgment, when he shall be either justified or condemned by his ivords. Judgment, like every other political transaction, is not the mere sovereign act of a supreme Lord, acting independently of the feelings or views of the intelligent creatures he has made ; but every eye shall see, and every ear hear, and every tongue confess, that the judge of all the earth doth right. And now we may distinctly perceive, that if the forego- ing view of the judicial object of the tree of knowledge of good and evil be correct, there was no use for any parti- cular tree of life, to serve an analogous purpose. Of course there was no particular tree of life, for God makes nothing in vain. But if the tree of knowledge of good and evil was not the physical agent by which death was introduced, by what means was the sentence executed ? This question too is fairly and fully answered by Moses. For he tells us, that 2-18 LECTURES ON the Lord God cursed the ground ; and that he did this for Adam's sake; or because that he had violated the statute which had been given to him. A similar fact occurs in the history of the flood ; which visitation produced still farther temporal calamities. Any medical njhilosopher, even though he has made but slender attainments in his science, will underwrite this scriptural explanation. You may be fully satisfied on the subject by very little inquiry or obser- vation. This physical agency will not only explain the cause of death, but it will, at the same time, account for its univer- sality, and will demonstrate the interest which all mankind had in Adam's official character. But it cannot prove that Adam or any of his posterity did become, by his one of- fence, dead in sin, and wholly defiled in all the faculties and parts of both soul and body. How could any noxious miasm, or poisonous vapor, thus exhaled, morally pollute the mind ? Nay more — how could spiritual death be instan- taneously spread out over the powers of the intellectual spirit, by an act whose penalty was so slowly executed, that the powers of the body itself were brought only into a dy- ing condition? And farther still — how could death, tempo- ral, spiritual and eternal, be implied in the sentence origi- nally pronounced, when the only physical agent referred to at the time, did not produce death at all ? Or is it not evident that the original sentence, instead, as has been as- serted, of going beyond the sentence which was actually executed, fell far short of it ? For if the tree of the know- ledge of good and evil was the physical agent by which the original sentence would have been executed, then death could not go beyond Adam's own race.. Whereas, when the ground is desecrated and becomes the physical agent, the various classes of animals, as well as the whole mate- rial system, are immediately involved, and cannot escape from its destructive influence. Their sufferings — which speculative theologians have not been able to account fox — MORAL GOVERNMENT. 249 necessarily follow ; though in no sense can it be said that they had committed Adam's sin. How much theologians have taken for granted ! Well might a candid reformer charge his successors to recollect, that Calvin and his noble companions had not discovered all that is in the bible. This matter, however, cannot be dismissed yet. For, admitting the correctness of the preceding argument, and supposing that the death of the body, with the various temporal calamities that attend it, constituted the penalty of the broken law ; even then would not death be eternal, seeing that the doctrine of a resurrection belongs to the mediatorial system ? Still all my labor would thus appear to be in vain. — Perhaps not. The objection may be more specious than solid. Let us try, 1. If Adam had not broken the law, but had secured its reward for himself and his posterity, they should not, ac- cording to the general principle which Paul advances in his argument on the resurrection, have remained here for- ever. As there is a natural body and a spiritual body, our parents and their offspring should have been changed. How would this change have been accomplished ? Unquestiona- bly by the power of God. As manifestly death itself comes not as the simple effect of any physical agency, but as a matter of divine administration ; and it is not to be viewed as a mere physical necessity, but as a decision of the divine judge. Man at first was made no more than " a living soul," and could have no power to change him- self. His inability to raise himself from the dead, would no more argue the eternity of death, than his inability to change himself from a natural into a spiritual body, would argue the eternity of his existence in this world. — The re- surrection therefore involves more questions than the mere issues of law may present. To illustrate my meaning by an analogy. If you have entrusted your funds to an agent, and he has squandered them away, assuredly the next question which arises is, 250 LECTURES ON whether you are able to meet your personal obligation ?— - In the case before us, we have the two systems of social and personal responsibility. Under the first, death has been introduced. Then the question is, whether, under the second, a man can recover himself? If he can, there is nothing in the sentence of the law to prevent him. But man cannot raise himself from the dead, because in his own nature he is nothing more than a living soul. Call back the analogy. If you aue unable to meet your personal engagements when your agent has wasted your means, and as your personal character has not been lost, ano- ther question arises : — w7hat will — what ought — your cre- ditor to do ? Your personal character is the very remedial resource which will attract his attention, and in view of which he will seek for relief. So in the case before us. Adam had committed one offence, but still his personal character invited confidence ; and the personal character of his children is, by his sin, unhurt. What then will God do? According to the nature of the creature he has made, according to the system of personal responsibility which he established, and at the very point where an exertion of his own power would be indispensable even if sin had not been committed, what mav we look to him to do ? — Is it con- trary to philosophy or scripture, that when one system is exhausted, we should draw on the resources of another ? When state objects, so to speak, or political purposes, or the general interests of social life, are preserved, is the divine government so defective as to leave individual in- tegrity unconsidered ? Would an administration so narrow and improvident, be either wise or good ? Did not Jehovah pardon David's sin, while,, yet for public reasons, or because he had given occasion to the enemies of the Lord to bias- pheme, the crime itself was formally punished ? Or must all such considerations be thrown aside as fugitive and irrele- vant, and system be jumbled up with system, merely to give way to the antiquated conjectures of a speculative the« MORAL GOVERNMENT. 261 ology, whose distempered fancies are more sacred, than its arguments are conclusive ? 2. Not only have we two systems whose respective inte- rests must be considered, but the actual circumstances, as these are stated, were arranged to meet those interests. There is nothing in the whole paradisiacal law, to prevent the full development of persojial responsibility, not even in view of transgression. The tree placed in the midst of the garden contemplated, by its own terms, a state of socie- ty in which good and evil should be intermingled. It was not all evil — all death, that was to be introduced. All that was good was not to be destined. Evil should come, but that which was good might remain with it. The ex- tent of the threatened evil must be interpreted by the fact. The death threatened was not perdition — instantaneous and entire. The penalty was expressed in very different lan- guage. Dying, thou shalt die, said the Creator; thus inti- mating a prolonged state of being, though suffering under a mortal infirmity. The fruit of the tree was not the phy- sical agent in executing the penalty ; but the ground, whose deleterious effects would be gradual in their operation. Though Adam forfeited the privileges of the garden, yet he might be returned to the spot whence he was taken. The very nature of the animal system, in that it might be- come mortal and corruptible, while the existence of the spirit is eternal, together with the limited effect produced on the moral nature of our first parents — all these things abundantly evince the political character, and consequently the external influence, of the Adamic institute. No case can be more clear. Every view which it presents looks to a remedial agency as both natural and just ; both wise and good. And when the remedial expedient is so visibly ex- hibited, at every point and on every turn, it would be very 6trange, if the dogma, unrelentingly wrapping up the whole system in the gloom of eternal death, should still be obsti- nately defended. 252 LECTURES ON We must now look at the effects of the fall, as they were visited upon all men. That all men were involved in Adam's official proceedings, must be- evident from the na- ture of the case, as well as from the character of the phy- sical agent employed. The deleterious influence which the ground, as having been cursed, exhales, is universal. There is no escaping from it. How men can dispute the fact, I do not see. But that they should quarrel with the philoso- phy of the fact, as it has been taught, is no matter of won- der. Our nature instinctively revolts from any political doctrines which impute a vindictive character to the Eter- nal, or which would build up despotic institutions on earth. The Spirit of God affords no such instructions to the hu- man mind. And the moral philosopher, in attempting to establish such notions, fails in his argument from a deficien- cy of testimony, and runs counter to nature. Take away the bayonetjind the sword, the gibbet and the stake, the star-chamber and the inquisition, and human beings natural- ly revert to original principles. Hence the controversies of the present age. Church courts will fail in their con- flicts with nature. Death has come upon all men. The body, as the scrip- tures describe it, has become — this mortal, this corruptible. A weakness of the flesh has supervened. Man is not able to do, what he could do, if his animal nature did not labor under this mortal infirmity. Hence he is unable to obey law, which was the rule of his being in its original vigor. Accordingly the Son of God is sent in the likeness of sin- ful flesh, to do that which the law could not do, in that it was weak, through the flesh. Or, in other words, the gos- pel is framed to meet this very weakness, under which our corruptible bodies suffer and groan. Hear Paul. " In me, i. e. in my flesh dwelleth no good thing. I keep my body under, lest, after having preached the gospel to others, I should be a castaway myself. There is a law in my mem- bers, warring against the law of my mind. The flesh lusteth MORAL GOVERNMENT. 253 against the spirit, and the spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other." Hear the Redeemer : — *' The spirit truly is willing, but the flesh is weak." We have already seen that the body, and its appropriate senses, constitute the means by which the spirit acquires its ideas, and the instruments by which it acts. Injure the body or weaken its senses, and the range of the spirit's ideas, as well as the sphere of its action, necessarily becomes limited. Under such circumstances, we cannot do, even what we would do. The power to will may exist where the power to perform is not possessed ; though we are some- times told that human inability lies in the will. A multi- tude of objects are now spread out before me. I see them all. Let me be deprived of my animal organs of vision, and I can see them no more ; but my intellectual power, con- sidered as an attribute of spirit, is not diminished. Restore by medical means my animal organs, and I see again ; but a surgical operation has not restored a lost intellectual attribute. While blind, I would see, if I had the bodily power. When my body dies, my spirit still lives. So when Adam brought death into the world, the body, or our ani- mal nature, became corruptible in consequence of his sin. Beyond this every thing is personal. I would have seen better, and would have acted more powerfully, if my body had been unimpaired in its various faculties ; but still I see and act according to the bodily power left, and for that I am personally responsible. Deny this view, and there is no escape from sheer materialism. There is no subject which theologians have tortured into more shapes, or have pencilled out under a greater variety of profile, than that of human ability and inability. It is really mournful to observe how deeply and awfully myste- rious they have made a very plain point. Certainly it is a very plain statement that, in consequence of Adam's sin superinducing a weakness of the flesh, men cannot obey law ; and it is just as plain that they can obey gospel, be- Vol. I.— 22 354 LECTURES ON cause it is intended to meet and help their infirmities. The whole doctrine of the scriptures is, that man cannot be saved without a Mediator, but that he can be saved with one. And it is certainly very evident that neither un- der law nor gospel, neither before nor since the fall, can man be viewed as independent of the providence of God, or as living in the moral and intellectual world, any more than he does in the physical world, without the co-operating agency of the Holy Spirit. What can be more evident? It is true that this matter has been argued in the scrip- tures : — but why ? The two systems — law and gospel — belong to the history of man. Under the one, evil has been introduced ; under the other, a remedy has been pro- posed. They are, therefore, the legitimate subjects of hu- man thought. Accordingly, in all ages mankind have been reasoning on their respective claims. Nay, so far have they carried their controversial expositions, and so great have been the mistakes into which they have reason- ed themselves, that Jehovah found it necessary to repre- sent the inefficiency of the one, and the remedial agency of the other, under two distinct dispensations — the Mosaic and the Christian. The argument, therefore, which serves to elucidate the original subjects, involves the two dispen- sations ; and the arguments intended to explain the two dis- pensations, involves the original subjects. The Jews mis- took the nature of their external position, and of the pur- pose of election by which they occupied that position. Necessarily they stumbled on a great deal of metaphysical speculation about human ability and inability. Paul had to meet and refute their errors. Since their days chris- tians have mistaken their external position, and the pur- pose of election by which they have been so peculiarly distinguished. They have, in fact, revived judaic notions ; and are consequently involved in all the metaphysical sub- tleties of the as;e in which Paul wrote. But more of this hereafter. MORAL GOVERNMENT. 255 You perceive that I have not denied the fact of man- kind deriving a corrupt nature from Adam. -But then that corrupt nature consists in this — that man has now a mortal and corruptible body. As he originally acquired his ideas by means of his corporeal senses, so he acquires his ideas now. Those senses have become impaired, but the intel- lectual power is not in itself injured or corrupt. It can have no ideas farther than it has the outward means of ac- quiring them. But so far as those means go, it not only can but does acquire them. It is here, where personal re- sponsibility, from the very nature of the case, arises: \vhere ability must be supposed, and beyond which, in re- ference to our personal -nature, the influence of Adam's sin does not and cannot go. There is, indeed, an indis- pensable necessity that a Mediator should be provided : and that his institutions should correspond with the mea- sure of our ability, as the law corresponded with the original ability of Adam. But that Mediator being pro- vided, and his institutions being established, we become personally accountable, and perish by our own fault, if we perish at all. Hence the scriptures write so freely of the lusts of the flesh, and inform us that whenever a man commits sin, he is drawn away of his own lust, and is en- ticed ; while they also describe the gentiles as doing by nature the things contained in the law, and showing the work of the law written on their heart, Man having this corrupt nature, i. e. a corruptible and mortal body , — carrying about him "this body of sin and of death," — having " a law in his members warring against the law of his mind," — goes out into the world to associate with beings of his own kind, and corrupted like himself. At the same time the whole material system is, to him, like his own constitution, an intermixture of good and evil : interesting all his sympathies, and forming the resources re- pared me," suitable in its constitution and temperament for the great work it was intended to perform. This was necessary, according to the views we have advanced in relation to the nature of the paradisiacal institute, and the effects of the fall. And Paul says: — " It behooved him in all things to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in all things pertaining to God. — It became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the Captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings. — Such an high priest became us, who was holy, harmless, undented, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens. — We have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities, but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin" It was in- dispensably necessary that our Saviour should wear our nature ; but it was equally necessary that he should be without sin. This was the great point to be gained. His being "the Seed of the woman," while yet he had no mortal father, accomplished the important end ; and in a way to which no one who understands the doctrines of correct legal jurisprudence, or can state an accurate and consistent view of the physiology belonging to the case, could offer one rational or philosophical objection. As the constitution of the mediatorial person is not an arbitrary matter, whose attributes are to be considered in- dependently of the nature of the system which is calling for relief; the first point which claims our attention is the application of an original principle to the case in hand. Man has no innate ideas, but acquires his ideas by means of his corporeal senses. Inferring the existence of a su- preme intelligence from the works around him, and which MORAL GOVERNMENT. 275 are intended to afford, through those senses, the evidence of Jehovah's eternal power and Godhead, he naturally seeks after personal intercourse with Jehovah. To meet that desire and view, Jehovah had previously assumed ex- ternal form ; and under this manifestation he is denomina- ted Jehovah-ELOHiM, or the Word. Man is now fallen. According to our argument, his bodily senses are impaired. Can he then enjoy that personal intercourse which his nature demands, and if not, what shall be done 1 I answer, that ' agreeably to the fact recorded in the biography of Moses, man could not, in his lapsed state, see the face of God and live. Either then the whole doctrine of personal intercourse must be abandoned, or another manifestation, suited to man's present condition, must be afforded. Here, therefore, in the nature of man, and in the nature of his circumstances, arises the necessity for Christ's divinity. And if this view be correct, the doctrine of Christ's divini- ty— which, as you know, I never for a moment denied — is put to rest. No man who admits that our argument is scriptural and conclusive, can ever have even a lingering doubt upon that controverted point ; — in relation to which philosophy and philology, reason and revelation, history and authority, reproach and invective, have all been sum- moned and forced to respond to the appeals of angry dis- putants : and about which, after all the controversy, the common mind has not obtained one clear or well defined idea in reference to its heavenly principle. The spirit of Arius and of the council of Nice, which at an early day acted out a very gloomy tragedy in the name of the Head of the church, seems still to superintend the angry conflict. Whether any thing can be offered to reconcile the combat- ants, prejudiced and committed as they are, is a very doubtful matter; or rather men are too sectarian, and too full of the philosophy of other times, calmly or patiently to judge of any argument which is not expressed in their own technicalities, 276 LECTURES ON The necessity for a second personal manifestation of Je- hovah, or for an exact image of his Person, having occur- red, he has been pleased, so far as man is concerned, to divest himself of the form of God, and to take the form of a servant; or instead of exhibiting himself as Jehovah- Eloiiim — whom no man can see and live — to reveal him- self in Christ, or as the word made flesh. Ac- cordingly the Mediator has been represented as a divine personage, by the old and new testament writers, as wTell as by his own assertions, before he appeared and while he was upon earth. The details on this subject are highly interesting, and the progress of our discussion requires us to pursue them. When Cain was born, Eve remarked, — "I have gotten the man, Jehovah his very self." She does not appear to have noticed or understood the peculiarity of the promise, as it was afterwards explained ; yet seems fully to have understood the fact that the deliverer should be divine — should be Jehovah himself. What was her train of re- flection, or wherein the fallacy of her calculation con- sisted, we are not informed. But she appears to have cherished her mistake ; and to have incorporated it in the early habits of thinking, which she produced in the mind of her first-born. Her observation- is the only hint given, from which we can ascertain any reason for his dereliction. His character betrays mortified pride, and disappointed ambition, together with excited envy on ac- count of his brother's higher promise. — The case of Rebec- ca furnishes an analagous fact in the history of maternal mistakes. At the close of the scene when Abraham was required to offer his son in sacrifice, he called the name of the spot — Jehovah-jireh — saying, in this mountain Jehovah shall be seen. The deportment of the patriarch, including the con- fession of the divine name which he thus made, has been celebrated in the scriptures, as a brilliant specimen of the MORAL GOVERNMENT. 077 righteousness of faith. The situation in which Isaac was placed, when bound on the sacrificial pile, and under the uplifted knife of a beloved father, who was reposing all his confidence in the ability of " Almighty God" to raise his son from the dead ; the relief which was granted when ano- ther victim was provided ; — the whole matter, with all its re- ferences, forms a beautiful figure of the mediatorial sys- tem, the patriarchal faith in which is so highly commended. As Abraham was constituted a covenant head, and the heir of the world ; as he did become an official head, under whose auspices two subsequent dispensations were erected ; and, as in his. seed all the families of the earth should be blessed, there can be no mistake in the comment he makes ; while the facts must be considered as a typical pledge of some future and more glorious transaction. Somewhere in the development of God's purposes of love, events must transpire, in which this singular pledge should be redeemed, and to which this scenic exhibitionrnost distinctly and hap- pily alluded. Accordingly the reference points to the sa- crifice of the Son of God, when, on mount Moriah or Cal- vary, he appeared to take away sin by the sacrifice of him- self. He with whom Abraham conversed, and to whom he offered sacrifice, was the angel, or messenger of Jehovah, of whom mention is frequently made ; and who is described as the lord, that was afterwards to come into his temple. On the present occasion he said to Abraham — "Thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only son, from me." But other facts occurred in the history of this princely patriarch, as well as in that of his immediate successors, Isaac and Jacob. When he was " ninety years old and nine, Jehovah appeared unto him, and said unto him, I am the Almighty God, walk before me and be thou perfect." — Again "Jehovah appeared unto him in the plains of Mamre : and he sat in the tent door in the heat of day. And he lifted up his eyes and looked, and lo! three men stood by him." After this he held a long and familiar conversation Vol. I.— 24 278 LECTURES ON with one of these, who is represented to have been Jeho- vah. Moses was explicitly told by Jehovah — " I appear- ed unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob as, or by the name, or form, of Almighty God ; but by my name, or personal form of Jehovah, was I not known unto them.. All these appearances in the biography of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, were in the form of man ; and the facts no pre- sumptuousness can deny, nor ingenuity fritter away. David utters a remarkable declaration, which is after- wards quoted by the Redeemer in elucidation of his own official pretensions ; — "The Lord said unto my Lord, sit thou at my right hand." The term Lord, as it was originally used, ever imported inferiority on the part of him who used it. David, in using it, then referred to the superiority of him of whom he spake. Hence the difficulty which the pharisees felt in answering the question — "If David in spirit call him lord how is he his son ?" David, as the king of Israel had no superior, but the God of Israel. Isaiah describes a vision which he enjoyed, when the royal magnificence of the heavenly court was spread out be- fore his view. That which the prophet beheld, an apostle tells us, was the glory of Christ. The prophet Malachi closes the old testament with the divine promise — " Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me : and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the mes- senger (angel) of the covenant, whom ye delight in : behold, he shall come, saith Jehovah of hosts." Jehovah here proclaims — my messenger shall prepare the way before me-t— the Lord is to come into his temple— and the angel of the covenant is the Lord, who was to come. This passage the Redeemer interprets as referring to John the baptist, who came to prepare the way of the Highest ; and whose official employment, for which he had been specifically de* precations, which so frequently occur in the book of psalms. Perhaps a reference to the peculiarity of the dispensation under which the psalmist lived, and which we have been reviewing, may clear up the whole difficulty. The Re- deemer himself explained a parallel case by such a refer- ence, when, passing through Samaria, the inhabitants of a certain village refused to receive him, "because his face was as though he would go to Jerusalem." The disciples, hurt at the indignity offered to their Master, asked him to permit them to pray for fire from heaven, even as Elias did, to consume these Samaritans. Jesus instantly rebuked the unreasonable request: — "Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of; for the Son of Man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them." To save their lives — what is the force of his reason ? or how does it bear on the official character and conduct of Elias ? I would paraphrase the Redeemer's answrer thus — " Ye know not the nature of the dispensation under which you are called to minister. Such a prayer might do for Elias, who officiated under a minis- tration of death ; but ye are called to officiate under a min- istration of life, whose head is a quickening Spirit — the resurrection and the life — the Lord of life and glory.* If * For such a view of the term spirit, see Acts xix. 2 — Rom- viii. 15—2. Tim. 1. 7. MORAL GOVERNMENT. 35 then the dispensation under which Elias lived, justified his prayer, or if his high official character entitled him to inflict death, the penalty of the law whose integrity he sought to restore ; the same justification may relieve David's official character, when, viewed either as a prophet or a king, he appeals to the great head of the nation — to Jehovah, con- cerning whom Paul says, "our God is a consuming fire" — to sustain his own law by the infliction of its known and in- curred penalties. I know not in what other way to ex- plain, either the prayer of Elias, or the imprecations of Da- vid. And if this explanation be correct, it will unques- tionably follow that, we have no more right to utter the im- precations of David, than the disciples had to offer the pray- er of Elias. The nature of the new dispensation forbids both, or it forbids neither; and affects praise as much as it can affect prayer. But to return. Perhaps, in reference to the mission of the Spirit, it may be asked, how can He be said to be sent, according to the ideas of the divine manifestations which I have advanced ? Observe the terms in which the Redeem- er speaks on this subject : — and when "he is come, he will guide you into all truth ; for he shall not speak of himself, but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak ; he shall o-lorifv me, for he shall receive of mine and shall show it unto you." Of course it is not abstract deity to which your attention is called, when the scriptures refer you to the Holy Spirit. The Spirit, Jesus said, shall not speak of himself. All the phraseology which is employed, belongs to Jehovah as manifested in personal form ; and the com- ing of the Spirit is, like the ascension of Immanuel, a trans- action which derives its propriety and its phrase from the nature of the case. On the principle of similitude, which is the professed object of the whole, and on which all the circumstances are made to turn, there is no more difficulty nor impropriety, than when Paul speaks of being present in 36 LECTURES ON spirit, while absent in body. The Spirit of a manifested God, or of a visible and glorious personage, of whom spirit and form or body may be predicated, might be said to come or to be sent, without any far-fetched idea being presented to the mind. We can have no other ideas of God, than those which are attendant upon, and consistent with, such a manifestation ; and any incongruity which we suppose our- selves to perceive from the fact of the Spirit being sent, arises from the labored and unsatisfactory attempt we have made to form a conception of abstract deity. — Jehovah, as manifested, says, my Spirit, in the same way in which any of us speak, when we say — my Spirit. — "The spirit of the prophets are subject to the prophets." The language does not barely cover the idea of God's sending himself. It is God manifested, who is represented to us as both spirit and form, who says my spirit, contradistinguished from form — that form being removed from our view. We no longer know Christ after the flesh. The object of the mediatorial work is to reconcile man to God. In this view, I presume, any one may distinctly recognise a remedial operation, which addresses itself to man as a free, intelligent, and responsible agent. The very term imports one of the highest intellectual efforts which a rational being can make ; implies an action on his mind of a variety of considerations, both pleasing and active; and indicates a state of heart in which a thousand evil passions may have been repressed, or have given way to the liveliest exercise of the best affections. The result is one in which, kindness and love, argument and entreaty, expostulation and warning, are employed ; and where mere force is the feeblest and worst of all means that can be used. Accord- ingly both "the word" and " the ministry of reconcilia- tion," are intellectual in their character and influence ; and never have been indebted to the physical arm for any part of the moral achievement contemplated. "Now then," says an apostle, " we are ambassadors for Christ, as though MORAL GOVERNMENT. 37 God did beseech you by us, we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God." Hence it is that we are charged not to resist. Hence it is that we are required to believe. And hence it is that the fault is our own, if we are not saved. Having eyes, we see not ; having ears, we hear not; and having hearts, we understand not. But submit- ting ourselves to other influences, and yielding to the lusts of the flesh, to the corruptions of the world, and to the temptations of Satan, and that in defiance of every sugges- tion which divine kindness has made, we bring everlasting ruin on ourselves. The reconciled man exerts all his% intellectual energies under the directing control of truth, whose evidence has been brought home demonstrably to his own mind, while all his feelings fully accord. He mortifies his flesh, " keeps his body under," watches against temptation, and lives above the world, that he may walk in communion with God. Christ is in his heart the hope, of glory ; and he lives by faith on redeeming love. He is distinguished by the fruits of the Spirit, who dwells in him. His business is to glorify God, to do good, and finally to attain to everlasting joy. His treasures, his conversation, his heart, are all in heaven, and he is patiently, but affectionately, waiting for the coming of the Lord. His path is like the shining light, which " shineth more and more unto the perfect day." "Drawn with the cords of a man, and with bands of love," he leaves the things which are behind, and reaches forward to the things that are before. And when at last he has finished his course, he cheerfully bids the world adieu, lays off the panoply in which he had mantained his successful conflict, "wipes from his brow the dust and heat of battle," and departs to dwell with his Lord forever. To produce such a change in human beings, who are found devoted to the sensualities of life, and alienated in their minds by wicked works, is the avowed object of the Mediator's righteousness, and of the Vol. II.- 59 LECTURES ON Spirit's operations. And the whole proceeds from setting up the kingdom of God in human hearts. It may be very readily conceived how the righteousness of Christ, accomplished by his becoming obedient unto death, should effect this reconciliation. It illustrates and exem- plifies the connexion between righteousness and life, which is the great moral lesson we have to learn ; and which consti- tutes the very elementof our intellectual existence. It un- folds to us the principle of moral responsibility, on which our everlasting destinies depend. It manifests the divine per- fections with all their attractive influence ; and exhibits the goodness and portrays^the love of God, in the most inviting and gracious form. It is the visible and demonstrative in- terpretation of all those moral principles which are appli- cable to our condition as subjects of the divine government, and as living in a world of sin and sorrow. It affords a lu- minous and lovely portrait of the glory of the Lord, by be- holding or reflecting which, we become changed into the same image, from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord. It consecrates a hallowed spot where the Lord reveals his presence ; that by communion with him, he may leave the full and vivid impression of his own pure^ and holy character upon our spirits. It creates, and bestows all those secondary agencies, through which, as his own ap- pointed means, he holds a purifying fellowship with our in- most thoughts. These, and such like results, make up its characteristic operations in a sanctifying process, which the Spirit carries on within us. He who submits his heart and yields his affections, feels himself to be in the holiest of all, and in communion with his heavenly Father. He calls up to recollection the lusts he has indulged, the sins he has committed, the mercies he has abused ; and how freely and copiously he weeps, repenting of all that he has done ! He looks to his Saviour's virtues and sorrows, learns the nature of his own being, perceives the truth of the gospel brought home to him " in demonstration of the Spirit and with pow- MORAL GOVERNMENT. 39 er," and deeply convinced, he believes. He listens to the promises of future glory, and withdrawing his eyes from the vanities of life, he, in the full swellings of hope, trans- fers his affections to heaven. He looks around upon a guilty, dying world, and — his heart bursting with the tenderest sympathies for his brethren — he tells them, in impassioned strains, what the Lord has done for his soul ; seeks to con- vince them that there is a living, regenerating, sanctifying influence about the truth as it is in Jesus, when it is admit- ted into the heart ; and beseeches them to be reconciled unto God. Ought not such effects to follow, if the gospel be what it pretends to be; if man be an intellectual creature; and if Jehovah communes with his mind, or deals with him on the principle of personal responsibility ? Must not such effects necessarily follow, unless the hearers of the gospel resist the moral influence, which the God of love thus brings to bear upon their own intellectual nature ? Is not power — power to reconcile, to regenerate, to sanctify, to elevate, the human mind, and analogous with the operations of power in all other directions — here most abundantly disclosed ? See you not that God is thus working — working mightily — in you, according to his good pleasure ? and, by his Spirit, convincing you of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment? Feel you not, that the gospel is a competent instrument of spiritual action on your own hearts ; that the cross of Christ is suited to your earthly condition ; and that your sympa- thizing high-priest is able to succor you in your temptation* — is able to save, even to the uttermost, all that come unto God by him ? Have you ever heard a "joyful sound, like it ? Has the proud philosopher ever displayed such wisdom ? or the haughty formalist ever manifested such power? Behold, sinner, what a glorious foundation God hath laid in Zion ! Lay down your weapons of rebellion ? Quit your unbecoming and ruinous strife with your heaven- ly Father. Listen to his exhortations. Harden your hearts 40 LECTURES ON no more against the yearnings of his Spirit. Calculate not, that after you shall have rejected his Son, there " remaineth a sacrifice for sin." Think not, that mercy will plead your cause, and avert your impending doom, while your nature is unsanctified, and your soul unreconciled. Other founda- tion no man can lay, than that which is laid, even the Lord Jesus Christ. Reject him, and you are undone forever, because there is no other medium of reconciliation — no method, consistent with your own intellectual nature, by v/hich you can be renewed in the spirit of your mind. An unholy being is prepared for nothing, either in his own bosom, or according to the established principles of all moral government, but perdition. You might as well sup- pose that a hurricane would contribute to vegetation, as imagine that an unsanctified man would be meet for heaven. But in speaking of the righteousness of Christ, it may farther be inquired, what connexion it has with the " ac- tual transgressions" of men ? or those which are committed by them as living on their own responsibility ? — In the text which has been so often quoted on these general subjects, this question is very explicitly answered : — "God is in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing unto men their trespasses." Can any other explanation be desired ? But men are so full of their ideas of abstract justice, and reason so exclusively on principles of mere law, that they have substituted a series of theological enigmas for the riches of grace. Taking their own range of thought, they dwell in deepest sadness on the forbidding and chilling views of divine sovereignty which they have formed ; and sit down wilted and writhing under the frowns of an angry Judge, as though they had committed the unpardonable sin ; when they should have laid their heads upon a sa- viour's bosom, and drank, yea, drank abundantly, from the fountain of his forgiving love. How often we have yearn- ed over such troubled spirits ! And that, when, perhaps, we have scarcely escaped from the toils ourselves I moral government. 41 Let us inquire after the principle. Theologians have rea- soned from the nature of law. But are we under law ? If we are not under law, their premises are inaccurate, and no wonder their conclusion is so troublesome ; — for what can the human mind ever gain by false reasoning ? The real fact is, that we are not under lew, but are under grace. The law gives sin all its power; but being under grace, "sin shall not have dominion over us." Christ having become the end of the law, by fulfilling its righteousness, we are placed under gospel ; and our inferences must now be drawn from the nature of grace. And what may we not expect from grace ? What will not the God of grace do for us, seeing that he has no pleasure in the death of the sinner, and has loved us so much as to give his only begotten Son to die for us ? Ke is our loving Father— what may his chil- dren not ask for ? After all his professions and declara- tions of fatherly kindness, can ministers of his holy sanc- tuary still describe him as keeping up a judicial process on principles of inexorable law, urging it even to an extremity — and would you believe them ? Would any of you, being a father, give to your son a stone, when he asks for a piece of bread ? or a scorpion, when he asks for an egg? What then mean all these fine-spun theories, and petrifying denuncia- tions, which drink up the spirit by the anguish they create, when prophets and apostles are singing and preaching ' grace divine, and when the providence of God, in "the riches of his goodness, forbearance, and long-suffering," stands inviting, commanding, entreating, reasoning, expos- tulating— waiting for the sinner to return ? Surely minis- terial men have misunderstood their commission, and the christian church has not read aright the charter of her pri- vileges and her hopes. And yet these very dogmas which distort our heavenly Father's image, and pierce our own hearts with so many sorrows, are antique traditions, which official men are so laboriously and fiercely defending, and *4 42 LECTURES ON which parents are so inconsiderately teaching to their children. Perhaps my remarks may be charged with a tendency to licentiousness. Does such a tendency belong to the nature of grace ? or does it acquire that tendency when it is put into contrast with law, and when it is exhibited as forming the characteristic of a remedial government in the hands of the Son of God? Is a reconciled man a creature of unbridled lusts and unhallowed propensities ? Or, as Paul would express the idea, "can he who is dead to sin, live any longer therein?" Is there any immoral or anti- philosophic attribute belonging to an administration of love ? But then are not our actual sins pardoned for Christ's sake! Most assuredly. The scriptures have explicitly de- clared the fact. We are all called upon to be "kind one to another, tender hearted, forgiving one another, even as God, for Christ's sake, hath forgiven us." Nor is it un- common with the bible to represent us as pardoned for Jehovah's name sake. On what principle? The ground was cursed, and might have been blessed, for Adam's sake. Sodom and Gomorrah would have been saved for the sake of fifty, or even of ten, righteous men. And why ? If the practical result of Christ's righteousness be to reconcile the world ; and if, when the mediatorial kingdom has been ac- complished, the redeemed are presented as personally holy, should pardon for their many transgressions be with- held? Is not this gracious result declared in the text, — "God is, in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing unto men their trespasses?'1 What would you do with a reconciled, a reformed, a holy man ? What would an earthly father do with a returning prodigal? Under such circumstances is- not forgiveness natural, wise, equitable, and right? Has not God explicitly declared, that — "If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness?" MORAL GOVERNMENT. 43 Could the issue of law itself go any further than to make- holy men eternalty happy ? And would not all this, flow- ing from the practical efficiency of the Redeemer's right- eousness, under a government oflove, be the fruit of grace, which the redeemed may celebrate through eternity ? — Christ's righteousness, as perfected by his death, thus be- comes the propitiation, or that official transaction, on whose principles, as intrinsically excellent, as most happi- ly appropriate to the case, and as sustained by the law it- self, God can be favorable to our world, and by which, or for whose sake, he may extend pardon freely and fully, without infringing on the nicest point of government. It may be farther objected, that the doctrine advanced exhibits the sinner as justified by the merit of his own works. To this I reply, that merit is another theological . term, whose technical obliquity has injured many a spiritu- al mind. Besides, it is a term which belongs, in the com- mon use that is made of it, to the administration of law, under which we do not live. As to justification, its details, though much involved by theological sophistry, are very plain and simple on the scriptural page. No man ever can be "justified by deeds of law," or obedience to law ab- stractedly considered ; because no man can obey the law ab- is what " the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh." Here arises the necessity for a Mediator. This Mediator having obej-ed, or fulfilled the righteousness of the law, all men who had been previously brought into condemnation by Adam's sin, are brought into a justifica- tion of life. That righteousness being produced, all men are put under the mediatorial government, and are requir- ed to believe and obey the gospel, on their own personal responsibility, and under institutions of grace which are most favorable to the discharge of that responsibility. He that believeth is "justified by faith," he that believeth not is condemned for his unbelief. And at the last day, when "God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ, 44 LECTURES ON according to the gospel," every man shall stand justified or condemned, according to the facts belonging to his indi- vidual case. — " I say unto you," said the blessed Master, — " That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment. For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned." And again I ask, what else would you do with a righteous man than justify him ? or with an unright- eous man than condemn him ? But theologians have con- founded " deeds of laws," predicated of the government of law, and irrespective of a Mediator, so much with "works" performed under the mediatorial administration of the gospel, that every plain reader of the bible is thrown into perpetual perplexities ; and no one can tell the precise place or value of good works. — True they tell us, that good works are evidences ; but are not deeds of law evidences too? The question is not f I, and hence the dif- ficulties which have arisen. I may, perhaps, be censured, as having left out of view altogether the atonement. But this certainly would be most careless and uncandid misapprehension. For I have been most distinctly portraying the reconciliation to vour view. Go back again, and see if such be not the fact. I have not used the word — atonement, it is true. And are all your ideas to be thrown into confusion, your preju- dices to be called up in all their vigor, and a scriptural ar- gument to be scorned as unworthy of consideration, be- cause a particular word has not been used ? Do you not see what an unhappy strife has been gendered by words! Oh, but the word atonement, you will say, is too important to have been left out ! Then I must assign my reasons for the omission. And, 1. After all the talk about it, the word occurs in our translation of the new testament but once ;* and there, as every greek scholar knows, the original term so translated. *Rom. v. 11. MORAL GOVERNMENT. 45 ought to have been rendered re conciliation. What then is the meaning of all this difficulty, which is so constantly felt in relation to it ? One would have supposed that the word occured on every page of the new testament. — It will not do to reply that the thing itself is every where pre- sented ; for the thing itself I have endeavored most faith- fully to describe. 2. The etymology of the word evinces it to be per- fectly consistent with the argument stated. Ment is the common termination adopted to form a noun : as for exam- ple— -pumsh-ment, bland'ish-ment, refresh-me?it , accomplish- ment. So here, ztone-ment. The termination ment, is merely added to the two words at and one, and makes at- one-ment, which means the being at one, or agreed, or reconciled. 3. The word has a technicality about it, which employs it to represent something in theological controversy, that is different from the official object which it is intended to de- signate. I shall hereafter use the term in this particular sense, or as importing reconciliation. This mediatorial work, Christ as a prophet proclaims ; as a priest he performs it; and as a king he has been exalted to administer, or reign on its principles. He is "a merci- ful and faithful high priest," he is exalted to be a "Prince and a Saviour, to give or grant repentance unto Israel and remission of sins;" — and this is the mediatorial adminis- tration under which we all live ; under which all have lived from the beginning, or since the first promise was given ; and by which all shall be judged at last. — May God Almighty give us wisdom to appreciate the privi- leges of grace, that we may be found ready for judgment at last ; and that it may not be our condemnation that we refused to believe in and obey him, who by his righteous- ness has brought us all into a justification of life. 46 LECTURES ON LECTURE XII. •Application of the mediatorial constitution — General views — Origin of Election — Object of the covenant with Abraham — Mature and Reason of the two " covenants" — Condition of the gentiles — Light of Mature — Priesthood of Melchisedec — Priesthood in general— Design of election. The extent of the mediatorial institute is a subject of very great interest. No theological point has called forth more argument, or excited more feeling. It has already been presented incidently in the preceding lecture. The nature of the institute could not have been discussed with- out stating its extent ; because the terms of the apostolic argument, which I have been endeavoring to analyse, in- cluded both subjects. In f xct, the nature of the Redeemer's work cannot else be ascertained. If Adam's transgression involved the whole race, so that all are constituted sinners and are brought into condemnation, and Christ's righteous- ness did not extend to the whole race, so that all are con- stituted righteous, and are brought into justification of life ; then Adam could not have been a figure of Christ. Much less could the abounding of grace over sin have been sustained. Such is the view afforded by the apostle ; — a view which includes both the efficacy and the application of the remedial statute. All the general principles on which I have been reason- ing lead to the same result. Jill mankindh&ve been brought into a state of sin and condemnation by a fault not their own; all the principles of justice and equity, from which the mediatorial constitution itself arises, are necessarily due to all, and necessarily applicable to all. The theolo- MORAL GOVERNMENT. 47 gical restrictions which have been arbitrarily imposed, and ingeniously and variously defended, instead of confer- ring a favor on some, take away a right from all ; — a right belonging to man's existence, and awarded by the very constitution of our being. The divine attributes, of which the mediatorial constitu- tion forms so beautiful a display, necessarily bring all men under the remedial operation which that constitution has introduced. Controvertists speak of the goodness, and wisdom, and power, and righteousness of Jehovah, in a sys- tem of government which does not respond to the person- al responsibility of its subjects ; which not only leaves them unpitied and unassisted in a train of sorrows and infirmi- ties, that are not to be traced to their own sin ; but which condemns them as personally responsible under its admin- istration, and for favors and privileges that have not been bestowed. It is impossible that any argument should jus- tify such proceedings ; or that the scriptures should state any views of the divine character so inconsistent with its essential attributes. The nature of man, as being qualified to acquire ideas bv means of his corporeal senses, renders it as practicable to apply a remedial ordinance to all as to one. One man will be, on all accurate and consistent principles, as respon- sible as another man, for that which he sees, hears, and has a "heart to understand.'''' And no reason can be assigned why any man should not be under the common moral re- sponsibilities of the divine government, any more than that a reason can be assigned why any man shall not enjoy the common privileges of his existence. The nature of the remedial institute, or the mediatorial righteousness of the Son of God, being, as has been shown, an exterior exhibition addressed to the human spirit through the bodily senses, brings one man within its range as well as another man. A doctrine of election cannot be sustain- ed under those circumstances, which excludes any man 48 LECTURES ON from seeing, hearing or knowing. And hence it is, that the condemnation of men does not consist in this, that there was no light, but that the light did shine, and they loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. Their condemnation is this — "That which may be known of God, is manifest among them ; for God hath showed it un- to them." — But " they hold the truth in unrighteousness; — when they knew God, they glorified him not as God — they did not like to retain God in their knowledge." Such are the scriptural comments on the subject. God does not, by any sovereign legislation, render it impossible for men to know, love, and obey the truth. The mediatorial righte- ousness of the second Adam is, like the sun in the firma- ment, intended for all — and all may enjoy the light and heat if they will. Our ecclesiastical lords would limit di- vine grace, and curtail the blessings of reconciliation by ar- bitrary statute ; but God spreads his tender mercies over all his works. In the chapters before us it is certainly as plain, that the promise given after the fall, expresses the mode of admin- istration to which Adam and his children were subjected: as that the law, promulged in paradise, included himself and children in its operations. They were all without any exception exposed to death, reduced to toil and sorrow, and involved alike in the same knowledge of good and evil. They all have the same attributes of character, the same mental and corporeal faculties, and are placed in the same circumstances of life. It may be said that all these effects were the results of Adam's sin, and prove nothing in favor of our argument. Be patient for a moment. — Theologians do not mean to abandon their own ground, as that was formerly exhibited ; viz. that the sentence executed was not equal to the sen- tence threatened.* If they do abandon their ground, then as "mankind would not be spiritually dead in Adam, they * Lecture VII. MORAL GOVERNMENT. 49 would be under the mediatorial institute. If theologians do not abandon that ground, then, by their own showing, all mankind are under a penalty, whose operations are re- stricted by the mediatorial institute. They may take either side of this dilemma. But still farther, all those other cir- cumstances, which attended on the early annunciation of the Saviour, and which were purely mediatorial in their re- ferences, are as universal in their application as the conse- quences of Adam's sin. The enmity between mankind and the serpent — the cherubim — the sacrificial institution — the idea of Jehovah manifested in the form of man, or of a virgin-born Elohim — all of which are purely evangelical, and are every where to be noticed among men, or go as far as death and the knowledge of good and evil have gone. Or if these distinct matters are lacking under any particular condition of society, the mediatorial^m is prominent in some peculiar and interesting form. — The universality of the mediatorial symbols offers an irrefragable argument in behalf of the universality of the institute itself. While all these details are instructive and evident, there is notin- corparated with them any — not even the most distant — hint of any election restricting the operation, or application of the mediatorial plan. Election, as the term is used by the inspired writers, comes into view long afterwards ; and for specific purposes, which shall be stated in their own place. Tbe mediatorial institute is the present and the gracious legislation of divine wisdom, framed in coincidence with man's personal reponsibilities ; and you must either admit its universality, or deny those responsibilities. The particular text which I have quoted as interchange- able with the first promise, and which I selected on account of the precision of its terms, ascribes the very same lati- tude to the mediatorial work. — " God was in Christ, recon- ciling the world unto himself." — The World. — I am fully aware of the exception which may be taken to this term, inasmuch as it is sometimes to be understood in a limit-* Vol. II.— 5 50 LECTURES ON ed sense. But it is not always to be so considered. The exception may be cheerfully conceded ; and yet, notwith- standing, the most fastidious theologue must admit that the world may mean the world. And perhaps, when he shall carefully observe the use of the term in the new tes- tament, he may find it utterly impossible to sustain its limit- ed sense, in application to the Redeemer's kingdom, by any ingenuity which may be employed. This philological difficulty I shall now endeavor to bring distinctly to view : and for this purpose, shall arrange the texts I may quote in three distinct classes. 1. "The Word, who was afterwards made flesh, was in the beginning with God; and the Word was God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thinf made, that was made. He was in the world, and the world was made by hjm, and the world knew him not." The idea here asserted is very frequently stated in the scriptures in other language : thus — " By him were all things cre- ated that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and in- visible." He is "the heir of all things" — the Son be- in°- the heir of the Father's official prerogative, which ex- tended to all things. Throughout the old testament too the God of Israel is continually represented as the Crea- tor of heaven and earth. To the Word also has been ascribed the whole work of a sustaining and overruling providence. " Who being the brightness of glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power." " By him all things consist." The remark that I wish to make upon this class of texts, which every reader of the scriptures knows might have been much enlarged, is, that the world, meaning all things, was made by him who was " in the form of God." Of course, when "the Word was made flesh" and taber- nacled among men, he came into his own world which he himself had framed, and which he continually upheld. MORAL GOVERNMENT. 51 Hence the apostle John remarks — " He came unto his own, and his own received him not." What is there unseemly or incongruous in the idea that the Redeemer should come to save and bless Ms own ? It may be replied, that the apos- tle refers in that phrase to the Jewish nation ; or as Paul would say — " his own house." That may, or may not be so. It may not be so, because they who did not receive him, were those who did not know him ; but they are not stated to have been the Jews ; for in the preceding verse it is said — " He was in the world and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not." But let the terms, his own, be restricted to the Jews, yet still his own did not re- ceive him, and nothing is made out for the " limited atone- ment," which is appropriated to the elect; because the elect, agreeably with the doctrine maintained concerning them, will receive him. And if, by any show of argument, the elect could here be introduced as the objects of his me- diatorial kindness, yet they become so by virtue of his par- ticular property in them, as being given to him by the Fa- ther. But this idea of property will destroy the argument it is intended to support ; for the whole world is his proper- ty, inasmuch as he made it. So also Paul reasons in his epistle to the Hebrews. Nor can any fair reason be assign- ed why the Redeemer, as being God manifested, should not bless the world ; seeing that the Creator, by whom the world was made, was God manifested. 2. The Redeemer is declared to be invested with all power in heaven and in earth ; to have all things ^ut under his feet ; to be the head over all things, unto whom even- knee shall bow, and every tongue shall swear. He is also said to be "the seed" of Abraham; and Abraham is de- signated as " the heir of the world," and that too by vir- tue of the righteousness of faith. Noah also, who, every- one knows, was the heir of the world, is emphatically styled " the heir of the righteousness of faith ;" then, the world, as such; has a deep interest in all that belongs to the rights 5-2 LECTURES ON eousness of faith, which is the very peculiarity of the medi- atorial institute ; so that Christ, as Mediator, has the whole world put into his hand, governs it by mediatorial law, and awards to it mediatorial privileges. It is true, that various dispensations have been establish- ed, some of which have conferred their special favors on certain portions of mankind. The patriarchal dispensation, erected with Adam, and afterwards revived with Noah, was universal in its application. It was mediatorial, for its cha- racteristic was the righteousness of faith ; and yet it was co-extensive with the world. The Mosaic dispensation was confined to the Jews. And the new testament dis- pensation has, thus far, been actually ©onfined to a part of the gentiles. But these two latter dispensations were not designed to shut out the rest of the world from the benefits of the first, as though they had no interest in the righteous- ness of faith, which had been preached to them from the beginning. So far from such a denunciation being the ob- ject of the two subsequent "ministrations," they, in com- mon with the first dispensation, were set up by the Re- deemer himself, as Paul explicitly declares : — " God hath," he says, "in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds, or dispensations, or ages. The Jewish ritual he enacted as " being in the form of God ;" and the gospel he has proclaimed as " the Word made flesh." Both of these, "the law" and "the gospel," he has established for special purposes, which I shall presently un- dertake to explain ; but neither of them was intended to set aside, or to revoke, mediatorial law, as given to all men immediately after the fall ; and therefore neither of them militates against the broad fact that he is the Saviour of THe WORLD. 3. ~ he would be entitled to rule : and as the first-born of every creature, he rules over all. According to this view, election is still an official affair, ■'and the purpose of election." which came in after- wards as an appendage of the two dispensations, was onlv a modification of the original principles of government. — Then other children, besides the first-begotten, did not cease to be members of the family ; but were members of the family under rule, and had a common interest in the rnment under which they were placed. And when Christ is made the First-begotten among men, or the Heir of all things, all other human beings are children of God. None of them, by such a political transaction which con- stitutes the Son of God the Head of every man, loses his membership in the family. All have a common interest in the mediatorial government ; and the discus- sion which controverts that common interest, and assert? that " redemption is particular,'" that Christ did not die for all men, or that his righteousness is not intended for all, is both puerile and anti-scriptural. To say that he MORAL GOVERNMENT. 117 died for the elect alone, is to proclaim that he died only for official men ; and is to allot the bread as well as the cup in the Lord's supper, and the things signified thereby, to the priesthood. Who is prepared for such a result ? The priesthood alone to be saved ! In consistency with the principle of exposition thus ad- vanced, the sanctification of Jacob's seed occurs, the scrip- tures themselves being judge. For when Moses was sent to Pharoah, the message he delivered was couched in this lan- guage:— " Thus saith the Lord, Israel is my son, even my first-born : — Let my Son go that he may serve me. And if thou refuse to let him go, behold I will slay thy son, even thy first-born." L e. In the proceedings on which Jehovah entered, when he consecrated the children of Abraham, the Israelites stood, to the rest of the nations, in a relation correspondent with that in which the first-born stood to the other members of his family. It was alto- gether official. And if the gentiles are brought in now, they occupy the same official position — like Seth, taking the place from which Cain by transgression fell. And as Seth bore the image and likeness of his father, officially considered, so now the gentile church has been conformed to the image of the Son of God, according to the predes- tination, or "the purpose of election," winch Jehovah had formed. In confirmation of the preceding view, it deserves to be further remarked — 1. That Cain was excluded from his official station, and forfeited his birth-right or political pre-eminence, not under any arbitrary proceeding, but because he did not do well. 2. That both Peter and Jude speak of these sons of God as angels or messengers, thus substituting one official term for another. 3. That these apostles, instead of describing these par- triarcal chiefs as elected unto eternal life, speak of them as having " sinned" — as cast down to hell — as delivered into 113 LECTURES OX chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment, because they kept not their first principality, but left their own habitation, and went after strange flesh. 4. These apostles also take occasion, from the history of this early apostacy, to warn the christian church against like official treason, perpetrated by men who are called false teachers. I do not know that these early political arrangements re- quire any further elucidation, other than to observe that 11 the purpose of election," which created the two dispen- sations, is only temporal ; and that, when it runs out, human things shall return to their original organization. The millennium is described to us as a political state of universal righteousness and universal knowledge, when so- ciety shall not need, but shall be delivered from, the com- plicated machinery under which we now live. In such an issue, characterized by so much simplicity in official provisions and so much vigor of individual conscience, I imagine that our political and ecclesiastical contests shall ere long be wound up. Not that I suppose there will then be no government — for Chrijt will still be the Head of every man — the man will be the Head of the woman — God will be the Head of Christ — and natcre will honor her first-born. It will be the reign of righteousness. Nor yet that I suppose that church and state will be united, ac- cording to the present import of those technical terms. — For as the church, properly so called, is formed by "the purpose of election," when that purpose shall be accom- plished, the particular organization which it creates shall be done away. Amid the preliminary revolutions which shall " overturn, and overturn, and overturn, until he shall come whose right it is," and through the present contests in which mankind have so determinedly arraigned both their civil and ecclesiastical rulers, may the Prince of Peace graciously and gloriously preside. MORAL GOVERNMENT. 119 Thus far then, or throughout the various facts and the different periods which the discussion of election has led us to review, Jehovah himself appears to be the great au- thor of our social institutions. Civil government is esta- blished by his own ordinance, and the two dispensations constitute what has been called " the mystery of his will." As Paul would say, " every house" — using the term house in a metaphorical sense, or to designate a community — " every house is built, or every community is framed by some one." Moses was faithful in all God's house or church, when with apostolic authority, immediately de- rived from the great lawgiver, he framed the legal dispen- sation. Christ was faithful to him that appointed him, and as a Son over his own house, or in his own church, when he erected " the kingdom of heaven." But he who built all things, or framed all communities, is God. They derive their existence, and all the official powers incidental to their appropriate operations, directly from himself. None but an apostle can alter or modify them ; and he must be prompt to furnish the proof of his heavenly commission. A reformer may call men back to the divine institutions, but. may frame no new ones. The whole modern doctrine of voluntary associations — inasmuch as, aiming at reforma- tion, they interfere with the ecclesiastical organization, is entirely aside of scriptural lawT ; is an assumption of the divine prerogative ; and ever ends in a burdensome, ex- pensive and corrupting ritual, which turns the human mind away from the simplicity of the gospel. Days and weeks, and months and years, come in under the sanction of ecclesiastical authority, availing itself of the morbid excitement which transient circumstances may create, and dignifying the ebullitions of undisciplined feeling with the lofty phrases which an intelligent piety is supposed to deserve. The very times to which theologians so rever- ently refer, rapidly and incautiously multiplied the most meager ceremonies and profitless services, and paved the 120 LECTURES ON way for all the absurd dogmas and degrading forma of the papal hierarchy ; and that too under the pretension of doing good, or of leading sinners to repent and believe. Against such like interferences with Jehovah's govern- ment, which, by substituting human institutions suggested by mere caprice or sectarian projects, must lead to similar disasters, and which, at the present day, are so common and popular, the church should enter her unanimous and uncompromising protest. Perhaps it may be urged that there still remains a scrip- tural fact, prior even to the antediluvian circumstances that have been noticed, which is beyond the social organiza- tions of this world ; and which might be relied on as dis- tinct proof of an individual election. Paul, in his instruc- tions to Timothy, employs this singular address: — "I charge thee before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the elect angels, that thou observe these things."* Ga- briel and his fellows, it will be said, have been elected, while Lucifer and his wretched companions have been re- jected. The reprobation in this case, as in all others, must be inferred from the intimation of an election. But the value of the inference must entirely depend upon the in- terpretation of the terms elect angels ; and the question will be, whether those terms refer to the personal condition of angels as accountable to their Creator ? or whether they are the mere expression of an official relation ? To aid us in answering these questions, the following points should be distinctly noticed. The term angel signifies messenger. — The angels are ministering spirits, sent forth to a ministry on account of the heirs of salvation. — They are called elo- him. — Even Satan is called the god (Elohim) of this world — the prince of the power of the air. — In Eden, when con- versing with Eve, he seems to hold fast to his forfeited dig- nity, and to act adroitly the false interpreter of the divine statute. — On the day when the sons of God, another offi- *1 Tim. v. 21. MORAL GOVERNMENT. 121 cial title applied to angels, came to present themselves be- fore the Lord, as the fact is recorded in the book of Job, 11 Satan came also among them." — The power of death too, as he was a murderer from the beginning, is ascribed to him. All these circumstances indicate that the term elect, as applied to angels, is, as we have shown it to be in every case that has yet been noticed, purely official. No- thing therefore is made out for the doctrine of a personal election unto eternal life, by the apostle's charge to his son Timothy. Once more. A case still remains in which this term elect is used, and in which every one will immediately perceive it to be official. Jehovah, speaking by the prophet Isaiah, observes concerning the Saviour — '* Behold my servant whom I uphold, mine elect in whom my souLdelighteth."* The apostle Peter utters the same idea, when speaking of the same glorious personage, he describes him as — " a liv- ing stone, disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of God."t In this peculiar phraseology he used prophetic language, and immediately confirms his assertion by a quotation : — " Behold I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, pre- cious." In what sense is the term elect applied to the Redeemer ? From among whom has he been elected ? Who, in view of his election, are the reprobates ? Like its fellow term — servant — used by the prophet, is not elect merely an official epithet ? Can any one dispute, in rela- tion to this fact, the correctness of our interpretation of the term ? And if the Lord himself is thus denominated God's elect, may not all the official agents which are employed — angels, prophets, apostles, the saints under both covenants — be with equal propriety so denominated ? Or if they are so denominated, must not the principle of interpretation be the same all round ? At least, must not the advocates of an individual election unto eternal life show, why they have changed the principle of interpretation ? And more *Is. xlii. 1. f 1 Pet. ii. 4. Vol. II.— 11 1-22 LECTURES ON particularly, are they not bound to assign a reason for their peculiar exposition, when it is recollected, that the scrip- tures do not refer to these cases so confidently quoted, when they argue on "the purpose of election" involved in " the mystery of the divine will," and out of which "the two covenants" arose. — We leave calvinistic disci- ples to the accomplishment of their task, and to the de- fence of their favorite theme, while we shall return in the next lecture to the scriptural argument. LECTURE XIV. Subject continued — Ishmael and Isaac — Esau and Jacob — Type of the Potter — Pharaoh — General reasoning — The oath. Resuming the general subject of discussion, on the doc- trine of election, as it is sketched on the scriptural page, I must now proceed to call up to your consideration, sundry instances which appear to be individual in their character ; but which, after all, every one must perceive to be purely political. Certain persons, whom God called into his service, and whom he consecrated for special purposes, are mentioned with peculiar honor; while others are reprobated as openly wicked and incorrigibly corrupt. But it is evident that this second view of election, if such it may be called, is perfectly analagous to the first, and is also official. Moses, Aaron, Levi, Judah, Saul, David, the prophets, the apostles, and many others, were all respectively chosen. Jehovah had selected them to accomplish some particular end ; but their election did not secure their everlasting life. How- ever highly they might have been distinguished by the MORAL GOVERNMENT. 123 special commission put into their hands, yet it was a very possible case for them to fail ; and, instead of securing eter- nal glory, to incur official disgrace, and serve as a beacon to all coming generations. The history of Balaam, the suicide of Judas rendered desperate by his own remorse, and the persevering efforts of Paul using every wise and well timed precaution, lest, after having preached the gospel to others he should be a cast away himself, amply elucidate this fact. All such cases of election were acts of the Mediator, exercising that sovereignty which belonged to him as Lord of the uni- verse, or using the prerogative of a ruler. So an earthly sovereign would act. Such patronage is attached to his official station ; and he employs it accordingly, ever using it for the good of his subjects, and like a father to his peo- ple, if he be a righteous ruler. He puts into commission those whom he judges to be best qualified to manage the trust to be confided, and whose services he can obtain ; or he aims to achieve the greatest amount of good. And while he thus acts, he secures the confidence and win* the applause of all honorable men. In the capacity of a wise and righteous sovereign, the Son of God presides over the world and its concerns. In managing the vast variety of interests committed to him, he chooses his own servants, or official agents. Nor is there any thing capricious or oppressive, invidious or inju- rious, in the choice he makes. He never acts without reason ; nor without a reason, which fairly and fully justi- fies his proceedings to all who are concerned. Those who are elected are highly honored, but their responsibilities are increased. They are not introduced into a sinecure, where nothing is to be done ; but they are called to action, which requires the full exercise of all their talents. And those who are not chosen are not injured : they are not de- prived of any of their rights, they are not reprobated, but are left in the free and unrestrained enjoyment of their 124 LECTURES Otf privileges ; and they have no ground to take offence, or io talk of partialities which are cherished to their detriment* In fact, they who are elected are servants to those who are not elected. Let us look at the particular examples referred to, which will fully illustrate my meaning; and which may, per- haps, need some explanation on their own account. God chose Isaac in preference to Ishmael : — had he any reason for so doing? Yes, replies an apostle. These " things are an allegory ; for these are the two covenants ; the one from mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage.'"' — But we who live under the christian dispensation, " are, as Isaac was, the children of promise;" or, we are " children of the free f — are not in bondage, but are heirs of liberty. Thus God, in the election of Isaac, while Ishmael was passed by, gave, long before their introduction, an emblem of the two covenants, and a view of their respective characters. Has not Paul assigned a sufficient reason in this case ? — Neither was there any violence offered to the parties concerned., agreeably to the ideas which then prevailed, or the distinc- tions in society which then existed. For Ishmael was the son of the bond- woman, and Isaac was the son of the free woman : and the respective circumstances of the two in- dividuals, furnished a fair opportunity to make the allego- rical representation. Afterward Jacob was chosen in preference to Esau ; not personally, but nationally. While they were yet unborn, and when they had done neither good nor evil, their mother was informed, that "the one people should be stronger than the other people, and that the elder should serve the younger." Here, by the way, we may remark, the election contem- plated had not the most distant reference to Adam's sin, according to the connexions in which the fact must stand, if the popular doctrine be admitted ; for then, the apostle's remark — that the children had personally done neither MORAL GOVERNMENT. 125 good nor evil — would be altogether superfluous ; and his further explanation — that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that call- eth — would not reach the case ; because the choice made is resolved into the simple purpose of God — it is of him that calleth: and because, that when the objection, which charges partiality or unrighteousness on the government of God, is met, the apostle never even hints at Adam's sin, which yet, according to the doctrine maintained on the subject, would have effectually justified the whole trans- action. But to return ; God told Rebecca that the elder should serve the younger. And why ? Can any reason be assign- ed for so singular a transaction ? In the preceding part of the chapter, where the statement is made,* Paul had de- tailed the privileges of Jacob's descendants ; but he had done this with great heaviness of heart, because he foresaw the sore judgments which should soon overtake them : and he was just about entering on the painful subject. In the outset of his discussion he meets an objection which might embarrass his argument ; and, apparently keeping away from the distressing subject as long as possible, or designing to open it up gradually to his brethren, he first meets that objection. It is this. If the children of Israel be cast off, the promise God gave to Abraham would be violated: — "The word of God hath then taken none ef- fect" is his language. Now, as God's promise cannot be broken, it follows that the children of Israel cannot be cast off. The objection had its weight, but was not unanswera- ble. He then proceeds to reply to it. " They," said he, "are not all Israel, who are of Israel : neither because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children." You remember, he continues, that the promise itself was — "In Isaac thy seed shall be called;" but Ish- mael was of the seed of Abraham. The casting out of * Rom. ix. 11* J*26 LECTURES ON Ishmael did not make void the promise. And not only this, but you also remember the case of Esau and Jacob ; of whom God had said, " Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated." Now Esau was of the seed of Abraham, and yet was rejected. The rejection of Esau does not violate God's promise. In other words, the casting away of Abraham's literal posterity will not destroy the cove- nant made with him. Your standing, therefore, as God's peculiar people, is not secured by the consideration, that you are Abraham's literal seed. The case of Esau and Jacob was intended to explain the then present condition of the jews ; or, like that of Ish- mael and Isaac, had been a provision for the coming times — an allegory, whose import subsequent events would un- fold. And to make this provision was the simple reason of the election in both cases. Adam's sin had nothing to do with either the one or the other. Accordingly, when the purpose of election, which had been announced to Rebecca, was executed, no outward violence was done to the two brothers. Esau sold his birth- right, and behaved himself as indifferently as Ishmael had done. Jacob, it is true, appears to have acted very disin- genuously ; and his mother deported herself as strangely as either. But the providence of God, declining to interfere with the free agency of his creatures, must take mankind as he rinds them, and as he certainly foreknows they will be ; nor can he do otherwise, unless he shall directly in- terfere with, and effectually control, their personal volitions. He must, therefore, act on his own foreknowledge. Further, the apostle, in stating the case, uses the pro- phet's language instead of his own ; and thus he eluded any personal reproach from the jews, while he established his argument by authority which they could not dispute : — "Jacob have I loved, and Esau have I hated." But per- haps the prophet did not mean that which the apostle en- deavored to make him speak. The jews, consequently MORAL GOVERNMENT. 1-27 must, as fair reasoners, either give up the point in debate, or go back and inquire what the prophet did report. Per- haps our own argument may be thought defective ; let us then go to the witness himself. Malachi's language is as follows — "I have loved you, saith the Lord. Yet ye say, wherein hast thou loved us ? Was not Esau Jacob's bro- ther ? saith the Lord : yet I loved Jacob, and I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dra- gons of the wilderness." What exhibition of God's hatred to Esau is here furnished ? None that we can see, saving that the Lord says — " I laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness." And what proof have we of God's love to Jacob? None that we can see, saving that he did not deal with him as he did with Esau ; i. e. he did not lay his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness ; but gave him a goodly heritage in the land of Canaan. This view of the trans- action precisely corresponds with our general argument ; and, instead of describing an election of individuals unto eternal life, asserts an election of a different character alto- gether ; an election which is to subserve the general pur- poses of the mediatorial government, as presiding over the whole world ; an election purely national, according to the annunciation to Rebecca, when "the Lord said to her — Two nations are in thy womb and two manner of peo- ple shall be separated from thy bowels, and the one people shall be stronger than the other people ; and the elder (people) shall serve the younger (people)."* The account given by Malachi is the very same given by Moses, when he records the whole matter with regard to the two brothers. Isaac said to Jacob — "God give thee of the dew of heaven, and the fatness of the earth, and plenty of corn and wine : let people serve thee, and na- tions bow down to thee : be lord over thy brethren, and let thy mother's sons bow down to thee : cursed be every one * Gen, xxv. 23. 128 LECTURES ON that curseth thee, and blessed be he that blesseth thee." Afterwards Esau came, concerning whom Paul remarks — " for one morsel of meat he sold his birth-right; for ye know that afterwards, when he would have inherited the blessing, he was rejected ; for he found no place for repen- tance, though he sought it carefully with tears." What blessing did he so ardently covet ? When did he so bitterly weep ? Who rejected him, and would not repent, or recall what he had done ? Look at Esau standing; in his father's presence. There he wreeps ; there he reproaches Jacob ; and asks his father to repent, and recall the blessing wrhich had been given to Jacob. Isaac did not repent ; he did not recall what he had done ; but, while he blessed the humble and weeping suppliant, he left Jacob in full pos- session of the birth-right, and all its privileges. It is to this transaction, whose results so exactly correspond with God's purpose of election — the elder shall serve the young- er— that both the prophet and the apostle refer. This case of election, therefore, stands forth before us a pure official matter, and totally different from what it is often represent- ed to be. Who can object to the preceding exposition? The Eter- nal must have, so to term them, such political rights and powers, whether the view of election which we controvert, be true or false. To object to them, it appears to me, would defraud him of his prerogative, and disrobe faim of his su- premacy ; and what then should become of the doctrine of divine sovereignty! An earthly potentate, thus treated, wrould be deprived of all legislative power and executive patronage ; wTould be in truth converted into a mere royal pageant, whom no political party could respect ; and all government must be at an end, or the prerogative must be transferred to ministerial hands. And can any one so re- gard the King of glory? To object, seems to me to im- peach his wisdom and integrity, and in effect to say — "why doth he then find fault, for who hath resisted his will?" MOItAL GOVERNMENT. 129 Then we retire, leaving Paul as the respondent. " Nay but O man)" he rejoins, " who art thou that repliest against God ? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, why hast thou made me thus ? Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump, to make one vessel unto honor, and another unto dishonor?" The objection is met and answered. The apostle, however, in replying to the objection, has made use of an analogical case, which has been, and very often is erroneously interpreted. He is supposed to speak of the glory of God, abstractedly considered, and without any reference to the good of the creature — a moral view which certainly ought not to find any place in the preach- ing of the gospel; seeing that the gospel, while it proclaims glory to God in the highest, yet, at the same time proclaims peace on earth and good will towards men. But the case which he states calls for no such interpretation. The whole matter is a quotation, and is taken from the writings of Jer- emiah ; to which we must turn in order to ascertain its true design. Jeremiah was told by the Lord to go down to the potter's house. He went as he was commanded, and the potter " wrought a work upon the wheels. And the vessel that he made of clay was marred in the hands of the pot- ter: so he made it again another vessel, as seemed good to the potter to make it." The clay was then so marred that the potter made another vessel of it than he at first intend- ed. This circumstance forms the turning point of the al- lusion. And though a sort of sovereignty is predicated of the potter, evidently he is represented as making the best of the disappointment he had met with. The Lord himself applies the symbol, to which he had called the prophet's attention. — " O house of Israel, can- not I do with you as this potter? saith the Lord. Behold, as the clay in the hands of the potter, so are ye in my hands, O house of Israel. At what instant I shall speak concern- ing a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up and 130 LECTURES OX to pull down, and to destroy it ; if that nation against whom I have pronounced, turn from their evil, I will repent of the evil that I thought to do unto them. And at what in- stant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it ; if it do evil in my sight that it obey not my voice, then I will repent of the good wherewith I said I would benefit them." Here Jehovah himself makes the doings of the potter symbolical of his own transactions among the nations, of whom eternal life is not to be predicated ; and declares his intentions concerning them to be modified, according as they shall, or shall not, do evil: — even as the potter makes another vessel, when the clay is marred in his hands. Accordingly thus the apostle applies the simile. " What," says he, "if God, will- ing to show his wrath, endured with much long-suffering, the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction!" Vessels of wrath — or clay marred in the hands of the potter — nations that had done evil in the sight of the Lord — the Jewish na- tion, who were now about to be cast off for their unbelief! The analogy has nothing to do with an election of indivi- duals unto eternal life ; nay, even while the nation was re- jected, a remnant was saved, or incorporated, for the fa- ther's sake, in the new dispensation, of whom eternal life, unless it be in an official sense, is not at any time asserted. Would you award eternal life to them for Abraham's sake ? The case of Pharaoh has often been an offence, or a stum- bling-block, in the way of an inquirer after truth. He has been led to imagine, that God did actually harden Pharaoh's heart ; or, by some direct agency, did prevent him from obeying the divine command, delivered by Moses; and that too, on purpose to destroy him ; or to compel him, under a most miserable infatuation, to rush presumptuously on his fate. A mere sectarian, ignorant of the purity and lofti- ness of moral principle, and repulsing every fair and con- sistent explanation, might strenuously defend such a theo- cratic view ; or he might pertinaciously assert, as Jehovah MORAL GOVERNMENT. 131 declares that the jews did assert — ye " come and stand be- fore me in this house, which is called by my name, and say, we are delivered to do all these abominations." But from such a fabulous and harsh commentary on the divine proceedings, or from such a defence of the flagitious con- duct of men, the human mind, if it has not been spoiled through philosophy and vain deceit after the tradition of men, instinctively revolts. The question, however, is — how can we escape from the interpretation when we look at the terms ? The theologian is perplexed ; and the infi- del feels himself entitled to scoff at divine revelation. But manifestly the whole case is covered by the principles de- veloped in the quotation, just made from the prophecies of Jeremiah. If the views which have been advanced in re- lation to election be correct, this case presents the oppo- site side of this great subject: and both sides of that sub- ject may well be looked for under an administration which presides over good and evil. Why should not the conse- quences of sin be symbolized, as well as the consequences of righteousness ? — Let the following explanatory remarks be duly considered. 1. It is abundantly clear, that though Pharaoh appears to be referred to individually, yet that reference is to his official character, as the king of Egypt. The language is similar to, and to be interpreted on the same principles with, that which is used concerning the hebrews, when God said — "Israel is my son." The whole case is to be expounded by the rules which belong to Jehovah's government over nations ; and which he himself has so distinctly stated by the prophet Jeremiah. 2. The judgments inflicted were national in their charac- ter ; and that which was the last, and at the same time the most distressing, was peculiarly so ; for then the first-born, or the family heirs officially speaking, were destroyed. 3. It is positively asserted that Pharaoh hardened his own heart. He reasoned on the whole subject which Moses 132 LECTURES ON presented to his consideration, as a politician. He was cal- culating the consequences which would occur to his own people from the sudden exodus of such an immense multi- tude of slaves, on whose labor the nation had been so long accustomed to depend. He foresaw the serious difficulties in which his people should be involved — the utter helpless- ness to which they should be reduced. The rights of the Hebrews — the history of their settlement in Egypt — the gratitude which any recollection of Joseph's ministerial ser- vices might have inspired — the well known tradition that Abraham's children should return to their own land — and the miracles which had been wrought before his eyes — were the considerations which, as a moralist, he ought most carefully and deliberately to have weighed. But I will freely admit, that when politics and morals are brought into collision — whether the problem be presented to civil or ec- clesiastical politicians — mankind have found considerable difficulty in acting right. And surely they have no rea- son, in doing wrong, either to complain, or to be surprised, if a retributive providence should at last overtake them. Should a course of forbearance be pursued, which allows them full time to reconsider and rectify these errors, this is more than they could demand from mere justice; and all that they could expect from grace. Thus God does deal, even tvith nations — as he states in the passage already quoted — "At what instant I shall speak concerning a na- tion, and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, and to pull down, and to destroy it; if that nation against whom I have pronounced, turn from their evil, I will repent of the evil that I thought to do unto it." Thus God did deal with Pha- raoh. Long did he forbear; and at a^ny time had Pharaoh turned from evil, he might have escaped the calamities un- der which he suffered, and the catastrophe in which the judicial process terminated. Under this view no case can be plainer, whether that case be individual or official. No- thing more is required of any controvertist in order to see MORAL GOVERNMENT. 133 it so, than to consider that politics are but a branch of morals ; that God governs nations as well as individuals ; and that his providence towards one is emblematic of his pro- vidence towards the other. 4. The difficulties which theologians have felt with regard to the expressions concerning Pharaoh, arise from their not considering the use which the Hebrews made of active verbs. These were often employed to express a mere permission to do a thing, or a mere prophecy of some particular event. Take this example of the first — " If the prophet be de- ceived, when he hath spoken a thing, / the Lord have de- ceived that prophet." Do you, can you, for a moment sup- pose that God is guilty of the immorality of practicing a deception upon the mind of any creature, who, in conse- quence of that deception, is involved in everlasting perdi- tion ? If the use of terms, or a grammatical principle be- longing to any language from which those terms are deriv- ed, will explain such a measure in a consistent manner, all difficulty is removed ; and no wisdom is displayed in the fastidiousness that refuses to be satisfied. Every generous and elevated mind would rejoice to be relieved from such an onerous and dishonorable imputation on the moral sys- tem he has espoused. Take these examples of the second : God said to Jere- miah— " See I have this day set thee over the nations and over the kingdoms, to root out, and to pull down, and to destroy, and to throw down, to build and to plant ." Thus Ezekiel speaks of himself, referring to his official at- titude as a prophet: — "And it was according to the vision which I saw, even according to the vision which I saw when 1 came to destroy the city." God gave this command to Isaiah — ■•" Make the heart of this people fat, and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes ; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and un- derstand with their heart, and convert, and be healed." The chief butler, giving an account of Joseph's ability to Vol. II.— 12 \S4 LECTURES ON interpret dreams, said — " Me he restored unto my office, and him he hanged." Mere prophecy, and nothing more, is expressed by the terms ; as is abundantly evident, not only from their own application, but from the fact that, when the Redeemer interpreted the prophecy uttered by Isaiah, he charges the guilt directly upon the jews. — " Their eyes they have closed." Interpret the term harden, when ap- plied to God's dealings with Pharaoh, under the recol- lection that the Hebrews did thus employ active verbs, and the whole matter is plain. 5. Let us put the different passages, as the apostle Paul applies them to Pharaoh, together, and then we may per- haps distinctly perceive their import. — "I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. — Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might show my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout the earth. Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth. What if God, willing to show his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much long suffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruc- tion." In Exodus the phrase is, u I will be gracious to whom [ will be gracious, and will show mercy to whom I will show mercy." The very same principle runs through all these passages : they all express the same political opera- tion of the Governor of the world. To have compa- to shoiv mercy, to harden, and to endure with much long suf- fering, are, in this connexion, synonymous and interchange- able. They are not intended to convey any idea of judicial blindness, or of a direct agency, by which Jehovah render- ed it impossible for Pharaoh to obey the summons which he had received. On the contrary, their meaning is perfect- ly coincident with the fact, as the history evinces. God did show compassion, or mercy, and did endure with much long suffering, when, on Pharaoh's professed repentance, judg- ment after judgment was kindly removed. The effect which MORAL GOVERNMENT. 135 followed was, that Pharaoh hardened his own heart. And as this effect did follow the compassion and long-suffering which God displayed, he is said, not positively nor judi- cially, but agreeably to the use of active verbs among the Hebrews, to harden Pharaoh's heart. Besides, the expres- sions refer simply to national character and doings, as is evident in relation both to Pharaoh and Israel. Moreover, the interpretation which God gives of his own transactions by the prophet Jeremiah evinces that, not only was the removing of the judgments in Pharaoh's case mer- ciful, but the object of that removal was to give him space to repent: for it is said — " If that nation, against whom I have pronounced, turn from their evil, I will repent of the evil which I thought to do unto them." Accordingly Pha- raoh is exhibited as a vessel of wrath fitted, or who had fitted himself/ for destruction. He did profess to repent, and his prayer was granted ; yet he became like the clay marred in the hands of the potter, by which Jehovah figu- ratively describes a nation which had done evil. But still God said to this infatuated politician — "For this same -purpose I have raised thee up, that I might show my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth." True. But in the original the phrase literally signifies, " I have made thee to stand." This declaration, too, is equivalent with showing compas- sion or mercy, and enduring with long suffering. For it was by these means that the nation was made to stand, or was preserved ; otherwise any one of the judgments would have swept them into destruction. Time was granted for repentance ; but as repentance was not produced, God dealt with that obdurate people as the potter dealt with the clay when it was marred in his hand, and while he was en- deavoring to make it " a vessel of honor." So God, in his providence, presiding over an intermixture of good and evil, must deal with mankind. If they will not suffer him to guide them to glory, honor, and immortality, and there- 136 LECTURES ON by demonstrate the connexion between righteousness and life, they must expect to be dealt with " as vessels of wrath," long cameo? with great care, but at length dashed into pieces, that the connexion between sin and death may be set forth. The apparent assertion that God dealt thus with Pharaoh on. purpose to destroy him, is nothing more than the idiomatic form of speech, so common in the he- brew language ; and which has already been noticed in the peculiar use of active verbs which characterizes it.* Now as this nation did not repent, as the Governor of the world must make a consistent and profitable use of their official relations, and as a period had occurred in the history of man when something must be done in order to preserve truth in the world ; while Jehovah, on the one hand, elects the children of Israel through grace, to be a symbolical exhibition of truth, so, on the other, he "re- probates" or '''passes by," or manifests correlative views of truth, by his dealings with Pharaoh. The whole mat- ter is brought out on both sides to stand distinct and pro- minent ; not to show us that God elects some to ever- lasting life, and reprobates others to everlasting condemna- tion, but to " declare his name throughout all the earth : — Or his design was and is to manifest his truth, that all men might see. believe, and be saved. The display comes home to them as being thrown on their personal responsibilities ; and not as having their fate determinedly and unalterably fixed by an eternal and arbitrary decree. So then, if man perishes, he perishes by his own fault, the election itself being the criterion by which the moral problem is to be solved. The subject of this providential superintendence, admit- ting so broad a distinction between official'services and in- dividual interest, is also beautifully illustrated by the Re- deemer in one of his parables. " The kingdom of heaven," said he, " is like unto a man that is an householder, which *See M'Kni^ht's Notes on Rom. ix. 4. MORAL GOVERNMENT. 137 went out early in the morning to hire laborers into his vineyard. And when he had agreed with the laborers for a penny a day, he sent them into his vineyard." At dif- ferent times during the day he sent other laborers into the vineyard, promising to give them whatever was right. In the evening, when the hours of labor were past, he called the laborers to give them their hire, and he gave to each one a penny. Those who came into the vineyard early in the morning were offended at the conduct of their em- ployer, and remonstrated against his apparent injustice. "These last," said they, "have wrought but one hour, and thou hast made them equal to us which have borne the burthen and heat of the day. But he answered one of them, and said — Friend I do thee no wrong: didst not thou agree with me for a penny ? Take that thine is and go thy way ; I will give unto this last even as unto thee. Js it not lawful for me to do what I will with my own ? Is thine eye evil because I am good?" Now, says the Re- deemer, the kingdom of heaven is like to this householder. But in what respect? In this, he replies, that " many are called, but few are chosen." If this be so, then the choice of the few does not interfere with the rights of the many : these are still respected, and get their penny, the full re- ward of their labor. Their responsibilities are not nullified : nor do they loose the fruit of their effort. Or, God in his own goodness, regulating his kingdom according to his own wisdom, may confer distinguished honors on a few, and carry out in his providence a " purpose of election," with- out infringing on the moral privileges of the rest. The way to eternal life is open to all, notwithstanding the elec- tion which has taken place. The election does not im- pinge- upon the universality of the atonement ; neither is it an election unto eternal life, which leaves all who are not chosen to perish, that is, involved in the divine trans- action ; but it is a pure rectoral matter, by which God does no wrong to any one ; and is perfectly consistent with the 12* 138 LECTURES ON salvation of every man. The scriptural doctrine on this unutterably interesting subject, leaves the personal respon- sibility of each one, as placed under mediatorial law and accountable to Christ his judge, unimpaired. Such are the scriptural views of the doctrine of elec- tion. Nor do I know of any other form in which the bible states that doctrine, unless it may be that which is implied in the declaration — "The Lord has set apart him that is godly for himself." And this exhibition of the doctrine, so far as personal responsibility is concerned, is exactly what it should be. It leaves the statement which the Re- deemer has made concerning the resurrection unembarras- sed : — " The hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear the voice of the Son of God, and shall come forth ; they that have done good unto the resurrec- tion of life ; and they that have done evil unto the resur- rection of damnation." It involves no reprobation, nor giv- ing over unto eternal perdition, excepting on the ground of personal crime. And in fact, no other view in reference to personal responsibility, would correspond with the gospel as an exhibition of the righteousness of Christ; for bj^ that righteousness all men are made righteous, and are brought into justification of life. There is no election to re- strict THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD. It now only remains for me briefly to consider some gene- ral reasoning, which is conceived to be utterly subversive of the preceding views, and directly in favor of a limited atonement, or an election of individuals unto eternal life. All will say, God is omniscient, and therefore he foreknows whatever comes to pass. And what then ? Whatsoever God foreknows will certainly, it is supposed, come to pass ; and is of course, fixed and certain — fore-ordained, or pre- destined. Foreknowledge and pre-ordination, are thus re- presented to be in fact the same thing; and we are often told that it is scarcely worth while to distinguish between them, seeing that either will lead infallibly to the same re- MORAL GOVERNMENT. 139 suit. — Nay more ; it has been said that nothing can be fore- known which has not been pre-ordained : so that the di- vine decrees are the basis of the divine foreknowledge. Such, it is imagined, is the order of nature in the case. This reasoning will be applied to the subject we have in hand, as follows : — God foreknows who will ultimately be saved, and who will not. This is necessarily implied in the fact that he foreknows all things that come to pass. In this matter God cannot be deceived. The precise number of those who are eventually to be saved is therefore certainly fixed, beyond the power of change ; and it is a matter of small difference, whether, in respect of that number, God be said to foreknow or to fore-ordain it. Still further ; as God cannot foreknow a thing to come to pass., which is not pre-ordained, that precise number is fore-ordained : — those that are saved, are elected, and those who are not saved, are reprobated. T believe that I have stated the argument fairly. If any object to the statement, and instead of re- probating, would say that those who are lost are passed by, I answer, that either this passing by is the consequence of a divine decree so predestinating the matter, or it is not. If it be the consequence of a decree, it is reprfibation. If it be not the consequence of a decree, God has simply fore- known the things, and has predetermined nothing about it. Then foreknowledge and fore-ordination are not the same ; and as foreknowledge is not fore-ordination in the one case, neither is it in the other ; so that, if there be no reprobation, there is, by parity of reasoning, no election. I object to the whole argument, though it be thought by many, to be unanswerable. The necessary connexion be- tween foreknowledge and pre-ordination, which it supposes, is not called for by the philosophy of mind. We foreknow that the sun will rise to-morrow, and we cannot be deceived. It is true, that the rising of the sun to-morrow is a prede- termined event. ; but though it be so, yet it certainly does not depend on our volitions, or on any predetermining power 140 LECTURES ON which we may possess. Here then is mind, foreknowing an event which must take place, and yet without pre-ordain- ing that event. So far from our predetermining this event, we merely foreknow it, while its occurrence depends upon the volitions of another being: and had we been ignorant of the plans and intentions of that other being, we should have foreknown nothing about the matter. We may shrewdly predict the results which shall occur in the history of an individual, whose character, or conduct, or circumstances, may have furnished us with premises from which to reason. We may foretell with unerring accura- cy the downfall of an empire, or a revolution in a com- munity : and yet the events which are so unerringly pro- phesied have no clependance on our volitions. We may kindly use all our efforts to prevent these foreseen disasters, may feel the most pressing obligations so to act, and yet our influence shall be exerted in vain. The more intellec- tual or intelligent a man may be, the more familiar he may become with such painful calculations. Yet his power to anticipate and declare these and like results, though amount- ing almost to the impossibilty of committing a mistake, argues no pre-ordination on the part of the individual whose prophetic vision has been so clear. In fact, the old testa- ment prophets, as well as the new testament apostles, did thus distinctly and indubitably foretell events which occur- red centuries after they had gone to sleep with their fathers, and others, which, to this hour, are not fulfilled. Yet their foreknowledge did not exhibit any power on their part to predestine what they had prophesied ; though, in using ac- tive verbs according to the idiom of the language in which they wrote, they seem to pre-ordain what they could only foretell. All this is perfectly accordant with the philosophy of mind. For in all the cases specified, intellectual beings simply declared what they had the power to perceive, with- out any power to preordain. The volitions of numberless other beings, and even of generations of beings, passed un- MORAL GOVERNMENT. 141 der their prophetic glance : and all that can be predicated o£ the intellectual phenomenon is, that great power of judgment has been evinced. God knows all things. To him the darkness and the light are both alike. One day is with him as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. He understand- eth our thoughts afar off; there is not a word of our tongue which he does not know altogether. Give to a human be- ing such power, and what will he not be able to foretell? What calculations can he not make ? Where is any ne- cessity that he should constrain, or control, the volitions of beings, wmose hearts and ways are thus open before him ? Could he not predict who would do good, and who would do evil? — We repeat it: the philosophy of mind requires no such indispensable connexion between foreknowledge and fore-ordination. And therefore the foreknowledge of God does by no means necessarily imply his fore-ordination. To me it seems, that the argument which I have framed, bespeaks a higher degree of perfection in the Eternal, than that which I combat. For certainly it requires more intel- lectual reach, and a wider range of thought, in an intelligent being, to foreknow and foretell the instantaneous volitions and varied movements of millions of other beings — of all other beings — than to foreknow and foretell what his own volitions and movements shall be. The one implies omni- science, and the other does not. Beings who are free to think and free to act, belong to a higher order of intelli- gence, than they do who have no freedom of volition ; and it is always more difficult to read their character, and fathom their purposes. A slave can never be compared with a freeman ; as he never can possess half the intelligence, nor evince half the intellectual force. Slavery destroys mind ; liberty cherishes and enlarges it. The officer who can govern a slave population, is, or may be, wholly incom- petent to preside over a free community. Now, man as a free agent is altogether a different being from man as not U2 LECTURES ON free, in respect of religion, as well as in regard of any thing else. In the latter case, he may be charmed with a series of " carnal ordinances :" — pictures and images, fasts and festivals, pomp and ceremony, are all that he delights in. But in the former case he calls for thought and argument, which must become refined, or profound, as rapidly as he advances in intellectual growth. The nearer therefore that he approaches to that, which his Creator intended he should become, the greater is the degree of mind which he calls into communion with himself, and the higher does the Cre- ator rise in his view. So that the philosophy of mind not only supposes no necessary connexion between foreknow- ledge and fore-ordination, but absolutely breaks it up, inas- much as it requires more mind to govern man as a free agent ; and inasmuch as free agency improves and exalts man himself. But again I remark., that God foreknows what has never come to pass, and what therefore could not have been pre- ordained. If this assertion can be made good, the argu- ment we are combating will be completely overthrown. Let us try. When Jehovah made man at first, he placed him in a probationary state, endowed with power to keep the law, and yet liable to fall. The constitution which the lawgiver established had two sides ; for it might be ful- filled, and one train of consequences would follow ; or it might be broken, and another train of consequences would follow. Certainly Jehovah knows both sides of his own constitution. This cannot be denied. The denial of such a plain common sense truth would be in a high degree ir- rational. If it should be denied, we have only to add, that the law was broken, and the appropriate consequences have followed, all of which were confessedly foreknown ; and now, the very object of the gospel is to recover what has been lost, and to bring about the other ; — an operation which is in actual progress, and therefore, on the same ground, must have been equally foreknown. Indeed from the first, MORAL GOVERNMENT. 143 Jehovah declares himself to know both good and evil ; nor could he threaten, on the one hand, or promise on the other, that of which he knew nothing. A similar state of things is described by the psalmist, in which God actually declares what would have occurred, had his people obeyed his commandments. " O that my peo- ple," said he, "had hearkened unto me, and Israel had walked in my ways ! I should soon have subdued their enemies, and turned my hands against their adversaries. The haters of the Lord should have submitted themselves unto him : but their time should have endured forever. He should have fed them also with the finest of the wheat: and with honey out of the rock should I have satisfied thee. But my people would not hearken to my voice : and Israel would none of me. So I gave them up to their own heart's lust; and they walked in their own counsels." Here, what came to pass, and what did not come to pass, are both distinctly asserted. One more example. — " 0 Lord God of Israel," said Da- vid, " thy servant hath certainly heard that Saul seekethto come to Keilah, to destroy the city for my sake. Will the men of Keilah deliver me up into his hand? Will Saul come down as thy servant hath heard?" The Lord replied to him, that Saul would come down, and that the men of Keilah would deliver him into Saul's hand. Now the fact is that Saul did not come down, neither did the men of Keilah deliver David into his hand : for David immediate- ly made his escape. Here then God positively foreknew and actually declared what did not come to pass. The in- indispensable connexion between foreknowledge and pre- destination, which has been so often asserted, is therefore a pure theological figment — destitute of all liberal thought, and as cramped as it is untrue. But perhaps it may now be objected that my reasoning destroys predestination altogether. This objection would be inconsiderate. For such a being as I have supposed 144 LECTURES ON God to be, presiding over such a race of intelligent crea- tures as I have supposed men to be, must have his own views and designs ; and would certainly predetermine' to the extent of his own volitions and plans. No intelligent being can act without some defined purpose and intentions. Neither would God so act. We may then expect to find, as a matter of course, "fixed points," established rules, and unavoidable events, displayed under his administration. He will carry on a line of moral causes and effects, as in- dispensable and certain as any laws in physical nature. He will create official trust, as seemeth good to him, in order to sustain his own government. He will bring about certain events — the crucifixion of his Son for example — as indispensable to the accomplishment of his own wise and gracious purposes. And all these events may be fore- known and foreordained. But none of them infringe, nor is there any necessity that they should infringe, in the least degree on the volitions of his creatures, beyond their own proper responsibility. Unless I greatly mistake, some such distinction as this, involving the immutability of established laws and the mutability of divine dispensations, is indispensably necessa- ry to the interpretation of the scriptures throughout. There must be some points which are unalterably fixed, and others which may be changed according to the issues of the sinner's probationary course. This peculiarity of every government. which recognises the free agency of its sub- jects, would no doubt be readily conceded as a character- istic of the divine government, had not an ideal perfection, which has no coincidence with the sinner's imperfection, been so long and so strenuously asserted as indispensably resulting from the divine attributes. Hence certain texts have been purloined from one view, and inconsiderately appropriated to the other, as though every thing were ab- solutely fixed, and any idea of change were perfectly in- admissible in reference to the divine mind. MORAL GOVERNMENT. 145 Let us lay some scripture passages along-side of each other. "Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness nor shadow of turning." " God is not a man that he should lie, neither the son of man, that he should repent. Hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?" "The Strength of Israel will not lie nor repent : for he is not a man that he should repent." "I am the Lord, / change not, therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed." "I am God — declaring the end from the beginning, and from an- cient times the things that are not yet done, saying, my counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure." Many such texts might be copied out, all of which would imme- diately be recognised by certain theological disputants, as sustaining the heavy proposition that God " has foreor- dained whatsoever comes to pass." But there are other texts which are identified with the free agency and imperfection of man, which, to some, are apparently contradictory to those quoted. Such as — " It repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart." " It repenteth me that I have set up Saul to be king, for he hath turned back from fol- lowing me." "And God saw their works, that they turn- ed from their evil way ; and God repented of the evil that he had said he would do unto them, and he did it not." — <( Should I not spare Nineveh ?" "Turn unto the Lord your God, for he is gracious and merciful, slow to anger, and of great kindness, and repenteth him of the evil." " For the Lord will judge his people, and he will repent himself concerning his servants." — How shall these things be re- conciled ? They perplex many a plain christian ; and as much as the Redeemer's declaration has done, when he said — "But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the son BUT THE FATHER." Vol. II.— 13 146 LECTURES ON Now observe that both classes of texts belong to the re- velation which God has given us. The first refers to es- tablished laws, which cannot pass away, or to the gospel which endureth forever : the second refers to the actions of the creature, moving under the burden of his lusts, or amidst most powerful temptations. The first is statute, and the second is the application of the statute to chang- ing circumstances. If circumstances change, ought not the application of the statute to change ? If the sinner re- pent, ought not his cry and prayer to be heard, though judg- ment had been proclaimed ? " Come Jonah," says Jehovah to his servant, I put the question home to yourself — " should not I spare repenting Nineveh?" Would law thus be abandoned ? Is not this gospel ? But, while the Son is presented before us, as such a Lord, to conduct such an ad- ministration, as becomes us, and while this want of know- ledge predicated of him is the correlative of his avowed sympathy or fellow-feeling ; this proposition — " God hath foreordained whatsoever comes to pass," passes by the Son, or overlooks all his official attributes, and pries into the Father's secrets, of which we can know nothing but as the Son reveals them. Hence the controvertist talks about mystery, and presumptuously reasons on what he is pleased to term the secret will of God. Our perceptions can- not keep pace, and we demand him to retrace his steps and preach the gospel to men, instead of confounding them with his conjectures. That God hath foreordained whatso- ever comes to pass, is an unrevealed, incomprehensible and irrelevant proposition, and is utterly out of all character with the fact that God has assumed personal form, or has made himself known to us by external manifestation. The theologue who maintains the difficult and abstruse dogma, has ventured to speculate outside of the world in which he lives. But has not the distinction which I have made, been un- equivocally stated in the scriptures ? When illustrating the MORAL GOVERNMENT. 147 priesthood of Christ, by a comparison with that of Melchi- sedec and Aaron, and measuring the period during which the Mosaic law imposed its obligations, Paul framed the following argument : Jesus was made a Priest with an oath: the levitical priests were made without an oath. Is there any valuable difference ? and if there be, what is it? An oath among men, says the apostle, is "for confirmation," and " to them is an end of all strife." Accordingly, he adds, " God willing more abundantly to show unto the heirs of promise the immutability of his counsel, con- firmed it by an oath." Thus Jesus was made a priest. " The Lord sware and will not repent, thou art a priest for- ever." There is therefore no changing the priesthood of Christ. It is immutable. But the levitical priesthood was not confirmed by an oath. It therefore was not im- mutable, and not only might be, but actually has been, changed. Is there not then a difference between the rec- toral transactions of Jehovah? May they not be mutable, or immutable ? and that according as they have or have not been established by an oath? On what principle then, do theologians undertake to tell us, that all events are " fore- ordained," or unalterably fixed? Have all events been established, and immutably so by an oath ? And why should theologians smile at our idea of u fixed points" in the govern- ment of God? and justify that smile by an appeal to the ab- stract perfections of God ? Will an intelligent being swear to every thing he knows 1 The transaction alluded to, by which Jesus was made a surety of a better covenant, and a priest after the power of an endless life, forms the second instance in which the apostle had reasoned on our general principle. The cove- nant made with Abraham had been confirmed by an oath, to show the immutability of the divine " counsel, which shall stand." That covenant has never been "disannulled." How should it be, when it had been thus confirmed ? The distinction should have been familiar to the jew, Many 148 LECTURES ON cases had occurred within the history of his own nation ! — - God had sworn that the generation which came out of Egypt, should not enter the land of Canaan— did they en- ter ? He had in like manner sworn concerning Moses — did he go into the promised heritage ? He sware unto David — and was not Jesus of Nazareth David's son? And why should not the christian understand this as well as the jew ? Look ye to it, and weigh well the idea that God "has foreordained whatsoever comes to pass," and the argument from divine omniscience which carries you be- yond the revelation by the Son, before you permit your- self to be troubled by such profitless metaphysics. How strange that all this confusion, and abstraction, and terror, should spring from those who appear to be afraid of no- thing so much as an attempt to be " wise above what is written." The argument of the apostle is as much against them as is the philosophy of mind. The connexion be- tween foreknowledge and foreordination is not indispensa- ble, though the two may be combined, for the crucifixion of Christ occurred according to the " determinate coun- sel AND FOREKNOWLEDGE of God." In fine. Reasoning from the perfections of God, ab- stractedly considered, we may sustain the most palpable con- tradictions, and annihilate moral science. I will frame various arguments, that you may see what absurdity may thus be introduced. 1. God is omniscient — Therefore, without any reference to human contingencies, he has foreordained whatsoever comes to pass. 2. God is omnipotent — Therefore, without any reference to human powers, or the formation of human character or its own constituent principles, he may save us if he will, or he may crush us if he will — he performs whatsoever comes to pass. 3. God is infinitely merciful — Therefore, without any re- ference to personal sanctification, he will save all men. MORAL GOVERNMENT. 149 t 4. God Is infinitely just — Therefore, without any refer- ence to infancy, ignorance, infirmity, repentance, or person- al virtue, he will destroy all men in hell forever. One argument is as good as the other. Introduce the intermediate circumstances, which have been excepted, and all are false. Throw out those circumstances, and these several arguments destroy each other, because they are con- tradictory. I infer that no one of them is true ; and that all of them incontestably prove, that the human mind has no power to reason from the abstract perfections of God. From the whole it follows, that there is nothing In God's foreknowledge or fore ordination to interfere with the uni- versality of the gospel. And we are left free to declare that Christ died for all men ; that his gospel may be PREACHED TO ALL MEN ; AND THAT WTHOSOEVER WILL, MAY BELIEVE, AND BE SAVED. LECTURE XV. Faith and Vision — Reason of Faith — Mature of Faith- Operations of Faith — Repentance — Gifts of God. I have endeavored to explain the nature, and to de- fine the extent, of the mediatorial institute. The oblige - tion, in which that institute involves mankind, is our ne>.t subject of inquiry. And here, as in the preceding lectures, my remarks must be considerably modified by the views which theologians have advanced. For, if I should affirm that the gospel is addressed to the faith of the human mind, and that every human being is required to believe the principles and facts which are detailed, then the ques- tions will immediately arise — what is faith ? — are men 13* 150 LECTURES ON able to believe ? These are very important questions. They are important, if for no other reason, yet because they have been so variously argued, and have agitated the public mind so much. It would therefore be in vain to pursue our ob- servations, "without keeping these inquiries continually in view. To answer them, shall be the object of this as well as of the next lecture. If Adam had obeyed the law, should there, in that case, have been any room for the operations of faith ? Perhaps you would immediately answer, no. But why ? When God said — "in the day thou eatest thereof, thou shalt surely die," were not our first parents required to believe him ? If they were, then certainly faith was demanded, even in paradise. And yet nothing is more plain, than that the scriptures place faith and deeds of law in direct contrast with each other. By the one the sinner may be justified : by the other justification is impossible. As-ain. When the redeemed of the Lord shall have been delivered from their earthly troubles, and introduced into their heavenly habitation, shall they any longer exercise faith ? This question also may promptly be answered in the negative. But why ? Shall all eternity be spread out to the view of the ransomed ? Shall nothing be future to them ? Or shall the promises of Jehovah not embrace the future ? And shall not the redeemed believe those pro- mises ? In short — (-an a community exist without* faith ? Is not reciprocity, or a mutual confidence, indispensable to social intercourse ? Elevate the character's of the individuals who may compose a society, and in proportion as that is done, faith becomes strong. Alter the circumstances in which these individuals move, lift them beyond the reach of temp- tation, multiply their facilities to become or remain vir- tuous, and faith will calculate with firmer confidence. In fact, whenever we, and in proportion as we do, get out of the range of vision, we get into that of faith. Such is the MORAL GOVERNMENT. 151 creature distinguished from the Creator — " all things are naked and open to the eyes of him with whom we have to do." But though what I have said be strictly correct, though faith may be predicated of Adam in paradise, and of the redeemed in heaven, yet it is evident that, when we com- pare the primeval condition of our first parents and the fu- ture glory of the righteous with our present state, faith is not to be viewed as their distinguishing characteristic, while yet it is ours. Because " deeds of law" were required of Adam, which are put into direct contrast with faith that is required of us ; and the ransomed shall see God as He is. On the one hand, we cannot render " deeds of laws," but "faith is counted to us for righteousness;" and on the other, we do not see God, but live by faith, waiting patiently "for that we see not." — Now, if faith may be predicated of the three different states to which we have referred, and yet does not occupy the same relations in all, the true way to understand our own present and immediate interest in it, is to ascertain what is the difference of those relations it sus- tains. In other words, if the distinguishing characteristic of the primordial condition of man, or that which may spe- cifically belong to his future state when perfected in Christ, shall be laid alongside of faith as our distinctive peculiari- ty, the comparison will furnish us with the best view of faith itself. Adopting the mode of explanation which has just been commended, a very little reflection will convince every one. that the point of contrast, which will thus be brought into view, is between faith and vision. Nor is there any thing- unnatural or arbitrary in the moral distinction. For, if a man cannot see, what relief has he except in believing? — Every being, in proportion to his helplessness, is reduced to a de- pendency on his fellows : and to meet such exigencies, whether they argue perfection or imperfection, is the very •design of society. Hence, it has been stated, that commu- 15:2 LECTURES ON nities cannot exist without faith : and the facts, which hare displayed the existence of faith in the original and future conditions of man, show that it belongs to the constitution of the human mind. Instead, therefore, of the mediatorial requisition, which calls upon us to believe, being a sovereign or arbitrary mandate, it results from the nature of the case ; and instead of faith itself being a supernatural or extrinsic property, it belongs to the operations of mind itself. We are consequently called upon to believe, because we cannot see ; and in so far as we cannot see, whether we be in pa- radise or out of it, in heaven or on earth, we are reduced to the simple necessity of believing. If the present state of man involves or supposes any disabilities, which were not characteristic of his condition in paradise, nor shall be characteristic of his condition in heaven, those disabilities, and that too, as far as they have occurred, are the simple reason why faith is now so imperatively required. We are not enjoined to render " deeds of law," merely because we cannot render them : neither is it exacted of us to see, be- cause we cannot see. So the command has gone forth, calling for faith, because believing is all we can do. It is laboring under this disability that the Redeemer finds fallen man; and taking him just as he finds him, the gospel is suited to faith, as the law had been to vision. The sectarian who has represented faith as supernatural or extraneous, and the sceptic who has declaimed against it as irrational, have alike misunderstood and misrepresented this momentous matter. Nothing is more common than the ministerial announce- ment, that faith is the gift of God : nor is there any doctri- nal disquisition more frequently heard from the pulpit, than that which arrays scriptural texts in proof of this proposi- tion. It would appear very ungracious, roundly to deny so favorite an assertion ; and yet if it be true, as it is generally understood, manifestly no man can believe until the special gift is bestowed ; and they are acting according to the I MORAL GOVERNMENT. 153 strictest philosophy of the gospel, who are waiting to re- ceive it, and living without regard to personal responsibility. It will avail nothing to reply, that as faith is a gift, our per- sonal responsibility requires us to ask for it; because the prayer that seeks it must be itself an exercise of faith. Either then there must be some mistake in the manner of representing this subject, or personal responsibility must be abandoned. Suppose we should allege that vision, with which, as we have seen, faith is contrasted, is the gift of God: what should we thereb}r declare ? Would any one understand this^>ro- position as affirming that an individual, who has the organ of vision, cannot see ? Would it not be apparent to every one, that the statement must imply that God had given to man the organ of vision, and spread before it the objects which it was intended to perceive ? For an individual, to whom God has given this faculty, not to see, is culpably to shut his eyes ; or to decline the opportunity of observation, with which he has been furnished. The guilt of not see- ing is his own, because he can see if he will. Now though faith be described as a gift of God, yet is it not to be so considered in like connexions ? God has jnven to man a mind, and spread before it objects which it can perceive. Then, not to perceive those objects, is culpably to shut the mind's eye, and to decline that intellectual observation for which he has been qualified. The guilt of not perceiving, is our own ; because we can perceive, if we will. And ac- cordingly the unbeliever is condemned for this very reason. He has eyes, but he sees not ; he has ears, but he hears not; he has a heart, but he understands not. If he could neither see, nor hear, nor understand, there would be some apology — there would be no guilt. Let us carry our hypothesis a step farther. Suppose that an individual, endowed with the organ of vision, should as- sert, that the objects which Jehovah has spread out before his eyes have no existence ; or that they are not, what they 154 LECTURES ON plainly are. He does not believe what his own eyes see I Let him argue out his own untenable dogmas. He will be learned and ingenious ; and when we try to detect his so- phistry, we may, perhaps, become so much perplexed by his artful refinements, that we may be almost convinced he is right ; while yet our own senses demonstrate that he is wrong. Cannot this philosopher see ? Can he not, or is he unable to, believe what he sees ? In like manner, God has given mind to man, and has spread before it objects suitable to its perceptions. The power of perception as cleanly belongs to mind, as the power of vision belongs to the eye. Cannot mind perceive ? We might just as well ask, cannot the eye see ? If mind perceives, cannot mind believe what it perceives ? We might as well ask whether man can believe what his eye sees ? As he who cannot see is blind, or has not the organ of vision ; so he who cannot believe is idiotic, or is destitute of the organ of in- tellectual action. This is the direct conclusion to which the general argument based on the nature of man neces- sarily leads. It as certainly belongs to mind to perceive, as it belongs to the eye to see. And it as clearly belongs to man to believe what his mind perceives, as it belongs to him to believe what his eye sees. Destroy the eye, and vision is destroyed : take away mind, and the power to be- lieve is gone. It is therefore utterly in vain to preach about man's inability to believe, as long as mind is conceded to him. Perhaps I ought, in order to save an apparent confusion of terms, to have remarked in the outset of the argument, that as faith, to a certain extent, is to be predicated of Adam in his state of innocence ; so vision, to a certain ex- tent, is to be predicated of us in our present lapsed condi- tion. I was relying on the reader's own discernment in-the case ; on the force attached to the statement, that vision was the distinguishing attribute of Adam's primeval, and that faith is the distinguishing attribute of his subsequent, MORAL GOVERNMENTS 155 estate ; as also on the scriptural details which I shall pre- sently proceed to exhibit. Mind belonged to Adam at first, and therefore he had the power to believe ; we have the organ of vision, and therefore we see ; but by the fall such a change has occurred, and the relative proportion of our animal and intellectual faculties has been so far affected, that while Adam at first was placed in a condition charac- terized by vision, he afterwards was reduced by " the weak- ness of the flesh" to a condition characterized by faith. — But the scriptural illustrations will make my meaning more apparent. The apostle Paul remarks — " We walk by faith, not by sight:" thus putting faith and vision into contrast. He further observes — " whilst we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord — we are willing rather to be ab- sent from the body, and to be present with the Lord."— - Vision implies presence with the Lord : as faith supposes absence from him. Were it our privilege to enjoy that vision, which is put into opposition with faith, we should see God. For, in any other sense, God is ever present with us : and when we shall realize that state, which Paul de- scribes as being " absent from the body, and present with the Lord," the apostle John tells us, "we shall see God as He is." Vision therefore implies a sight of God. Paul again declares — " Now we see through a glass darkly ; but then face to face : now I know in part ; but then shall I know, even as also I am known." We see darkly or obscurely as in an enigma, in which one thing represents another ; i. e. we do not see the great and im- portant objects with which we are concerned. They are represented to us by way of preparing us to see them, and that representation calls for our faith. Could we see the objects themselves, we should not need the representation, and of course there would be no room for the exercise of faith. I mean that vision, not faith, would be our distin- guishing characteristic. 15G LECTURES ON The Redeemer also asserts, that " no man hath seen God 0 at any time ; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him." Vision is here put in contrast with revelation; and revelation, which is the divine testimony, is the great object of faith. Again he remarks, in one of his arguments with the jews — " not that any man hath seen the Father, save he which is of God, he hath seen the Father. The same general truth was proclaimed to Moses, when he desired to see Jehovah's glory: — "Thou canst not see my face 'said Jehovah ;' for there shall no man see me and live." Such is the fact ; and it has been thought to be of sufficient importance, to be thus formally, distinctly, and frequently announced. In the last instance, however, which has been quoted, we have more than the simple statement of the fact. Jehovah assigns the reason why Moses could not see his face. He had gratified his servant as far as was proper, and said — " I will make all my goodness pass before thee, and I will pro- claim the name of Jehovah before thee, and will be gra- cious to whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy on whom I will show mercy. Behold there is a place by me, and thou shalt stand on the rock ; and it shall come to pass, while my glory passeth by, that I will put thee in the cleft of the rock, and will cover thee with my hand, while I pass by : and I will take away mine hand, and thou shalt see my back parts ; but my face shall not be seen. Thou canst not see my face ; for there shall no man see me and live." Had Moses been indulged any farther, "had the face" of Jehovah been exposed to his view, it would have cost him his life. But how, or why ? Death is the conse- quence of sin; and in what way could it be produced by a sight of the face of Jehovah ? which is the highest privi- lege of an intelligent, unsinning, or redeemed man. An- gels, said Jesus, behold the face of my Father, which is in MORAL GOVERNMENT. 157 heaven. Manifestly there could be no immorality about obtaining the view ; and how then could it produce death ? The history of such transactions, or the effects of such appearances, as are recorded by Moses, will sufficiently ex- plain the whole matter. The people said to him — " Be- hold Jehovah our Elohim hath showed us his glory and his greatness, and we have heard his voice out of the midst of the fire : we have seen this day that Elohim doth talk with man, and he liveth. Now, therefore, why should we die 1 For this great fire will consume us : if we hear the voice of Jehovah our Elohim any more, then we shall die. For who is there of all flesh that hath heard the voice of the living Elohim speaking out of the midst of the fire, as we have, and lived!" Moses himself said — " I exceedingly fear and quake." And are such feelings unnatural? Are not supernatural appearances the dread of all the wTorld ? — The animal nature of man could not have borne the view. " The weakness of the flesh," superinduced by Adam's sin — for by his sin death has come into the world — incapa- citates the human being to sustain the resplendence of such glory : and Moses, with all his official honors, was subject to the infirmities, and exposed to the death, wThich belong to the lot of his race. Take away this incompetency, thus brought about, and the effect stated would not have follow- ed ; for the scriptures have given us no explanation of death, but as it is the consequence of sin. Plainly then vision is not, nor can it be, the distinguishing principle or attribute of our present condition ; and that simply because of the disability or weakness of the flesh, under which, in that condition, we labor. It is here where the doctrine of faith comes in ; i. e. by reason of that same disability, faith is the distinguishing attribute of our present state. Will the theologian turn round and tell us that man cannot believe ? What ? Able neither to see nor believe ? This is surely strange. Where, then, is the remedy ? The controvertist must not retreat Vol. II.— 14, 158 LECTURES ON into divine power ; for God can qualify us to see, as well as he can to believe. Neither must he talk about consistency ; for in so doing he would yield the whole argument, see- ing that the only circumstance with which God is called upon to legislate consistently, is human infirmity. If, af- ter all, faith is above his ability, man is no better off with, than he was without, the remedy. It follows irrefutably that he can believe the gospel which is addressed to him. The term faith is generally used in a technical sense ; which sense it is not easy to apprehend or explain. There are definitions in abundance, and there has been contro- versy without end. Treatise after treatise, exegesis after exegesis, homily after homily, and sermon after sermon — all have been furnished to explain and elucidate this inte- resting particular ; and yet, after all, faith is, in the minds of most people, a mysterious something,* which they have not precisely understood. And they are not a few who, despairing of acquiring any clear views about it, have abandoned their research, and exclaimed in pettish disap- pointment, For modes of faith let angry bigots fight, His can't be wrong, whose life is in the right. This difficulty occurs in the evangelical use of the term, while, in the common affairs of life, every body uses it, and with a clear, well defined idea. We read a history, or hear an oral relation, and talk about our belief, or our faith, in what we have read and heard ; and every one un- derstands us to assert our intellectual conviction of the truth of what we have read or heard. An interchange of information creates every day universal excitement of feel- ing, and calls every body into action : and all this is no- thing but the influence of faith, or reciprocal confidence, without which society must be dissolved. Nor is there * This term something appears to be taking the place of the old term mystery. " There is something in God common to the three per- sons"— " there is something behind sinful acts." MORAL GOVERNMENT. 159 any wretched fatuity betrayed in this social excitement. It gives birth to the most vigorous thought, and to most ex- tensive inquiry. The character of witnesses, the proba- bility of testimony, and the consequences of events, are carefully scrutinized and canvassed. The fewer the legal restraints that are imposed, the more intelligent the com- munity becomes ; so that faith is always the associate of light and liberty, of honor and benevolence. Introduce legal enactments beyond the simple necessities of the so- cial compact, and in interfering with the operations of so- cial confidence, they become substitutes for the workings of mind, and the harbingers of conflict and strife. So that this very principle, called faith or belief, while it is so well understood in the commonest affairs of life, rises with the elevation of individual intellect, and expands with the ex- tension of our social relations ; until it pervades the high- est concerns, in which men can have any community of interest. In short, how can any man avoid believing that which he knows to be true? or how can he believe that which he knows is not true? But when we become religionists, and undertake to dis- cuss Christianity, where faith, from the condition of man, from the constitution of the human mind, and from the na- ture of social principles, is as necessary as it is in common life, we possess not this clearness of view ; because Ave have lost its simplicity. They who can believe the histo- rian, or the oral narrator, of any train of circumstances, and easily giv? +he rationale of this mental operation, seem to be at a lc - to explain what it is to believe a historian, or an oral narrator, when relating sacred truths. They who are every day scrutinizing the character of witnesses, can- vassing the probability of testimony, or predicting the con- sequences of events, with a view to making up their judg- ment, or forming an opinion, or exercising faith, are at a loss to explain the same intellectual operation in its spiritual relations. They can be believers, habitually and unre*. 160 LECTURES ON servedly, as friends, as merchants, as politicians, as philo- sophers ; in all these connexions they can display the great- est mental force — the highest excitement of feelino- — the wisest, the boldest, the most persevering, the most efficient action — and yet they fail to carry the principle of these af- finities into religion. They can believe their fellow man in any relation of life, but cannot believe him as a chris- tian. They can believe God, as he moves in his daily providential transactions ; they can read his volume of na- ture, as they call it, with accuracy and care ; but when they hear him speaking as the God of grace, they know not how, nor what it is, to believe him; neither can they imagine that his bible is a plain, intelligible, book. Now the reason of all this embarrassment on a subject which, in any other form, is familiar, is very evident. Whenever men turn to the science of morals, as it is dis- played in our inspired manual, they assume, as an incon- trovertible position, that the subject of inquiry is altogether a mysterious matter. They have been often told so. So the books and the pulpit have declared. And who would not tread lightly and cautiously on mysterious ground ? They do not seem to be aware, that the gospel has any co- incidence with that which is natural ; but are rather in- clined to suppose that it is contrary to, and above, nature. Consequently, the operations of mind are not the same in religion that they are in any other branch of science ; and faith in Christianity is wholly different from what it is in our common transactions. Thus robbed of the analogies by which divine truth is to be illustrated, and led to aban- don the visible symbols which so variously and beautifully represent it, men sink into despondency and unbelief. Could they give up their false assumptions ; could they un- learn the dogmas which have " grown with their growth and strengthened with their strength ;" could they carry along the unbroken chain of human interests, through all the varying circumstances of life ; and could they perceive MORAL GOVERNMENT. 161 the intellectual identity of the believer, as he examines and apprehends both physical and moral subjects, their dif- ficulty would vanish. They would find it as easy to un- derstand faith in Christianity, as they do in any secondary form in which it occurs. They would carry their illustra- tions from the fireside to the sanctuary, from the volume of nature to the volume of inspiration, and understand the doctrine of our moral dependencies with as much facility as they do that of our domestic or political relations. Nay more, they would find, that throughout their whole pilgrim- age, in those reciprocities which they have thought to be natural and philosophical, they have been sustaining the same moral operation, which they imagine to be so verv mysterious and incomprehensible in religion. Unfortunately, however, the common theological discus- sions to which sectarian disciples may have the opportuni- ty of attending, will afford them no aid in their retrogade movement after truth. From these discussions they derived all their erroneous views ; and to remain under the scho- lastic dominion, is only to perpetuate their own perplexing mistakes. They will still be entertained with the inju- dicious distinctions that have involved the whole doctrine of faith in all its obscurity ; and have forms of faith de- scribed to them, which are at the same time declared to them not to be faith. There is an historical faith — there is a speculative faith — there is a faith of miracles — there is an appropriating faith — there is a reflex faith — there is a saving faith. The mind is bewildered by " distinctions without a difference;" and the man expires amid the ob- scurities of learned and ingenious explanations. I wish that all this were pure fabrication. Cheerfully would it be retracted, and the inquirer be referred to better instructions wherever they maybe found. I have been exhibiting faith in contrast with vision : or, to use Paul's language, as " the evidence of things not seen" There are "invisble things of God," which he 14* 162 LECTURES ON has manifested in such a manner as to be " understood by the things that are made." And can any one object to such a display on the part of God, made with a view to the instruction of his intelligent creatures, who have no bet- ter means of acquiring knowledge ? Is there any known principle belonging to the philosophy of mind, which would evince such a display to be irrational ? Man, as he is, sees a great deal of the wonderful works of God ; is this irrational ? Should he see more, would that be irra- tional ? And if he shall be incapable of seeing more, yet is not incapable of learning more by some other method, is that other method irrational ? If by that other method, some truth, or a series of truths, which he had not seen, and could not see, should be brought home to his mind in clear and satisfactory demonstration, would that mode be subversive of mental philosophy ? Truth is not absurd, come in whatever form it may be made known. And if a manner of communication is used, without which truth cannot be made known, that manner of communication cannot be absurd. Yet this is the attitude in which the sceptic stands who laughs at the doctrine of faith. For faith is the evidence, the subsistence in the mind, the de- monstration to the mind, of that which is not seen. It is an operation by which the mind, through the intervention of surrounding emblems, gets at the knowledge of things that are invisible, in which it argues from the type to the antitype, from the symbol to the object symbolized. Plain- ly then between faith and ignorance, there is no interme- diate state. For what should the mind do with a truth, made evident by vision, but believe it? And what can that same mind do with any other truth, demonstrated in any other way, but believe it? I see no alternative. Such is faith m Christianity. God has made known to man certain matters which he cannot see. But then they are demonstrated to him to be true; and when he is con- vinced by this demonstration that they are true, what else MORAL GOVERNMENT. 163 can he do with them than believe them ? An individual sees his father die — what else can he do than believe that his father is dead ? Would it not be folly for him to doubt ? — But he was not an eye-witness to the domestic catastrophe ; he has simply received information of the afflictive fact — yet it is information whose verity is fairly proved ; what else can he do than believe what he has heard ? Just so with regard to scriptural truth. It stands demonstrated : and must not the mind, to which the proof has come home in undeniable form, believe scriptural truth ? — Where then is the difficulty of, or objection against, the doctrine of faith? It may be replied that the truth of that which the scrip- tures have stated is doubtful. Be it so ; but that involves a totally distinct question. Faith, as belonging to the philosophy of mind, is one thing; and the character of any particular matter offered to consideration, is another thing. A man may disbelieve what he knows is not true ; or he may doubt what he does not know to be true ; and yet reason will bind him down to believe what he knows to be true. If any one doubts the truth of the scriptural statements, it does not follow that he may begin to declaim against faith as irrational : but leaving faith to possess its own philosophic attributes, his business is to as- certain the truth or falsehood of these scriptural state- ments. He must scrutinize the character of the witness- es ; he must canvass the probability of their testimony ; he must follow out effects to their causes, and causes to their effects ; he must pursue the argument in every di- rection, and in every form, to which his intellect may make him competent. He must take up the subject just as he would any other matter, of the truth of which he desires to be informed. And whether he believes or disbe- lieves when he has done, the philosophy of faith, as a mental operation, remains undisturbed ; or it is alike de- monstrated by his belief or unbelief. In the one case, he exercises faith in that which he has found out to be true ; 164 LECTURES ON and in the other, he withholds his faith from that which he has found out to be untrue. Now, suppose an individual to have instituted, and effi- ciently to have carried on, such an investigation into the truth of the scriptural statements. After he shall have ac- complished his task, he proclaims himself to be convinced of their truth. Is he not a believer? Has he not faith? What else is left for -a man under such circumstances to do but believe ? Can faith be predicated of a man who has no conviction? Is it not the province of revelation to make its subjects clear'? Does not the Spirit of God convince the world of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment? — Take the other side, and suppose that, instead of all this inves- tigation, by which an inquirer has been convinced, he had enjoyed unclouded vision — what would have been the effect in that case ? Would it not be conviction? And when this favored individual should be convinced by what he saw, would he not be a believer ? Certainly this idea of faith must be palpable to every one, as being the moral operation which the scriptures require of all their readers. What other idea of faith can there be from the nature of mind ? Or what other connexion can there be between Christianity, as an intellectual system, and man as an in- tellectual being ? It may, perhaps, be objected to the foregoing observa- tions, that a man, who has gone as far as has been descri- bed, is a mere speculative believer ; and will in all proba- bility stop short with the conviction he has reached. His heart, it will be said, is not touched ; and there are hun- dreds like him,,, who have never gone one step farther in the way to eternal life. We do not know exactly what theologians mean by the heart. If they mean by it that it is a part of man's intel- lectual nature, we cannot conceive how it is to be touched, but by such a train of convictions, as this objection seems to consider so trivial or equivocal. The probability, in our MORAL GOVERNMENT. 165 view, is that the heart would be reached by the process which has been suggested ; and that the individual who has advanced to the specified point, would be strongly im- pelled to go farther. Will the objection imply that when, for example, Paul says — "with the heart man believeth unto righteousness," he means to say, that the head, the understanding, the judgment, has nothing to do with faith? Or does he not, on the contrary, mean by the heart, the whole intellectual man1. There is much loose talking in religion about the head and the heart, as though they be- longed to different systems, and in character and location corresponded with the anatomical fixture of the literal head and heart in the human body. Hence some teachers of Christianity undertake systematically to address the head, and others employ all their force in assaulting the heart. Which of them deal with man as an intellectal being? As to the other part of the objection, in which hundreds are so summarily included, as being thoroughly convinced while their speculations lead to no practical result, I should doubt the facts. The process through which we have sup- posed our case to run, would certainly bespeak better re- sults. But men differ in their views of human society, and often trace what they see to very different causes. In the present instance, lest we might be supposed to be too much prepossessed in favor of our own theory, we shall take cover under authority. Halyburton, whose " rational inquiry into the principles of the modern deists," it has been said, re- mains unanswered, makes the following remarks — " It is much to be regretted, that the bulk of mankind found their principles, as well as practices and hopes, on no better bot- tom than education ; which gives but too j ust occasion for the smart reflection of the witty, though profane poet, By education most have been misled, So they believe, because they were so bred. The priest continues what the nurse began, And thus the child imposes on the man. 16(5 LECTURES ON u Most part seek no better reason for their belief and prac- tice, than custom and education. Whatever those offer in principle, they greedily swallow down, and venture all on so weak a bottom. And this surely is one of the great rea- sons, why so many miscarry in this important matter. — The more considerate and better part of mankind, in matters of so high importance, will, with the nicest care, try all, that they may hold fast what is good. If a man understands the importance of the case, he will find reason to look some- what deeper, and think more seriously of this matter, than either the unthinking generality, who receive all in bulk, without trial, as it is given to them; or the forward would- be-wits, that ofttimes are guilty of as great, and much more pernicious credulity in rejecting all, as the other in receiving all." The Master seems to pass the same judgment, and to view the individual whose case we have specified, as having at- tained to a high condition of intellectual privilege : — " That servant," he rcnarks, " which knew his lord's will, and pre- pared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required : and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more." And indeed the man, the prospects of whose course are under considera- tion, if he shall reject the gospel, will generally distinguish himself in abusing what he has acquired. He will reach greater lengths in depravity, and rush to a more fearful ex- treme, than the generality of those around him ; because he has had more to overcome, and therefore feels a stronger stimulus urging him onward in his iniquitous career. But why should not a well formed conviction of truth lead to the happiest results ? Let us call back to our aid that which has been contrasted with faith. What effect would clear and unclouded vision produce ? Would it end MORAL GOVERNMENT. 167 in mere speculation too ? Or would not the inducements to effort be proportionably stronger ? Taking the figure un- der another aspect — is light no stimulant ? The day dawns, and all the world is roused to action. And will not intel- lectual light produce a correspondent effect ? Is truth an inert matter, or has it not, by its own nature, an influence on mind ? " The words that I speak unto you," said Jesus, " they are spirit and they are life." Instead therefore, of conviction, produced by fair investigation, being likely to end in mere speculation, its natural tendency is to impel the man who has acquired it, to still further exertion. So that the very nature of faith, as we have presented it is, to lead to action ; and that to the whole extent of the subject with which it is concerned. "As a man thinketh in his heart," says Solomon, "so is he." — "A good man," says the Re- deemer, "out of the good treasure of the heart, bringeth forth good things : and an evil man, out of the evil treasure, brino-eth forth evil things." I have already intimated that there is a very striking co- incidence beUveen this mental operation, and the nature of truth itself. It as much belongs to truth to excite the mind to action, as it belongs to the mind to act, when excited. — The effect of truth on the mind, is like that of light on the eye ; and the mind under the influence of truth, is like the eye under the stimulus of light. Truth excites, and the mind is excited. They bear therefore, a reciprocal rela- tion, which is both evident and natural ; and which is sus- tained in all the circumstances where they can possibly meet. There are a thousand cases, it is true, in which men are commonly said to act by intuition ; whence has arisen no small controversy, intended to settle the philosophy of in- tuitive truth. Still, truth and mind bear to each other, in these cases, their natural relation. An- analysis will easily discover a regular and accurate process of argument, through which mind has passed, rapidly arriving at a con- clusion which has been fairly deduced from premises dis- 168 LECTURES ON tinctly perceived. Or, if any should deny the actual pro- cess of thought, in the cases alluded to, on account of the rapidity of the supposed operation — which perhaps, many might do, notwithstanding the proverbial quickness of thought — -yet evidently, the whole process can be readily made out by an after review ; however instantaneously it may seem to have occurred. " It may be difficult," says a. popular medical writer, "for a person not accustomed to reflect on such subjects, to believe that every time his leg is moved in walking) he performs a distinct act of volition ; but he will be convinced of this, if he observes the motions of those whose power of volition is impaired by disease. — He will find the patient hesitate which leg to move at every step ; and at length his attempts to move the limbs produce a confused and irregular action, incapable of carrying him forward. The act of expanding the chest, is an act of vo- lition ; it is an act, in ordinary breathing, rendered extreme- ly easy by the gentleness of the motion required, and the continual habit which renders it familiar, and is excited by a sensation proportionally slight ; but which is as essential to it, as stronger sensations are to more powerful acts of vo- lition. Thus it is, that on the removal of the sensorial power, respiration ceases."* The direct tendency of truth operating on mind is, to lead to any train of actions which it may prescribe ; and the direct course on which mind enters, after perceiving truth, is obedience to injunctions so communicated. The attribute of mind, so called out and displayed, is precisely the principle of intellectual vitality, on which rests the whole value of divine revelation. By revelation, Jehovah communicates truth to men ; truth appropriate to their na- ture and circumstances ;• and in a form suitable to, or with- in the range of, their apprehensions. This truth, thus af- forded, it belongs to them to perceive, and having perceived * W. Philips' Treatise on the nature and cure of Diseases. &.e. Amer. ed. page 54, 55. MORAL GOVERNMENT. 169 it, it is the nature both of truth and mind that they should comply with its dictates. All the adjuvants which are em- ployed, direct their influence to the same point ; and they are the mere agents of the Spirit, in his great work of con- vincing the world of sin, of righteousness, and of judgment. Nor is there any arbitrary or incomprehensible influence exerted in the manner of executing their task ; but they address to the human mind a varied and satisfactory ar- gument; — an argument, made up as processes of ratioci- nation are in all other cases, and equally as clear and con- clusive. He who is convinced of truth, which has been thus substantiated and demonstrated to his own mind, is a believer ; and, as a matter of course, must act accordingly. So that we may include, and the scriptures often evidently do include, under the term faith, the appropriate conse- quences of conviction, or of a full persuasion of the truth believed. This is philosophy. This is scripture. Just such a moral operation is called for by the condition of man, and it is as consistent with the grace of God, as it is with the liberty of the human mind. The effects of faith will always correspond with the na- ture of the truth believed. If a credible witness shall re- cite to us a tale of crime and infamy, we are immediately struck with horror. If he shall, on the contrary, commu- nicate some pleasing intelligence, Ave instantly become sen- sible of pleasurable emotions. Such is the fact in Christi- anity.— God reveals himself to us as love. He declares that he has loved us so tenderly, as to give his only begotten Son to die for us. He assures us that he has no pleasure in the death of the sinner ; that he is long-suffering and kind — always waiting to be gracious ; that he will forgive iniquity, transgression and sin; and that whosoever cometh unto him, he will in no wise cast out. It is the direct na- ture and tendency of these truths, to excite in the human mind the most delightful feelings ; and, under the obliga- tion which they create, to call forth its gratitude and love. Vol. II.— 15 170 LECTURES ON Ought we not to, is it not natural that we should, love that which is good? Whatever is beautiful and excellent, is the legitimate object of esteem and admiration ; and we can- not withhold our praise without violating nature, or betray- ing some obliquity that falls not within the ordinary or le- gitimate operations of mind. It is for this very purpose that God has revealed his love in Christ ; given to its display so much interest ; adorned its circumstances with so much glory ; and identified its overtures with every earthly inte- rest that man can consider valuable, or worthy of effort. — And what can be more beautiful and lovely, what more likely to captivate and charm, or what more capable to dig- nify and bless, than the gospel ? Earth suffers, angels mourn, and Jehovah grieves, when man acts so unnatural and irra- tional a part, as to repulse from his bosom such an enchant- ing scheme of love. Again. If a credible witness should apprize us of some imminent danger overhanging, which jeopards life, estate,, and whatever we hold dear, we should be instantly and greatly alarmed ; and would make every effort in our power to avoid or escape the threatened calamity. Or, on the other hand, if he should disclose something which would be greatly to our advantage, and which we might certainly secure by well timed and diligent effort, we should be im- mediately roused to action. This illustration all men are prepared to appreciate ; for it is their daily employment to avoid the ills, and to secure the joys of life. And should they make like effort, and on the same principle of acting, in relation to religion, they would meet their moral obliga- tions, and carry out, to its whole extent, the scriptural doc- trine of faith. A dire calamity overhangs our race, filling time and eternity with its fearful consequences. Of this the scriptures have distinctly and fully informed us, adding in their details the divine testimony to human experience. They have pointed out a way of escape ; have proclaimed a Saviour ; and promised everlasting life. They bring the MORAL GOVERNMENT. 171 divine agency into co-operation with human effort, and iden- tify human happiness with practical righteousness. They disclaim any interference with intellectual liberty, and call for personal conviction, designing thereby to excite to indi- vidual purpose and effort. Every sentence which they reveal or proclaim, is the testimony of Jehovah, as a cred- ible witness ; and our faith in, or our belief of, what he has said, should naturally lead us to avoid the evils and se- cure the benefits of which he has spoken. And thus would follow, in all their consistency, and variety, and beauty, and richness, those multiform virtues and good works, whose precise place in the christian economy, its expositors have found no little difficulty to ascertain. They arise as all other human actions arise ; and b}^ a simple operation, with which every child of Adam is perfectly familiar, and which he is exemplifying every day and every hour throughout his entire life. I protest I cannot see this deep mystery about faith, which seems to perplex so many ; and which calls for so many distinctions, when a formal statement of its nature and attributes is attempted. I discern nothing in it but a plain, easy, natural operation of mind, in which a man be- lieves, on the testimony of others, what he has not seen. Nor can I perceive any reason why it should occupy so conspicuous a place in christian morals, other than that as through the sin of Adam we are rendered incapable of vision, there is no resource left, save to believe what others tell us. It will still be urged that, after all, men who have been and who are convinced of the truth of the scriptures, and of the philosophy and propriety of their doctrines, do live in sin. Be it so. What then ? Will it follow that the pre- vious elucidations of faith are therefore imperfect? Will it thereby appear that faith has not the tendencies which have been ascribed to it ? I judge not. For is it not unna- tural and irrational that men should act contrary to their 172 LECTURES ON own convictions? Is such deportment honorable or consist- ent? Can any plea be offered to justify it? And is not this the very reason of their condemnation at the bar of God? Are they not " beaten with many stripes," because that when they knew their Master's will, they would not fulfil it? " Because," saith the high and holy One, "I have called, and ye refused ; I have stretched out my hand, and no man regarded; but ye have set at nought all my counsel, and would none of my reproof; I also will laugh at your calamity, I will mock when your fear cometh." To rebel against their own convictions is then highly crim- inal on the part of mankind. But if resistance against these convictions is implied in their course of sin, our ar- gument is sustained even by the very threatenings of the scriptures ; because the crime of the resistance consists in its being an opposition to those very tendencies ascribed to faith. Their living in sin, therefore, instead of dispro- ving the practical influence of faith, by exciting all holy affections, and inducing to all good works, is demonstration that faith has that influence. And even this touching the heart, as it is called, which so many think to imply a full initiation into all the myste- ries of spiritual living — does it involve no deception ? or never end in a moral result as equivocal as that which the ardent sectary so familiarly and unhesitatingly reprobates as mere speculation? We live in an age of " revivals" and "protracted meetings," of matins and vespers, of weekly lectures, and of religious associations almost with- out end. And are not all these, which shut out the min- ister from his study, and prevent the people from thinking, designed to produce excitement, to rouse feeling — to touch the heart ? Are there no hasty purposes by which the sinner, who has felt much, and thought none, "commits" himself? Even with those who tell us that "the saint cannot fall from grace," are there no falling away of " hopeful" con- verts ? Have these " new measures" awakened no painful MORAL GOVERNMENT. 173 suspicions? called forth no warning prophet? produced no controversy? ended in no evil? As chivalrous as they are mechanical, and as poisonous as they are exciting, these movements are but too painful an illustration of what many mean by touching the heart, and of their gross mis- conceptions of the work of the Holy Spirit. Accordingly a new proposition asks for " rectified revivals;" and, admit- ting the value of " protracted meetings," yet would restrain their frequency — perhaps to copy out the festivals of the obsolete Jewish ritual, or the holy days of a papal rule of faith, and establish an annual ordinance. The standard of piety, I greatly fear, is at present a very childish sophism. The whole experiment, notwithstanding it is sustained by so much effervescence, will terminate in languor and cold- ness, and substitute for the morality of domestic and civic life, the mere versatility and exaggeration of outward forms. In averring that faith has a tendency to produce all the varieties of practical godliness, I have had no intention of attributing to it an irresistible mechanical force. What- ever may be predicated of man, viewed in his probationa- ry character under the government of God, must be con- sistent with his free agency, or it is false in morals. There may be a thousand counteracting agencies, whose tendency would naturally lead to practical ungodliness. They are equally destitute of mechanical force ; and yet a man may feel their full influence, and suffer himself to be misled by them into most criminal indigencies. He may choose the good or he may choose the evil, for God has characterized him by freedom of will : but his mistakes are at his own peril. He lives in the midst of circumstances where there is an intermixture of good and evil — each having its own associations, or being a property of every part of the sys- tem. He has intelligence to discern between them, and the gospel is intended to afford him the greatest facilities in following the one and avoiding the other, which his condition will admit. His knowledge of evil can exert no 15* 174 LECTURES ON irresistible agency ; for his knowledge of God, by the in- troduction of the gospel, is more than equivalent to that agency. Yet he may yield to that agency which he can resist. His first parents, though more happily situ- ated, became polluted by transgression, and angels them- selves fell, and were dealt with as guilty. Thus man may fall at this hour, and be condemned as faulty and criminal in falling. And such is the scriptural view of his case in his present condition. He minds the things of the flesh, instead of minding the things of the spirit. He has cherished instead of mortifying his lusts. He has loved the world instead of loving God. He has tried to effect a compromise between God and mammon ; but has failed in the impracticable scheme, and fallen a victim, as he might have forseen, to the lust which he brought into competition with his moral sense. He has entertained the agents which decoy to evil, and thus nurtured his passions with all their hurtful tendencies ; and he has done this at the expense of his better convictions and his purer feelings. The opera- tion is common, and the consequences are natural. No mechanical force is necessary to explain the catastrophe. The human mind may, after having reached the most vivid conviction of any particular truth, soon loose the se?ise or impression of that truth. Pains may not be taken to preserve its freshness. Its value may not be fully cre- dited, and attention may be withheld from it : and so a ready admission may be given to other impressions than its own, and which may be very insidiously made. Its com- panions may not be sought — the mind may not persevere in its habit of inquiry — a single virtue may be thought suf- ficient— and thus an appearance of morality will cover a formal treaty with lust, or serve as an apology for indo- lence. The sense of truth is in this manner lost, and con- viction has not produced its natural results. In order to preserve the force of truth when it has been acquired, its bidding must be obeyed, and its influence be sustained by practical effort. Otherwise there will be a total failure in MORAL GOVERNMENT. 175 the great work of regeneration, by which alone, as being an 'entire transformation, man can be fitted for the enjoy- ments of heaven. There is a vast deal of moral philoso- phy in the simple adage — "practice makes perfect;" and in no connexion is its philosophy 'more apparent than in the cultivation of faith. Faith leads to works, and " by works faith is made perfect." Without works, faith is like a body without a spirit — it is in an unnatural state — it is dead. There is no matter of wonder that a man, who re- sists his own convictions, should soon loose this sense or im- pression of truth on his own mind ; or, in other words, that he who does not yield to their influence, or follow out their tendency, until his affections shall become gracious, should lose the convictions themselves, and be justly de- nominated an unbeliever. The Redeemer very explicitly stated to the jews, that they could not attain to evangelical truth in any other way* They were very much astonished at the moral elevation which he evidently occupied, and seriously inquired by what method he had reached it. '* How knoweth this man letters," they asked, " having never learned?" To this he replied — "My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me. If any man will do Ms will, he shall know of the doctrine. whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself." To apply the principle of this answer — Every man has some degree of knowledge. The very heathen, as we have seen, have the law written on their hearts, and do b)r nature the things contained in the law. Their own con- science is ever bearing witness to them ; and God himself has afforded them ample and varied exhibitions of his nature and proceedings. It is surely not too much to as- sert that, in christian lands, the elemental truths in evan- gelical morals are equally apparent. If any man, be he christian or heathen, shall do the will of God as far as he knows it, or shall carry out into actual practice the convic- tions which he cannot disavow, he shall continue to grow 170 LECTURES ON in knowledge to the whole extent of his effort. The prin- ciple may be carried up to the highest degree of moral re- finement, to the greatest reach of intellectual improve- ment, or to the loftiest assurance of faith ; and it can be as effectually and profitably applied in that condition of ex- tended privileges. The sphere of action has then become enlarged ; all the fine affections and more delicate sensi- bilities of the human heart, all the broad and expanded views, and all the magnificent conceptions of the human mind ; all the dependencies of human life, in which mul- titudes, unable to sustain themselves, look out for a leader, desire instruction and call for example; are then to be supported by the practical operations of faith. He who has received ten talents, must do the will of God, so fully and extensively, as to gain ten talents more: at the same time that he who has received but one talent, moves in an humbler sphere and with feebler ability, to gain one talent. These moral agents cannot exchange places ; but each must do the will of God according to his ability. If either declines to meet his own personal obligation — it matters not which of them it shall be — he resists his own convic- tion, loses the sense or impression of divine truth on his own mind, and retrogades into unbelief. It is natural that it should be so ; and just as natural as that he should grow in knowledge by doing the divine will. " If any man be a hearer of the word," says James, " and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a glass, and goeth his way, and straightway forgctieth what manner of man he was." Christian, jew, or heathen, will be alike amenable to the unhappy issue ; for it follows, simply ac- cording to the essential laws of human nature, which have indissoiubly connected faith with works, op principle with action. Christian, jew, or heathen, in the very act of re- sisting conscience, will sear conscience ; or, not liking to re- lain God in his knowledge, will sink into a reprobate con- dition of mind. MORAL GOVERNMENT. 1?T There is another scriptural subject which is closely allied to faith, because it is analogous in its character ; and which is, perhaps, as widely misunderstood. I refer to repen- tance : and call it up in this place, both for its own sake, and on account of its analogical attributes. It is not un- common to hear of some, who are alwa}^s repenting and always sinning, or alternately sinning and repenting ; and it is equally common to view the convulsions of feeling which others may experience, the many sighs they heave, and the floods of tears they shed, as being truly peniten- tial. Indeed great effort is frequently made to produce these paroxyms of feeling ; and that effort is giving char- acter to the ministerial operations of the present age. Sin being a great evil, abominable in its nature, and fearful in its consequences, it seems befitting that the sinner should deeply mourn ; and that he should so deeply mourn, as though he had discovered himself to be " the' chief of sin- ners," the vilest of the vile; a very wretch, whose visage has not a lineament of moral beauty, and whose heart is nothing but " a cage of unclean birds." This awful con- viction being produced, and all hope being merged in a sense of self-degradation, so that the sinner begins to writhe in agony, and tells in unmeasured terms the torture of his soul, repentance is supposed to be strikingly exempli- fied. To such a statement of the interesting subject be- fore us, I do most seriously demur : my ideas of repen- tance are totally different; yet they neither justify sin, nor exclude feeling : but they are far more consonant, as I be- lieve, with the condition of man under the proclamation of mercy — under which whosoeve?- will, may be saved. I do not see how, nor why, any man should be brought into such a state of mind, who has not harboured some most diabolical intentions, or committed some most flagrant trans- gressions ; who is not entirely ignorant of the calls of mer- cy, and therefore, put on his justification under law ; who has not been brought under some artificial excitement, 17- LECTURES ON which is neither wise nor pious ; or who is not a pitiable instance of nervous derangement, whom no argument can reach, nor promises soothe. This kind of feeling appears to me to be that worldly sorrow which, Paul declares, worketh death : such as distracted the bosom of Judas, when he threw back in anguish the thirty pieces of silver, and in horrible despair terminated his wretched existence. These ideas of repentance, which happily may be more rare than I imagine. I suppose to originate in an injudi- cious theory, which refers the sinner to law. as the con- demning power under which he lives. Xow the fact is that we are under grace, and not under law. The call to repentance is not a legal, but an evangelical matter. No man since the fall has ever been under law : unless the symbolical exhibition of law, involved in the Jewish dis- pensation, be considered as throwing the children of Israel into that relation. Change the fact, and bring law, deprived of all the modifications of the divine government which grace has introduced, to bear in its appropriate force upon the human conscience, and I readily grant that we maybe remitted to unmingled terror, and to the wildest distraction, •ciate with such a statement of the law a correspond- ing view of the divine character, and introduce upon the whirlwind the coming Judge, infinite in justice and al- mighty in power, instead of describing: the yearnings and declaring the loving; kindness of the God and Father of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, and the tumultuous horror is protracted. Much I fear that this is sometimes done in the most unwarrantable manner, as though the Sa- viour were yet to die, and God were to be reconciled. The effect thus produced inspires the individual, who so keenly suffers, with false views of God, and sends him forth into the world to criticise and condemn his brethren by a mis- taken standard of piety : to inject doubts, where he should have offered consolation ; or to stand off in all the coldness of suspicion, when he should have unreservedly afforded MORAL GOVERNMENT. 179 the sympathies of a broher's heart. Such an effect is un- desirable in every view ; and, in the guise of evangelical purity, makes sad the heart of those whom God has not made sad. Repentance is evangelical in its character, and ought to be equally so in its terms. Thus it is set forth in the scriptures, and thus it ought to be exhibited from min- isterial lips. There are two greek words which the inspired writers have used in their various grammatical forms, and which our translators have uniformly rendered repent, or repen- tance. The one signifies an uneas}r condition of mind : a state of regret or sorrow, for something that has been done, without any regard either to duration or effects. So Judas is said to have repented. The other word expresses a change of mind ; and consequently of conduct or behavior. Both these terms are used by the apostle, when he remarks that, " Godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation, not to be repented of." This "play upon the Avord repent" is not in the original ; which would be better rendered — ' Godly sorrow worketh repentance unto salvation not to be re- gretted.'* The word, which signifies a change of mind, is always used, when the repentance under consideration is called for. Manifestly no sorrow for sin, however protract- ed or deep, makes up repentance before God. Something more — a great deal more — is required, and that in the most positive and solemn terms. Many a man weeps over his sin, and greatly regrets it, who has not repented, because he commits it still. His feelings have been transitory ; his mind has not been changed ; and until his views are en- tirely altered, and sin is abandoned with a firm and intelli- gent purpose ; until his feelings, under the direction of an enlightened mind, have become pure and staid ; and until his habits shall be correct and uniform ; he has not, how- ever deep his sorrow, heavy his sighs, or loud his lamenta- tions, attained to repentance unto salvation. * See Campbell's Four Gos. Dis. vi. p. 3. 180 LECTURES ON Very probably repentance has been misapprehended for the same reason that faith has been misconceived : i. e. it is viewed as the gift of God ; and therefore the intellectual operation it implies has been slighted. Christ, it will be said, has been " exalted to give repentance unto Israel, and forgiveness of sins." But it is to be observed that the word Israel is a general term, and is applied to the whole nation of the jews. And can it be said that repentance was bestowed as an individual gift upon that people ? or that repentance was, strictly speaking, a gift to them at all ? Certainly not ; for that nation, instead of repenting, were cut off. A more liberal construction must therefore be sought ; and giving must be taken in the sense of procla- mation. Instead of cutting them off instantly, Jehovah waited on them in much long suffering, calling upon them by his apostle to repent ; and delaying, in order to give them full opportunity to repent. Hence Paul reasons with them on this principle — " Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness, and forbearance, and long suffering kindness; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth (moveth, exciteth, or urgeth) thee to repentance ? But after thy hard- ness and impenitent heart, treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath." The same expression — God's giving repentance — is also applied to the gentiles. When Peter " rehearsed" unto his brethren the occurrences that had transpired during his vi- sit to Cornelius, they rejoiced and said — "Then hath God also unto the gentiles granted (given) repentance unto life." The language is general, and denotes the call of the gen- tiles, according to the purpose of election, which had been distinctly announced by the prophets. The great matter of offence with Peter was, that he had gone among gen- tiles. The inference drawn from his explanation was, that he had done right, and that from henceforth any of them might imitate his example ; seeing that it was now evident MORAL GOVERNMENT. 181 that God had conferred the privileges of the gospel upon the gentiles, as well as upon the jews. In like manner, Zacharias, being filled with the Holy Spirit, prophesied concerning his son John the baptist — " Thou shalt go before the face of the Lord, to prepare his way; to give knowledge of salvation unto his people." — The same kind of phraseology is used in relation to Jeze- bel— " T gave her space to repent — and she repented not." In fact this mode of expression is common with both pro- fajne and sacred writers. Faith resembles repentance in this respect ; or is the gift of God in a similar manner. The human mind is pas- sive in neither, but is active in both. And the texts which are brought to show that faith is directly the gift of God. are like those which have been advanced to establish a cor- responding view in relation to repentance. Thus — "Unto you it is given* in the behalf of Christ, not only to believe on him, but also to suffer for his sake." Here suffering is as much the gift of God as faith is ; and evidently nothing more is intended, than is implied in Peter's declaration — " for even hereunto were ye called, because Christ also liath suffered for us." The suffering, which is alluded to. resulted from the nature of the calling, to which those who endured were required to respond under peculiar circum- stances. The mind is not passive, but is called particular- ly to endure ; which requires a great deal of active energy. Such was the duty assigned to the Philippians — not only to believe, but also to suffer. And that duty was assigned to, or this task devolved upon them, with the view of their promoting more efficiently the kingdom of Christ ; so that the matter of favor figuratively applied to the means, be- longs properly to the object. Suffering, simply considered, is not a gift ; nor is it so represented in this passage ; but, it is spoken of in an official view. Being then placed un- * A particular favor has been granted, or ye have been favored. Vol. II. — 16 182 LECTURES ON der those circumstances which called for suffering, the whole text must be interpreted on the same general prin- ciple : i. e. He who has been exalted a Prince and a Sa- viour, to give, to grant, or to proclaim, repentance unto Israel and remission of sin, hath given unto you — hath called up- on you — not only to believe, but also to suffer. And such being the call, you must not decline it in either respect. Again, it is said — " For by grace are ye saved, through faith ; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God." In this expression, the apostle is supposed to assert une- quivocally that faith is directly the gift of God." But a little reflection may convince any one that the expositor has been too rapid : for why may not the relative refer to the whole proposition as well as to faith ? It is the gift of God that "ye are saved by grace through faith." The whole economy is a divine gift, and particularly was so to the Ephesians ; because they, being gentiles, were now called in, according to the purpose of election, which Je- hovah was executing at the time in erecting the new dis- pensation. This peculiar favor, conferred on the Ephesians, was the very subject which he was arguing out with them ; as is evident from the whole chapter from which the text is taken. " You," says he, " who were dead in trespasses and in sins, hath he quickened — That in the ages to come he might show the exceeding riches of his grace." If any one should demur to this analysis, and assert that feith is the nearest antecedent, and that therefore the relative must necessarily refer to it, we must ask him to go a little far- ther, and to observe the grammatical construction of the sentence. He will find that the relative is in the neuter gender, while the supposed antecedent is feminine. Of course they cannot agree ; and the assertion, that faith is the gift of God, is not in the text. Further remark must be entirely unnecessary. These two matters then, faith and repentance, are intel- lectual exercises : repentance is change of mind, and with MORAL GOVERNMENT. 1£# the heart man believeth unto righteousness. In view of a general argument the}'- illustrate each other, as kindred ope- rations of mind. They differ as the corresponding phrases in the old testament — forsake your sins and turn unto the Lord — differ. The call to repentance, requires of men to alter their views, feelings and habits — to abandon or re- nounce them, because they are sinful. The call to faith, requires of men to accept the offers of mercy, and to think, feel, and act accordingly. A compliance with these calls imperiously demands the human soul to put forth all its en- ergies— which effort being declined, or carelessly made, sin is committed, and condemnation incurred. It thus appears that the call to believe, like the call to do, results from the simplest attributes of man as an intel- lectual being. He has been made for faith and action. There can be nothing so deeply mysterious, nor so awfully distant and impracticable, in a system of evangelic legisla- tion, which requires of man the very effort that his nature was framed to produce. Between believing and doing, as distinguishing features of gospel and law, there is no dif- ference, excepting that which arises from our present con- dition as encompassed by infirmity, when contrasted with the original condition of Adam, as he came from the hands of God. The simple reason why faith is called for as it is, is that man cannot meet the original requisition of works ; and the very next step, in the process of his intellectual operations, is to take him up where he stands, and to effect the object of his creation, by turning to the best account whatever remains. He can believe a truth which is demon- strated to him ; and to act accordingly is the natural result. The present institute of grace is as philosophical as the original institute of works ; or the gospel is as consistent with human nature in its present condition, as law was con- sistent with human nature in its original condition. The question which involves the agency of the Spirit of God in the evangelic objects under consideration, would now 184 LECTURES ON demand our attention. This, however, is a subject which requires to be discussed by itself; and I shall take it up in the next lecture, when a fair opportunity of exhibiting the general principles belonging to it will be afforded* LECTURE XVI. Subject continued — Divine power, whether physical or moral — Spirit's operations — Analogies — Physical agents — Philosophy of means — .Mistakes of official men — The moral sense — Popular hypothesis examined — Doctrine of Faith sustained — Individual application. After having explained the nature and operations of faith, on the common principles which belong to the cha- racter of man as an intellectual being, the question — whe- ther he has the power to believe, becomes a mere' inquiry whether he has ability to observe, read, and hear? or to think, reason, decide, and act in relation to any thing he has observed, or read, or heard ? We might as well ask — can the farmer plough, sow, reap, and gather into his gar- ner? Can the mechanic handle the implements of his trade ; or ingeniously contrive and promptly execute those various combinations, which have both multiplied and suppli- ed the artificial wants of mankind ? Can the philosopher, by his researches, ascertain the laws of nature, trace the path of a celestial luminary, or analyse the properties of matter ? These queries are too simple and plain to admit any hesitancy in reptying. And if man has power to do all this, where lies the difficulty ? Is it not strange that there should be any perplexity about such a familiar matter ? But it will be said, that the argument maintained pre- cludes all the Spirit's operations, and shuts out divine power MORAL GOVERNMENT. Ifc5 from all concern with the subject. If so, I recant, and con- demn the whole reasoning so carefully elaborated. But is it the fact, that the Spirit of God has nothing to do with the operations of the farmer, the mind of the mechanic, or the genius of the philosopher ? If, instead of faith, we had been so fortunate as to enjoy vision, would such superior ability have rendered us independent of divine power ? Or doth not Jehovah " hang creation on his arm, and feed it at his board?" Why then should not faith be as fairly repre- sented in its own place, as vision may be in its own place ? Is diminution of power an annihilation of power ? Or may not man be a responsible agent, as well as an angel ? — There must be some fearful premises, both distant and occult, from which the conclusions we would combat arise ; or moralists would never have gotten into such unhappy collision with all the plain perceptions of common sense, and the beauti- ful analogies of nature. Let us minutely trace one of these analogies. A says to B — the farmer cannot plough nor sow his field. B stands astonished at so unblushing a declaration, which every one may be conscious is untrue, and intimates his great sur- prise. A replies — I made the statement merely for illus- tration, and freely admit that the farmer can plough and ^sow his field. The dispute is at an end. But C steps in and remarks, the farmer cannot plough and sow his field, unless God shall co-operate with him. He is a poor feeble creature, and his Creator must support him every hour, and in every movement ; and not only so, but he must bless his labors, and by a providential agency make the earth to bring forward the seed sown to the maturity of harvest. I know it rejoins A; God sends forth his Spirit, and the face of earth is renewed ; nor did I intend to utter any doubt about the agency of divine providence. So I understood you, adds B ; for the connexion and consistency between the farmer's ability to plough and sow, and the co-operating agency of God, is too plain and evident to be denied. And in fact 16* 186 LECTURES OJV the farmer ploughs and sows, because he knows that God sustains him, and will bless his labors. — All parties are agreed, and the controversy is over. And thus all the world talk about ability and inability ; and say what can, and what cannot be done, with well defined ideas, and in perfect har- mony. No evil passions are engendered ; no harsh lan- guage is used ; every one does his duty in his own place ; and the beautiful system which God has formed, is pre- served in regular and uniform operation. I desire to be as plainly understood in my ideas of faith. When I say that man can believe, I have not a solitary doubt with regard to the Spirit's agency or an overruling providence. On the contrary, the promises of the gospel guaranty to us this divine agency ; and the believer "works out his own salvation with fear and trembling," because he knows that " God works in him, both to will and to do, of his own good pleasure ;" just as the farmer goes forth to plough and sow, knowing that God will sus- tain his being and prosper his labors. I mean nothing more, nor any thing less. Dropping technical terms, I use words in their plain aud common acceptation, and suppose man in his moral relations to be the same creature that he is in other relations. And if christians in general would adopt this course, they would soon understand Christianity, and understand one another. The scriptures speak in this man- ner *- and appeal to the analogies of nature, which no one mistakes, to illustrate their meaning. To return to the analogy, and change the point of argu- ment.—.^ says to B, the farmer must plough and sow his field. He has no choice in the case. B is as much aston- ished as before, and again expresses his surprise. Jl must again recant, for the proposition is too monstrous to be sus- tained. And C can have nothing to object; for here the equiv- ocal doctrine of election would be out of place, though one man is rich, and another is poor. No decree beyond the com- mon laws of nature is suspected ; and, as the free agency MORAL GOVERNMENT. 187 of the farmer stands undisputed, all ideas of compulsion are cheerfully given up. Some individual, laboring under a pitiable obliquity, or yielding to the prejudice of a griev- ously faulty education, or anxiously endeavoring to invent an apology for criminal indolence, might frame an objec- tion, whose apparent ingenuity would please himself. But all the world would smile at the petty conceit, and, having no time to wraste on the freaks of abstract theory, would industriously pursue their course ; while he himself, not capricious enough to carry out his own system, would eat his daily bread and enjoy his nightly rest, as though he knew that effects had causes, or that ends were to be ac- complished by means. The truth of the case is simply this. The farmer is fully aware that labor is the common lot of humanity, and that unalloyed good is not to be attained in this world ; that, if he does not plough and sow, he can reap no crop, for the beams of the sun and showers of rain will not supply his lack of service : that he must gain bread by the sweat of his brow, or starve ; that he must provide for his own house, or make his wife a widow, and his chil- dren fatherless, before he descends to the grave ; that to neglect his employment, and to "follow vain persons," is to show himself " void of understanding," while his field is "all grown over with thorns, and nettles hath covered the the face thereof;" and that his indolence will convert him into a wretched and degraded pauper, reduce him to infamy and crime, prepare for him an inglorious death and a dis- honored grave, and usher him into the presence of an an- gry God only to banish him to hell. These are spirit-stir- ring reflections. The}' inspire him with motives both ra- tional and powerful, and he neither " observeth the wind," nor " regardeth the clouds," but goeth forth to his labor with the morning dawn, gathers his fruits in their seasons, and is "satisfied with bread." Reverse the picture, and the disastrous consequences of which he had been distinct- ly forewarned, come in regular and rapid and certain sue- 188 LECTURES ON cession. His own conscience accuses and condemns ; and all the world affirms the decree, pronouncing a "judgment that will not linger, " and "a damnation that will not slum- ber." Just so do I understand the matter in reference to reli- gion. The christian is a moral farmer, and is called to plough and sow, if he desires to reap. A thousand motives, involving honor and happiness, both individual and social ; extending tn their application both to time and eternity ; and which he can comprehend and appreciate, agitate his mind. His soul feels their power ; for they are not mere words whose sound has fallen on his ear, but " they are spirit and life," and have reached his-inmost mind. He must obey their impulse and live, or resist and perish. There is no other alternative. God, in much forbearance, is ever varying the form in which these interesting truths are presented ; or, multiplying and simplifying their illus- trations, is waiting for a decision ; or, inducing a review when a false decision is made, and appealing, while the moral sense is not entirely stupified, he appears to calculate on its last and least remains. Angels have tuned their harps, and wait to rejoice. Ministers, parents, a ransomed church, wait. How can the sinner resist ? Or resisting, say — let common sense speak — is he not guilty — fearfully guilty ? It appears to me, that theologians have failed satisfacto- rily to illustrate the subject of divine power, in view of its mediatorial operations, or in respect of its consistency with human free agency, because they have never considered, or have lost sight of, that which constitutes its peculiarity. Speaking by one of his prophets, Jehovah uses this sin- gular language: — " Not by might, nor by power, but by my Spirit, saith the Lord of hosts." There is a distinction between might or power and the Spirit of the Lord. You may then make a difference between physical power and moral influence if you please, and as multitudes do ; but remember that Jehovah speaks of acting by his Spirit Moral government, jssi as distinguished from power. The scriptural reference, in relation to this matter, is uniformly to the agency of this Spirit; and if you predicate power of that agency > as in- spired writers have unquestionably done, you must not for- get the distinction which has been so pointedly expressed * This fact, that Jehovah acts by his Spirit — meaning, re- collect, not might or power — is the peculiarity to which I adverted ; and its force must be fully and accurately esti-» mated, before the subject in hand can be understood. When I remarked, that theologians appear to have lost sight of this peculiarity, it was not intended to assert that they do not refer to the agency of the Spirit, in their spe- culations on divine power. They are exceedingly free and abundant in their allusions to the divine Spirit ; in their quotations of biblical phrase which proclaims his ope- rations; in their prayers for his outpouring, and in their praise for results which they have been impelled to ascribe to his presence and goodness. But after all, they are con- tending whether it is physical or moral power which is ex- erted ; are laboring to sustain their dogmas as consistent with human free agency ; and, when they have finished their lucubrations, they retreat into mystery as their last resort. You feel that not only the subject is not explained, but that the explanation they profess to give, involves you in fresh difficulties; and readily ask — " Why then are not all men saved r" — " Must not all men be saved ?" — " Is it the sinner's fault if he should not be saved, seeing that his salvation depends on an exercise of divine power, which is both sovereign and irresistible ?" Is it any matter of won- der, that a system of divine policy, like that involved in the preceding statement, should perplex the world ? But how, I pray you, could theologians help themselves? Their doctrine of power is the legitimate and necessary result of their view of the agent who exerts the power. Their idea of trinity leads them to represent the agent as a distinct divine person. Means may be used, but means 190 LECTURES ON are insufficient, and the agent must proceed to act with his own hands. Of course he exerts his physical agen- cy, and must accomplish a physical result. With the premises which they have adopted, these commentators are perfectly right in referring the mediatorial operation to di- vine omnipotence. When that agent calls for the use of secondaiy means, they are right again in insisting on the use of those means, because as a sovereign he does what he pleases ? And when they tell the world that they can- not explain the consistency between these two — that it is a mystery — that we must wait until we get into the next world — they are right a third time ; for the human mind cannot reconcile such discrepancies. Their error is in the start. The first step taken is wrong. If the Spirit is not a distinct divine person, the whole argument, which hinges on the supposition that he is, is immediately chang- ed ; and the popular idea of power must be dropped. Let us call back the simile — the image — by which this sub- ject was illustrated on a former occasion,* and which Paul so unequivocally employs, when he says — " What man know- eth the things of man, save the spirit of man which is in him? Even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God."t When you would explain the operations of the Spirit of God, you must take up the only compe- tent analogy which is afforded you, and that is to be found in the operations of the spirit of man. You have no reason to proceed timidly in the illustration ; for an in- spired apostle has taught you to employ the image ; and you will find yourselves, as you proceed, getting out into light and truth. Now when you speak of a man acting on the minds of his fellow men, do you mean that he is exerting physical power? or do you intend to convey the idea of what you call moral influence ? When a man is bodily present to accomplish some particular design by his own hands, or when being bodily absent, it is executed by others under * See Lee. IV. f l Cor. ii. 12, MORAL GOVERNMENT. ]91 the influence of his spirit, is there any difference ? Which of these is physical, and which is moral power ? When Paul says to the Corinthians — " I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged already, as though I were present, concerning him that hath so done this deed ; in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gather- ed together, and my spirit, &c." — when Paul brought his apostolic influence thus to bear upon the case involved, was it physical or moral ? When an author's spirit pervades his book, and through that agency convinces his reader by his argument and illustrations, what kind of influence does he exert ? When a father, going from his house, is said to leave his spirit behind him, what is the character of that controlling influence which is felt by his family ? is it phy- sical or moral? When Solomon says — " Where the word of a king is, there is power : and who may say unto him, what doestthou?" what kind of power is it — physical or moral? And when the Son of man, "as a man taking afar journey, who left his house, and gave authority to his sei- vants, and to every man his work, and commanded the porter to watch," they not knowing when the master of the house should return — when thus Jesus ascended on high and promised that his Spirit should dwell in the church, to convince the world of sin, of righteousness and of judg- ment, what kind of influence is exerted? is it physical or moral ? When that Spirit acts by the word of truth — written or preached, what power — physical or moral — will you expect him to exert? — Can it be personal, when the person is removed, and the presence of the Spirit alone is felt ? Yet it must be personal, if the agent be a person, and be personally present. Again. On the principle of illustration thus exhibited, can you feel any difficulty in respect of human free agen- cy ? Were the Corinthians not free agents wThen, by Paul's direction and in communion with his spirit, they excom- municated the individual concerning whom he wrote? Is 192 LECTURES ON the reader destitute of free agency when he feels the spirit of the author whose book he reads, and by whose argu- ment he has been convinced ? Have children lost their free agency, because they feel parental influence, though their father is not personally present? When the spirit of the community has chosen its official agents, and estab- lished various institutions for the purpose of government, do the citizens forfeit their free agency ? Is it folly to talk any longer of liberty ? Or does free agency imply the desecration of truth and righteousness, and the means by which they are held up to observation ? Is there any mys- tery about the political or intellectual operation ? Must we wait to escape from this state of being, where we see as " through a glass darkly," and to enter into the loftier re- lations and the clearer atmosphere of a better world, where, with the refined organs of a spiritual body, we shall see as we are seen, before we can understand the philosophy of political ethics ? If these things are plain now, and create no perplexity to the philosopher or the moralist, why should we feel any difficulty in view of our free agency in christian morals, or because God "strengthens us with all might by his Spirit in the inner man ?." This exposition of divine power, which so happily corresponds with intellectual fellowship, afforded in all other social re- lations, leaves the human mind precisely in that condition where, from the nature of the case, it ought to be left; where every thinking man perceives it to be ; and where no confusion, nor uneasiness, nor uncertainty can be pro- duced. The principle which so entirely clears up the subject of human liberty, and yet brings in a divine influ- ence so salutary and efficient, while no objections can be reasonably made, must be true. It may enable you more fully to appreciate the ar- gument of the preceding paragraphs, if I remind you of the distinction beiveen soul and spirit in man, which we MORAL GOVERNMENT. 193 before made.* Spi-rit is the intellectual part of man, ir- respective of its bodily connexions. Soul is that same intellectual part of man in its embodied state. Soul, when predicated of Jehovah, always refers to that divine person which was constituted at first by the assumption of form, and was denominated the Word ; which Word was after- wards "made flesh," and dwelt among us in "the man Christ Jesus," affording thereby to mankind an exact image of the divine Person. Such is the scriptural testimony. Having the distinction again before you, you may now observe that this divine power, which we have under con- sideration, is not ascribed to the soul but to the spirit of of God. Search and see. You cannot find any allusions ■of the kind, excepting under the Jewish dispensation, when Jehovah presided, so to speak, in his own proper Per- son, or as Creator and Lawgiver. Our concern is with the mediatorial institute, where the reference is to Jeho- vah's Spirit. The exception which thus occurred under the former economy, when you duly consider the nature and objects of that economy, confirms the idea now advanced; and leaves us to interpret the divine influence by the laws of spirit, as it is distinguished from soul. It cannot be otherwise, for we cannot see God and live. The original manifestation is inappropriate to our present condition as sin- ners ; and, therefore, when a second manifestation is afford- ed, a second divine Person must be constituted ; and thus two Gods would be revealed to us, or God must act ac- cording to the pure philosophy of such a transaction — by his Spirit. Hence the Redeemer told his disciples that when the Spirit should come, he would not speak of him- self. It is precisely here where the whole scheme and doctrine of means arise. Theologians admit — they most strenu- ously contend for — " the use of means." A man who cannot accomplish in his own proper person, or by hii *See Lee. V. Lee. IX. Vol. II.— 17 194 LECTURES ON own individual acts, an object he has in view, employs se- condary agencies. I say secondary: for as they are era- ployed by him, he is the primary agent. His spirit moves, animates, controls them. They are his means. — A philo- sopher wishes to instruct the community. His voice can- not be heard very far. His strength will not hold out long. His argument may be dense, and require patient and care- ful study. His object may be to reach higher classes of mind, that they, in their turn, may instruct the lower classes. The explanations he has to make, the experi- ments he wishes to describe, the doctrines he is very de- sirous to sustain, he designs shall live after he has gone to his fathers. Here is* a long series of effects which may place him by the side of Aristotle, Plato, and a multitude of others. It is obvious that he cannot accomplish all this in his own proper person. He writes a book, which is read by thousands. Many espouse his doctrines, and use his volume as a manual for the instruction of others — you cannot number up all the agencies which are thus employ- ed. And these are his means. His spirit animates them all. He has put them all in motion ; and by them, like Abel, though dead, he yet speaks. This species of intel- lectual operation pervades social life in all its departments. All the different branches of science — moral, political, le- gal, medical, mechanical — are now taught as they were exhibited by the master spirits of some preceding ages. Nay, you cannot start aside from the beaten tract without being reviled for your heresy, lashed for your presump- tion, and avoided for your impiety. The glory of great names, the authority of precedents, the infallibility of the fathers — under such "tutors and governors," like dutiful children, we all live. The example which I offer you in illustration "must needs" be perfectly understood. •Let us delineate another. A prince cannot be person- ally present in all parts of his dominion at once. There is no sense in which ubiquity can be predicated of him. MORAL GOVERNMENT. 195 unless it be that his spirit is every where felt by the in- strumentality of the secondary agents he employs — his officers, laws, institutions, courts, military or* naval estab- lishments. Thus, and thus alone, he sustains his adminis- tration. All things go on according to his wishes, as though he were present. He will impress his image upon his country — upon his age — upon generations to come. Alexander, Caesar, Washington, Bounaparte, though, dead, stilL live among men, like Aristotle, Plato, Newton, Bacon, and a host of others. Here again every thing is plain and easy to be apprehended. • On this principle, why may not the Creator of the world, though he be not visible to the eye of his creatures, move and reign among them by his Spirit ? Creation is his store-house of means — a tissue of secondary agencies which he employs. Why may not the Redeemer thus rule on earth — the Lord of glory sustaining his evangelic admin- istration by his Spirit ? He is no more visibly dwelling anions: us — we henceforth know him no more after the flesh. If he reigns at all, it must be by his Spirit. There is no other line of policy to be pursued. And commentators on the mediatorial government must either freely and fully admit the whole doctrine, or give up the subject. They do not admit the doctrine when they descant, as they often do, upon the use of means or on the action of the Spirit ; and they s;ive up the subject whenever they retreat into mystery, or stretch the sovereignty of the divine govern- ment beyond its own proper attributes. Here then we take our stand, and interpret the pow'er of God, so far as it is the subject of our discussion, by the laws of Spirit, as Spirit is to be distinguished from Soul. But it may be that we have not yet entirely escaped from the entanglements of the philosophy which we have endeavored to expose. The means which are employed, it may be said, are physical: and, it will be argued, we are necessarily under the action of physical power. It is un- 196 LECTURES ON questionably true that the material system affords to us, as well as to the great Governor of the world, the means of action. Such was the object and design of that system. It was intended to subserve a moral purpose, and to furnish to moral beings their secondary agencies. But will it fol- low that the moral purpose must be forgotten? that the moral being must be degraded to a level with his seconda- ry agencies? that the material system must be consider- ed as primary ? or that we have no will to exercise, no liberty to choose ? Is there nothing wrong in stretching a system beyond itself? Have we heard nothing of the evil of being carnal, when we ought to have been spiritual ? Suppose we subject this matter to the test of experi- ence. The prince has forgotten to be a father to his peo- ple, and has put on the character of the military chieftain. Swords and bayonets, armies and navies, mighty prepa- rations for war and slaughter, have been the secondary agents which his ambition has selected. What has been the result? His subjects have been despoiled of their free agency — politicians would say, of their liberty. See what physical power has done ! It is no wonder that theolo- gians cannot sustain human free agency in consistency with their view of divine power; for you see that the di- rect consequence of physical power, when carried beyond its appropriate limits, is the destruction of free agency. Again. The priest has forgotten his official place. In- stead of being a "helper" to the people of God, he has become their " lord." The gibbet and the stake, the star-chamber and the inquisition, the synod and the coun- cil, both general and particular — by such agencies as these mankind have been despoiled of their rights — their moral liberties, their ecclesiastical free agency. The sanction which ecclesiastical law has extended to these measures, can be justified in no way but by the doctrine of physical power. By maintaining that doctrine, moralists have been united with political and military chieftains in a crusade MORAL GOVERNMENT. 197 against the well-being of man. In fact, notwithstanding all their boast, there is nothing in which mankind believe so little as they do in free agency. They are afraid to trust it ; and, pretending that it will necessarily go wrong, they have trembled to let mankind have even the bible. The legislative policy pursued by the Mediator, and the reason for which is found in the circumstances of the nations, illustrates our general argument. The former economy, as an administration of law, was made up of "the elements of the world." Physical agents were em- ployed to a fearful extent — so much so that an apostle de- scribes the institute as "a yoke which neither we nor our fathers were able to bear." Jehovah presided, so to speak, in his own proper Person ; and though the Spirit, as such, exerted a moral influence — for a father may do this even when personally present in the midst of his family — yet you remember that God then spoke of motions and actions of hh Soul. " Shall not my Soul be avenged on such a nation as this ?" According to the distinction already set forth, here is room for more than moral influence. Physical power may be readily discerned and safely asserted, yet only to a certain extent : but up to the whole extent of the physical operation the influence of Spirit would be modified, as you may perceive, if you place yourselves for a moment by the burning mountain in the wilderness, and endeavor to estimate the scene of terror which made even Moses exceedingly to fear and quake. But let God be his own interpreter. He represents his people under that dis- pensation as being in a state of bondage — under bondage to physical agents, or the elements of the world — under tutors and governors like a child, and differing nothing from a servant — and the Spirit to be a Spirit of bond- age and fear. Symbolically and comparatively speaking, did not that institute, in making so large a use of physical agents, interfere with the free agency or liberty of the jews ? 17* 198 LECTURES ON On the other hand, these physical agents are discarded under the new dispensation, and in their room we have "the ministration of the Spirit." Jehovah makes no re- ference to his soul. No fearful transactions are recorded : — no mighty wind — no alarming earthquake — no consum- ing fire — but a still small voice. The whole is emphaticallv sustained by the Spirit : and to blaspheme against the Spirit, is to turn traitor to the gracious government under which we live. The ignorance of childhood is passed away. Light and knowledge have been brought in. Physical agency yields to moral influence. "Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty." Intelligent men must, and will be free ; and Jehovah's government recognises the fact, uttering a still small voice, instead of those " almighty vo- litions" of which some theologians pompously but igno- rantly speak. An apostle would say — " Stand fast in the liberty wherewith Christ has made us free, and be not en- tangled again with the yoke of bondage." I am not sure but that some one shall infer from the preceding argu- ment that, as the government of law has been represented to be a condition of bondage, it would follow that if Adam had not violated law, all mankind, who would then have been under law and not under gospel, would have been in bondage. Such a controvertist, however, must be called upon to remember that his argument assails the facts as they have been given by inspiration. He might ac- cordingly be left to settle the question with, and for?* him- self. But we have no wish to evade a difficulty, nor any objection to try the doctrine even by this test. Cannot a parent personally dwell in the midst of his children, after they are " of fall age." without destroying their individual liberty ? Some parents, we know, cannot, or do not. Their children are always children, and never are considered to be, or are not dealt with as though they were, men and wo- men. But is any parental wisdom thereby displayed ? Is such conduct right ? Is it consistent with the nature of the MORAL GOVERNMENT. 199 case ? Can such children ever become respectable, influ- ential, or prosperous ? You can have no difficulty in un- derstanding, and deciding upon such a case. Yet this is precisely what theologians have made the government of God to be, and is the real import of all their speculations about physical power and " electing love." Physical agen- cy is followed by a train of partialities, which not one of these reasoners can explain, and over which they necessa- rily throw the veil of mystery. Still further. While the Mosaic economy, considered simply as law, is described as so oppressive, it was }~et un- der the control of the evangelic principle "involved in the Abrahamic covenant. The action of this evangelical prin- ciple would imply the operation of Jehovah's Spirit, ac- cording to the distinction under consideration. Hence God said by one of his prophets — "According to the word that I covenanted with you when ye came out of Egypt, so my Spirit remaineth among you, fear ye not." The ex- istence of law as a principle of government, would not break up the moral influence involved in the operation of Spirit. You may then, if you please, carry this back to the original circumstances in which Adam was placed, and learn, that when God had finished his works, and entered into his rest, the world was left under "the ministration of the Spirit." In fact, the remedial institute is a modi- fied application of original principles. Christ, who is the exact image of the divine Person, enters into his rest, as God did, and leaves his Spirit, as God did. to sustain his rectoral plans. But leaving the political view, in reference to the divine government just advanced, out of consideration, we might anticipate the heavenly state itself, by supposing that Adam had not sinned — that all his children were consequently under law — that Jehovah presided in his own proper person as their Lord — and that men obeyed the law. Our heavenly Father would betray no want of intelligence. He 200 LECTURES ON would do whatever is right ; and all would display wisdom and love. His children, would act precisely right, and from their own inward impulse, or the impulse of their own feel- ings ; for law, in view of the original constitution of man, is written on his heart, or incorporated with his nature. Man would, in such a case, act intelligently and kindly. — How much physical power would then be required ? How much liberty is sacrificed when an intelligent being does what he knows to be right? And how much of the slave does he betra}r, when he is guided by wisdom and moves under the impulse of the best feelings ? Where love, wis- dom, and right action are found, who discovers bondage? Such a condition affords us the best view we can have of Jehovah — the very view he gives of himself; and at the same time presents men as they ought to be, and as finally they shall be — like God. That Jehovah should dwell in the midst of them under such circumstances argues any thing but the bondage of his children. To accomplish that which is right, and in the wisest and most benevolent man- ner, is the object of all government. When that is accom- plished., or when such a system of administration is regu- larly and fully sustained, government may be felt, but it will not be seen; and the feeling will be associated with every movement that is dignified, noble, generous and heavenly. The simple characteristic of the whole will be — unit}7 of Spirit. Compulsion by physical power will not be sought nor desired. Instruments of oppression would be transmuted into instruments of general use, and that which is carnal would be exchanged for that which is spi- ritual. God would be tl^p centre of union and love— God WOUld be ALL AND IN ALL. The most compendious view which the scriptures have given us of the mediatorial government, I suppose is to be found in what is commonly called " the apostolic blessing," and which is expressed in the following language — u The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and MORAL GOVERNMENT. 201 the communion of the Holy Spirit be with you all. Amen." By the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, I understand all that belongs to the mediatorial administration of Jesus in his official character, as constituted "the Head of every man." By the love of God I understand, not merely di- vine love as that in which the plan of redemption originated, but that which he, as "the Head of Christ," extends to every one who believes and acts accordingly. All who, by the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, are brought as new creatures to walk in newness of life, are objects of, and sharers in, this love of God. It therefore, occupies its ap- propriate place in the apostolic benediction, when it suc- ceeds " the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ;" and is inten- tionally put in its proper order, as that order is prescribed, not by the popular doctrine of trinity, but by the essential philosophy of Christianity as a remedial system. The com- munion of the Holy Spirit, I understand to cover our pre- sent subject; i. e. in contemplating the principles, in at- tending on the ordinances, and in performing the duties, which the gospel unfolds to the human mind, we have fel- lowship with the Spirit of God, just as we have fellowship with an author in reading his book ; with an apostle in pe- rusing one of his epistles ; with a departed friend in any memorial which may delineate an image of one who, personally, can no more be seen in this world. To realize that fellowship, in any of those intellectual exercises to which the truth may invite us, is to feel that moral influ- ence which God exerts — that wisdom and power of God which, through the preaching of a crucified Christ, con- verts the soul. Such an intellectual operation you distinctly perceive is implied in the moral influence, which is exerted by the spirit of man ; and man is like God — and like him in this very connexion. " For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him ? Even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God." The similitude thus traced out offers no violence 20-2 LECTURES ON to true philosophy. It is merely the human mind rising from fellowship with an intellectual creature, to fellowship with the intellectual Creator, and that by a direct process — communion with a brother — a father — a minister — a pro- phet— an apostle — Jehovah himself. All the way it is communion of Spirit with Spirit. Physical power be- longs no more to one part of the process than to another — no more to the operation of the Holy Spirit, than to the spirit of a father upon his child ; the spirit of a minister upon his people ; the spirit of a prophet or an apostle upon the church ; the spirit of a ruler on his subjects ; the spirit of the community upon its members ; or the spirit of the world on the ungodly. It is the communion of mind with mind, and must be explained on the laws of mind. Physical power in such relations is a very small matter; physical agencies are but the means by which the mind acts, and without which, in this material world it cannot act. Let us exemplify. — Some stranger undertakes to counsel a wayward youth. The advice offered is just such as ought to be given. Its truth is unquestionable and easily per- ceived. Perhaps the youth may bow submissively : for there is nothing unnatural or improbable in the idea that mind may yield to the influence of truth, or that the spirit of one human being may strongly affect the spirit of another human being. But the stranger may possibly be considered to be officious and impertinent, and may be treated accordingly. Yet he uttered truth, and in all probability the truth he uttered was distinctly understood. Why then has his advice been rejected, and himself dis- dained ? The objection supposed, you perceive, is personal. Though the stranger has uttered truth, yet he is considered impertinent or officious — the errant boy declines all fellow- ship with the strangers spirit. — The father then appears, offers the same advice, and urges the same truth ; or it is made evident that the stranger interfered, not on his own account, but as the father's agent, and the desired impres* MORAL GOVERNMENT. 203 sion is produced. What is the difference ? Truth is de- clared in both cases. No arbitrary power, no physical com- pulsion has been employed. Had such power been called in, the impression desired might not have been made. The only difference which can be perceived is, that the per- sonal objection supposed has been removed, and that fel- lowship of spirit has sustained the appeals of truth. The gospel is preached by a fellow-man, and no good effect follows — the sinner remains unmoved, unconverted. On some occasion a circumstance occurs which leads that same sinner to recognise the presence of the Spirit of God. He listens, and hears the same gospel which he had before heard unmoved and unconverted. An impression is now made, deep and fixed. He weeps — he repents — he for- sakes his sin — he turns to the Lord ! what is the influence ? The gospel, or truth, is the same in both cases. No arbi- trary power has been exerted. Had there been, it might have alarmed — peradventure it would have hardened — the sinner ; for what wonderful works did not the children of Israel behold in the wilderness, or in Messiah's day ? But now the conscience has been convicted, the God of love is believed, the sinner instantly sets out on his career after glory, honor and immortality, and may soon be heard sing- ing the song of Moses and the Lamb before the throne. What has transpired ? Simply this — He has perceived that God addressed him. The gospel was wisdom, from the first, but now it is discerned to be the wisdom of God ; it was power from the first, but now it is discerned to be the power of God ; and is not this precisely what is meant by the communion of the Holy Spirit ? The God of love has sustained his own truth, and the combination — truth demonstrated in love by the Spirit- — has been perceived and felt. It is not however to be denied, that after this intellectual operation the sinner may continue his course of transgres- sion. If he should, what is his crime ? Has he not resist- 204 LECTURES ON ed — grieved — vexed — quenched —blasphemed the Holy Spirit? Will you bring in physical agency at this crisis? will you throw the sinner into the omnipotent hand, to be remoulded in some of his intellectual qualities ; and call it the renovation of his will, or the renewing of the Holy Spirit. While this deteriorating .process has been going on, much forbearance has been extended. One kind provi- dence after another may have renewed the opportunity of repentance ; and thrown the sinner's mind into the centre of most interesting circumstances, betokening the presence, and inviting to the fellowship, of the Spirit of God. In an age of miracles many mighty works may have been per- formed. In the ordinary course of human events argu- ments may have been framed ; appeals may have been pointedly addressed ; threatenings fearful and alarming may have been uttered ; mercies may have been bestowed or withdrawn ; afflictions may have been sent ; sins may have been visited with appropriate punishment ; marked deliverances may have been accomplished ; Jehovah may -say — " All day long I have stretched forth my hands unto a disobedient and gainsaying people." Every step of this remedial process is like the first which has been described, and when at last the Spirit has been blasphemed, is there any pardon to be obtained ? is there any more sacrifice for sin ? is there any omnipotent, irresistible, agency to be put forth? is unreserved mercy to be extended, indiscrimi- nately saving all ? is Jehovah to be censured ? or is the sinner alone, and altogether, in fault? Now God is always speaking in his gospel, and this fel- lowship of the Spirit may be enjoyed by all. The hearers are not always conscious of the fact. And why ? Their ** carnality of mind," or their " minding the things of the flesh," is the scriptural exposition of the melancholy scene, and not a personal election unto eternal life, nor a deficien- cy of divine power. The hearer places the world as an intermediate object between him and the truth, and per- MORAL GOVERNMENT. 205 ceives not what is transacting, because he is shutting out the whole scene from his view. If, while a father is delivering his earnest and affectionate advice, the mind of his son is dwelling on the anticipated sports of to-morrow, neither the truth utterred, nor the strong working of the parental heart, can be perceived. A dead, stupid, silence might prevail ; and so far parental authority might be recognised. Just so is it with the hearers of the gospel. They listen silent- ly, and visibly acknowledge the divine institution, but do nothing. Perhaps they are waiting for God, like the jews waiting for the Messiah ; and are wondering at the mighty things which are doing around them. Should they ven- ture to ask — how is it that these things are so ? I would answer as the Redeemer did — " If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it is from heaven" or not. But you see that this is not the course which multitudes of gospel hearers adopt. They are delighting themselves with a display of eloquence — are admiring a beautiful piece of fancy — are following an in- genious argument — are criticising oratorical, or logical, or philosophical mistakes — are carefully squaring what is ut- tered with their sectarian standards — are arranging plans of business — or are fatigued, and anxiously waiting for the close of an uninteresting service : but fellowship with the Holy Spirit in his own ordinances they neither hold nor seek. Perhaps, like certain disciples baptized unto John's baptism, they "have not so much as heard, whether the Holy Spirit is. Can such hearers of the gospel be roused ? Can the thunders of violated law and a coming judgment alarm them ? Can the voice of love call them off from their vain pursuits ? Can a season of affliction break the spell that binds them to ruin ? Can any agency bring them into communion with God ? — a communion which demands their best affections, and in which is to be realized the liv- ing and transforming influence that saves the soul. This power of God, of which you hear so much, and Vol. II.— 18 206 LECTURES ON which is so often represented to be something more thanr and something above, the truth, is simply fellowship with God in the truth. Here is moral influence — the se- cret of evangelic philosophy. The gospel reveals Jeho- vah ; opens up the way into the holiest of all through the rent veil of the Redeemer's flesh; consecrates "heavenly places" where God and the sinner meet on common prin- ciples, and hold fellowship in common transactions ; and encompasses the sinner with suitable and appropriate images in which he beholds the glory of the Lord, and so is transformed into the divine likeness. God is in the sanc- tuary— in the family — in the closet — m the heart. The sense of his presence and love, with thrilling influence wakes up all the fine sensibilities of the soul, and bears the sinner aloft, regenerated, redeemed, and glorified, to the mansions of everlasting life. With wThat alacrity Moses headed the hosts of Israel and marched to the land of Canaan, when he received the assurance that God would go with him ! With what con- fidence the disciples went forth to organize the kingdom of heaven, when the Master fulfilled his promise to be with them, and sent the Spirit to hold fellowship wdth them in their work ! How the laborious and abused apostle to the gentiles felt himself inspirited for duty and toil, for enterprise and danger ! and with what unbending purpose he went to the synagogue, to the temple, to the court, or to prison, when he heard the Master say — " Fear not Paul. I am with thee!" And the humblest or the feeblest among us may do likewise. If we live in communion with the Holy Spirit, the proudest philosophy cannot shake our faith ; the severest, the longest, trials cannot exhaust our patience ; the most painful or ignominious death cannot defraud us of our integrity, nor take away our crown ; we can glory in tribulation, or triumph amidst floods or flames. This is pow^kr — is it not ? Just such power as we need, and which will make us sufficient for every effort — is it not ? MORAL GOVERNMENT. 207 What more can be desired? unless indeed the human mind he physically dead, i. e. has lost all power of intel- lectual action. In such a case, intellectual fellowship is not to be spoken of, until by physical power, intellectual vitality shall be restored. The character of theological controversy makes it ne- cessary for us to dispose of another idea, which may be embarrassing. The Spirit of God sustains in being what- ever it pleased him to create. God sends forth his Spirit, and thus renews the face of earth. In like manner he sus- tains the human mind, and seeks to renew it. In him we live, and move, and have our being. He has an access to our spirits as free and unreserved as to any object visible to us. Darkness and light are both alike unto him. He looks upon our inmost thoughts with as much ease as he looks upon a blazing sun, or the brightness of the seraphim that are near his throne. He dwells in us. Of course he sustains us in our actions; both mental and corporeal. We can no more think without him, than we can walk without him. — The analogy cannot be disputed. But to what con- clusion will the analogy lead ? Does not the Spirit act in perfect consistency with all the laws of the material sys- tem ? and will he disregard the laws of the intellectual system ? When he renews the face of earth, does it follow that the withered vegetation was litterally dead, and that the farmer can do nothing? When he speaks of renewing the human mind, does it follow that mind is dead, or that the sinner can do nothing ? If mind and matter belong to different systems, and are governed by different laws, will not the agency of the Spirit conduct trains of operations correspondingly different ? Will he sustain the actions of the creatures when they cultivate the earth? and not sus- tain their actions in the cultivation of mind ? When beau- ty, and verdure, and fruitfulness, and fragrance, pro- ceed from human agency, as sustained by the co-operating agency of the Spirit of God, would you not thankfully as- 208 LECTURES ON cribe the whole to a divine blessing, without inferring: that man could do nothing in view of the effect produced ? In the acquisition of science, under the direction of an intel- ligent preceptor, is the pupil incapable of exerting his own mind ? or is not the very object of tuition, which the pre- ceptor keeps constantly before him, the eliciting the pupil's own mind, and teaching him" to think for himself? And in morals, as superintended by the Spirit of God, must not a similar intellectual process be sustained? or are we to be forever talking about our inability? But then is not this agency of the Spirit, in sustaining his creatures, physical ? Be it so. Free agency is not here asserted. Whether we shall live or not, is not a ques- tion for us to determine. It has been appointed unto all men once to die. Does it follow that our intellectual operations, which imply free agency, are controlled by the physical energy of Jehovah, because we have the evi- dence of that controlling energy, where free agency is not implied ? Or when we look around upon the other parts of creation, of which free agency is not predicated, do we not observe even then that visible effects are flowing from visible causes ? Or, as science advances, and new dis- coveries are accumulated, do we not ascertain that visible effects, which were deemed mysterious, or were referred to an inscrutable sovereignty because they could be as- signed to no known cause, are, after all, the product of se- condary agencies ? And while infidelity is flattering her- self that these various disclosures shall confirm her adven- turous theories, does not the enlightened christian exult in his enlarging views of his great Creator? Can any one prescribe a limit to this series of created laws, or interme- diate instrumentalities? Does not the illumined mind go onwards in its intellectual investigation, until it discovers spiritual intelligences of other and higher orders, mingling amid the busy scene, and God himself putting on exter- nal form, on purpose that his Spirit may act by interme- MORAL GOVERNMENT. 209 diate agents ? And yet theologians around us are referring every operation to his physical power, and frittering away means by the very argument professedly designed to up- hold them. I cannot conceive of any other operation of divine pow- er in the case, than that in which God — acting as an intel- lectual being, and with man as an intellectual creature, on the laws of mind or spirit — accomplishes his designs by appropriate means ; unless man shall be stripped of his free agency, and be as destitute of power of volition as an inanimate machine. That operation of power, as we have seen, Jehovah disclaims: — " Not by might, nor by power, but by my Spirit, saith the Lord." He promised much to Israel of old; but said, "I will yet for this be enquired of by the house of Israel to do it for them." We are kept by his power through faith. Neither can I see any valuable end to be answered by any other view of divine power. If men can be saved, according to the sys- tem laid down, and consistently with their own responsi- bility, what need is there for any further operation of power? If a farther exercise of power will necessarily construct individual salvation upon divine sovereignty, and take it away from human free agency ; then, to bring in that additional power, is not only to introduce another but a worse system of morals. It would distinctly follow that God must, without any reference to their moral abili- ties, save all men ; or assign a reason why he has, in sove- reignty, made a selection. In the one case men are re- sponsible to the extent of their capacity, and in the other they are dealt with as responsible, while they have no ca- pacity. Surely this latter view is incomparably worse than the first ; and there must needs be a very sufficient reason for so strange a proceeding. The hypothesis which strikes me as so singular and ob- jectionable, has been both stated and defended. What is the reason by which its advocates would justify it? Some 18* 210 LECTURES ON will reply, all men have forfeited their moral rights ; God is under no obligation to save any of them ; and he may surely save some of them without doing injustice to the rest. That answer might do if it corresponded with facts. But mankind have not lost their personal responsibility ; and consequently have not forfeited their claims to a form of moral government which shall be consistent with that responsibility. It is true, that personally they have sinned ; but then they have been brought into a condition of infirm- ity, by a fault not their own; and therefore are objects of forbearance — and this same matter of forbearance is a fa- vorite attribute of the evangelical administration. More- over, the gospel is as happily suited to one human being as it is to another ; and, on a principle of free agency, is just as practicable for one as for another : so that if there be no omnipotent combatant on the field, one might be saved as well as another. And finally, they who are condemned, are not condemned on account of an original forfeiture, in view of which the gospel has passed them by ; but be- cause they have rejected the gospel in their own unbelief. "The Spirit shall convince the world of sin, because they believe not on me," said the Redeemer. The answer stated does not correspond with the facts. Some may attempt to meet the difficulty by asserting, that man is not competent to fathom so deep a mystery ; and that God gives no account of his matters to his creatures. Such a reply makes the whole hypothesis equivocal. Every man should speak very modestly, when he professedly does not understand the doctrines which he advocates. I see no advantage to be gained, by proclaiming a moral system which is so defective and unintelligible at the very start. Besides, this reply is directly opposed to the facts in the case. For God has given the reason, why he condemns any of our race, with as much distinctness, as he has ex- plained why he has accepted others. The law of the moral system is explicitly applied both ways. He who belie veth MORAL GOVERNMENT. 211 shall be saved — he who believeth not shall be damned. Nor only so. But Jehovah has not curtailed the intellectual inquiries of his creatures, in any such abrupt manner. He has spread the universe out before them, and bid them car- ry their researches as far as their capacities can extend. He has called upon them to canvass his character, and investi- gate his proceedings. He has no fear of his own integrity, nor does he dread our scrutiny on our own account ; but unhesitatingly commands us to see, whether the judge of all the earth must not do right ? Under such circumstances, the plea of mystery betrays our own ignorance, whenever it is heard. It is sheer cowardice not to investigate. No doubt we shall meet with mystery — or that which to us 13 a secret — at last; for who can, by searching, find out God ? But reach mystery, when and where we may, it will still betray merely our ignorance. We may go on, therefore, until faith is beginning to mingle with vision, and patiently wait the disclosures of the eternal world, where we shall see God as He'is. "I gave my heart," says Solomon, "to seek and search out by wisdom concerning all things that are done under the sun : this sore travail hath God given to the sons of men to be exercised therewith." Theologians have, however, offered a formal reason for this forbidding hypothesis, which seems to them fully to sustain it. They tell us that God carries on this system of operation for his own glonj. But is this dark expression made up of mere words ? or does it contain an idea ? If there be an idea, what is it ? Let us attempt to analyse it. Glory is manifested excellence. Now what excellence is there in God's saving some, and not saving others ? What excellence is there in God's saving any, in a manner which is not consistent with the attributes of their own nature ? or in not saving all if it may be done in a consistent man- ner ? Wherein is the greater glory displayed — in a scheme constructed on the intellectual free agency of an intelli- gent creature ? or in one which converts that creature into a 212 LECTURES ON mere mechanical agent ? Again ; admitting that excel- lence may be predicated of the transactions under review, to whom is the manifestation made? To God himself? This would be too small an idea to be gravely entertained, in explaining such high concerns. To us, is the display made ? Then what is the excellence, which is thus vividly exhibited ? We are left to admit its existence, without be- ing able to perceive it : and this is no manifestation at all. Can you see the excellence of God's condemning immortal spirits solely for his own glory ? T cannot. My soul shud- ders at the thought. The angels on the plains of Bethle- hem sung — glory to God, peace on earth, and good will to- wards men. Perhaps it will be said, that the glory of God is designed to be set forth before the universe. But for what practical purpose ? To afford inducements to obedience, and to deter from rebel. ion — it may be answered. Then God governs the universe on the principle of moral agency, which we have been setting forth as belonging to his go- vernment of man , and our doctrine belongs to every part of God's dominion, excepting this earth, and to every intel- ligent creature, excepting man. And where is the proof, or what is the principle of proof? Is spirit one thing on earth, and another thing elsewhere? or shall not redeemed spirits be like the angels ? But conceding even this mon- strous absurdity, by which method would the end be best answered — by an example, in which free agency is laid aside, and which would consequently be altogether irrele- vant, as other intelligent creatures are free agents? or by an example in which free agents act out their own character? How would proceedings purely arbitrary, instruct a rational creature to judge of the character of proceedings which are not arbitrary ? place him in what part of God's dominions you please. Still farther — By what principles of jurisprudence shall some not be saved, but be left to sink into perdition for the instruction of others ? Surely the case is a most strange MORAL GOVERNMENT. 213 anomaly, which has not an analogy to support it. — The Redeemer suffers for the benefit of others ; but then his sufferings do not involve perdition, and he endures them voluntarily; which is a totally different matter. His was a magnificent undertaking, which gave form to the love that God has for man, and has long since been rewarded by an exaltation to the throne. Believers may suffer now, and the good of others be promoted thereby ; but then suffer- ing is a constituent part of their earthly lot; and the means of doing good are derived from the nature of the case ; nor do they perish, even wThen called to martyrdom itself — but their afflictions work out for them a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory. There is no way to explain how any sinner is ruined, but that it is his own fault. He does evil, and therefore goes down to weeping, and mourning, and lamentation, and woe. Nor is there any rule to show how God, who is a righteous Lord and loveth righteousness, who is just while he justifies the ungodly who believe in Jesus, and who has no pleasure in the death of the sinner, can be glorified in the sinner's condemnation, save that which belongs to an administration strictly just. It may now be objected, that simple as the foregoing views represent faith to be, yet after all, the scriptures have argued out the matter at very great length ; from which it would appear, that the subject has not all the simplicity which I have supposed it to possess. But unless I very greatly mistake, theologians have here committed another grievous error. I very much doubt, whether the scriptures ever argue out the question — whether man can, or cannot, believe the gospel ? — On the contrary, they positively re- quire him to believe, and unhesitatingly condemn him if he does not believe, the gospel. They certainly do take up the subject of human "ability and inability," and reason upon it at large ; but their remarks take a different direc- tion, and are applied to another point altogether. Man- kind have been placed under two distinct forms of moral 214 LECTURES OX government — the one called law and the other called gos- pel. The respective attributes of these two systems have been the frequent subject of discussion. Their reciprocal relations call them up, for the sake of mutual explanations. The gospel has been introduced to effect what the law could not do, in consequence of "the weakness of the flesh." Of course the gospel could neither be illustrated nor de- fined ; it could not be traced to its origin, and defended on the plea of necessity ; nor carried forward to its results, and commended on its sufficiency without referring to law, the previous institute which had become ineffectual. Besides, the question whether man can or cannot be justified by "deeds of law :"' or whether he does or does not need a Me- diator r has given rise to a great deal of controversy in the world. The antediluvians abandoned the Mediator alto- gether; the postdiluvians preserved the external mediato- rial symbols, but stammered about their import, as appears from the fact, that Abraham's covenant relations, and offi- cial actions, were intended to illustrate "the righteousness of faith;" the jews were, notwithstanding their zeal of God, seeking to be justified by law, and going about to es- tablish their own righteousness ; and to this hour the chris- tian soldier, professedly contending for "the faith once de- livered to the saints," seems to have but a cloud-capt tow- er of strength. How then could the scriptural writers avoid discussing the comparative merits of lav: and gospel I or informing men. that they could not be saved by law, and that they must, as a matter of imperious necessity, flee to the Saviour }. This is the point of their argument on the subject of human ability and inability. In view of one in- stitute— man has Jiot ability to meet its requirements, ac- cording to the scriptures : in view of the other, he has ability ; and if he does not rise and diligently use it, he must perish forever. In view of the one, no interference of divine power, consistent with the intellectual and moral nature of man. nor any agency short of physical omnipotence, MORAL GOVERNMENT. 215 bo to speak, could extricate him ; in view of the other, di- vine power, as in every other instance, acts in perfect con- sistency with the nature or abilities of the agent employed ; and man escapes, or is lost, on his own responsibility. In other words — as by the sin of Adam#his children are un- able to meet their personal engageng&nts, Jehovah has ex- tended favor or grace unto them ; and put them into a con- dition where they can meet those engagements. A few texts it may not be improper to quote, in order to exhibit this contrast. — "By the deeds of law, there shall no flesh be justified in his sight ; for by the law is the know- ledge of sin." Every man who makes the experiment of deeds of law, will utterly fail; and instead of justification, will acquire the knowledge of sin-*rthe law will charge sin upon him because he cannot fulfill it. " Therefore we con- clude, that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of law." The knowledge of sin does not follow the experi- ment of faith ; because faith is within the range of human ability, and the call for it can be met, "Without me," says the Redeemer, "ye can do nothing:" i. e. remove the Mediator, and man is undone ; for then he is referred to " deeds of law," and his case terminates in the demonstration of his guilt. That this is the meaning of our Redeemer, is evident — 1. from the nature of the repre- sentation he makes. "lam the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman." — Another vine may be said to exist; but I am the true vine. Abandon me and ye are undone, be your proposed relief what it may. I am the true vine. To send me into the world is the Father's great plan of salvation: and tome you must come, or perish. More- over, the whole practical operation of faith is compared to the process of vegetation : in which, not only the original cause is presented, but an ulterior result is produced, through a series of agents ; each of which occupies its ap- propriate place, and ministers according to its own capaci- ty. And, 2. The Redeemer is addressing himself to jews, 21G I^ECTURES ON who misunderstood his mediatorial character, had forgotten the righteousness of faith, and were seeking to be justified by law. In opposition, therefore, to their mistaken theolo- gy, he was pointing out the position and connexions of the mediatorial institute* • The rigid sectariarffcwho has diverged so far from the simplicity of moral philosophy, as to mistake the scriptural argument in relation to human ability, never meets the terms can, or cannot, in the scriptures, without imagining that they afford full proof of his dogma. And perhaps the general impression is in his favor. Let us quote some ex- amples of its use. " How canst thou say to thy brother — let me cast the mote out of thine eye ? — Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, arud the cup of devils. — If this cup cannot pass from me, unless I drink it. — Christ could not enter into the city — his diciples could not eat bread.— Christ could not do many mighty works, because of their unbelief. — How can ye believe, who receive honor one of another? — How can you, being evil, speak good things?" A thousand instances of this kind can be quoted, and no one will suppose them to imply positive inability. Some- times an inconsistency is asserted ; and at others a breach of law is merely supposed. Let us select a particular example, which is often ad- duced in a very positive manner. "The carnal mind, the minding of the flesh, is enmity against God ; for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be." Now this has nothing to do with the inability of man to believe the gospel, considered simply as a moral agent. The as- sertion is applied to him, in view of certain circumstances which are stated. He is supposed to be minding the things of the flesh, or giving his affections and time to worldly pursuits and pleasures. The mind, thus employed, cannot obey God ; but is engaged~in actual rebellion against him. The Redeemer has paraphrased this matter thus — " No man can serve two masters : for either he will hate the one, and MORAL GOVERNMENT. 217 love the other ; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon." " Doth a fountain," says James, "send forth, at the same place, sweet water and bitter? Can the fig-tree bear olive berries? either a vine figs ?" Surely, all this is plain enough: and no one can suppose it to follow, that because a man cannot serve God and mammon, therefore, he cannot abandon mammon and serve God. Because a man cannot see in the dark, it does not follow that he cannot see in the light. It appears, from the whole survey of God's works, that he exerts an agency which can be distinctly recognised, and which always adjusts itself to the nature and capacities of the creatures whom it sustains. Such is the fact, phy- sically, intellectually, and morally considered. Terms may be employed, which may be respectively applied to the creature or to the Creator, according as the agency of the one or the other is intended to be expressed. If, in relation to the subject before us, we shall suppose regene- ration, new creation, being born again, and such like terms and phrases, to belong to the divine agency ; then faith and repentance, thought and feeling, principle and action, may be as safely predicated of human effort. The foregoing argument has been constructed, under this impression ; and our subject has been involved in no confusion, but stands out fairly and prominently, preserving simply its own identity. It further appears from the investigation of this whole matter, that the very point at which Jehovah aims, is to re- vive and cherish the moral sense in the bosom of man. To revive it, to call it up in powerful and efficient action, is regeneration : to cultivate and train it — to subdue every faculty, and affection, and habit — to bring the whole man, in all his individual views and social relations, in reference both to time and eternity, under its enlightened control, is sanctification. Here is the value of education, and the true secret of government, personal, domestic, political. Vol. II. — 19 213 LECTURES ON and divine. And hence it is, that you find an apostle, af- ter all his toils and labors, retiring from the busy scene of action, and hastening away to be ever present with the Lord, having a good conscience as his great characteris- tic. With this testimony he dared to challenge the accu- sation of all his adversaries, could invite the closest in- spection of his most intimate friends, could take God to record on his soul, and could depart to the judgment seat like one "ready to be offered," and in the full assurance of the crown of life. Here too the Holy Spirit would bear witness with his spirit, and seal him up for ever- lasting glory. Can you frame a good conscience? Can you create common sense? Can you endow a man with con- sciousness ? Are not all these, notwithstanding the great and protracted metaphysical discussion to which they have given rise, the same thing? And can you produce these effects by physical power? You perceive that personal responsibility is a perfectly philosophical matter, and of necessity must give form, and shape, and interest to any regenerating or sanctifying influence which may be em- ployed. The plea of inability is nothing more than the refuge of an unenlightened conscience — of an unex- ercised, and consequently an undisciplined moral sense. And that, not because conscience is by nature dead : but because men have grown carnal amid spiritual privi- leges, and have become hardened by resisting truth, and impetuously pursuing the gratification of their own lusts: or under false social principles — domestic, fraternal, politi- cal and ecclesiastical — have followed the multitude to do evil. Thus the Spirit of God acts : — he leads the human con- science to the knowledge of truth, holding fellowship with us during the whole process of thought, of feeling, of anxiety, of action, through wrhich we pass — our helper amid our infirmities, and our comforter under our sorrows. Thus a man should govern himself, and acquire self-re- MORAL GOVERNMENT. 219 spect, not from the plaudits of the multitude, not from the amount of his wealth, not from the reach of his intellect or the range of his literature — all of which may only cher- ish his pride and ruin his soul ; but from the consciousness of innate principle. The Redeemer bid his disciples to live in this holy and heavenly manner, though it should bring them before kings, or to the martyr's stake. Thus a parent should govern his children. Thus a minister should deal with his people. Thus a prince should rule his subjects. And here it is where, at this moment, with so much pain and convulsion the human mind is studying its individual liberty, and pondering over personal respon- sibility. The dogmas of ecclesiastics will no longer be ac- cepted as a substitute for conscience ; nor will the burden- some legislation of politicians be any longer greeted by an imbecile and uninformed patriotism. And any man who feels an interest in " the spread of the gospel," or in the destinies of the nations, must become the advocate, not of deadening terror, nor licentious feeling, nor military su- premacy, but of educated consciences. Our ministers need, and should seek for, a treble portion of Elijah's spi- rit; and our rulers ought all to be "men after God's own heart." O that our controvertists did but understand the philosophy of the scriptures, instead of bolstering up that of the dark ages ! 0 that they could rise to think in fel- lowship with' the Holy Spirit, instead of eulogizing the virtues, and portraying the apotheosis of worthies of other days ! They would quickly find that a cultivated con- science would be a never failing source of practical efficien- cy. The individual man, they would perceive, should soon become conscious of personal ability ; and truth would govern the world, which physical force has only degrad- ed. God governs man by gospel, not by law — by con- science, not by force. But it is time this discussion should be concluded. I will close it by remarking on its individual application in 220 LECTURES ON the differing circumstances of society. That I may be un- derstood, permit me to state a particular case. Saul of Tar- sus was converted from his persecuting purposes, and en- listed in the support of the great cause he had been attempting to overthrow. His history is supposed not only to exhibit more power than my doctrine has conceded ; but to be a good sample of Jehovah's ordinary proceed- ings, in bringing sinners to the knowledge of the truth. I remark concerning it, 1. That it occurred in the age of miracles. The new dispensation was established by such exhibitions of divine power, and men were thereby con- vinced of the truth of Christ's pretensions as Mediator. Hundreds of others had been in like manner convinced. No one can calculate on such a peculiar interference now; for the new dispensation has been long since established. 2. Paul was, by this means, professedly called to the apostleship. In truth, it was his official designation, and not his conversion, which formed the object of this inter- view. God appeared "to him as he did to Abraham, when he constituted him the heir of the world ;" as he did to Isaac and Jacob, when he selected them rather than Ish* mael and Esau, and renewed his "covenant" with them; or as he did to Moses in the burning bush, when Israel was to be brought to the land of promise. And who would inter- pret any of those events, as a sample of God's sovereignty in conversion! No one. The case is again' lifted above the ordinary occurrences of our own times ; is exhibited as belonging to that peculiar age ; and is to be interpreted on official principles. 3. Both the miracle of the divine mani- festation and the call to the apostleship, though above or- dinary occurrences, appealed to Saul's mind and heart. And throughout his entire course, no man appears more conscious of personal responsibility, nor has any one ever manifested a deeper solicitude to fulfil its claims. He stu- died closely, thought profoundly, labored industriously, and closed his life rejoicing in the testimony of a good MORAL GOVERNMENT. 221 conscience. Had he not done so, notwithstanding the extraordinary circumstances which roused his spirit to thought and action, he might have preached the gospel to others, and have been a cast-a-way himself; or, like Ba- laam, he would have sunk into perdition unsanctified by his official honors. This case, therefore, offers no opposi- tion to the doctrine advanced ; but lends all its influence to establish and maintain the principles I have advocated, and sheds all its glories upon the dignified theme— per- sonal RESPONSIBILITY. This cultivation of mind, this watchfulness over self, this careful improvement of privileges, and this conscientious regard of circumstances, which so highly distinguished the apostle, and so strongly marked his career, every moralist should exhibit. But the exhibition must necessarily be ex- ceedingly diversified. The varieties of human life are end- less. There are babes, young men, and fathers. One por- tion of human beings is described as the image and glory of God ; and another as the glory of the man. Some are rich, and others .are poor; some are learned, and others are unlearned. The mechanic is not the chieftain ; nor is the divine the physician. Mind is developed under different auspices, in different countries, and by the excitement of dif- ferent objects. Empires rise or fall, and social habits are revolutionized by the change. War is waged, or peace is proclaimed, and new associations are immediately formed, or new habits of action are required. Each age has its own peculiarities, and each series of ages seems but to afford a proportionate period, for the revolutions which belong to our political or moral atmosphere. False prophets mingle with the sons of God, and these are at last not unfrequently led away to deserve the fate of apostates. Primitive simplicity has yielded to the pageantry of the papal hierarchy; and re- formation seems to carry the attributes of " the man of sin" into her professedly more accurate organization. And do the- ologians expect to reduce all these discordancies to their stan- 19* o-2-2 LECTURES ON dard of uniformity? or hope, by a creed, to relieve the fearful distraction ? Who can preside over such moral desolation save the mediatorial prince ? What secondary agent can control such excited passions, or such multifarious interests, save conscience, grown enlightened and vigorous ? And how can harmony be produced by abstract legislation ? or by any other means than the sympathies of a living inter- course, creating reciprocal confidence, and operating by the principle of faith ? Thus Jehovah, well estimating human affairs, and see- ing the end from the beginning, prescribes. The lordship he reserves to himself; his ministers must keep knowledge, that the people may learn the truth from their lips ; and they must divide to each one his portion in due season. A o-ood conscience, faith as the result of conviction, and forbearance amid varieties of opinion and interest, form the prominent items of the moral code he has given : and when the ministr}- come forward with their substitute — power, terror, excitement, feeling — and deceive the people and themselves by tlxe representatives of the good that is done, they try a fearful experiment over which succeeding gene- rations may weep. In such a social state, philosophy is sure to be laughed to scorn as a pagan or infidel heresy ; and the love of wisdom must give place to the ebullitions of undisciplined feeling. The intelligent stand aloof, too timid or too powerless to stem the current ; or take refuge in infidelity, vainly hoping to find something more coincident with common sense. Such is the present state of society ; and if, in describing it, I incur a harsh condemnation, my refuge is — a good con- science and the Master's truth. But however the censure may be expressed, the revival and education of the moral sense, now become puerile by the oppression of authority or the force of prejudice, is the great object of the Spirit's opera- tions; is the philosophy of faith ; and is the mystery in all those laborings of individual mind, while seeking to sus- MORAL GOVERNMENT. 223 pend its eternal destinies on its own convictions, or while as- piring after "salvation" as "the end of its own faith." LECTURE XVII. Infants — Sins of ignorance — Characteristics of the two co- venants— Mystery and knowledge — Law and Gospel in their results in view of conscience — Social influence — Annual atonement typical of Christ's sacrifice — Sin taken away — Relation of children to the mediatorial institute — Sin against law — Si?i against gospel — Theological mis- takes. In view of the application of the general principles of moral government, a question remains to which we have had, thus far, no fair opportunity of turning our attention. It is this — What is the relation of infants to the mediato- rial administration ? Are they to be considered as sinners ? Are they sinners by an inbred corruption ? or can they be such only by actual transgression ? Were they sinners be- fore they were born, as Augustine taught ? or do they sin as soon as they are born, knowingly violating divine statutes ? See what multitudes die ! What becomes of them ? Are they saved or lost ? Are any of them saved — any of them lost? Can any light be shed on their fate ? or is it a dark, mysterious, convulsing theme, on which it is our wisdom to be silent and submissive ? These are thrilling questions to the parental heart, waking up its deepest sensations. And they are scarcely less interesting, as topics of moral science, to the philosophic theologian. You are, no doubtfully aware of the varied views, and of the frequent and protracted controversies, which this in- teresting subject has originated. Perhaps you feel that it 2-24 LECTURES ON is a branch of morals on which but little light has been thrown. For yourselves you can speak with no confidence, and you know no one who can. Certain common sense ideas which seem to be true, which you wish to be true, and which, if true, would relieve your anxieties, occasion- ally flash upon your minds. But theologians have perplex- ed you by their subtle speculations. Divine justice is in your estimation such an abstruse matter, defined by no rule, and regulated by nothing but the secret will of God ; and divine mercy is so entirely resolved into a mere sover- eignty, which acts by no established principles that arc within the reach of the human mind, or whose reasons must be reserved for another world, that you are fearfully embarrassed. Have your infants, who, while they live, are in the midst of death, and whose numerous ailments give you so much anxiety both by day and night — have those, whom death has borne from your embrace, and cast as mouldered ruins into the grave, any interest in the cross of Christ? Have they been delivered from the entangle- ments of " the sin of the world ?" The multitude of their acts which yourselves condemned as wrong — are these con- demned as sin by the Judge of all the earth ? Can — shall such sin be forgiven for Christ's sake ? Will the Prince of life bring; our children along with those who have "fallen asleep in him?" or shall they appear to be cast off with them who know not God ? Every query, clothe it in what language you may, goes to the Jieart, and, perhaps, remains unanswered ; or hope is distracted by fear, and no assurance cm be cherished. Perhaps you even now rebuke me for adverting to the painful topic, and tell me — " all has been said that can be said — it is cruel to torture us into an ex- citement, you have no power to allay." But the candle of the Lord, as I believe, has shone upon our path thus far. perhaps wTe may take it, and go a step farther. In this course of " lectures" I have so often been called to contemplate the characteristics of the two dispensations, MORAL GOVERNMENT, 225 and to array them before you in a form seemingly so novel, that almost every subject belonging to moral science ap- pears to participate in that novelty. Even the interesting topic before us, it will be seen, has some close associations with these two covenants; and associations which very few have been induced to notice. It is true that, in the controversy to which infant baptism has given rise, very distinct and frequent reference has been made, and justly made, to the circumcision of infants as beloneino- to the Abrahamic and Sinaitic covenants, and as consequently being both an evangelic and a national privilege ; to the unequivocal and unqualified interest, which children are thus demonstrated to possess in the administration of the divine government upon earth ; and to the elemental prin- ciples of organized communities, which were so promptly and fully recognised in the formal instruments alluded to. My present remarks however, though I may have occasion in some manner to incorporate those general considerations, are aside of that familiar train of argument. There is ano- ther spot in this ecclesiastical field, over which the star that has guided me thus far, has rested ; and my own heart, net only as that of a moral reasoner deeply committed in his own speculations, but of one who feels that he has no slight interest in the subject under consideration — my own heait has been both delighted and satisfied. You remember that Paul has described the church under the Jewish dispensation as a child under age, and as differ- ing nothing from a servant. "When we were children,'' he remarks, "we were in bondage under the elements cf the world." On the other hand, the church under the gos- pel dispensation he describes as an heir arrived at full age. " Thou art no more a servant" he said, " butascm." " The fulness of the time — the time appointed of the Father — has come ; and God has sent forth the Spirit of his Son in- to your hearts, crying, Abba, Father." God's deportment to the Jewish people was therefore a typical exhibition of 226 LECTURES ON" the ecclesiastical relations of children. And it is by an- alysing this type, following it up on the scriptural page, and noticing those coincident views which may occur, that I expect to present our whole subject in the most interest- ing and instructive light. In framing my argument, you may be solicited to start at a point, apparently very dis- stant from the object I propose to reach. But you must al- low me an opportunity to gather materials, and to lay down premises distinctly and fairly ; that the conclusion may ap- pear with becoming strength, when it shall be brought out. Mr. Tucker once observed, while framing a like, but long- er, and more abstruse argument, and when making simi- lar preparations for future conclusions — " While this is do- ing, we work under ground. You see we are very busy, but to what purpose is not so readily visible ; nothing ap- pears useful, nothing convenient, nothing serviceable for the purposes of life. Have but patience until we come above ground, and then perhaps you will see a plan arising that promises something habitable and commodious, and which could not have stood secure without the pains we have been taking underneath." This, you remember, was my urgent entreaty when this course of lectures was com- menced : and those who would not, or did not, patiently listen to the detail necessary for the statement of the pre- mises, are even now embarrassed by the conclusions al- ready drawn, and cannot see how they have been reached. The apostle, whom the Spirit employed as the great ex- pounder of ecclesiastical law, when he undertook to sketch out the ground on which " the High Priest of our profes- sion" should perform his official duties, was necessarily led to compare the two covenants together. These official du- ties included two distinct series of services — the sacrificial ceremonies, and those that attended the entrance into the Holiest of all, and that were typified by the Jewish high- priest on the great day of expiation. In stating the parti- culars of the annual atonement, the apostle remarks, that MORAL GOVERNMENT. <%ft the high priest offered for himself, and then for the errors of the people. Now the argument which I am about to develop, will turn upon the import of this phrase " the er- rors of the people ;" and before that argument shall be closed, I hope to present before you, and in a very plain form, the relation of infants to the mediatorial admi- nistration. The term errors, by which our translators thought pro- per to render the greek word used by the apostle, is suffi- ciently general to hide any peculiarity that may belong to it ; and to suffer a reader, unacquainted with, or inatten- tive to, the original, to pass on, without suspecting that the whole of the sentiment, intended to be conveyed to his mind, has not been expressed. The commentators have noticed this circumstance, and, by their critical emendations and remarks, have endeavored more accurately and fully to state the apostle's idea. I shall quote the observations of a few of them — those which rare at hand — by way of affording you an extended view of the peculiarity adverted to ; and of bespeaking for the general argument the favor- able consideration of those, who are disposed to regulate their own opinions by the authority of commentators. Dr. Scott translated the word — "Ignorances," and re- marks— " It seems to denote all those sins, for which sa- crifices were appointed ; indeed all, but those presumptu- ous sins, which were punished by death." Dr. Clarke observes in explanation — "Transgressions of which they were not conscious: there were so many nice- ties in the ritual worship of the jews, and so many ways in which they might offend against the laws, and incur guilt, that it was found necessary to institute sacrifices to atone for these sins of ignorance. And as the high-priest was also clothed with infirmity, he required to have an in- terest in the same sacrifice, on the same account. This was a national sacrifice ; and by it the people understood that they were absolved from all the errors of the past year ; 228 LECTURES ON and that they now had a renewed right of access to the mercy-seat." Dr. Whitby explains as follows — "And for the igno- rance of the people. It is certain that the law allowed of sacrifices for sins committed not out of mere ignorance, i. e. for lying, and false swearing. We therefore must either say with Vatablus and Munster, in locum, that sins com- mitted through the violence of our passions and afFections are called sins of ignorance, and so they stand opposed to sins of presumption, or that the sins of the people are here so styled, because they are mostly such." Dr. Macknight, after having assigned to the atonement by the ordinary priests its own place, considering them as God's ministers, by whom his government as king of Israel was carried on, and by whose service a political pardon from Jehovah as the head of the Jewish commonwealth was extended, goes on to remark — " The sacrifices offered by the high priest on theHay of expiation, had a quite dif- ferent effect. They were offered for the wtiiole nation. to make atonement for the sins which they had ignorantly committed during the preceding year, and to open the ta- bernacles to their acts of worship during the succeeding year. And to show this, the high-priest carried the blood of these sacrifices into the inward tabernacle, and sprink- led it before the symbol of the divine presence." Dr. Owen observes on the passage — n To offer for the errors of the people, is to offer for all their sins, of what nature soever they were. And they are thus called, be- cause indeed there is no such predominancy of malice in any sin in the world, as wherein there is not a mixture of error, either national or practical — of the mind or of the heart — wThich is the cause or a great occasion of it. Here indeed is the original of all sin. The mind being filled with darkness and ignorance, alienates the whole soul from the life of God, &c." MORAL GOVERNMENT. 229 But enough. These quotations are sufficient to show that, even when the original term is so rendered as to ex- press the peculiarity of the apostolic idea, commentators throw the whole subject unexplained upon the public mind. The difficulty must lie deeper than they seem to have im- agined. Some other political idea must remain behind the sectarian vail, that separates them from the holiest of all, which idea they have not discerned ; otherwise they would speak and write more intelligently in their comments on this peculiar phrase. For the same reason, or because the theological sentiments of their age seemed to require it, our translators have used a very indefinite term ; or, in the changes to which every living language is liable, that term did not mean in their day precisely what it means now. Understand me then. When the apostle declares that, on the great day of expiation, the high-priest offered for the ignorances of the people ; while the Mosaic statute, which called for the sacrifice, specified "the uncleanness of the children of Israel," and "their transgressions in all their sins," I intend to ask the broad question — what does he design to express? Was the uncleanness of the child- ren of Israel — concerning which a prophet confessed, "We are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags" — the ignorance of the people ? Were all their transgressions in all their sins, ignorances — sins of igno- rance ? or, to vary the question, that its whole force may be felt — does not the statute bring the uncleanness and transgressions of the children of Israel together as a whole, for which one annual sacrifice was offered ? and does not the apostle intend to express that very idea in the phrase he employs — ignorances of the people ? and that with the view of exhibiting in its own proper connexions, the one great and all sufficient sacrifice of Christ for the sin of THE WORLD ? These questions, or the one question thrown into these different shapes, can be answered only by referring to the Vol. II— 20 230 LECTURES ON comparison of the two covenants, which is drawn out in the context. By carefully noticing the characteristics of these two institutes, the difficulty, which has so evidently perplexed the commentators, may possibly be removed ; and a great variety of scriptural texts, or phrases, may be more easily explained. Such at least, is my impression. The Lord had spoken by Jeremiah ; and in the argument pursued by the apostle,* the declarations made to the pro- phet are quoted, and the attributes of the two covenants are stated. For the sake of order, and in view of the phrase before us, the following arrangement may be neces- sary. 1. " This is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord ; I wi/ 1 put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts : and they Bhall not teach every man his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying know the Lord : for all shall know me, from the least unto the greatest." Here knowledge is, in the most unequivocal terms, declared to be the character- istic of those who live under the new dispensation. This covenant is not like, or " according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt ; be- cause they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord." What is the difference ? The particular which is mentioned, is, that under the new cov- enant the people should have knowledge ; of course un- der the old covenant the people had not that knowledge. Ignorance was their characteristic. You can readily dis- tinguish, with such a statement before you, between sins committed under the two covenants — the one being sins of ignorance, and the other being committed, against know- ledge. When, therefore, the apostle is speaking of the an- nual atonement, which regarded the nation as a whole, the phrase, "ignorances of the people," is most expres- *Heb. viii. 7—13. MORAL GOVERNMENT. 231 sive ; and particularly when you consider that hi3 design was to show the superiority of the new covenant. This symbolical illustration, — I say symbolical, for it is not intended to be asserted that the iews knew nothing — is very common in the scriptures. In fact the scriptures have been given in connexion with the two covenants, and are Jehovah's "rule of faith and practice" to those who, by election, have been placed under these covenants. Paul, drawing the contrast on another occasion, remarks — " Ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God ; not in tables of stone, but in fleshly tables of the heart." He does not mean to assert, that the jews had no divine laws incorporated in their nature, or inscribed on their hearts; for he says that even " the gentiles show the work of the law written on their hearts." He is speaking of dif- ferent communities as compared with each other, and of the two covenants as symbols of law and gospel. This being understood, I may ask, what is the difference be- tween two communities, when one has truth in a series of hieroglyphics, and the other has it if written on the heart?" Is it not simply this ? — the one community is ignorant and the other is intelligent. The same apostle again speaks of the mystery which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit:" — of those glorious things which "eye had not seen, nor ear heard, neither had entered into the heart of man to conceive ;" and " of the mystery which hath been hid from ages, and from generations, but is now made manifest to the saints ; to whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the gentiles, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory." A mystery is a secret — a thing not known. The age of mys- teries is therefore the age of ignorance : but when myste-. 232 LECTURES ON lies are revealed or uncovered, and that which was secret is brought to light, the age of knowledge has arrived. Again this apostle represents the Jewish church as a child — an heir under age ; but the new testament church he describes as an heir arrived at full age. On the one hand you have the ignorance of childhood, and on the other the knowledge of mature life. Even the prophets sat down to ponder over, made an earnest and laborious ef- fort to understand, the very mysteries which the Spirit of Christ employed them to testify. They were all, without any exception, in a state of tutelage. The law was their " schoolmaster." As incompetent to regulate themselves, because not sufficiently informed, they were " under tutors and governors." They wistfully looked forward with j uve- nile anticipations, and not unfrequently with juvenile fret- fulness, as though "the ways of the Lord were not equal," to the time appointed by the Father. They desired to see the things which we see, and did not see them ; and to hear the things which we hear, and did not hear them. Many a youthful conception is but the play of an untutored fan- cy ; many a boyish desire is doomed to be disappointed ; and the progress from infancy to manhood is slow, and de- pends upon the growth of intelligence. The infancy of society is like that of the individual, and must be judged of on analogous principles. Many mistakes are, in such a case, committed through ignorance — mistakes which will not occur, when information shall be acquired by expe- rience. The heathen worM itself is supposed to have been in a like situation. Thi fact is abundantly proved by its own history ; and has never been more strikingly displayed than in the interesting account which Luke gives of Paul's visit to the Athenians. That exceedingly superstitious people had erected an altar — To the unknown God. This in- scription as emphatically declared the condition of the gen- tiles, as the Jewish proverb — "the fathers have eaten a MORAL GOVERNMENT. <%$% sour grape and the children's teeth are set on edo-e," declared the oppressive character of the Mosaic ritual. Paul promptly availed himself of a fact so prominent and characteristic, and said — " Whom therefore ye ignorant-- ly worship, him declare I unto you." And after having pointedly exposed the folly of their idolatrous system — for divine truth may be demonstrated both to idolaters and philosophers — he added, "The times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent." Because of the ignorance of the gentile world Jehovah forbore ; as he did with the jews, to whom he granted "remission of sins through forbearance," and in view of the righteousness afterward to be wrought out by the Mediator. If you carefully consider these peculiarities, you cannot fail to understand what the apostle meant by "the ignorances of the people," for which the high-priest offered on the great day of atonement. The people lived in times of ignorance, and their sins were sins of igno- rance. 2. A second point of contrast between the two cove • nants, which Jehovah states by the prophet Jeremiah, and which Paul quotes, is expressed in the following lan- guage— The people whose fathers were brought out of Egypt, continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord. "But under the new covenant, which I will make with the house of Israel, I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more." — This language appears to be involved, and there may be some difficulty in getting at the precise ideas intended to be conveyed. Theologians have studied the bible so much as a compend of abstract philosophy, and have so entirely forgotten that it is the rule of faith and practice in connexion with the two cove- nants, that they have lost the "key" when th«y would open up its phraseology. Quitting these abstractions, let us place ourselves within scriptural restrictions* 20* $34 LECTURES ON The Jewish dispensation, as has been shown at large, was a symbolical exhibition of law. By law no one can be saved, because no one can obey it. The hebrews, when put under the law, could no more obey it than other men. In fact the ecclesiastical operation, which placed them under it, was intended by the mediatorial sovereign to show to the world that none of our sinful race could obey law ; and thereby to shut all up to the faith which should afterwards be revealed. Of course the jews sinned — sinned like Adam — and consequently incurred death. For this reason the lawgiver, as their judge, did not re- gard, but rejected them. Hence the Jewish law is descri- bed to be "the letter that killeth" — "the ministration of condemnation" — " the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones." On the other hand, the new dispen- sation is an exhibition of gospel. It is constructed on the finished righteousness of the second Adam, and substitutes faith as the principle of moral obligation. Mercy is its appropriate attribute ; for it is enacted in favor of those who are encompassed by the " infirmities of the flesh," and who carry with them " a body of sin and of death." Apply the principle of law to these — "Do and live, trans- gress and die" — and they also certainly perish ; as our doctrine has uniformly asserted, and as the history of the Jewish nation has abundantly demonstrated. If then the jews had no dependence but their own law, they were entirely ignorant of salvation and life. The typical "sha- dows," which belonged to their institute, referred them to the coming Saviour, and thereby was imparted to them what knowledge they had. Accordingly the apostle, when commenting upon the official services of the Jewish high-priest on the da}r of annual atonement, remarks that the gifts and sacrifices then offered were a figure — a parable for the time then present; but they " could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience." The reason is MORAL GOVERNMENT. 235 abundantly evident. The blood of bulls and of goats, aa any rational man may distinctly see, could no more take away sin, than baptism can be regeneration, or the bread and wine become the body and blood of the Re- deemer, under a priestly consecration. On the other hand, the blood of Christ, having offered himself through the Eternal Spirit, purges the conscience from dead works r The conscience — a failure here — no perfection here — ceremonies that could not remove its guilt — unsanctified— unenlightened — with no sense of pardon and acceptance — how deep the darkness ! how dreadful the ignorance ! But the conscience purged, sanctified, perfected — how blissful its peace ! how heavenly its assurance ! how lumi- nous its knowledge! Life and immortality brought to light, are shining all around, and the sure and steadfast hope of heaven spreads its glory over life and death. An enlightened conscience, responding to the claims of moral obligation, sustaining hope in view of the final judgment, and bearing a good testimon}'" in the presence of the Searcher of hearts, is the greatest blessing, is the rich- est treasure of a redeemed man. Without this, God with all his glory, heaven wTith all its bliss, could not make a human being happy. You never heard of a saint, a pro- phet, nor an apostle, rejoicing or peaceful on any other terms. The pardoned, the regenerated, the sanctified man, is the heir of glory. Mere education — mere literature — mere philosophy — a mere acquaintance with theories and their external symbols, never satisfied the human mind. Satan might, and does believe, but he trembles. He might transform himself into an angel of light, but would not be relieved from his dreadful fate. Saul of Tarsus could ex- cel all his equals in native mind and literary acquisition ; and yet, with all his official pre-eminence, ignorant ly " think that he ought to do many things contrary to the name of Jesus of Nazareth." Aristotle, Socrates, Plata, and a host of others, might be reputed wLe — philosophic $36 LECTOftEU ott — divine, and yet leave the world in darkness ; transmit theories, and distinctions, and subtleties to embarrass and perplex succeeding generations, and substitute "the wis-^ dom of words" for truth. Even the high-priest of the Lord might accurately conduct the external forms of di- vine worship, and yet be any thing else than infallible, or "perfect as pertaining to the conscience." The whole world, at this moment, waking up from the deadly sleep of centuries, and speaking in highest strains of gratulation of "the march of intellect," has yet to learn that intellec- tual cultivation, without the resuscitation of the moral sense, will not meet the exigencies of the coming times. Regene- ration is the only principle of reform, politically as well as morally considered. Social combinations, and multiplied days and ceremonies, though their advocates had the "tongues of men and of angels," and " though they had the gift of prophecy, and understood all mysteries and all knowledge, and had all faith so that they could remove mountains," could only deceive sinners by the miserable tones of " sounding brass or tinkling cymbals." Con- science must be enlightened and made perfect. Charity must take the reins, and rule and bless the rich and the poor, the learned and the unlearned. If this be the moral phi- losophy which the Mediator propounds by his Spirit, it is no wonder philosophy has failed to regenerate the world, and that the nations, misled by their systems of political ethics, have been " all as an unclean thing, and all their righteousnesses as filthy rags." When Paul then, is led to describe the old covenant as not making perfect in view of conscience, and the new one as purging the conscience from dead works to serve the living God, he may well use ignorance and knowledge as most expressive technical terms. Listen to the Redeemer's remarks. You remember that he addressed the multitude in parables, but explained all things to his disciples. When asked why he did so ? he re- MORAL GOVERNMENT. 237 plied — " Because it is given to you to know the myste- ries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given."* Their position, which is given or assigned to them, is un- der the old covenant, which was a parable.! I speak to them according to the nature of the dispensation under which they live — an4 for a very plain reason. They are ignorant: like children, they have not their " senses exer- cised by reason of use to discern both good and evil." " They seeing, see not ; and hearing, they hear not, nei- ther do they understand." But unto you is given a posi- tion under the new covenant, and it belongs to "you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven." " Bless- ed are your eyes, for they see ; and your ears, for they hear." Like children arrived at " full age," and havino; your senses exercised by use, "strong meat belongeth" to you.t But they need to be taught " the first principles of the oracles of God," because they are " unskilful in the word of righteousness." "Wisdom" is spoken "among them that are perfect." Listen again to the Redeemer. — He had been describing the new dispensation under the figure of a vine and its branches, when affording to his disciples a train of prepara- tory instructions, in view of their official relations. — " I am," said he, "the vine — the true vine. My Father is the hus- bandman. Ye are the branches. Ye are my friends, if ye do whatever I command you. Henceforth I call you not servants" — the technical term under the old covenant — for the servant knoweth not what his lord doeth ; but I have called you friends ; for all things that I have heard of my Father, I have made known unto you. Ye have not chosen me3 but I have chosen you, and ordained you that ye should go and bring forth much fruit, and that your fruit might re- main : that whatever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you." -Under this ecclesiastical con- stitution of knowledge and liberty go, and preach the gos* * Matt. xiii. 11. f Heb. ix. 9. J Heb. v. 13, 14. 238 LECTURES ON pel to all nations — to every creature. — Must we not sup- pose that the disciples understood this difference between servants and friends — between ignorance and knowledge ; and that in the case under consideration. Paul is using: fa- miliar Jewish language ? 3. Jehovah, speaking by Jeremiah, affords us a third point of contrast between the two covenants? "In those days,'* saith he, " they shall say no more— The fathers have eaten a sour grape, and the children's teeth are set on edge. But every one shall die for his own iniquity: every man that eateth the sour grape, his teeth shall be set on edge." The first covenant, as a symbolical exhibition of law, ex- emplifies the action of social influence ; like the law given to Adam, the breach of which brought death into our world and all the evils we are enduring. The new cove- nant, which is an emblematic exhibition of gospel, is, like gospel itself, constructed on personal responsibility, and exerts no social influence but that which is kind — mercy upon children's children. The errors, or sins of ignorance, of which Paul speaks, and for which the annual offering was presented, were the errors of the people — of the whole nation. It was therefore an official service, rendered in view of the social principle, as an attribute of the legal covenant under which "the people" lived: or it regarded that thing which theo- logians have called imputation, and on which they have reasoned so harshly. And may not sins, committed under the action of social influence, be correctly enough deno- minated sins of ignorance ? What consciousness can a child have of the faults of its parents ? These committed the sins — it did not. Children may suffer because of the errors of their parents, according to the necessary opera- tion of the political or social principle. They may be con- scious that they are suffering; and conscious that they are suffering on account of parental delinquencies; but of parental sins they are not, nor can they be conscious, be- MORAL GOVERNMENT. 939 cause they never committed them. Their own character may remain unhurt — their own integrity may be unsullied, They may most righteously, and most severely, condemn the crimes for which they suffer, and yet justify the action of the political principle which involves them in conse- quent suffering. In this way they became interested in the annual atonement, which was offered for sins which they did not commit, which did not rest on their consciences as their own guilt, and which would thus be to them mat- ters of personal ignorance. Again. Under the force of social institutions, or under the . influence of parental tuition and example, children might be led to commit the same offences, by which their fathers fell. These would be sins of ignorance to them ; be- cause they knew no better; and would be followed by cor- responding consequences, because causes must produce their effects. Here then would arise the necessity for the annual atonement, with its peculiar character, and in all its political beatings. And that provision should be made for such a case, any benevolent or evangelic moralist would promptly admit. To deny it, is to sweep away the very basis on which the gospel rests ; to confound social and personal responsibility together ; and to refer for hope to some arbitrary statute, which can have no foundation in nature. To show you that mercy not only may be, but actually is, extended to such cases, and in consideration of the ig- norance they imply, I quote to you some scriptural exam- ples. The crucifiers of our Lord — you are wont to repro- bate their crime as diabolically malignant, and themselves as the vilest murderers. And truly it was a most atrocious deed they committed. But Jesus prayed for them. He said — " Father forgive them." And why should they be forgiven ? He added — " For they know not what they do." It was a sin of ignorance. They did it, wTith their own hands — with wicked hands ; but under the false rea- 240 LECTURES ON sonings, the mistaken notions, and the erroneous politics of the age, which had been handed down from the fathers. Blinded by a false philosophy, they knew no better. Pe- ter declared the same facts when he said — " And now, brethren, I wot that through ignorance ye did it, as did also your rulers." Paul gives the same testimony, and as- serts that had ''the princes of this world known the wis- dom of God spoken in a mystery, they would not have cru- cified the Lord of glory." And well did this apostle know how to sympathize with these men — for he himself was a persecutor ; and telling his own story, he frankly declares — " I was a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and injurious. But I obtained mercy, because I did it ignorantly in un- belief; and that in me first, Jesus Christ might show forth all long-suffering, for a pattern to them which should here- after believe on him to life everlasting." He acted under the social influence exerted at the time by his nation, and his sins were sins of ignorance. Indeed God long forebore with the whole Jewish nation. The Redeemer himself besought them ; mercy upon mer- cy did he show ; miracle after miracle did he perform ; ar- gument after argument did he urge ; year after year did he wait; and when he could do no more, he wept. His apostles came to vary and renew the effort, and the Spirit descend- ed to convince them of sin, of righteousness and of judg- ment. All was done that could be done. They were not cast off until every expedient had failed. Mercy was not regarded ; forbearance was exhausted ; ignorance ceased to be a plea, after all overtures were despised, and all means were tried in vain. Thus Jehovah pities the ignorant. The annual atonement was no anomaly. It was a mere figure of the doctrine of the cross — God's evangelical plan for regenerating and saving the world. A mode of moral action presented for our own imitation, and which we must carry out if we mean to be ministers of grace to a dying world. The age in which we live demands from us every MORAL GOVERNMENT. 24 j thing that is kind and benevolent in the human heart — particularly in that heart as sanctified. Were such feel- ings reciprocal, catholics and protestants might soon har- monize together, and harmonize where both would be right. Love to God and love to man, the grand moral characteris- tics of the redeemed, would grace them alike as partakers of a common salvation ; and bring light and truth to scatter the ignorance and errors that now involve them in com- mon mistakes. Having; thus exhibited at lars:e the characteristics of the two covenants, and having shown that the annual atone- ment respected those of the first covenant, we may pro- ceed to remark, that this annual atonement was a type of the sacrificial services of "the High-Priest of our profes- sion." He, having been "put to deatji in the flesh," en- tered by his own blood into the holiest of all, or. appeared in heaven for us. But the atonement of the great day of expiation was made for the errors, or sins of ignorance of " the people :" i. e. for the whole nation. The sacrifice of Christ, therefore, must be of a like general character, else the type is destroyed. The question, consequently will be, to what " people" — to what community, that can be politically considered as a whole, did his sacrifice ap- ply ? The answer to this question is a matter of primary importance. So theologians have considered it to be, and it has given rise to protracted controversy among them. Some have maintained that Christ died for " the elect alone ;" and that they, as the invisible church, constitute the people, the whole community, whom he seeks to save. Others have averred that he died for " the whole world.'* How shall the question be determined ? The atonement, be it remembered, is made for transgres- sion of law. The Jewish people, as placed under the first covenant, were all under law. The typical character of this transaction then requires that those for whom our High- Triest should offer, should be under law as a covenant or Vol. II.— 21 242 LECTURES ON dispensation ; and that those who were thus circumstanced should constitute the people — the whole for whom he should die. Who were they ? The elect, or the whole human family ? Doubtless the whole human family were under law, or the covenant made with Adam, seeing that they all suffer the consequence of its breach. Of course, Christ died for the whole human family. The elect, as such, never were under law, considered as a covenant, or dispen- sation, except the jews, to whom no one confines either the term elect or the death of Christ. The elect were un- der law, only as they formed a part of the human family, and can come in to share the benefits of an atonement made in view of law only in that connexion. The "one offence" involved all men in condemnation, and the one righteousness brought a justification unto life upon all men. Our sacrifice is "the lamb of God that taketh away the bin of the world." Either law has nothing to do with this subject — and yet Christ was made under the law — or there is no escape from the conclusion that Christ died for ALL MEN. The same conclusion may be reached by considering the peculiar phrase employed by the apostle, and which is now under consideration. Surely the whole world, as under law which had been broken, and living under the action of so- cial principle, and knowing Jehovah's purposes of mercy only as they were hidden in a mystery, were as much guil- ty of sins of ignorance, as the jews who were so placed typically. In fact the jews were put under these circum- stances figuratively, because the whole world was under them really. The mystery was concealed not merely from the Israelitist fathers, but from "the sons of men." It "had been hid from the beginning of the world in God, who made all things by Jesus Christ." And when it is made known, gentiles have an equal interest in it with the jews — are fellow-heirs, and of the same body ;" and to themselves the whole pur- MORAL GOVERNMENT. 243 pose of mercy is revealed. They, to whom knowledge is imparted, must have been previously in a state of ignorance. Under the law, as broken by the great progenitor of all, there was no relief for any ; yet every one was by necessi- ty personally responsible to God. In such a condition, what could any one do? — either gentile or jew. Take away the first promise, the sacrificial institution, the cheru- bic symbol, in which salvation was presented in a parable, and the world is reduced to the most profound ignorance. You have heard of the superstition of the gentiles, and of the wisdom of their philosophers ; but while, on the one hand, the annual atonement among the jews could not make them perfect as pertaining to the conscience, so on the other, '•'in the wisdom of God, the world by wisdom knew not God." Boastful as the learned and philosophic have been, long and loudly as their objections to Christianity have been proclaimed, have they ever solved the problem of " moral evil? Look at the world as it is now, when emero;in£ from the deadly influence of false politics and false morals, for which infallibility has been pleaded. Who can satisfactorily answer the many questions, which are at this time agitating the community ? Who anticipates any good from any con- troversy at present in progress ? or is cheered by the intel- ligence communicated by our ecclesiastical partizans? What humble inquirer feels the dogmas of any party, com- ing home to his conscience in "demonstration of the Spi- rit and with power?" Drilled bands, full of prejudice and conceit, exchange their pseans; social combinations mul- tiplied almost to infinity, have tried every expedient ; the Eternal has been invoked from his throne — what have not sectarian chieftains tried ? and yet men's hearts are failing them for fear. Preaching the terrors of the law to beings who are " not under law," the result shows what the whole world, as guilty before God, shows ; i. e. until the gospel ia made known, all are in ignorance. — When the Son of man cometh, shall lie find faith on the earth? 244 LECTURES ON Under the social principle, as such, not only may the jew say — "The fathers have eaten a sour grape, and the children's teeth are set on edge ;" but all the world mourns over " the infirmities of the flesh," superinduced by Adam's sin. Can any one of us be conscious of Adam's sin ? — I mean of the thing itself. We may feel its effects, we may have full proof that the crime has been committed, but not one can be conscious of having: committed it. With none of us is it our own ; nor can it so rest upon the con- science of any. In this view again, the whole world is in ignorance, and labouring, by the action of the social prin- ciple, under the effects of "one offence," committed by "one man." If then there was a manifest propriety in meeting such a case as typically presented among the jews, was there not an equal propriety in meeting it, as it really existed in the whole world ? If the case was not met by the sacrifice of Christ in view of the world, you perceive that it could not be jnet even among the jews : for, among the jews, the whole affair was typical. Take the world out of these sacrificial relations, and there is nothing for the type to represent ; because an essential part of the type is, that the jews were under law. But if Adam, as the head of the human family under law, be thrown out of consideration, the type has no correspon- dent, for no one else was under law. Nor only so : but if Christ's sacrifice did not respect "sins of ignorance," the type is again destroyed ; because for such sins the annual atonement was made. Nay more. The annual atonement " could not make him that did the service perfect, as per- taining to the conscience ; or the blood of bulls and goats could not take away these sins of ignorance ; so that for those very sins of ignoronce, the jew himself was referred to the sacrifice of Christ. If then Christ's sacrifice takes away sins of ignorance, the whole world, as involved in such guilt, is interested in his death and intercession. The fact, however, is broadly asserted in both views-r- * MORAL GOVERNMENT. 245 "The redemption of, the transgressions, that were under the first covenant," is directly referred to the " death" of the " Mediator of the new covenant."* The principle of this political operation is declared to be divine forbearance : — Christ Jesus hath been " set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God." And that forbearance, Paul tells the Athenians, was freelyextended to all. "We are all his offspring," he remarked, " as certain also of your*own poets have said." " Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device. And the times of this ignorance God winked at ; but now commandeth all men every where to repent, because he has appointed a day in the which he will judge the world by that man whom he hath ordained ; whereof he hath given assurance to all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead." The cases are perfectly analogous ; are parallel operations under the same general political measure ; and exemplify divine forbearance, running down through "times of ignorance." and on to times of knowledge, when the mystery should be revealed, in consideration of the righteousness of Christ; and when he should be made perfect through suffering. In fact they are finally amalgamated — "out of twain, one new man" created in knowledge, righteousness and true holiness "is made." And why should it not be so ? Could the ignorance of the gentiles not receive indulgence as well as the ignorance of the jews ? Was it inconsistent that the intercessory prayer should rise for them — " Father forgive them for they know not what they do ?" Should they not obtain mercy, if they had committed sin " ignorantly in unbelief?" Would they not have acted differently, had they known better ? Is Je- hovah " the God of the jews only ? is he not the God of * Heb. ix. 9. 21* 246 LECTURES ON the gentiles also?" Did they act worse than the jews? Did they " crucify the Lord of glory ?" Would not Tyre and Sidon have repented in sackcloth and ashes, had they beheld the mighty works which were done in Chorazin and Bethsaida ? Shall it not be more tolerable for Sodom in the day of judgment than for Capernaum? Shall not the uncircumcision judge the circumcision ? Shall not the greek, who has done good, have eternal life, as well as the jew who has done good? Whither, 0 whithe*r, have we been led in cur sectarian folly ? Here then is a whole, made up of two parts. The same things are asserted of both ; and must — must they not? — be true of the whole. Therefore, Christ died for all men, or he died for none. He has mercy on all, as encompassed by ''the infirmities'. of- the flesh;" or "the infirmities of the flesh" arc no reason why he should die, and why he should have mercy on any. In his gospel he calls upon all men, every where, to repent, or be calls upon none. — All — all — are thrown on their personal responsibility, and their final destiny shall be the just award of a righteous government to beings thus si'uated. l^ any shall, be lost, it is because they have not met that responsibility. We have at length leached the point, in view of which the whole argument has been elaborated. If you have care- fully attended to that argument, you can scarcely avoid go- ins directly to the conclusions, in view of the relations of children, which we must now proceed to contemplate. And 1. Children were evidently included among the people for whom the annual atonement was made. If that atonement Was typical of Christ's sacrifice, then the sacrifice of Christ Was offered for a people — some political whole — in which, according to the plain meaning of terms, children are ne- cessarily included. Can there be a nation— a people — a political community — without children ? Assuredly not. Either therefore the political principle had nothing to do with the annual atonement, and with the mediatorial right- MORAL GOVERNMENT. 247 eousness of the Son of GoJ, or children were included un- der this political operation. But you know that the Jewish nation, as such, were God's people; and that he himself was their king. According to the old prophets, when God should elect the gentiles, he would call in a people; or, those called would be as the apostle Peter expresses the divine proceedings, when addressing the "elect according to the fore-knowledge of Gjd" — " Ye are .a chosen genera- tion, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar peo- ple— which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God." The terms thus employed, cannot be explained, if children shall be shut out from the ecclesias- tical privileges to which allusion is made. To make full proof of tiiis argument, let us review the history of God's dispensations, which, as the Governor of the world, he haj based on the social principle. I have, already shown to you that the paradisiacal consti- tution was a political institute. Ey denying, or overlook- ing this important consideration, theologians have destroy- ed all just views of personal responsibility; and have merged cur personal obligations in the divine sovereignty. Ail men, they say, are thereby brought into temporal, spi- ritual, and eternal death ; and of course, they readily see, that children may perish. Our baptist brethren, who advo- cate this view of the original covenant, when they come to consider the provisions of the mediatorial covenant, ex- clude children, because they overlook or disregard the po- litical character of both covenants. Here is the origin of their difficulty. But let them reason as they may, the con- sequences of Adam's sin come down upon all — children suffer and die. When Christ appears, he is proclaimed to be the second Adam. His righteousness, from the nature of the case, must afford its application to all — children as well as adults, else there would be no resemblance ; Adam would be no figure of Christ. If the consequences of Adam's sin were death temporal, spiritual and eternal to 248 LECTURES ON all — children not excepted ; then the consequences of Christ's righteousness must be life temporal, spiritual and eternal to all — children not excepted. If the conse- quences of Adam's sin were temporal death, with all the various temporal ills we suffer, to all — children not except- ed ; then the consequences of Christ's righteousness must be deliverance from that death, and all the blessings which can be afforded in this life, for all — children not except- ed. Hence Paul asserts, that as by one man's sin all men were brought into condemnation, so by one man's righte- ousness all men were brought into justification of life. As in Adam all die, so in Christ shall all be made alive. As by man came death, by man also came the resurrection from the dead. Viewed as parallel political operations, the interest of children in these two covenants is thus demon- strated. Every one may understand such an argument, who can understand how children are identified with pa- rents in the common concerns of life ; how their interests in the political charter of their country are recognised ; and how property descends from parent to child. Let us suppose that Adam had not eaten the forbidden fruit — what then ? None would have been subject to death, nor would have known good and evil. Children consequently would not have suffered as they do now. And why ? Because they would have been covered by the official righteousness of Adam their federal head ; and would have enjoyed all the facilities which the covenant, as fulfilled, could have afforded to them, in view of their personal re- sponsibility. When therefore Christ fulfils the law, his righteousness covers all, and children are entitled to all the remedial benefits it affords, as they are advancing un- der a system of personal responsibility to meet the awards of the last day ; and that because he fulfils the righteous- ness of the law. Thus again the case before us is neces- sarily provided for, and in the most ample manner. The Jewish and the christian dispensations, which have MORAL GOVERNMENT. 249 been brought in are emblematical, the one of law, and the other of gospel ; and are in like manner political in their character. They are therefore based on social principle, and consecrate nations as their agents. The Jewish na- tion was brought in under law — many nations are brought in under gospel. Children must necessarily be included in this political operation; for 1. The Jewish institute, as symbolic of law, referred to law which had been violated by Adam, and which has entailed the consequences of sin upon children as well as upon adults ; and the christian in- stitute, as symbolic of gospel, refers to Christ's righteous- ness, which brings a justification unto life upon all — Children as well as adults. And 2, as under both, na- tions are made the ministerial agents, and as children are parts of nations, to leave those out is to destroy the official exhibition. Accordingly the facts, in the history of both dispensations, sustain the general doctrine. The Jewish dispensation did, in the most unequivocal manner, include children. They "were shut up" with their parents under "the ministration of death and con- demnation, "unto the faith which should afterwards be re- vealed ;" or were put under the law as " a schoolmaster to bring them to Christ." Hence, you remember, they were circumcised ; and the circumstance, whether they under- stood the nature of that ordinance or not did not vitiate the ceremonies ; even as in every political community children are entitled to its privileges, and are not deprived of them in consequence of not understanding their import. Doubt- less under such an institute as Moses established, children would do many things that would be a violation of the rigid statutes which he enacted. But such acts would be sins of ignorance, and this great annual atonement would cover them. Now would it not be a strange inconsistency, if, after children had been shut up under a ministration which was professedly intended to lead to Christ, they should have no interest in Christ and his institutions when he should come ? 250 LECTURES ON Yet how much difficulty has been felt! Our baptist breth- ren cast off children as having no place in the church ; and many others carry out their doctrine of "personal election" among infants. What are the facto in the case ? Christ said — " Suffer little children to come unto me." And will any of you keep them back, or condemn those who would bring them ? — But why should they come? The Redeem- er himself assigns the reason, and observes — "For of such is the kingdom of heaven." The present dispensation i3 here called a kingdom : — can there be a kingdom without children? Where there is a kingdom, all its subjects are under the action of its constitutional principles ; so that if children are in the kingdom of heaven, they are necessa- rily under the action of its constitutional principles. Where there is a kingdom/there is also a king, and he is Lord over all that belong to that kingdom; so that if children belong to the kingdom of heaven, Christ is their Lord and Saviour. Again. On the day of Pentecost, when the multitude addressed Peter and the rest of the apostles with so much feeling, and said — "Men and brethren what shall we do ?" Peter replied — "Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins; and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the pro- mise is to yon and your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call." The promise, to which the apostle alluded, was that of the "new covenant" — or the charter of their ecclesiastical state un- der the new dispensation. This promise, and of course "the covenant," or dispensation, the apostle appropriates to them and their children; and, on the ground of its ex- tensive application, exhorts them to repent and be baptiz- ed. In like manner, when the Philippian jailor inquired of Paul and Silas what he should do to be saved ? they replied — " believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house"* — Can any one demand any * Oikos, or family. MORAL GOVERNMENT. 251 farther statute, in reference to the church-membership of children ? and that when he lays these explicit declarations alongside of the political principles which have just been stated ? But once more. When a particular case was referred by the church of Corinth to the apostle Paul on the sub- ject of divorce, he replied — " The unbelieving husband is sanctified by the believing wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the believing husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy." Did the un- believing husband, or wife, by being sanctified, become really holy ? Surely not. The apostle uses the term of- ficially, in order to state the constitutional principle on which children came into the new testament church, or the company of God's saints. If it were not as I have described to you, says the apostle, your children would be among the unclean — the unsanctified heathen.* Now they are not unclean, but holy — saints — belonging to God's sanctified ones. In like manner, this same apostle, describ- ing the character of those who might be ordained as elders, mentions that they should have "faithful children." Faith- ful is another term like " saint," and belongs to members of the church : and if children can be described as not un- clean— as holy, or as saints — and as faithful, it seems to me that the most fastidious might be fully satisfied. As not unclean, and as holy, under the former dispensa- tion, children were circumcised, or had the seal of their ecclesiastical state under the Jewish church. Why should they not now have the seal of their ecclesiastical state un- der the new testament church ? Will you reply that cir- cumcision was the seal of their national relations under the Sinaic covenant? Suppose I grant this: then it will fol- low, that children are identified with their parents in a po- litical organization ; which is one of the matters I insist on. But I must go farther and remind you, that circumcision * Acts x. 28. 252 LECTURES ON was appended to the Abrahamic covenan-t; and as such was " a seal of the righteousness of faith." Any one, who is acquainted with the bible, knows that the new testament church is a society under the Abrahamic covenant ; and consequently under that covenant children are, and must be, members of that society. And farther, that man knows that the distinguishing attribute of this new society is "the righteousness of faith." But children had been entitled to the seal of the righteousness of faith ; and that not only by the Sinaic ritual, but by the covenant with Abraham, whose children we are. Where is the statute by which they are deprived of that seal, seeing that the Abrahamic covenant is still in force ? Let the opponent to infant baptism show his authority ; or, taking the whole argument together, an- swer if he can. . Speaking on the subject of a statute for infant baptism, it may not be amiss to observe, that the Redeemer calls upon parents to educate their children in his laws. Ac- cording to the doctrine I am canvassing, he would then re- quire them to obey the laws of a kingdom, which does not recognise them as subjects. The old testament was a rule to the Jewish church, and not to the gentile nations: the gentiles, Paul declares, had not the law, but were a law unto themselves. Now when Christ has given us the gos- pel, understanding thereby the new dispensation, and has called and consecrated many nations as his church, those, whom we call the heathen, are not under it, and shall not be judged by it. They stand to the new testa- ment church in a relation similar to that in which the old gentiles stood to the old testament church. The law, of which I am speaking, and which requires parents to bring up their children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord, is a law of the new dispensation, as such. Of course children are members of this dispensation, because they are under its own peculiar laws. Those, who are not members of this dispensation and are not subject to its re- MORAL GOVERNMENT. 253 gulations, are strangers to the covenant of promise — aliens from the commonwealth of Israel. And none of these terms are applied to the children of believers. On the contrary, they are called saints and faithful. It will not do to reply that parents are by nature required to bring up their children in the fear of God ; because the statute to which I refer belongs to the bible, which is the rule to the church as such, and the subjects exhibited are those which belong to the dispensation.* How then can children be under the municipal regulations of a commu- nity, of which they are not members. It may not be amiss to inquire how this idea, which shuts children out of the christian community, could ever have been entertained ? There must be some reason for it. The argument which is generally offered in its defence, cannot sustain it. That argument is so palpable a breach of general principles, that it always appears to me like a conclusion whose premises are not known. But I appre- hend that the premises may be ascertained, though they lie far back ; and that they will be found the fruitful source of many errors. To explain. In the second century the christian community, in imitation of pagan "associations, was divided into two parts, which have been called church and congregation. For this distinction there is no warrant in the word of God. But when it was made, the question would of course arise — who are the members of the church? The ground on which the Saviour constructed his dispensa- tion, or the principle of organization which brought in many nations, and separated them as a peculiar people, was abandoned ; something purely spiritual was substituted for that which was political ; and the tie, which united children with the christian community as the church, was broken. The scriptural doctrine of election was perverted, and ' instead of being a great political transaction of the Gover- * See my Essay on Creeds chap. xi. Vol. II.— 22 •254 LECTURES ON nor of the world applicable to the many nations, it was frittered down into the frigid dogma taught by Augustin, and afterwards by Calvin. And when the doctrines of election, of definite atonement, of particular redemption, &c. came in, I see not why the antipajdobaptist might not bring in his heartless speculation, and unfeelingly drive children from the mercy-seat. In truth the ideas to which I have alluded, have made the subject of infant salvation a difficult problem among theological dogmatists every where. Abandon the distinction between church and con°re°-atioii, come back to the broad views of the new dispensation afforded in the scriptures, and reason on the political principles necessarily belonging to "a peculiar people," composed of many nations and constituting the church, and infant baptism will be restored in all its plainness and simplicity ; while those forbidding peculiari- ties, called calvinistic, and which, in the viejy of so many, border so close on fatalism, will immediately dis- appear. But I have followed this matter farther than I intend- ed.— To return. Children were members of the Jewish church ; the annual atonement was made for the people ; therefore it wras made for children, inasmuch as there can- not be a people or nation without children. That atone- ment was typical of Christ's sacrifice ; his sacrifice must have been made for a people, and consequently children were included in his sacrifice. He was the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world ; consequently the children of the whole world are interested in the right- eousness he fulfilled. All men are brought thereby into a justification of life ; so that children are interested in this justification of life, and shall be raised from the dead to see God as He is. After having pressed our argument thus far, and ascertained the political relations of children under the government, or in the kingdom of Prince Mes- MORAL GOVERNMENT. 255 siah, it only remains that we follow out the subject in view of their personal responsibilities. Then, 2. I inquire, may not children — do they not — sin against Christ? and if thev do so sin, what must the issue with regard to them be? Here is the only connexion where any difficulty can possibly remain. Covered under the mediatorial mantle, and brought into £C a justification of life" by the Mediator's righteousness, their final salvation can be jeoparded in no other way than hy their personal delinquencies. Accordingly theologians have not failed to advance certain most fearful and heart-breaking senti- ments concerning the personal character of children. A child, they say, cannot believe, and is therefore destitute of evangelic virtue ; and farther, they say, it actually sins as soon as it is born, and thereby deserves death under God's righteous government : — in support of which harsh and aguish notions, the text will be quoted — " The wicked are estranged from the womb, they go astray as soon as they are born, speaking lies."* Now, while on the one hand, the psalmist, in the text quoted, is speaking of the development of youthful char- acter in the midst of a corrupted community, and under the force of parental vices ; death, on the other hand, we have seen, is the consequence of Adam's sin, is not origi- nally connected with personal responsibility, and cannot be incurred by, but is executed irrespective of, infantile errors. These defences of the theological dogmas in ques- tion, having been thus easily removed, the inability of the young to believe yet remains in our way. What does an adult believe ? Just what may be represented to him as true, and as far as his ability to apprehend can embrace what is represented. And cannot children do the same thing ? They may not be able to read and analyze a print- ed book — they may not know how to estimate lofty strains of eloquence, nor be competent to follow a long and ab- *Psalms 58, 3. 256 LECTURES ON struse argument, proceeding from the pulpit — they may not be intellectual enough to measure the manifestation which God has made of himself in the heavens and the earth, nor understand his "witness" always speaking in goodly tones in his providence. All this adults may be able to manage, while their children cannot. But God has provided for children their own ministers of grace, around the family fireside, in the parlour, in the chamber. And can they not, do they not, believe their parents, when speaking of Christ — his love and his sorrows? nay, do they not believe more implicitly than adults ? The Redeemer seemed to recognise the pure moral character of children, when he said to his disciples — "Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven." Nor only so; but he warned his disciples not to " offend one of those little ones which believed in" him ; thereby, in explicit terms, predicating faith of their mental exercises. But we must treat the subject more at large. That children do many things which, abstractedly speaking, are wrong, and which, left to an operation pure- ly legal, would work condemnation, or bring suffering until relief is obtained, no one can deny. The moral reasoner gains nothing, either for the cause of truth and benevo- lence, or for that of biblical exegesis and parental comfort, by denying the fact. Thisbeing admitted, it will be said — "Sin is transgression of law;" and thus children, by their own actual transgressions, incur the penalty of the law. What relief then has the parental heart ? None, but in the sovereignty of God, it may be answered. And as that proceeds on a principle of election, we may be certain that some will be saved — it may be that a great many will be saved ; but whether or not — or who — or how many — no one can tell. How such remarks try the soul! The heart bleeds, the eyes grow dim, the spirit droops, every nerve quivers, under such preaching. By what authority MORAL GOVERNMENT. 257 do ministers of the gospel thus torture the spirits of be- lievers, whose children God promised to take into cove- nant with himself? or the feelings of any, of any nation,, to whom they are sent to preach the gospel ? By what right do they thus limit the action of the first promise under which the world was called to live in hope ? or the "riches of grace" and "riches of glory," which the new covenant has spread out over christian communities ? The Master never gave them such a commission : and no ordi- nation vows they ever assumed can justify such official severities. It appears to me that theologians uniformly suppose that temporal death is the result of personal sin. On no other supposition can their argument rest. Then, as in- infants die, it will follow that they have personally sinned. But this is not the scriptural view of death, as has been abundantly proved. Death is the consequence of Adam's sin. "In Adam all die." " By one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin." " By one man's offence death reigned by one." "It is appointed unto man once to die." The political operation — for such it is — is the great proof of the scriptural doctrine that sin will brine- misery: — proof inscribed on nature, to which even they must yield who so proudly affect to contemn the bible. Controvertists have, I conceive, forgotten that "we are not under the law, but under grace;" that law was put under mediatorial restrictions when the first promise was given ; and that the bible unfolds the philosophy of this new and evangelic policy. The law. it is true, was again introduced — it entered privily, among the jews — they sin- ned like Adam — they therefore mourned under a " minis- tration of death" and " condemnation :" but this has long since decayed and vanished away. Has the law come in a third time ? Do we sin like Adam ? Are we under a " ministration of death and condemnation ?" Within this periphery, it appears to me, that theologians are alwavs 22* 258 LECTURES ON circulating their dogmas ; and therefore they reach con- clusions which they cannot sustain to the common sense of mankind, and by which they can do nothing but torture the parental heart. It is doubtless true that — "Sin is transgression of law ;" but it is equally true that, " sin is not imputed where there is iso law." And law was not " from Adam to Moses," during which period mankind did not sin after the similitude of Adam's transgression." Law is not now, and has not been since the old covenant vanished away ; so that none now " sin after the similitude of Adam's transgression" — neither adults nor infants. Our infants are not under " the ministration of death." It is not a little strange, that mere abstract law should be judicially applied to the case of infants. For even in po- litical science with which you are all familiar — and you must remember that civil government is an ordinance of God, and the human being is its subject — in political science abstract law cannot be carried out. Law must be admi- nistered on mediatorial principles, and with a view to re- formation. Or, in so far as it is not, our political rulers commit mistakes, from whose consequences physical pow- er cannot extricate them. Tire Redeemer is a " Priest on his throne," governing the world by love ; and at first the civil ruler was both prince and priest. The philosophy of the divine and the human governments is thus the same. To exemplify. Law forbids one man to take the life of another, and threatens death. Let us suppose that life has been taken. The law then has been violated. But life was taken ignorantly or accidentally, and the- penalty is not in that case incurred. Mediatorial principle comes in and modifies the action of law, and the sin of ignorance is not punished. " Malice prepense," knowiedge, purpose, must be proved, to produce conviction. — Other alleviating cir- cumstances might warrant an appeal to the pardoning pow- er reserved to the chief magistrate, and the mediatorial principle will again be displayed. — In causes of a different MORAL GOVERNMENT. 259 nature, and under a multitude of forms, law would utter a decision which would be very oppressive, and political science must refer such causes to a "court of equity." Mere law, however righteous in view of abstract principle, will not answer for society in its present condition. And yet on mere law the whole argument rests, which has ori- ginated all the doubts concerning the destiny of infants ; and that too, when, not onty has the gospel come in, in terms most forceful and tender, but when Jehovah most specifically appropriates its provisions to those who are the most helpless — the Levite, the stranger, the widow, the fatherless and the orphan — as though the more helpless a human being is, the more certainly we may calculate on divine grace. I know very well, that the law of the state presumes no man to be ignorant of its statutes. It is a part of the ne- cessary rigour of law. Man cannot judge the heart; and for this reason, as well as from its own nature, mere law cannot be relaxed. For that very reason the pardoning power has been entrusted to the magistrate ; and for that same reason the sympathies of the public mind so often and so readily appeal to principles of equity. So in the government of God, causes, as is necessary, hasten on to their legitimate effects ; while yet the individual, who may appear criminal under the operation, shall be pardoned by both God and man. The interminglings of the personal and the political systems require this double action. But can any of us be strangers to the wisdom of a policy, or to the morality of the jurisprudence which leans to the side Of mercy ? And yet theologians, living under the mediato- rial government, and continually discoursing about its at- tributes, seem to know no remedial principle which can cover the case of infants. These are unceremoniously thrown under the action of abstract law, and as "sin is transgression of law," they have incurred its penalty; and can you believe they must perish ? Arc }uu doubtful ? 0(50 LECTURES ON cannot the mediatorial government rescure, save, and glo- rify them with the Redeemer on high ? Pardon me — I cannot, must not, dare not, follow the sectarian in his pe- trifying speculations. We must fix a different centre, or use a larger radius, when we would describe the evangelic circle. It has al- ready been admitted that " sin is transgression of law." But law has been put under mediatorial restrictions. Man- kind are called upon to believe. The question then is, what is sin under this new form of moral obligation ? As most assuredly our accountability must be regulated by the government under which we live, sin must be denned by the statute which that government has proclaimed ; and of every other rule ignorance must necessarily be presumed. Accordingly " the Father judgeth no man, but hath com- mitted all judgment to the Son;" neither shall we be judged by the law, but by the gospel. How then does the evangelic legislator and judge estimate and explain sin ? This question you must answer, in order to take an intelli- gent view of the subject before us. Would you go to the charter of a monarchy, in order to ascertain the constitu- tion of a republic ? or to a code of criminal law, when you would define the powers of a court of equity ? The apostle James has told us, that " to him who know- eth to do good, and docth it not, to him it is sin." The apostle Paul has said — " Happy is he who condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth. And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith : for whatsoever is not faith is sin." He acts contrary to his knowledge. Jesus told the jews — " If ye were blind ye should have no sin ; but ye say, we see, therefore your sin remaineth;" and said of them — " If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin : but now they have no cloak for their sin. If I had not done among them the works which none other man did, they had not had sin : but now MORAL GOVERNMENT. 261 they have both seen and hated both me and my father."* The jews should be judged by the law, because they were under it ; the gentiles were not under it, and could not be judged by it. Christians shall be judged by the rules cf the second covenant, or of the new dispensation, because they are under it; the heathen shall not be judged by those rules, because they have not received those rules. " How shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard ? How shall they hear without a preacher ? And how shall they preach except they be sent?" And yet the hea- then shall be judged by the gospel, for " faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God. And have they not heard ? Yes verily, their sound went unto all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world. "t If they sin against the gospel, or against the word of the Lord, which has gone to them, though they may not know the present dispensation under which we live, or though they may not have the new testament scriptures, as the old gentiles had not the old testament scriptures — if they sin against na- ture, as we sin against the special act of revelation afforded to the election, they perish under the same evangelic prin- ciple of judgment, for they sin against knowledge — the knowledge they have. "They perish without law." It is no wonder then that the philosophy of civil govern- ment should be like the philosophy of the divine govern- ment, for both are founded in nature. Nor is it any mat- ter of wonder that theologians should have been involved in difficulty, and run out their speculations into such fear-, ful consequences; for, jn constructing their argument on law, abstractedly considered, they have forgotten the first promise, which placed the world under law in no other form than as it has been modified by mediatorial restric- tions, and have abandoned nature. You see that sin now, as it involves any of us as accountable beings, or as it is to be interpreted in connexion with our personal respon- * John ix, 41. xv. 21, 24. t Rom. x. 13—21. 262 LECTURES ON sibility, must be transgression against the word of the Lord which has come tons. — against our knowledge — the know- ledge which, from the nature of the case, we must be sup- posed to have. All else are sins of ignorance, and are covered by the great sacrifice. But even with these restrictions, we have not stated the whole indulgence afforded by the evangelic institute. The judgment of ignorance, or the presumption of knowledge, is not committed to our discernment, or to our hasty and partial, and censorious criticism. All this belongs to the Searcher of hearts, whose ways are not like our ways and whose thoughts are not like our thoughts ; but whose ways and thoughts are as far from ours, as heaven is distant from earth, or east from west. The old testament prophetesses "made the hearts of the righteous sad, whom God had not made sad ;" and the leaders of the people caused them to err. The Redeemer noticed the absurdity of the popular theologians of his day, who were foolish enough to mark the mote in their brother's eye, and to forget the beam that was in their own ; and positively refused to entrust to his disciples the difficult and delicate task of separating the tares from the wheat. Well knowing that they would ig- norantly, or recklessly, or in the heat of party zeal, " pluck up the wheat with the tares," he reserved the judicial dis- tinctions for the day of judgment; never hinting the be- stowment of that "infallibility" to which, with such mon- strous absurdity, some have since pretended. Now then throw the problem of infant salvation under the light of these principles, and where is the difficulty ? Has the word of the Lord come to infants ? Have they read the volume of nature or revelation? Have they heard, that they might believe ? Have their "senses been exer- cised to discern both good and evil ? Do they sin against knowledge ? if they have done many things which, judg- ed of by mere law, are wrong, have they known to do good ? and in not doing it, sinned ? The church under the Jewish law was a child under age. Was perdition her MORAL GOVERNMENT. 263 fate ? Were her sins then committed against knowledge ? Was the sacrifice, offered for sins of ignorance, and for the whole, of no use ? or did the gospel, as preached to Abraham, as involved in the typical character of the insti- tute they had received, or as wrapped up in the mystery of which their official circumstances formed a part, cover every iniquity ; and protect them from the consequences of sin committed against law ? Did the covering cherubim, overspreading the mercy-seat, hide the law ? Has the mediatorial righteousness of the Son of God been thrown as a mantle over the sins of this typical child ? and can you feel any difficulty about your little ones? whom the Redeemer has recognised as belon^ino: to the kingdom of heaven, and whose angels do always behold the face of your Father which is in heaven. Farther. When the Redeemer told his disciples — " Ex- cept you be converted, and become ?.s little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven;" but "whosoever shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven; and whoso shall receive one such little child, receiveth me ; but who- so shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone we.e hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea" — how much "sin," as "transgre?°'on of law," dees he charge against infants ? When he "took little children in his arms, and put his hands on them and blessed them," and assigned as the reason — "of such is the kingdom of heaven;" when his apostle said, that the unbelieving hus- band is sanctified by the believing wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the believing husband, in both of which cases the children are holy ; and when the same apostle exhorted the Corinthians — " Brethren be not children in understanding, howbeit in malice be ye children, but in understanding be ye men;" how much " sin as transgres- sion of law," would theologians suppose them to aver in 264 LECTURES ON the case of children ? Do you not perceive that the con* dition of children is professedly covered by the righteous- ness of the Son of God. The theological dogma, with which we are in conflict, seems to have been advanced without any reference to the attributes of the new covenant. Describing that institute, Jehovah long since promised by his prophet, as quoted by his apostle — " I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities I will remember no more;" and yet ministers of the new testament can discern no- thing moral in the condition of infants, saving that they are sinners. Perhaps they will reject the promise just re- cited, as having no application to the case in hand, al- though it was originally given in reply to the proverb — "The fathers have eaten a sour grape, and th? children's teeth are set on edge," and was therefore professedly in- tended to meet the action of social law. They may, per- haps, as rapidly despatch the clause which can be adduced from the second commandment, and which evidently belongs to the general administrstion of the divine government — " I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me, and showing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my command- ments." Children, it might be churlishly said, are not men- tioned here, although the last clause is palpably correlative with the first ; and the continuous operation of social law under different institutes, appears to be the very thing, and the only thing, that is stated. Let the Spirit himself speak — " The mercy of the Lord is from everlasting to everlasting upon them that fear him, and his righteousness unto chil- dren's CHILDREN." But our commentary may be still resisted ; or, while it may be admitted that children are referred to, it may still be urged that the quotations do not cover the whole sub- ject, and that they only state exceptions ; for the language MORAL GOVERNMENT. 265 is evidently applied to "them that fear him," and to their children. Then let me ask, why the children of those ? The exceptions, admitting them to be such, are ranged under a particular rule, and are therefore not arbitrary nor myste- rious. That rule expresses the very principle — the con- nexion between righteousness and life — which Jehovah is carrying out every where ; and it expresses that principle as belonging to social law. The symbolical character of the new covenant is therefore the reason of the operation ; and the new covenant is a symbol of gospel. Now gospel rests on the righteousness of Christ as bringing all men into a justification of life. The symbolical action is consequently the proof of the general action — the particular exceptions confirm the general rule — all infants are, therefore, co- vered by the mediatorial righteousness of the Son of God. They are identified with the mediatorial system, just as they are with the intellectual system — just as they are with the animal system — just as they are with the political system ; and no difficulty occurs any where but in theology. Parents carefully cherish the bodies of their children, and never doubt their resurrection because their bodies are small when they die ; the annihilation of their spirits is not inferred because they had received no intellectual cultivation ; their interest in the political institutions of the land is not de- nied— their rights in law are not rejected — because they have not apprehended political principles ; and why should their rights in the mediatorial administration be so enig- matical ? In all ordinary cases children are put under tuition, and are not considered as culpable and degraded, because they are ignorant of doctrines and statutes beyond their years. And may not the mediatorial Prince place them "under tutors and governors," without rejecting them as guilty, and worthy of perdition, because they have not discerned both good and evil while their senses have not been exercised ? — But here is the origin of all our ecclesiastical strife. Vol. II.— 23 266 LECTURES ON Personal responsibility has been lost sight of; every thing is merged in ihe results of the social system ; and that so- cial system is always — or for the most part — considered to be violated law, bringing in death. Wherever good is the result, and the social operation is supposed to be merciful, why then we are told, it is an inexplicable anomaly — a glo- rious mystery of grace — God so determined in his sovereign purpose of election, and he gives no account of his actions. But how theologians can see so distinctly the connexion be- tween Adam and children, while their vision is so in- distinct in view of the relation between Christ and children, is the wonder. Could they but learn, that the mediatorial government recognises personal responsibility, that its de- sign is to cultivate the moral sense, or make the mora] agent perfect in view of conscience ; and that the remedial ope- ration consists in moral tuition under the superintending care of the Holy Spirit, their difficulties would be removed, Christ is the light of the world — the Holy Spirit convinces the world — knowledge is the attribute of the saint. There is no other principle of reformation, where sin — which is darkness and wraps the world in ignorance — prevails. Po- litical economists must learn the value of the moral sense. Civilians must teach a better philosophy than that of ab- stract law. Theologians must turn from sectarian infalli- bility to conscience. After every other experiment has failed, moral education must display itself as the world's last hope ; and when this only remedy shall have been fair- ly tried, " all shall know the Lord from the least unto the greatest." In such a case, what other destiny can await those who die in infancy, than that which the gospel, the social system under which they live and-die, brings to light LIFE AND IMMORTALITY ? It may now, in conclusion, be asked, what shall infants, on the preceding principles, praise God for ? I answer, for life and immortality — have their parents any more? But you may say, no sin is forgiven to them — but many sina MORAL GOVERNMENT. 267 are forgiven to their parents. But how much sin have in- fants committed, even on the system we reject? As many as their parents ? For what shall "elect infants" give praise ? If Adam had never sinned, would he have had no harp to tune in glory ? or, would his children, enjoying life and bliss in this world as the consequence of his righteousness, have passed through this life, without discovering objects for praise, or feeling influences that would wake up "melo- dy in their hearts to the Lord ?" These questions you see, drive us into a mere commercial comparison ; and then, what can John have to give praise for compared with Peter or Paul ? What trifling! when all God's character shall be understood, and all his glory shall be displayed — when moral excellence shall be set forth in its own cloudless bril- liance and its supreme control — when we shall see God as he is, and shall be like him — when those who have been brought from a world of sin and death — and, seated by the Redeemer on his throne, shall review the remedial opera- tion which made them partakers of life and immortality — think you that children, gathered with the saints to know, admire and enjoy all these things, shall lack subjects of praise ? — Ah ! me. What a puny affair scholastic theology is ! How could the world believe in the infallibility which counterfeited such dogmas in the name of the King of glo- ry ? or pay any respect to creeds, the symbols of such ab- surdities ? It is high time these parables of a false philoso- phy, which never have made the worshippers perfect in view of conscience, should be cast, with the idols of the heathen, "to the moles and the bats." Our conclusion then is — That infants are placed under the government of Jesus Christ, who is made Head over all things : that they are partakers of life and immortality as brought to light by the gospel : and that their character is developing under a system which holds their race re- sponsible, each according to his ability, or according to the light dispensed. If, as infants, they die, they are made par- 238 LECTURES ON takers of life and immortality ; — and as it cannot be said of them, "they knew to do good, and did it not," nothing is in plea against them at the bar of the Judge of all the earth. LECTURE XVIII. Reason why Jekovah-Elohim sent our first parents out of Eden — The principle of Labor — Jewish Laws — Provisions for the Poor — New Testament regulations — Origin and evil of Public Charities — State of Society — Remedies — Ecclesiastical mistakes — General conclusions. The new constitution, so precisely suited to man as per- sonally responsible, having been announced, Jehovah- Elohim sent our first parents out of the garden which he had planted for them, and which had become the scene of their crime and shame. Why did he do so ? Why did he not suffer them to remain and enjoy its beauties and its fruits ? Was not this step unnecessarily severe ? These questions merit a deliberate answer. The historian represents Jehovah-Elohim as tenderly commiserating the situation in which these unhappy be- ings had involved themselves by sin ; and assigning their ejectment from paradise to the same general cause. — "And Jehovah-Elohim said — Behold the man has become as one of us, to know good and evil. And now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever ; therefore Jehovah-Elohim sent him forth from the garden of Eden to till the ground from whence he was taken." As Adam had brought himself into the condition of the knowledge of good and evil, by eating of the forbidden fruit, he might still continue to eat MORAL GOVERNMENT. 269 of the trees of the garden — and might so live forever. To prevent his thus living forever, he was driven to till the ground from whence he had been taken. The reason seems to be sufficient. But the question is — what is really meant by it ? Are we to suppose that if Adam had eaten of the trees of life, he would have never died! Perhaps the generality of readers have taken up this very impression ; and do in fact suppose that, by these means, he would have escaped death. Nor is it easy to see how any one, from the first view of the case, could avoid entertaining that idea. But is it not strange that Adam himself never thought of this expedient — at least so far as the narrative reports. Instead of sewing rig- leaves together, he might, if he did not, have resorted to this simple and better remedy. Is it not strange that Satan never suggested it ? And stranger still, that Jeho- vah-Elohim should have prevented it, when he was pro- fessedly stating the outlines of a remedial plan ? or that he should have excluded Adam from the means of living forever, when the very object of Christ's death and resur- rection is to bring in eternal life ? — This view, arising so directly from the appearance which the narrative gives to the fact, cannot be sustained. Moreover, the physical agency, by which death was brought in, was the ground, as cursed. The tree of life, if such a particular tree there was, must have been material in its own nature ; and consequently, being subject to the deleterious influence, under which all material things change and wither, it was liable to decay. How could it, while under the general sentence which followed Adam's sin, be the means of imparting everlasting life to him ? The idea is manifestly most incongruous — there is nothing, in any form, plausible about it.# It has farther been supposed, that though Adam, by eating of the trees of life, would have lived forever, yet *Lecture VIII. 23* 270 LECTURES ON he would have led a life of misery. But from what source would this misery have proceeded ? That source must have been external or internal. If the first, in what way could external agents injure an immortal being? Could they inflict disease ? Could they make him feel the sensation of want ? Could they occasion any alarms ? If internal, then what would his misery be? Not disease — for disease is the working of death ; disease could make no impression upon his immortal imperishable frame. Would it be a sense of guilt ? Then this living forever would be only temporal life ; and where, when, and how, has spiritual life, which theologians carry in their spe- culations up to this very point, been dropped from their thoughts ? According to this view man would live for- ever, while he was spiritually dead ; and as the conse- quence of eating of the tree of life ! i, e. consistently with the doctrine under consideration — the consequence of Adam's eating of the forbidden fruit was temporal, spiritu- al, and eternal death. But it is supposed that eating of the trees of life would have controlled the sentence, and man should not have died. Then surely, if his eating of the trees of life would have controlled the effects of his eat- ing the forbidden fruit, the consequence of eating the for- bidden fruit could not have been death temporal, spiritual, and eternal ; or the consequence of his eating of the tree of life would be life, temporal, spiritual, and eternal. No sense of guilt could exist in the case, and the account of the fall is a mere fable. The truth is, that this whole matter turns upon the force of the original word, rendered forever. Now this word, as formerly observed, may signify endless duration ; but it does not necessarily do so. It is as often finite, as it is infi- nite, when used by the scriptural writers ; and it implies a duration that is not known, but which may be longer or shorter, according to the nature of the particular subject to which it is applied. To repeat the examples already MORAL GOVERNMENT. 271 adduced. If a hebrew servant did not wish to cc go out free," his master was required to bring him to the judges, and to the door post, and to bore his ear through with an awl; which being done, he became a servant forever. So Hannah proposed to bring her child Samuel to the tem- ple, that he might appear before the Lord, and there abide forever. The passover was established as an everlasting memorial: — "You shall keep it," said Jehovah, "a feast to Jehovah throughout your generations ; you shall keep it a feast, by an ordinance, forever." In the case before us, as in that of the hebrew servant, the term is simply applied to the duration of a man's life. Adam was driven from the garden to prevent him from spending his life in eating of the fruit of the trees of life ; and he was sent out to till the ground from whence he had been taken. The term forever, and the circumstances of the case, call for nothing more : and this interpretation leaves the whole matter plain and unembarrassed.* The Lord had just informed Adam that, in consequence of his sin, he had forfeited his peculiar privileges ; that he was now destined to a life of labor ; that he should from henceforth obtain his bread by the sweat of his brow ; and that the earth would bring forth briars and thorns unto him, which would occasion much toil and sorrow. This would certainly be any thing but an agreeable prospect to one who had been accustomed to better circumstances ; and he would very naturally prefer to live on the fruit of the trees of life, growing luxuriantly and spontaneously, rather than to eat the herb of the field, which was to be the pro- duct of his own labor. Jehovah-Elohim therefore inter- feres, and puts him directly under the necessities of the condition to which he had reduced himself; breaks up all those associations which could now lead onlv to indolent and hurtful indulgence, and sends him forth to work. Thus was established the operative system, which has re- *Lectures VII. VIII. Kennicott's Dissertation on the Tree of Life, 272 LECTURES ON ferred the means of human subsistence to human labor; a system which must be perpetuated with all the coming generations of mankind ; and which shall be as steadfastly kept up as the sun in its course. Labor or starvation is the simple alternative. There is no escaping from it ; there is no modifying it ; there is no putting forth the hand to pluck the fruit of the trees of life ; nor can the experi- ment of a different system be tried in any form, without inflicting an injury upon individuals and upon society — an injury which will be felt to the whole extent of the ex- periment. Here is the first principle of political economy ; and the true and only remedy for the immense evils of pauperism, which no effectual method has yet been de- vised to arrest. — This principle I now propose to consider at large, and in its various bearings on society: as such a discussion may, perhaps, be the very best form in which the wisdom and goodness of God to man, in removing him from Eden, may be made to appear ; while, at the same time, the doctrine of personal responsibility will be still farther illustrated. Under the Jewish polity, this same system was made the basis of all the political regulations, which Moses, by the divine appointment, enacted. There were many statutes then enforced, which may appear to a modern reader very singular, perhaps even objectionable, and which are alto- gether inappropriate now. But circumstances have been very much altered ; society, then young and immature, has now arrived at full age ; bondage and minority have been exchanged for liberty and manhood; and the external policy, which must be sustained in view of the present condition of mankind, is necessarily different from that which any legislator could then have adopted. Still the general principles, which belong to the intellectual .and animal natures of man, must be essentially the same ; and Moses regarded nothing with a more careful eye, than he did the indissoluble connexion between human labor and MORAL GOVERNMENT. 273 human subsistence, which God established on that event- ful day, when he sent our first parents from the garden. Moses did not forget the poor ; or push the system so far as to disregard the emergencies which are continually oc- curring; and under which a fellow man might " fall into decay" — as he expresses it. His code has specified several provisions, by which the poor might be relieved from any present distress ; but they seem to have been intended rather to preserve, than to set aside the original system, with which the Mediator commenced his administration. They are such as follow — " when ye reap the harvest of the land, thou shalt not wholly reap the corners of thy field, neither sfralt thou gather the gleanings of thy harvest. And thou shalt not glean thy vineyard, neither shalt thou gather every grape of thy vineyard ; thou shalt leave them for the poor and stranger."* " Six years thou shalt sow thy land, and shalt gather in the fruits thereof. But the sev- enth year thou shalt let it rest and lie still; that the poor of thy people may eat : and what they leave, the beasts of the field shall eat. In like manner thou shalt deal with thy vineyard and oliveyard."t The poor then had the seventh year — they had the cor- ners of the field — the gleanings of the field, of the vine- yard, and of the oliveyard. What was thus to be acquir- ed, called for their own labor ; and was not a single gratui- ty bestowed upon the idle and dissolute. Neither was the labor compulsory, any farther than the actual necessities of life made it so — a sort of compulsion, which, by the laws of his own being, every man should feel, and ought to feel. But it was not the compulsion of law. Every thing was left to the moral force of the individual character of the poor. The supply which was thus afforded, did most sa- credly regard their character, and was intended to cherish it as far as the nature of the case would allow. Nor yet was the provision thus made of a, public description, furnish* * Lev? xix. 9—11. t Exod. xxiii. 10, 11. =274 LECTURES ON ing a protracted series of degrading statistics, and handing down from age to age the palsying records of a public es- tablishment. Every man was the almoner of his own bounty, the trustee of his own charity ; and the poor, who gleaned in his fields and vineyards and oliveyards, gather- ed by their own labor whatever they could, thinking of, dreading, feeling, no public exposure. In all this there was no degradation of the poor; no depressing them in their own esteem ; no unfeeling attraction of the public eye to their condition ; no dissolving of the ties which bound them to society ; no breaking up of the mutual sympathies, which resulted from their being brethren and enjoying a common heritage; but relief was afforded in the safest, the most humane and honorable manner. Or if it may be supposed that any degradation was experienced by these eleemosynary provisions, yet they are evidently designed to make that degradation as light, and to counteract it as far as possible — by calling out, on the part of the poor, what- ever character they had ; and taking from the bounty itself much of the appearance of a gratuity : and by not only securing to the poor the heart-felt sympathies of their breth- ren, but taking care that those sympathies should not run riot, and become the mere ebullitions of undisciplined feel- ing. The question of almsgiving was thus put into all its moral connexions; and the almoner had something more to do, than merely to shed a tear and give a mite. The poor man was his neighbor, became his companion, and might be courted as his fellow traveller to eternity. He is thy brother, said Moses. Among the hebrews, it was a custom to tithe all the in- crease of their seed ; to go up to the place where the Lord had chosen to put his name ; and to eat before the Lord. They carried thither the tithe of their corn, of their wine, of their oil, and of the firstlings of their herds, and of their flocks. Or if they thought the way too long, or found it very inconvenient to carry up their tithe to the chosen MORAL GOVERNMENT. 275 place, they were at liberty to sell their tithe ; and, taking the money, they might on the spot, buy whatsoever their soul lusted after, oxen, sheep, wine, strong drink, or what- ever they desired — and feast with their households before the Lord. On these great festivals they were not to forget the levite, who had no inheritance among them, nor the stranger, nor the fatherless, nor the widow. This was another provision in behalf of the poor, which was calcu- lated to affect their character and standing in the commu- nity, in a very favorable manner. It preserved their bro- therhood and prevented their sinking into disgrace ; it stim- ulated them to action, and cherished their most honorable feelings ; it hushed their complaints and awakened their best affections ; it tutored even the orphan in social virtue, by extending the fostering care of a kind parentage, and prepared him, not only to display the most enthusiastic pa- triotism, but the most filial regard to the religious institu- tions of the land. Politically and morally considered, it must ever be a most disastrous occurrence, when the poor are cut off from their interest in the state, or from the friend- ships and great social movements of the community to which they belong. They grow, in such a case, into a distinct, independent, and degraded class ; and they acquire an anomalous character, which fits them to commit depre- dations on society, or prepares them to execute a despot's will. Moses wisely prevented all this ; and, by preserving, them in their political and moral standing as an integral part of society, he secured all their feelings and efforts in harmo- ny with the general weal. His statute was founded on princi- ples of a fine moral cast, which the Redeemer himself distinct- ly recognised, when he said — "When thou makest a sup- per or a dinner, call not thy friends, nor thy brethren, nei- ther thy kinsmen, nor thy rich neighbors ; lest they also bid thee again, and a recompense be made thee. But when thou makest a feast, call the poor, the maimed, the lame, the blind ; and thou shalt be blessed, for they cannot re- 07G LECTURES ON compense thee : for thou shalt be recompensed at the re- surrection of the just." Moses farther provided for the poor, by requiring that their wages should be faithfully and promptly paid ; by af- fording them every facility to redeem their land when it was sold ; and by liberally assisting them, when they were reduced to want ; i. e. according to the laws he ordained, the poor must not be oppressed nor maltreated ; their hard- ships must not be cruelly increased ; but rather they them- selves must be sustained and helped. "Thou shalt not," said this lawgiver, " harden thy heart, nor shut thine hand from thy poor brother ; but thou shalt open thine hand wide unto him, and shalt surely lend him sufficient for his need, in that which he wanteth. Beware that there be not a thought in thy wicked heart, saying — the seventh year, the year of release is at hand ; and thy eye be evil against thy poor brother, and thou givest him nought." This assist- ance was to be afforded by lending to the poor according to their necessity, and was to be extended cheerfully and with all integrity. It was not a public charity, but a matter of private concern, by which a sufferer was ena- bled to meet some emergency, without any sacrifice of character. It is true, Moses had no beggars, as they are now term- ed, to provide for. Why, or how, on his principles of le- gislation, which were so admirably calculated to tutor, and elevate the moral feelings, both of the giver and the re- ceiver, should he have any? Indeed, says Michaelis — "If we trace back the history of most nations, to their ancient state of general poverty, we shall find, the farther we go back, that beggars more and more decrease, until they al- most entirely disappear in statu natures. Perhaps, instead of them, we may occasionally meet with an account of some brave man, who by the labor of his hands, could scarcely earn bread enough for himself and his children ; and who actually was under the apprehension of starving, MORAL GOVERNMENT. 277 "when, to save his country, he was called from the plough to the dictatorship."* All this is to be accounted for, on the one hand, by that vigor of individual character, whose force and delicacy Moses seemed to be so anxious to pre- serve ; and on the other, by the absence of those public charities, which have corrupted the poor without relieving them. The Mosaic law comes in as a commentary on the general statute, given at first; and which made the means of subsistence to depend on human labor. In the new testament, our subject is presented in the same general form ; and the principles which belong to it are very briefly, but very distinctly, stated. "The labo- rer" is emphatically declared to be "wrorthy of his hire ;" and the withholding of it is very severely reprehended. "Behold," says James, "the hire of the laborers which have reaped down your fields, which is of you kept back by fraud, crieth ; and the cries of them which have reap- ed are entered into the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth." — The necessity for labor is declared with equal point: and the neglect of it is condemned with equal severity: — "For even when we were with you," said Paul, "this we com- manded you, that if any man would not work, neither should he eat. For we hear that there are some who walk among you disorderly, working not at all, but are busy bo- dies. Now them that are such, we command and exhort by our Lord Jesus Christ, that with quietness they work, and eat their own bread." And again — " But if any pro- vide not for his own, and especially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infi- del." Christianity therefore, is, in this respect, "the same nowT that it was when the Seed of the woman was promis- ed, and man was sent forth to till the ground whence he was taken. Legislation for the poor has not been forgotten by the apostles, as is very evident from a great variety of facts, * Comment, art. 142. Vol. II.— 24 £78 LECTURES OPf which it is scarcely necessary to repeat. Paul, speaking of the reception he had met with from Peter, James and John, remarks — " Only they would that we should remem- ber the poor ; the same which I also was forward to do." It was not uncommon to have collections made by the churches, for the relief of the poor ; and though Paul sanctioned and directed them, yet he seems to have his own fears of the consequences, and appeared very anxious that this species of public charity should be confined to those who are " widows indeed." In writing to Timothy, he directs — " If any widow have children or nephews, let them learn first to show piety at home, and to requite their parents; for that is good and acceptable before God." And again — " If any man or woman that believeth have widows, let them relieve them, and let not the church be charged : that it may relieve them that are widows indeed. Had these rules been duly regarded, and had their philosophy been understood, the state and the church might have been saved at this time a thousand evils, under which they are ineffectually, but loudly, complaining. The Master himself, in correcting the many abuses which he detected in his own house, reproved the pharisees, be- cause they taught, that a man might take ih&t portion of his substance with which he should have supported an aged father or mother, and present it as a gift to the sanctuary. Such offerings were not acceptable in God's sight. — When; at another time, he discovered the pharisees, distributing their alms in the most public and ostentatious manner, he described them as a set of hypocrites, and took occasion to lay down this general rule — " When thou doest alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth ; that thine alms may be in secret : and thy Father, which seeth in secret, himself shall reward thee openly." A rule which has long since been forgotten, and given place to public charities, so extensive and splendid, as to leave the phari- sees far out of sight, and to actuate a large class in socie- MORAL GOVERNMENT. 279 ty, anomalous in character and degraded in life, with which neither church nor state knows what to do. It is very evident that there is nothing exaggerated in the preceding delineation of society, taken from the scrip- tural pages. The principles are all plain and simple ; car- rying their own evidence along with them, and commend- ing themselves to every man's understanding. They are easily enumerated. — Every man should support himself by his own labor. — Every man should support his own family by his own labor ; or every family should have in itself the means of its own support. — Every poor man, who really needs assistance, ought to have it, but nothing more ; i. e. he must labor as far as he can. — Every poor man who has become really disqualified to labor, should be sustained by others. — This assistance, or support, must be derived in the most private and considerate manner; so that, while the poor man's physical wants are supplied, his moral charac- ter may not be injured, nor his moral sense be impaired ; so that, when his distress may have passed by, he may resume his own labor for his own support. — This assistance, or sup- port, should be extended by the poor man's immediate rela- tives, family connexions, or personal friends ; or, in the event of their incapacity, by his neighborhood. — None but an ex- treme case indeed ought to be referred to the church. Public establishments, set up by law, can do nothing but mischief, for it is impossible that they should not, sooner or Jater, and to the whole extent of their means, interfere with all the principles of human society. These views, which commend themselves to every man, •are in actual operation now. They always have been, and always must be, in operation. And up to this point many of the poor do help themselves, rise above their difficulties, and command respect and confidence. But beyond this point, whenever private benevolence becomes indiscrimi- nate and disregards the essential principle of human sub- sistence, and public charities begin to display them- selyes, a new condition of society supervenes ; and an un- 280 LECTURES ON suspected evil is betrayed, which quickly demands an ex* tension of these charities. These charities are extended, and the evil soon overtakes and goes beyond them, and loudly calls for more. It fastens itself on the body politic, like a horse-leach, crying, give, give. Such is pauperism and its history. The ancient monastic institutions, says Blackstone, " sup- ported and fed a very numerous and very idle poor, whose sustenance depended on what was daily distributed in alms at the gates of the religious houses. But, upon the total dissolution of these, the inconvenience of thus encourag- ing the poor in habits of indolence and beggary, was quick- ly felt throughout the kingdom ; and abundance of statutes were made in the reign of king Henry the eighth, for pro- viding for the poor and impotent ; which, the preambles to some of them recite, had of late years strangely increased."* Almshouses,, hospitals, parish allowances or poor rates, fol- lowed ; to which have been added work-houses, or houses of industry, and charitable societies Avithout end. The provisions which have been made to relieve these hordes of paupers, have all originated in the most benevo- lent feelings, both on the part of individuals, and on that of the different legislatures. But as church and state were blended together, the ecclesiastical ideas, which gave rise to the monastic institutions, and which had made almsgiving a very important item in preparation for heaven, not only pervaded the general mind, but they were carried into the councils of the nation. Thus that, which had been one of the very worst effects of the monasteries, was reproduced by the royal prerogative, and stalked forth in giant form ; having exchanged its ecclesiastical habiliments for the civi- lian's gown. So we have the evil now ; and perhaps not altogether divested of the religious sentiment, which the Caliph Omar Ebn Abd'alaziz has so forcefully expressed— * " Prayer carries us half way to God, fasting brings us to the • Com. B. 1, ch. 9. MORAL GOVERNMENT. 28l tloor of his palace, and alms procures for us admission." After all, let the character of the feeling, in which these institutions originated, be what it may, yet the consequence has been most disastrous ; not only to society, bat \o the poor themselves. A few extracts may confirm our state- ments. One writer remarks : — " Since the poor laws were esta- blished, however humane and judicious in their first insti- tution, by affording a certain provision for infancy and age, we find pauperism has been continually increasing ; and that, with growing wealth, the laboring poor have become more and more numerous and depressed." Another writer observes — " Those most impolitic of all impolitic laws, were unquestionably established on princi- ples, and from motives, that do honor to the feelings of the legislative body of the time in which they were enacted. They were considered, not only by those who framed and supported them, but by all sensible and intelligent people, as the wisest and most philanthropic of human institutions. They had for their chief object the comfortable sustenance of those, who, feeble through age or misfortune, were ren- dered incapable of exerting themselves in such a manner as to procure by labor a sufficient supply of the necessaries of life, and that by means the most rational ; namely, by compelling those who possessed none, or but a small share, of 'the milk of human kindness,' to contribute in an equal proportion with those, who, from liberal and benevolent dispositions, would have continued to do so without legal compulsion. It was expected that the enacting of these iaws would have had the effect of introducing a spirit of industry among the lower ranks ; which, while it tended to render the operation of the poor laws in a very small de- gree burthensome to the wealthy part of the community, would also have greatly promoted the prosperity of the na- tion. But how blind is human foresight, and how imper- fect all human institutions } These laws, from the establish- 24* 282 LECTURES ON ment of which so many happy effects were expected to result, have tended to consequences of the most alarming nature ; consequences which, if effectual measures are not speedily taken to avert them, may, and probably will, end in universal ruin. "It is added, that, notwithstanding the enormous assess- ments to which the poor laws gave rise, they are by no means attended with the advantages which were expected. In place of tending to improve the morals, or increase the industry of the poor, they have had quite a contrary effect. It was but a short time after the enactment of these laws, that the public were insulted with the famous song of, ' Hang sorrow, cast away care, The parish is bound to maintain us.' And how much this sentiment seems to be impressed on the minds of the generality of that description of people, for whose benefit these laws were framed, is well known to all who live under their influence. They require not to be reminded how necessary it is become to endeavor, by every possible means, to curb that spirit of licentiousness, which so generally reigns within the walls of a parish workhouse, whence shame, honesty and pride, seem to be forever banished."* The details of this subject are to the last degree distress- ing and frightful. The rapid increase of the number of this portion of the population ; the shame and infamy, and disgrace, which their crimes necessarily produce, which no extent of bounty can ever relieve ; but to whose progress, multiplied and misguided charities, both individual and public, must, and constantly do, lend accelerated force, might arouse the deepest slumbers of the community. The statistics of this onerous system have been often pre- sented to the public, without producing any reformation, or leaving any more than an evanescent impression. It is no part of my object to go out into these details. * Rees' Encyc. Art. Poor. MORAL GOVERNMENT. 283 Though they belong to the general subject, yet I am look- ing forward to a class of conclusions, which can be sus- tained without such troublesome minuteness. These shall appear in their time. I am, at present, merely preparing the way for them. The question arises, and may be pressed with great pro- priety and force — how is society to be extricated from this terrible labyrinth ? And certainly the answer is both near and distinct, if our statements, taken from the scriptures, be at all correct. There is manifestly neither discretion nor safety in going on, guided by the ignis fatuus that has al- ready led us so far astray. The farther we go, the more rapidly the evil will grow, and the farther we may go. Every additional society, intended to relieve the poor, will injure the poor themselves, and add to the burthens which are declared to be already too onerous. To stand still, if that could be done, would be to leave the evil as we find it ; and yet the evil could not remain stationary, because it has its own principle of amplification, which would ulti- mately carry us along with it. The evil itself must be as- sailed— effectually and successfully, and society be brought back under the force of scriptural laws. No other remedy remains. But how is that to be done ? In attempting to answer a question of this kind, it is in- dispensably necessary to ascertain the precise object in view. All the facts in the case serve to show that the poor themselves have become degraded ; their conscious feel- ing of individuality is vitiated or impaired, or their moral sense is deadened. The great re me dy is a regeneration, or a reviving of the moral sense. There is, therefore, in the political object to be achieved, something analogous to that which the great Redeemer himself is aiming to effect ; and the principles on which he calculates as remedial, are those on which the operation in view must rely. His grand design is to brina; information, varied and extensive — fur- nishing accurate views of our moral condition, to bear up- 284 LECTURES ON on the human mind. At one time he established a great variety of symbolic institutions, and sent prophet after prophet to enforce and illustrate them. At another, he af- fords his bible, and organizes society under the inspection and sympathy of numerous ministerial helps. He makes every man a moral monitor to every other man ; and calls upon all, by the light of the good works they behold, to forsake sin and turn to his commandments. He thus pre- serves the whole subject of morals, fairly and constantly before our eyes ; and presides, by his Spirit, and in love, over the whole train of instruction thus imparted to us. By argument, by appeal, by entreaty, light is brought into the understanding, and impressions are left upon the heart. His kingdom is thus set up within us, and the sinner, learn- ing to act from established principles and rectified views, acts correctly ; and attains to those heavenly associations, whose members have all pure personal characters. A like operation I would commend in the present case ; and on the ground that it will be found as effectual as it is consistent, and as practicable as it is unequivocal. The poor must be enlightened, that they may be able to look at their own condition through another and abetter medium; that they may acquire higher motives and more enlarged views ; and that they may learn to multiply their own internal resources, and cherish feelings which will be utterly irre- concilable with their present degradation. The community may then repose confidence in all ; as they can, and do now, in the better classes of the poor, whose views and feelings have not fallen below the consideration of personal indi- viduality. Education is by far too expensive, and the poor feel it to be out of their reach. An inequality is thus created; and those who cannot enjoy early tuition, expend their minds on such objects as they meet ; often reaching the extreme of vice, before they have known any thing of its enormity. Here then the remedial operation must commence; and as it proceeds, carrying light and liberty MORAL GOVERNMENT. £83 and love along with it, a regenerating influence will be felt, which will ultimately redeem the whole class from infamy and distress. To the accomplishment of this ob- ject all the energies of the state, urged on by the wise and good, should be unweariedly directed ; the consequences will repay them for their anxiety and toil, and rid them of an evil which has long been a political opprobrium. I speak not of pauper schools, erected either by public charities, or by religious sectaries, or by the legacies of the rich. These I have ever considered to be of most hurtful tendency ; though perhaps they may be the best form in which a mere gratuity can be conferred. But still such institutions treat the poor as paupers ; and do not fair- ly identify their children as an integral part of the commu- nity. On the contrary j their children grow up with the very associations, with the very habits of thought and feeling, which the remedy proposed intends effectually to destroy. They who get their education as a gratuity, have only to take one step farther, and ask a support as a gratu- ity. Lessons of independence cannot be taught, without disgusting the pupil with the very institution from which they proceed ; or, without disclosing to the child the pa- rent's shame, betrayed by the very act of sending him to school. The influence of the higher classes is not brought to bear upon the poor, in a manner calculated to elevate them, or to cherish loftiness of sentiment ; but rather the distinction is made wider, and a depressing influence is exerted; while those sympathies of life are withheld, which can be enjoyed only by a living intercourse. The Redeemer, carrying out his regenerating plan, allows us the most intimate fellowship with himself, and sends his Spirit to dwell in our bosom. The very idea of commu- nion with him is calculated to elevate our thoughts, and to inspire us with lofty purposes and feelings. And in the secondary operation I am recommending, access to the higher classes, familiarity with them, the experience of 283 LECTURES ON their kindness, and the sight of their smiles, would have the happiest effect upon the poor — both old and young. Pauper schools afford no opportunity for such communion, and leave no room for so fine a display of humanity. Moses secured all this, by his regulation of the various festivals which he enjoined ; and by the liberty which he awarded to the poor, to go and glean in the fields of the rich. On no occasion ought the rich more distinctly to recollect the reason why Moses did this, than on the estab- lishment of schools. The poor man is thy brother. It may not be amiss here to observe, that in the higher remedial plan, which is carried out under the superinten- dence of Jehovah, he is fully and accurately informed on the whole subject with which his agency interferes. In like manner they who would engage in the benevolent enter- prise of lifting the poor from their degradation, ought care- fully to investigate the subject they seek to relieve. But unfortunately it happens, that they who give are as little aware of the consequences of giving, as they who receive. The community themselves do not understand the princi- ples of pauperism. They see the evil only partially. They think it to be within the compass of their individual or so- cial gratuities ; and are grievously disappointed, when they find that their benevolent design has been frustrated. They search a little way for the cause; and, finding some- thing which seems to be sufficient to produce the evil, they inveigh against the insidious agent they have detected; and so leave the whole matter until a periodical excitement again occurs, which again calls forth their unavailing com- plaints; and seeing no alternative but gratuity or starva- tion, their own feelings impel them still to give. How often has intemperance, for example, been declared to be the cause of pauperism ; and no doubt in a multitude of instances it has been the fell destroyer. But if there was no intemperance, there are other causes which would produce the whole evil. Pauperism may lead to intern- MORAL GOVERNMENT. - 287 perance, as well as that intemperance may lead to pau- perism. How often has pauperism been ascribed to bad and op- pressive government; and a bad government is certainly one of the greatest of human calamities. But pauperism may be engendered under any form of government; and certainly will follow a system of legislation which enacts a code of poor laws. It has its own resources, and is char- acterized by its own attributes, which may be fully dis- played independently of government. Those principles, which are inherent in the subject, whatever they may be, should be fairly and fully canvass- ed, until both the rich and poor should understand them : or any effort which may be made to eradicate the evil, would be continually counteracted and thwarted ; and the benevolent would again, as they did after the destruction of the monastic institutions, seek the coercion of law, to compel others to assist in bearing the burdens they had created. And we conceive that there is nothing which ought to be more distinctly impressed on the public mind, than this matter of general education; and not education, simply considered, but extended, as it ought to be, in an honorable manner ; so as to secure both the intellectual and moral elevation of all classes. Again we repeat the important lesson which Moses taught — The poor man is thy brother. Such a system of education — by its general character, as well as by the associations or intercourse it should create among the different classes of society — would carry amoral influence along with it, and to the whole extent of xpauper- ism. The Mediator, in seeking the moral reformation of our race through the medium of instruction, sustains an operation of love ; nor is there any truth which he more intensely labors to impress upon the human mind, than this very fact — that God is good, and really desires to promote our present and everlasting welfare. Such should be the £88 LECTURES ON character of the enterprise now suggested. The greatest benefit which can be conferred on a human being, is to fur- nish him, in an honorable manner, with the means of intel- lectual cultivation. It will be received as an inestimable boon; as the strongest expression of kindness which could be af- forded, and as the certain means of attaining whatever- is within the reach of human effort. He who engages in the undertaking, feels that he is aiming at a magnificent ob- ject, which will absorb his best affections, and carry a puri- fying influence to his own bosom. There is something in the very nature of the operation, which necessarily assimi- lates it to the evangelical purposes of Jehovah ; so that, when it is fairly tried, it quickly develops, as wrapped up within itself, the principles of its own execution. It has a thousand adjuvants, which are immediately called to its aid ; and there are a thousand unfavorable circumstances) which it readily controls, or quickly removes. Instead of restraining the poor by the presence of power, it animates them by the demonstration of love. It substitutes kind- ness for whins and scorpions, and the excitements of hope for the shiveiings of fear. It represses trains of suspicions and jealousies, and promotes a reciprocal confidence. It elicits whatever is good, and restrains the jarring passions of human nature, which are ever ready to run into the ex- treme of licentiousness, under the influence of the most vulgar and grovelling temptations. In short, such a general system of education confirms the various ties of life, mingles heart with heart, and identifies the whole of society in the pursuit of common objects, and the enjoyment of common interests. All the better classes of society, by their mutual respect and their harmonious operation, de- monstrate the truth of our remarks ; and the poor, brought under the same influences, would stand regenerated before us, fitted for the noblest deeds, and stimulated by the purest feelings. Whereas, on the other hand, frowns and penal- ties, which remove them to a distance, degraded by igno- MORAL GOVERNMENT. 289 ranee, and wretched through apprehension, destroy every thing that is noble in their nature, and force them to nurse their evil passions in their own defence. The most impol- itic of all political measures, is to throw off the poor from our hearts and leave them to vegetate unregarded ; or to feed them upon chanty, and punish them by law. They occupy a higher place in the scale of being, and are entitled to more dignified consideration. But, if I mistake not, society will throw many difficulties in the way of such a project. They will apprehend that it must necessarily lead to an indiscriminate intercourse be- tween the children of the rich and those of the poor ; and that the tendency of such intercourse will be to corrupt the children of the better classes, by teaching them vulgar and profane habits. Such an objection must necessarily have great weight, as far as it is believed to be true. But the question is, is it true ? I apprehend that it is not. — Somehow, in reasoning on morals, a tendency to evil, sure and uniform, is ever suspected to be the single characteris- tic of mankind. A tendency to good is seldom supposed ; or if it is presumed to exist, the reasonerwho advances the idea, is heavily accused as heretical, or laughed at as chi- merical. And yet Jehovah himself describes our condi- tion as an intermixture of good and evil ; and has establish- ed all his operations, as a reformer among men, upon that tendency to good. On this tendency he calculates in pre- senting truth to their minds, and seeks to rouse them to moral action. His remedial interference is neither harsh nor violent ; he seeks not by omnipotence to coerce, but by conviction to persuade, or by love to attract ; and he calls upon us to imitate his example. Christians are the lio-ht of the world, illumining the darkness around them ; and the salt of the earth, communicating their own properties for the purificiflion and preservation of others. Nor is the expectation vain ; for the lower are ever copying the higher classes in manners, dress, language, and a thousand Vol. II.— 25 590 LECTURES ON other things, which make up the minutiae of life. In the project contemplated, it will be well if the result be not the reverse of that which the objection urges, and if the chil- dren of the rich do not corrupt those of the poor. Many a lesson of false pride, unprofitable and injurious, may be secretly insinuated ; and habits, both of thought and feeling, may be most insidiously formed, before the innovation may be suspected, or shall have attracted any notice. But the truth is, from an individual's own heart down through all the forms and circumstances of life, every thing requires vigilance, because every thing may be mismanaged. It be- longs not to man to say — Let it be. Every object is to be obtained by effort ; and the education of the young is not to be effected by magic, nor by an overweening confidence which shall relieve the parent from watchfulness and cau- tion. I recommend no project of spontaneous growth, whose practical operations require no providential care. Chris- tianity itself, devised by infinite wisdom, requires the super- intendence, kind and forbearing, of him who framed it. If, however, the pride of wealth and of family distinc- tion, must still be arrayed against the philosophy of life and its social relations ; if the rich cannot consent to identify themselves with the poor, so far as to carry a moral and re- forming influence into the whole field of pauper wretched- ness ; if, in spite of our strong republican asseverations, with which we are rendered familiar from childhood itself, an aristocracy, disregarding the morality of benevolence, must be maintained ; if the division of mankind into classes by artificial lines, must still be held as natural and sacred ; and if the various ideas to which that division has given rise must be pronounced orthodox and wise, without refer- ence to those moral laws which bind man to man, whatever may be the difference of external circumstances ; then the alternative remains — charity or starvation. They who have hitherto given, must go on to give. The evil they deplore will continue to grow ; and all the facilities and advantages MORAL GOVERNMENT. 291 which our fine country affords, will not save us from the convulsions which must ensue, and which the voice of all experience has proclaimed in the clearest and most une- quivocal manner. The only effectual remedy that exists, is to be found in reviving the moral sense of those who have sunk into such great degradation. Abandon all thoughts of this only remedy, and we may as well expect to carry sinners to heaven without regeneration, as to accomplish any permanent benefit for the poor, or cure the evils of which we complain. This system of general education is, however, not the only measure to be adopted, in view of the painful and af- flicting subject before us. Our charities must be reviewed ; for though they express great benevolence, they are yet most improperly bestowed; and while they professedly seek to relieve the poor, they are actually degrading them more and more. Mere gratuities, extended to any one able to provide for himself, are to that individual a positive injury. They contravene the great law which God has established; namely, that man must gain subsistence by labor. And that law can no more be safely set aside, than any other law which has been enacted. Suspend the law of gravitation, blot the sun from the firmament, or withhold the rain, and no sub- stitute can be devised by which their effects can be pro- duced. Banish love to God and love to man from a human heart, and that heart must necessarily become depraved and vicious. No more can the means of subsistence be pro- duced without labor. Mere dependent poverty, where a man can help himself, is therefore directly in the face of divine law, and is both criminal and disgraceful. Under such circumstances, both he who gives and he who receives are alike in fault ; and make an inroad upon the well-being of society, which needs only to be amplified, and pauper- ism is produced in full size. There is no escape from this statement. It is necessarily true — the effect follows its cause most exactly and philosophically. 592 LECTURES ON It is conceded that the poor we must always have with us ; and that they are entitled to the most tender consider- ation. There are the aged and infirm, the lame and blind, &c. &c. who are not able to help themselves, and who ought to be supported. Oftentimes a poor man is overtaken by an emergency, which he did not foresee, and which he could not prevent; a little assistance would immediately relieve him, and enable him to rise above his difficulty. — That assistance should be cheerfully extended to him. " Thou shalt open thine hand wide," said Moses, "unto him, and shalt surely lend him sufficient for his need, in that which he wanteth." Every one will often find him- self under circumstances, where he must act the kind al- moner to the needy, and God will bless him in his deed : for " he who giveth to the poor, lendeth to the Lord." But then the question arises, how shall these charities be extended ? The Redeemer considered the pharisees, as has already been intimated, to have interpreted the law falsely, when they excused a son from the duty of support- ing his father or mother, on the plea that he had presented as a gift that portion of his property which he ought to have devoted to their use. Paul says — " if any widow have chil- dren or nephews, let them learn first to show piety at home, and to requite their parents ; for that is good and accepta- ble in the sight of God." And again — "if any man or woman that believeth have widows, let them relieve them, and let not the church* be charged. According to these regulations, enacted by inspired wisdom, and enforced by scriptural authority, charity would be purely an individual matter, and should be confined to the circle of family rela- tives. We should almost be afraid to originate such a mode of relief. But as the scriptures have so distinctly stated it, we * Agreeably to my ideas of the church, as made up of christian or many nations, I would consider the apostle to use that term in the text quoted, as we would use the word public. MORAL GOVERNMENT. 293 may venture to remark upon its simplicity ; and to assert, that had it been faithfully employed, society would be vast- ly more moral and benevolent than she is at this hour. — Writers on political economy, when they speak on this branch of their science, frequently refer to Scotland, and note the happy operation of these scriptural rules in that country. — "Few," it is said, "but such as are destitute of relations able to support them, make the application for public charity : it being considered disgraceful, both to themselves and their relations, to have their names entered on what is called the poo?%,s root." So that, though these rules come under the form of apostolic injunctions, yet their wisdom is demonstrated by experiment, whenever they have been tried. And every one will readily per- ceive that there is no danger of their being carried to any hurtful extreme, nor of their ever operating as a bounty on marriage, and a spur to population. The apostle does certainly allude to eleemosynary pro- visions made by the church, as such; and the office of dea- con was created, to take charge, with other temporalities, of the church's alms. But observe how Paul limits and guards the whole matter. — "Honor them," he says, "that are widows indeed — let not a widow be taken into the number, under three score years old" — let nephews and children, let any man or woman that believeth, relieve their own widows and not suffer them to be thrown upon the church fund. At the same time, and alongside of these very restrictions, he remarks that, "if any provide not for his own, and especially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith and is worse than an infidel;" the worst species of immorality must follow ; the renunciation of Christianity itself will ensue. But guarded by such rules as have been quoted, the social charity can do no harm. In fact, it is in consequence of disregarding these restrictions, which have been either forgotten or misunder- stood, that this very provision, made for "widows indeed," 25* 294 LECTURES ON has become the embryo of all out public charities. The rule, good and necessary in itself, has been carried beyond its own limits ; and the abuses, endless in variety and fearful in form, have followed. The brief history of the matter maybe told almost in a sentence. — " In the first ages of the church, the bishop had immediate charge of all the poor, both sound and diseased ; also of widows, orphans, strang- ers, &c. When the churches came to have fixed revenues allotted them, it was decreed that, at least one fourth part thereof should go to the relief of the poor ; and to pro- vide for them the more commodiously, divers houses of char- ity were built, which are since denominated hospitals." Or, to view the subject in a somewhat more advanced state, as Stuart remarks in his "historical memoirs of the city of Armagh," and when writing of the differ- ent orders of catholic saints in Ireland, where pauper- ism puts on its most distressing forms — "These pious men seem to have been bound by vows to cultivate the deserts in which they lived, for the use of the poor. Their suc- cessors probably gave up the reclaimed land for the joint benefit of the indigent. Hence we find so many commons in the neighborhood of ancient monasteries." Such is the simple history of this momentous and disas- trous matter. In other words, 1. The bishops either as- sumed, or had imposed upon them, the charge of the poor. Leaving the word of God to serve tables, these official men became secular in their views and habits ; and presented in its embryo state that towering system of corruptions, which astounded, distracted, and degraded man, and of which pauperism in its general view is only a part. 2. Fixed revenues were substituted for free-will offer- ings, and the philosophy and morality of benevolence were merged in forced and unwise provisions. Bishops became licentious as the church grew rich ; the poor sank into in- dolence and vice ; the moral sense was deadened ; society was debased and loathsome, for the very fountains were MORAL GOVERNMENT. 295 poisoned and all the steams administered a deadly draught \ liberty was lost when intelligence wTas gone ; the bible was surreptitiously taken from the altar; and the "shadows, clouds and darkness" of the middle ages rested on the pa- trimony of the saints. 3. Almshouses and hospitals, and monasteries were erect- ed; the poor were removed from the fire-side and home of family connexions ; a new class of human beings, technically called paupers, was begotten; while those, for whom the scriptures legislated, still remained to be provided for on better principles. These institutions were established for the sake of convenience. Bishops and their hearers sought to climb by the easiest ascent to the heights of heaven, and the attributes of individual conscience were lost in a palsying doctrine of sovereignty, to dispute which, even at the present hour, incurs every penalty which the Vatican, either papal or protestant, has power to impose. The an- nals of pauperism form but a chapter in the history of a series of causes which, in producing this evil, has brought in a thousand others. Thus poor rates were commenced, and almshouses form- ed ; and they have been perpetuated under the same false views of benevolence, in which they originated. Their abandonment is indispensable to our return to the happier condition, in which the apostolic regulations should have placed us. Corporate bodies in the state, and "voluntary associations" in the church, rest on the same principles ; and equally disregard personal responsibility by carrying social law too far. The Master himself has sufficiently exposed the whole evil. The pharisees, in his day, wTere exceedingly osten- tatious in their alms-giving. They sounded a trumpet be- fore them, in the synagogues and in the corner of the streets, and exposed the whole matter to public view. Every body knew what they did ; and thus in the very act of giving, they lowered their own moral character. Public charity 296 LECTURES ON degrades the benevolent themselves. The Redeemer, therefore, forbade his disciples to act in any such manner; and laid down this rule for their regulation. — "Let not thy right hand know what thy left hand doeth, when thou doest alms." Act not like the pharisees. Never bring your alms before the view of men : your heavenly Father will neither approve nor reward the deed ; but let them always be be- stowed in secret, in the presence of your heavenly Father, who seeth in secret, and will reward you openly. The reason of all this the pharisees themselves made manifest — the duty was vitiated in their hands ; their deceitful hearts obeyed the impulse of false motives; and they obtained, in the flattery and adulation they received, all the reward they sought. And if it is more blessed to give than to re- ceive, then how shall the poor fare under the operation of public charity, when public charity degrades even the er. The Redeemer certainly had no intention to lay down an arbitrary statute, without having a sufficient reason to en- force it. He thoroughly understands human nature, and has no need that any should tell him what is in man. He legislates for mankind, according to their own nature^and capacities ; ever seeking to promote their welfare, and to protect them from the evils that are incident to their lot. — His statute in the present case, then, is founded on the principles of human nature ; and if it be disregarded, the worst of evils must follow. Public charities can, there- fore, do nothing but harm, however they may be modified ; and the very little ways that the apostle himself went, in encroaching upon the general law, and which he did from sheer necessity, he seems to have passed with a fearful heart and a trembling step. The erection of houses of cha- rity was a bold and hazardous adventure, on which, from their own just estimate of human nature, neither he nor his Master would ever have entered. That was left for the ecclesiastics of after times ; who, misunderstanding both MORAL GOVERNMENT. £9T human nature and divine law, have flooded society with inventions of their own, which are rife to this hour, and as desolating as they are rife. There is another objection to public charities, in which they seem, under another form, to invade nature's laws, and whose force we see no way of evading. They appear to be increasing the means of subsistence, without actually doing it. The means of subsistence can be acquired only by labor. Money cannot raise them ; corn will not grow in the rich man's coffers; nor can the treasury of a nation produce a single stalk of wheat. Labor alone can accom- plish the growth of grain. But public charities bring hordes of consumers, without providing any additional labor to supply the increasing exigencies. As a natural consequence, when these supernumeraries are driven to occasional work, any given community will feel that there is an apparent in- crease of laborers beyond the demand ; and a reaction, of the most hurtful kind, is carried back to the classes of the honest and habitual laborers, which directly interferes with their resources. With the apparent increase of labor, there is no actual increase of it. Wages of course fall ; are not always punctually paid ; and the hours of work are hurtfully multiplied. Then the public charities must be in- creased, for the poor cannot live by what they earn: and as rapidly as public charity grows, the evil grows, and every new society adds to the general stock. Hence, in large cities, where public charities are always most munificent, the operation commences, and the pauper population be- gins to accumulate. Public beneficence there first hangs out her signals ; and the poor, from the country round, feel actually invited to come and partake of the bounty. — If nature's laws. are thus defied, what else could follow, than the very consequence that has been realized? The evil has been the legitimate result of ecclesiastical mistakes and monastic institutions. There has been a very favorite project, which looks well, 298 LECTURES ON and promises fair; in which the benevolent seem prompt- ly to engage, and by which they calculate to do much good* — They have wished to erect houses of industry or have framed societies to find work for the poor. We could heart- ily wish success to the plan, if it were not that the pros- pects with which its friends are flattered are utterly delu- sive. It has not been left to this age to conceive or exe- cute this apparently excellent enterprise. Public charity has long since tried the experiment. The statutes which have been framed, embraced the double object of provid- ing for the impotent poor, and finding employment for those who were able to work. Nor only so; but the question was agitated whether it would be better to procure " stocks to be worked up at home," or to " accumulate all the poor in one common workhouse ?" — The latter plan has been ob- jected to, as "tending to destroy all domestic connexions, the only felicity of the honest and industrious laborer ; and to put the sober and diligent \tpon a level, in point of their earnings, with those who are dissolute and idle.*'* This project is therefore nothing new, but has already been fully tried, and has contributed all its influence to increase the evil it was intended to relieve. — Such a result might have been expected ; and it will infallibly occur. The reasons why, or some of them, I shall proceed to state. It is very evident that a house of industry, or a society finding employment for the poor, still dispenses a gratuity, and a public gratuity. The name has been changed, but the thing itself is preserved. Work is substituted for money ; but it is still a gratuity. They who receive work on these terms, do not perceive the degradation which begins so in- sidiously ; but, having learned to take work as a gratuity, the very next step is to take money. The idle will turn away from the overture, and the corrupting principle ap- peals to the better classes of the poor; so that by begin- ning a step higher, a house of industry becomes a nursery *Blackstone, B, 1. ch. 9, MORAL GOVERNMENT. 299 for the almshouse. The evil is the same, and its conse- quences the same, whether the process commences with work or money; or, if there be any difference, the first is the most pernicious of the two. The agent for such an institution, solicits A, B and C to give to his direction whatever work they have to put out. A, B and C consent to the proposition ; and so far as it goes, they have accepted a gratuity, and have acted on the pauper principle, by committing to a trustee that which they should do for themselves. But a still worse effect follows ; the poor are by this means removed from the sight of A, B and C. Intercourse between the different classes of society, of which there is by far too little already, is thus broken up. A, B and C, are induced to believe that the poor ave well provided for, and never feel their sympathies aroused in favor of those whom they do not see ; or, while the evil is rapidly growing, that share of moral influence which familiarity would exert, is withheld, and the poor become degraded while the public really know nothing about it. The subject sinks from public notice and public thought ; aiad it presently becomes exceedingly pa- radoxical, that charity does not relieve the distressed. Besides A, B and C, were in the habit of giving their work to others, whom they knew and esteemed. What will become of their poor ? These must either go to the pub- lic institution, or suffer. Should they apply to the society who charitably give out work, they meet with crowds of competitors — for such a society will always have more ap- plicants thau they can supply — and are probably disap- pointed. Or should they be furnished with employment, they must execute it for lower wages than they would have obtained from A, B and C, because they must assist in de- fraying the expenses of the society. Perhaps they may be too sensitive to apply at all ; and then the institution has simply taken bread from one poor individual to give it % 300 LECTURES ON to another. A, B and C, never learn this unexpected re- sult, until it may be too late to use the remedy. Farther. — The institution being public, the poor are en- ticed from the surrounding country, and more laborers are brought into the community, where there are too many al- ready. Wages, instead of being increased, are diminished, and the charitable are called upon for farther assistance. — A preference will be given to such an establishment, and the honest laborer cannot bear up under the competition. The expenses of the establishment must be paid ; and thus the community will appear to be more charitable than they really are. It was not intended to produce these evils, for they were not foreseen. The community designed to be benevolent ; but deceived by fair appearances, they never stopped to analyze the operation in which they so prompt- ly engaged. Good intentions, however, never raised an ear of corn, though they have often created the necessity that it should be done. With a view to eke out an argument in favor of public charity, it may possibly be urged in reply to the preced- ing views, that the apostle Paul directed that collections should be taken up, on the first day of the week, in the gentile churches, for the poor saints which were at Jerusa- lem. The fact is not to be denied ; but then what are the connexions of the fact? The passages which have been quoted from his epistles, as well as the directions given by the Master himself, are evidently general rules. Are we to suppose that the apostle laid down, or re-enacted, rules, which he never intended should be executed ; and that personally he said one thing, and did another ? Or is it un- common, that there should be an exception to a general rule, which might suspend it for the time being, without ultimately setting it aside ? Such cases are emergencies, which must provide for themselves. A famine or a pesti- lence would take a community by surprise ; and more par- ticularly the poor in a crowded city. — The case would ap- MORAL GOVERNMENT. 301 pear more peculiar still, if that community should be un- der foreign domination ; for then their spirit of indepen- dence would be cowed by military oppression, and their energies would be paralyzed by unrighteous exactions. Substitute persecution for the famine or pestilence, and such would be the condition of the poor saints at Jerusa- lem. At Jerusalem their Lord had been crucified ; there some of their brethren had been martyred ; and the apostle himself could not enter the city witnout personal hazard. They had been informed, before they embraced Christiani- ty, that they must forsake houses and lands for the sake of the gospel; and they are represented at one time, as being so hard pressed, that they were obliged to sell all they had and make a common stock. Such a case must suggest its own remedy. A general law would yield to a pressing ne- cessity, as when David ate of the shew bread, or the dis- ciples plucked the ears of corn on the sabbath day. But take away the emergency, and the general rule returns with all its authority. But this case deserves to be more closely investigated. Its circumstances are detailed in the Acts of the Apostles.* The public collections, which were required and made, are referred to in different parts of the new testament.t But the biblical student knows, that the community of goods was established in Jerusalem, and nowhere else ; and that the public collections were made for " the poor saints at Jerusalem," and for none else. He also knows that nei- ther was called for by a divine commandment ; but that, on the contrary, any divine commandment in the premises was disavowed by the apostles themselves. " While it remain- ed," said Peter to Ananias, "was it not thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power ?" And Paul, * See ch. ii. 44, 45. iv, 32—37. v. 1—16. vi. 1—7. t See Acts xi. 27—30. xxiv. 17. Rom. xv. 25 — 27. 1 Cor. xvi. 1—4. 2 Cor. vii. 1—24. ix, 1—15, Gal. ii. 10. Vol. II.— 26 302 LECTURES ON when urging the Corinthians to be ready with their con- tribution, observes — " I speak not by commandment — I give my advice." Consequently there could have been no intention that, either the community of goods or public collections should be continued in the church. For still farther I may remark, that in an analogous case, when no commandment had been given, and where Paul gave his advice, he explains himself as referring to " the present dis- tress ;" and declares that the man who should not act. ac- cording to his advice in that case, would not sin* If there- fore, there was no divine commandment, calling for the community of goods at Jerusalem, or for the public collec- tions which Paul solicits, even at the time when these things were done under the eye of the apostles, it is evi- dent there can be no divine commandment for such provi- sions now. Yet these public contributions are at this day supposed to be matters of positive duty. — It is a mere pa- pal commentary, whose sophistry the protestant church has not detected. But for the sake of the subject, it may not be unprofita- ble to inquire, why "the poor saints in Jerusalem" were excepted ; and, without a divine commandment, made the objects of such anomalous provisions ? And I may answer — 1. That there was " a present distress ;" and that very distress, on whose account Paul exhorted the Corinthians, on his own responsibility, not to marry. A persecution was about to be kindled, which very shortly broke out, and which would rage severely at Jerusalem. That devoted city was itself to be besieged, sacked and burnt ; and the Master himself, alluding to the fearful desolation, said to his disciples — "Then let them which are in Judea flee to the mountains ; let him which is on the house top not come down to take any thing out of his house : neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes. And wo to them that are with child ? and to them that give * 1 Cor. ch. viii.'l MORAL GOVERNMENT. 303 suck in those days ! But pra)>- ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day : for there shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time ; no, nor ever shall be." Of what use was private property under such circumstances ? The dis- ciples at Jerusalem, were in fact declaring their faith in, and ordering their conduct by, the prophetic declarations of their Lord ; and their situation must have become a sub- ject of universal interest throughout the christian church. A strong case, it is to be admitted. There has been, and there shall be, said the Redeemer, nothing like it. •2. The festivals which were so frequently held in Jeru- salem, and which were required by the Mosaic statutes, made a community of goods necessary for the time being. The hospitality which such seasons called for, would na- turally present such a scene as we have now under con- sideration. There wTere many, from different countries, who were attached to the christian community, as was made evident when the gift of tongues was conferred on the apostles: Barnabas was of the country of Cyprus: and the Grecians murmured against the Hebrews, because their widows were neglected in the daily ministration. The ha- bits of the je.;ish nation would then readily suggest the present expedient adopted at Jerusalem ; and the saints there might, as they did in many other instances of com- pliance with Jewish customs, have acted out of forbearance; or, as even the question of the admission of the gentiles into the church was far from being understood by them, they might have done what they did, from lack of better information. 3. The Redeemer commanded his disciples to begin their official career at Jerusalem, Here then was the mother-church, so to speak ; — the moral centre of official action and official reciprocities. And to this circumstance Paul seems to re- fer, when he remarks, in speaking of the public contributions made for " the poor saints at Jerusalem" — " If the gentiles 304 LECTURES ON have been made partakers of their spiritual things, their duty is also to minister unto them in carnal things."* In the beginning of society, all temporal property was neces- sarily common. Adam and his sons, Noah and his sons, had not formed the idea of property in lands, &c. — That idea seems to have been introduced very late into society; for the next view on the subject of property, in her subse- quent history, was that the king was the proprietor of the land. Hence Pharaoh gave Goshen to the family of Ja- cob : hence Joseph, after the famine, divided the whole country afresh ; hence the God of Israel, as king, claimed the land of Judea as his own ; and as king of all the earth, declares that the cattle on a thousand hills are all his own — that the earth is his, and the fulness thereof. It is not therefore any far-fetched idea, that in the beginning of the kingdom of heaven, the mother church, called to peculiar official responsibilities, and in the land of Judea, should give up to the divine service, that portion of property which the service called for. 4. From Jerusalem it might be expected that the first preachers of the gospel would go forth. The gentiles were not acquainted with the ceremonial allusions which were to be explained, nor with the prophecies which were to be expounded, as forming the great testimony in favor of the Messiah. They did not even know "the sound words" which the Holy Spirit had taught, and which Paul thought to be so important; but would have filled the church with technical terms, derived from "philosophy falsely so call- ed." The multitude of believers at Jerusalem appear to have been poor, while not many wise, nor mighty, nor no- ble, were ready to devote themselves to ministerial ser- vice ; so that those who did surrender goods, might have done it in view of the ministry. A distinction of this kind appears to be necessary to explain the record ; for we are told — " Of the rest durst no man join himself to * Rom. xv. 27. MORAL GOVERNMENT. 305 them* but the people magnified them ; and believers were the more added to the Lord, multitudes both of men and Women." In this statement there appears to be a palpa- ble contradiction, which is only, so far as I can perceive, to be removed by some such distinction. Barnabas was a Levite, and was afterwards earnestly engaged in preaching the gospel. Ananias might have been of priestly relations, and have contemplated the same official employment with Barnabas ; for which purpose he might have joined him- self, not only to the church, but to the apostles as an offi- cial band. This point brings up many interesting particulars. When the young ruler wished to be attached to the little compa- ny of disciples whom the Redeemer had chosen and or- dained, he was told that, to accomplish that object, he must sell all that he had, and give to the poor. When the disciples observed that they had left all, they were inform- ed that they should sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel, because they had followed their Master in the regeneration. When a certain individual, who, it would seem, had no qualifications for such an en- terprise, proffered to do the same thing, he was bidden to go home, and relate to his family what great things the Lord had done for him.* Nor is such a political measure an uncommon one. The Levites had no portion nor in- heritance among their brethren. The Lord was their por- tion. Nay beyond this — originally the priesthood belong- ed to the chief ruler. He was both prince and priest ; and when the two offices were separated, the last lost not its elevated and public character, nor its interest in the pub- lic revenues. Hence the priests in Egypt were sustain- ed by Pharaoh, and Joseph could not sell their lands. So that it was according to generally established law, that the provision was introduced into the Mosaic economy ; and the Levites, as attendants on Jehovah the king of Israel, * See my Essay on Creeds, chap, x, 26* 306 LECTURES ON were sustained at his altars. In the constitution of the kingdom of heaven, the ministry of reconciliation are at- tendants on Prince Messiah ; and, forsaking all, live in his courts. They administer spiritual things, and are entitled to carnal things in recompense for their labor. This for- saking, or selling all, then manifestly belonged to official life — to those who were folio wing the Master uin the rea-ene- o o ration ;" and lays no sort of foundation for a community of goods now ; nor for that degrading system of public charities, derived from the papal church. In truth every community, whether political, ecclesiasti- cal, or domestic, must sustain its own public servants. The ministers of Christ have, with few exceptions, depended, and ought to have depended, on the reward due to their labor ; as the Levites, with like exceptions — for Barnabas had lands, and, according to the Mosaic law, a Levite might in certain cases, redeem land — as the Levites had done be- fore them. The laborer is worthy of his hire — thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn. Many abuses, it is true, have been introduced, which the revolu- tions of society have not yet corrected. The abuse of a principle, however, is no argument against the principle itself; and it must forever remain, at least while God's o-overnment and human nature are what thev are, a fair exchange, that the church should give carnal for spiritual things. But public gratuities are as degrading as they are illegal. There is still another item in this subject of public chari- ty which merits very serious consideration. The apostle has said, "that he who provides not for his own, and es- pecially for those of his own house, has denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel." But if the public undertake to provide for his family, why should he trouble himself about the matter? Instead of the moral question resting at all upon his conscience, when he is about to form a family connexion, he sees no evil in which he is likely to MORAL GOVERNMENT. 307 be involved, or which will not, he calculates, be speedily relieved. The great impulse to virtue is taken away. In Paul's strong language, he " denies the faith, and is worse than an infidel;" or, as the fact continually presents itself, he is idle and intemperate, profane and vicious; and not only becomes a pauper himself, but raises up a race who will emulate and imitate his awful example. — I affect not to be a political economist; but plainly state my own im- pression, long since formed, and every day confirmed; and in behalf of which I appeal to scripture, nature, and his- tory. And if these views are correct, public charity is the nurse of pauperism : and while the nurse lives healthful and vigorous, the child will thrive. As has already been intimated, intemperance has been heavily accused as the prolific cause of pauperism. And most assuredly the drunkard is in a fair waj^ to beggar both himself and family. But then on the other hand, pauper- ism ma}r lead to intemperance ; for if public charity mav be relied on, a poor man is tempted to be idle, or to spend his earnings in riot and dissipation. The necessity under which the divine constitution has placed him, to gain his subsistence by the sweat of his brow, is in a great measure removed ; and, losing the balance which moral principle would have preserved, he learns to think lightly of an evil which he calculates will be speedily relieved. The statis- tics of this matter are fairly petrifying. But I feel no great necessity to furnish them, or to protract the argu- ment; because the subject has been attracting public con- sideration for many years. The political measure of im- posing a tax upon whiskey, and a project to plant vine- yards in our country, have been largely and variously discussed ; so that it were impossible that the information which was thus spread abroad, should not produce con- siderable excitement. The enormity and extent of the evil were thus exposed to view, and the habits of society have been consequently very much changed. $>g LECTURES Off The abandonment of public charities may be thought far be a very cruel step. And so it would be, as all violent measures necessarily are, if it be suddenly done. The charitable are as much in fault as the poor themselves, and must retrieve their own errors in a prudent and cautious manner. But it is presumed the object is not impractica- ble. If no new societies should be encouraged ; if those which are comparatively new should be dissolved ; and if then a gradual retrenchment should accompany a general system of education, the end would be ultimately attained. A stopping point must be found somewhere ; and that may as well be ascertained by retrograding as by advancing. Should the community, however, be incredulous, or give up the matter in despair, they must only remember that, in all the departments of nature, violation of law will certainly entail suffering ; and that the pauper population will as infallibly overtake the means of subsistence afforded by charity, as in general society population overtakes the means of sub- sistence derived from labor. The benevolent cannot alter the course of nature, or correct the wisdom and mend the philosophy of the divine institutions. To remedy the evils of pauperism, we ought still to have another resource on which to rely. It is not to be supposed that Jehovah has framed a system for the moral reformation of mankind at large, without that system being capable of bearing with great effect on our present subject; because the great thing needed, in relation to that subject, is moral reformation. The additional resource should then be found in the church, which God has made the light of the world — by which he would preach the gospel to all nations — to every creature. And it would seem, from the example afforded in apostolic times, as though when a great and good revolution was intended, it should com- mence with the poor. The wise, and mighty, and noble, have all that they desire ; and are apt to imagine, from their own flourishing condition, that things are right just MORAL GOVERNMENT. 309 as they are ; that no improvement is needed ; and that no change would be for the better. Men in power seldom seek or wish for reform. But when we turn to the church, any calculation in re- ference to the matter in hand seems to be utterly futile. There are, at present, such various and incessant calls for money; and we hear so much of education societies, pa- rental and auxiliary; of gratuities and loans; of beneficia- ries and scholarships; of bonds redeemed, and bonds re- mitted; that instead of the church exerting any influence to cure the evil complained of, that very evil has become epidemic in her own precincts. And it requires very little prescience to prognosticate some very heavy calamities as near at hand — calamities which will desecrate the pulpit by degrading the ministry. For pauperism will run a similar course, in whatever connexion it exists ; and must necessarily assail, in some form, the integrity of those who are found in its ranks. The analogy is too striking to be disregarded ; or if it should be pertinaciously defended, it will not be long until it shall have worked out its own de- monstration. It is a pity that honorable young men should not be apprized of the deleterious tendency of public charities, wherever they may be found; and that they are never more hurtful than when they come under guise of promoting the Redeemer's kingdom ; because then the equivocal character of the means is forgotten in the con- templation of the goodness of the object. Under such circumstances, an ingenuous youth is in great danger of supposing that "the end sanctifies the means." Pauperism, which is entirely an unnatural state of so- ciety, originated, as has been seen, in regulations intended to direct the application of the revenues of the church. And when the church, as such, has the opportunity of gathering and using large funds, she must necessarily un- dertake to legislate on secular principles. Instead of wield- ing a moral influence in her Master's name, and under her 310 LECTURES ON Master's blessing, she has superadded something to the free-will offerings of his people, and becomes distinguish- ed by her political and commercial attributes. She must have a new class of agents and a new class of dependants, because she has a new class of objects. And it would not be very difficult to foretell to what such an operation, sus- tained by the strong religious feelings of mankind, would grow ; even if we had not the history of the papal hierar- chy, and the powerful influence of ecclesiastical policy on the general principles of legislation, to forewarn us. The idea of a church becoming rich is not unpopular in our own country, notwithstanding the fearful example of past ages.* Yet money gives power to ecclesiastics as well as to politicians ; and to voluntary associations in the church, as well as to corporate bodies in the state. Some alarm has been felt, but that is laughed at as a mere piece of infidel effrontery or folly ; and the moral irrelevancy of such means, in promoting the interests of the Redeemer's kingdom, is not suspected. Amass these means, and re- form becomes impossible ; for they who wield them — at least such is the history of man — have no perception that any thing is wrong. They who have apprehended evil, feel that they can scarcely assail the colossal power without being crushed : and, becoming too timid to meet the dan- ger or make the sacrifice, they cower to the supposed ne- cessity, and call it expediency. But should this apparently useful operation be encouraged, or should the events, which are now transpiring in the world, and have given to the papal power so fatal a blow, not arrest it, another Hen- ry the VIII. may be needed in some after age, to cut short the wide spreading degeneracy. Those who are en- gaged in this matter, have no intentions which deserve censure. They are seeking to do good, but they have mistaken the means, and may discover their error when it is too late. Apprehended contests for church property, *JDeuteronomy xvii. 17. MORAL GOVERNMENT. 31 1 even now, may impose silence upon many a tongue ; and a civil charter creates the turning point of argument. The moral character of the church is suffering much, at this hour, from her secular measures. The ostensible or avowed design of these pecuniary provisions is to supply the world with ministers ; and hence they are expended in behalf of theological seminaries, education societies, &c. But when the object is stated, another evil is betrayed ; for the population is seen to be increasing far beyond the means of furnishing ministers. Yet it is supposed that the effort is as great as can be made ; and though it is demonstrably insufficient, it will still be maintained and defended, because men can do no more than they can do. In this way the difficulty is kept out of sight, discussion is prevented, and the church remains satisfied with her own unsatisfactory measures. Did the Redeemer or his disciples adopt such a course ? Did they rear such institutions, and wait on the proficiency and pro- mise of annual classes of students? Did they project a political system which was narrower than society itself? and, erecting a government within the government, did they enact a code, and consecrate official men, for the few who were personally elected unto everlasting life ? Or were not elders ordained in every city, chosen from the inhabit- ants of the city itself? And must not every society have within itself the means of its own operation ? I am aware that the power of working miracles has been urged as a sufficient explanation of the rapid manner in which the churches were furnished with official men : i.e. this power was a substitute for literature ; and now that the power is withdrawn, nothing but literature can qualify a man for ministerial office. Bat this argument grows out of a misconception of the use of miracles. Adam wrought no miracles, neither did Noah nor Abra- ham. But when the two dispensations, based on a purpose of election, were introduced, that election was so far out 318 LECTURES ON of the ordinary operations of the divine government, that special proof of its divine origin was indispensably necessa- ry. This point having been established, the power of working miracles was withdrawn ; excepting that old tes- tament prophets, having received an extraordinary com- mission, were under a similar necessity to substantiate their pretensions by like proof. Miracles never were in- tended to be a substitute for literature, nor to have any influence in determining a question, like that which is now called up. The Redeemer carried his apostles out and in with him during the whole of his ministry, notwithstand- ing his intentions to endow them afterwards with such pe- culiar gifts. When he wished to instruct the gentiles, he called Paul to the enterprise, because it needed high intel- lectual character, and varied literary attainments, Paul found it necessary to lower the estimate in which the pow- er of working miracles was held, and represented the con- stituent principles of human nature, and the ordinary moral characteristics of society, as of much higher con- sideration. He would rather speak five words with his understanding, that he might teach others, than ten thou- sand words in an unknown tongue, though the power to do so would have commanded great admiration; and charity, or love, he thought far more excellent than all spi- ritual gifts. Neither were the elders, among the jews, learned men. True, after the establishment of the synagogues by Ezra, it was conceived to be necessary that the bishop should be- come a literary man ; public seminaries were formed to in- struct those who were intended to occupy the episcopal of- fice ; then honorary titles were bestowed — such as Rabbi, Doctor, &c. Metaphysical questions were soon started; long and bitter controversies divided the community into sects and parties ; ordinances and burdens were imposed upon the human conscience ; and the traditions of men took the place of the commandments of God. A similar opera- MORAL GOVERNMENT. 313 tion has been most successfully carried on since the ascen- sion of the Redeemer and the death of his apostles, not- withstanding his severe criticism of these public errors of the jews, and his direct charge to his disciples not to imi- tate their example. And now, with the fully formed im- pression, that literary men alone should enter our pulpits, multitudes are perishing around us for lack of vision ; and the church has no agents to carry home to the poor, the in- struction which is necessary to raise them from their de- gradation. Elders in every city, ordained according to scriptural rule, receive no compensation for their services, though the Redeemer has explicitly declared that " the la- borer is worthy of his hire ;" and, consequently, no services, or very few, are rendered. The church, by these arrange- ments, seems to be furnished with her full number of offi- cial men, when in fact she is not ; and the gospel is not, nor can it be, carried to every creature ; but the very in- fluence which was intended to bear upon the poor is with- drawn, or is not exerted. The consequence is natural. Society at large is not literary, either in old or new coun- tries; and particularly, where any considerable portion of the population is made up of the poor. It is, therefore, an idle plan which requires all ministers to form a literary character ; and more especially, when the eldership render no actual ser- vice. A literary community may call for literary ministers ; but an illiterate community would be much better served by those, who are not very far ahead of themselves,. As society advances, she will call for official men of improved character; and she will be able to furnish them. But if all classes are put upon a level, and all must have literary preachers, it is no matter of wonder that the supply should be short of the de- mand, and that large funds are required to meet circum- stances which society can never manage. The consequence necessarily is, that public institutions fail to realize their ob- ject, even after the most expensive and excessive effort. The poor are disregarded, population increases, and the evil Vol. II.— 27 3X4 LECTURES ON hourly grows more unmanageable. Occasionally this evil attracts public notice ; a transient excitement is produced ; some new societies are formed ; interesting speeches are pronounced ; painful statistics are repeated ; and the whole matter terminates, as though something really praise-worthy had been done, while the divine law is disobeyed, and so- ciety is not relieved. It may be stated that, in certain sections of the church a different plan has been tried : and that, notwithstanding some objectionable peculiarities, these sections have grown in numbers and influence ; both society and ministerial character have improved with their progress, and they are rapidly spreading themselves over the world. The fact de- monstrates the truth of the preceding remarks ; yet, after all, it is only a sectional movement ; and so far as it is of sectarian character, it adds to the aggregate of evil. It would seem strange that the gospel of the Son of God, if it be what it professes to be, should not carry its demonstration to every bosom. Surely it cannot lack proof of its own truth ; and one maybe well surprised that there are so many who do not submit to its control. It is easy to explain their con- duct by referring it to the depravity of the human heart. I shall not dispute the truth of the position ; but then it is very general. The depravity of the human heart may in- clude in it a great variety of particulars ; and those par- ticulars should be ascertained, that the general mass of evil may be assailed. If the difficulty under consideration should be the result of mismanagement in the practical adminis- tration of the church, then to keep that mismanagement out of sight, and to talk of the depravity of the human heart, may seem very pious, but it is trifling with the subject. Per- adventure many, who have not submitted to the gospel, have seldom or never heard it ; and to speak in hard terms of their rebellion is dealing unfairly — for "how shall they be- lieve in him of whom they have not heard ? And how shall they hear without a preacher?" They may have heard the MORAL GOVERNMENT. 315 gospel, and yet some other reason may account for their un- belief. The apostle Paul tells the jews — "The name of God is blasphemed among the gentiles, through you." And perhaps the matter under deliberation may be traced up to a like cause ; and that would be the very form in which the depravity of the human heart may be betrayed. " By this," said the Redeemer, " shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another." And will any man, who has any acquaintance with the different sects in the christian church ; who has heard their various controversies, and read their different statements of the doc- trines of the gospel ; who has observed the principles of their association, adopted and carried out into execution in defiance of the claims of local situation ; who has watched their emulation, their proselyting spirit, and their sectarian prejudices — will any man, who has known all this, pretend to say, that the sects have demonstrated the truth of Chris- tianity by their brotherly love ? Can they have carried light and conviction to the houses and bosoms of the poor ? or at- tracted the attention of a casual observer by the moral ex- cellence of their profession, or by the beautiful and fasci- nating display of their harmonious feelings in a common cause ? Will not the multitude be rather intimidated from investigating a subject, about which there is thus apparent- ly declared to be but little certainty? Amid the confusion of angry passions, bitter words, and endless strife, would " one that belie veth not, or one unlearned, be convinced of all and judged of all?" The mischievous consequences of sectarianism are altogether incalculable. While they are defended and maintained, the church can bring but a fee- ble moral influence, to reform the crowds of paupers that fill our land ; and can never exert those moral restraints that are indispensably necessary to remedy the evil, which the state seems long since to have given up in despair. If these associations were dissolved, and christians of each community should consider more maturely and harmonious- 316 LECTURES ON ly their own social and local interests, they might carry out the Redeemer's rule, and supply the demonstration of the truth of Christianity which is so much needed. Those as- sociations must be broken up ; either by voluntary consent, or under the force of desolating judgments, which already seem to be abroad in the earth. A bleeding, a wailing, a dying world calls upon christians, of all denominations, to quit their strife, and hasten to preach a crucified Christ in her houses and her streets. And will they still go on, offending and injuring that world by their contention, in despite of all warning ? Then the mightiest influence, by which the degraded and unhappy poor should be reformed, and brought back to sobriety, industry, and morality, will still be wanting; and all their benevolent societies, like the monastic institutions, will deepen the gloom, aggravate the sorrows, and increase the calamity, they professedly seek to relieve. If it were not for these forbidding circumstances — i. e. if the church was not divided into contending parties, if her official principles were not so narrow as to shut out all but classical men from her pulpits, and if the pauper principle were not so popular an ingredient in her own general mea- sures, she might bring in a vast amount of moral influence to bear upon all classes. She would be a praise and a beauty in the midst of every city where her ordinances are admin- istered, illumining the darkness, and relieving the ignorance of all who dwell around her altars. But as matters now stand, the essential principles of human society must yield to her artificial distinctions, and the remedial agencies of the Mediator are paralyzed by sectarian regulations. She has acted not much unlike the rich man, who, fond of pomp and display and equipage, has injured his own children by bringing them up in idleness, and with feelings of pride and selfishness, which have rendered them indifferent to the wants and interests of all around them. How can the world be else than injured in a moral point of view, when the MORAL GOVERNMENT. 317 very means of moral reformation, which God himself has instituted, should be so crippled in their operation, and so circumscribed in their objects ? when, instead of elders being ordained in every city, who shall be identified with each particular community, a class of men is detached from society ; and, regulated by creeds and laws of their own, are better instructed to govern, than to reform, their fellow men ? Let nature and reason speak, and Christianity will justify their decisions ; and if those decisions shall be faithfully and affectionately followed up, a thousand bless- ings will be diffused abroad, and the desert will presently blossom as the rose. This discussion has been maintained, because its subject fell directly in my way ; but more particularly with a view to some general conclusions, which I shall now briefly state. It is very evident, that the argument just closed is perfectly parallel to that, pursued on the subject of faith, in the preceding lecture. Man was driven from paradise, because that God would not maintain him as a pauper amid its luxuriance and bounty. And this purpose was adopted and carried out, not in an unkind and arbitrary manner ; but because the improvement of human nature, and the necessary restraints under temptation, depend upon the industrious exercise of our own faculties. Such is de- monstrated to be philosophy, from the whole history of mankind in relation to the means of subsistence. The same thing would be very apparent, if the acquisition of science had been the subject of inquiry; and morals can- not be considered as an exception to the general law, when that law results from the simple philosophy of mind. Faith, therefore, like labor, involves the full exercise of the hu- man faculties ; and, as the means of subsistence cannot be obtained without, but may most certainly be obtained with, man's personal labor; so salvation cannot be achieved with- out, but may most certainly be achieved by, the exercise of faith, as the operation of his individual powers. 27* 318 LECTURES ON The objection must not be again returned upon us, that this view of faith shuts out the operation of divine power, while the scriptures declare the necessity for regeneration. For though man must, and can, obtain the means of subsis- tence by his own labor, yet by the divine constitution it is God who prospers his effort ; nor only so, but Jehovah carries a regenerating influence into the field of labor. "Thou sendest forth thy Spirit," says the psalmist, " they are created; and thou renewest the face of earth." The same word is here used, which is again employed by the psalmist when he prays, " Create in me a clean heart, 0 God, renew a right spirit within." The use of such lan- guage in the scriptures, does not at all interfere with our personal responsibility and effort ; nor is it ever intended to argue an incapacity on the part of man to believe more than it does an incapacity to labor. Neither does the use of such terms imply a state of absolute death in reference to the subject to which they are applied ; for when the regenerating process is carried on in the spring, life is not infused, but is merely called out into exercise. The dead tree, or vine, or plant, is not revived : but a principle of life is acted on, wherever it exists; just as we have sup- posed in relation to morals. I am not without my fears, that divine grace is often con- sidered as a simple gratuity, and the mediatorial kingdom as a kind of pauper establishment. It appears to me, that many, whether conscious of it or not, really mean no more by their doctrines of free grace and imputed righteousness. Let them analyze their terms and phrases, and honestly de- cide— if they can dissolve the charm of, what they call, sound words. For myself, though " glorying in the grace wherein we stand," I cannot sanction a notion, which would so entirely desecrate man as a moral agent, and rob him of the glory of a sanctified character. The philoso- phy of human nature, is at irreconcilable war with the idea : and the material world furnishes us with no emblems of it. MORAL GOVERNMENT. 319 God calls upon men to act up to the whole extent of their powers, and demands no more of them. He does not re- quire, "deeds of law," because we cannot render them. "Faith is counted for righteousness," because such a sys- tem is consistent with our capacities ; and can be fully car- ried out, according to the philosophy of human nature, and the ordinary laws of his providence. It is true, that God has given to us, and for us, his only begotten Son ; but it is equally true, that he has given the earth to the sons of men. While in the one case, the means of subsistence are the product of human labor, and in perfect consistency with the gifts that have been bestowed ; so in the other the be- liever works out his own salvation, on the principle that it is God who works in him. As we are called upon to pray for our daily bread, so we pray continually for the healthful influences of divine grace ; and as the Spirit of God re- sponds in the one instance, so he does in the other. If men will not labor, they must starve ; and if they will not believe, they must perish. The doctrine oi personal respon- sibility thus again stands out justified and commended as a display of pure moral philosophy, and intelligible scriptural legislation. In preaching the gospel to any community, the Redeem- er directed his disciples to seek out in the first place, the man who was worthy — like the angels searching Lot in Sodom; or Jehovah making inquiry after " ten righteous men," with the view of ascertaining a starting point for a remedial operation. A direct assault upon the worst part of the community, though sustained by the denunciation of most fearful terrors, is not the most prudent ministerial effort ; and even when it is successful, it generally amounts to a discovery of some worthy men, who might have been called out by less violent measures. But ministers are so much in the habit of calculating on divine sovereignty, or which is the same thing, on divine power, that they are apt to imagine that God's- providence must guaranty all their ab- 3-20 LECTURES ON surdities. Nothing is set down to the action of intelligent human nature; public opinion is set at defiance; and com- mon sense is laughed to scorn, in presuming to judge of spiritual things. But in the mediatorial operations of the Son of God, the human mind must pass for all it is worth ; and the only value of a minister himself, consists either in the intelligence he displays, or the moral influence he may exert. An altar inscribed to "the unknown God," may afford a better starting point for a moral reformation, than the talents or eloquence of a Paul, with all the abstract mysteries that all antiquity could afford. An individual must be approached with like wisdom and caution. The remedial point in his character should be as- certained, and then addressed as though a thinking being were to be roused to action. That point may be some- times very high, and at other times very low. Uniformity is an idea that belongs only to the mind that is ignorant of human nature, or which jesuitically intends to degrade and enslave human beings. Or, as has been well remarked — "by placing force on the side of faith, you put courage on the side of doubt." Call it what you may — grace, sover- eignty, power, mystery, law, or gospel — apply it where you may — in religion, politics, literature, or charity — enforce it on whom you may, christian, jew, mahomedan, or pagan — the system, whose formalities do not serve to revive the moral sense, nor to awaken the intellectual energies of man, is false in philosophy ; is heretical in Christianity ; and was never espoused by Jehovah, nor successful in practice. I care not what excitement may be produced ; what alarms maybe roused; what tears may flow; or what numbers may be added to a party ; the end must be disastrous. There is nothing to prevent such a catastrophe. A high nervous excitability rushes into every extravagance, and is pleased with its own prowess ; but its boasted good is based on the heaviest social calamities. Our influential men, who win public favor by popular show, may think MORAL GOVERNMENT. 321 differently. To their own Master they stand or fall. But purperism in every form is false in philosophy and false in morals. LECTURE XIX. Principle of Religious Forms, — Cherubim. — Sacrifice. — JVew Testament Ordinances. — Conclusion. When Jehovah-Elohim created our first parents, and placed them in the garden of Eden, he afforded to them in forms correspondent with their own nature, every va- riety of instructive emblems. The heavens and the earth declared his glory — the assumption of personal form pre- sented to them a "ministerial organ" of heavenly fellow- ship with himself — the garden of Eden was his holy tem- ple, where he delivered his law, and where they enjoyed his presence — the seventh day was a memorial of his fin- ished work, and summoned them to some special services, which they were required to render, in view of a heavenly rest into which they should ultimately enter — the surround- ing objects were lovely and good, teaching them of the love> the wisdom, the power, and the righteousness of God — no- thing was wanting to explain their duty and to attract them to its performance. Even in a political point of view, when the paradisiacal statute was proclaimed ; and social responsibility, with all its multifarious circumstances, was appended to personal obligation as connected with the law written on the heart, the garden furnished a still more exuberant display of di- vine goodness. If this secondary form of human existence 322 LECTURES ON multiplied duties, it also multiplied exterior advantages as attendant on those duties. It was not good that man should be alone ; so that the paradisiacal constitution was establish- ed out of real kindness ; and was so set forth by the vari- ous circumstances under which it was introduced. The tree of the knowledge of good and evil, placed in the midst of the garden, was like every other symbol, a kind and a needful monitor, as well as a simple and easy test of obedience. In short, place man where you will, his char- acter must be developed by his works. Thus he is to be estimated and judged by both God and men. — "By their fruits ye shall know them." In the progress of our discussion, we are now contem- plating man as a sinner; and as placed under a remedial system which, like the original institute, must be corres- pondent with his own nature. He is still surrounded by the outward exhibitions of the divine goodness. Now, as well as at first, the heavens declare the glory of God. Social life, with its appropriate relations, we see have been preserved; and its distinctive purposes are held up to view as good in their intentions, and as important in their operations, as ever they were. A sabbatical ordinance, emblematic of a heavenly rest to be enjoyed after we shall have fulfilled our various responsibilities and finished our earthly labors, was not revoked. Evil it is true has been introduced ; but then that evil has not been the en- tire desolation of the good originally created. The condi- tion, the constitution, and the life of man are an intermix- ture of good and evil ; and a remedy has been promul- gated by which he may overcome the evil. And this se- cond constitution, like the first, being based upon, and con- sistent with the principles of human action, or calling upon men to labor according to their ability, must estab- lish its own external ordinances, and be illustrated by a series of evangelical symbols. The nature of man requires these provisions : the whole material world was construct- MORAL GOVERNMENT. 323 ed to answer such purposes. The cherubic emblems and the sacrificial institution, baptism and the Lord's supper, if they correspond with the peculiarities of our situation, may be sustained by reasons as rational, and fulfil inten- tions as valuable, as any other ordinance, human or divine. In fact, without such outward forms, the remedial system would soon sink into oblivion ; for, by what other means would you furnish man with remedial ideas, seeing that he obtains his ideas by his corporeal senses. Religious forms have created a great deal of discussion. Some moralists can never have enough of them ; they add line upon line, and precept upon precept; rites and cere- monies, fasts and feasts, days and weeks have been mul- tiplied without end : new inventions are added to old tra- ditions, and judgment, mercy, and faith are forgotten amid tithes of mint and anise and cummin. Social com- binations and ceremonial display become substitutes for practical virtues; and formularies of faith and prayer render thought and investigation unnecessary. An ec- clesiastical legislation of this kind, small in its beginnings but fearfully rapid in its progress, has more than once held on its course, until a ritual has been established, so child- ish and burdensome, that revolution has become indispen- sably necessary. On the other hand, many have rushed into the opposite extreme, and have cast off all religious forms. They would adore God in the great temple of nature, and laugh at all religious associations. In the outward ceremonies of di- vine worship — in the priestly functions, in the sacrificial institution, in evangelical ordinances — they can see no- thing but the inventions of desio-nino- men. In the church ~ Do itself, hundreds can hear sermons, and, out of respect to public opinion, seek baptism for their children ; but per- ceive no beauty, and feel no attractions in the new testa- ment passover. So mankind pass from one extreme to another, and in rejecting the superstition of the age in 324 LECTURES ON which they live, lose sight of the elemental principles of their individual and social nature ; and that too, while they can draw an accurate line in an analogous case ; or can point out the difference between despotism and anarchy, politi- cally considered. Sometimes these contradictory matters institute their rival pretensions ; — ignorance presuming to be the mother of devotion, and infidelity running up her genealogy to superstition — until intelligent men are brought to live in fearful suspense, painfully prognosticating, yet afraid to meet, the disasters that are coming. The promise given to our first parents, assuring them that " the Seed of the woman should bruise the serpent's head," was certainly not all that Jehovah gave, in order to set be- fore them the remedial institute. The fate of the literal serpent, converted into a degraded symbol of Satan's over- throw, which has been known in every age, and exhibited in every country — the remark of Eve on the birth of Cain, when she observed, "I have gotten a man. even Jehovah his very self" — the offerings which Cain and Abel respec- tively brought to the Lord — the official distinctions which were very soon so accurately defined, and so strongly marked — the prevalence of sacrifice all over the world, ac- companied with the expectations of a mediatorial advent — these, and other matters of a similar kind which might be mentioned, certainly evince that fuller representations were made at the time, than Moses has recorded. He was writing to a people who were no strangers to the matters to which he so briefly refers; and he felt no occasion to write any fuller details for future generations, because the insti- tutions, which he was commissioned to establish, would supply any deficiency which might be felt. The prophe- cies and promises which himself uttered, the types and or- dinances, designed to prefigure the coming Messiah and his work, which belonged to the Sinaic ritual, clearly an- nounced whatever was necessary to be known by us. For this reason Moses has not traced up sacrifice to its divine MORAL GOVERNMENT. 325 origin, further than as it is implied in the history of the events he records ; nor has he, any where in his writings, explained the nature of the cherubim. Both of these, however, appear to have been attached to the early system of worship, which Jehovah established when he expelled man from the garden. Neither of them was forgotten, ei- ther among jews or pagans, at the time when Moses wrote. They evidently distinguished the whole patriarchal dis- pensation, and were left among the heathen, at the very time they were renewed with such peculiar glory among the descendants of Abraham. — But they require some far- ther illustration. The cherubim are not generally understood. " The com- mon notion," says Faber, " that they were little better than a sort of terrific scare- crows, employed to prevent mankind from approaching the tree of life, seems to me to be no less childish, than irreconcilable with other parts of scripture." Under the levitical economy, the cherubim were placed first in the tabernacle, and afterwards in the temple. And if so, why should they not be considered as serving a cor- responding purpose from the very beginning ? If they were then, as well as afterwards, placed in a tabernacle, it would seem that no doubt should be left, either of their hiero- glyphical character, or of their sacred intention. And that they were so placed, appears to be very distinctly implied in the following apocryphal text ; — '" Thou hast commanded me to build a temple upon thy holy mount, and an altar in the city wherein thou dwellest, a resemblance of the holy tabernacle, which thou hast prepared from the begin- ning."* The "flaming sword which turned every way," was "a bright blaze of bickering fire," or "a fire infold- ing itself;" which was equally characteristic of the levi- tical cherubim, and the symbol of the divine presence. The Jewish rabbins have called this display of the divine glory the shechinah : which is a term merely angli- * Wis. of Sol. ix. 8. Vol. II.— 28 326 LECTURES ON rising, in its substantive form, the very word which Moses here uses, and which our translators have very imperfectly rendered placed. It ought to be — " Jehovah-Elohim caused to dwell,, or put in a tabernacle, at the east end, or before, the garden of Eden, the cherubim." When Moses gave his directions concerning the taber- nacle, which was erected in the wilderness, he did not de- scribe the cherubim. Neither were they described after- wards, when Solomon built the temple. No very good reason can be assigned for this repeated silence, unless it be that the people were well acquainted with their charac- ter and form : and this reason will be entirely satisfactory, if it is recollected that " the various consecrated utensils, and outer parts of the temple, were profusely decorated with these mysterious hieroglyphics." Ezekiel, however, has supplied the deficiency, when he details "the visions of God," which he saw by the river of Chebar. He saw four living creatures, which had the face of a man, the face of a lion, the face of an ox, and the face of an ea- gle."* Again he remarks — "I knew that they were the cherubim ; — every one had four faces apiece."! Of course the cherubim were well known, as having four faces, surmounted by a brilliant display, or ardent blaze : — "the cherubim of trlory.'' or of manifestation, as Paul de- nominates them ; though even he did not think it worth while to speak particularly about them.t Furthermore, the same prophet, referring to the king of Tyre, represents him as having been in Eden, the garden of God, and describes him as "the anointed cherub that covereth ; that was upon the holy mountain of God, that walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire," and the Lord God said to him — " I will destroy thee 0 covering cherub from the midst of the stones of fire."§ The prophet, by his allusion, not only evinces * Ezek. i. t Ezek. x. 10—22. J Heb. ix. 5. §Ezek. xxviii. 12 — 16. MORAL GOVERNMENT. 327 that there were cherubim situated in connexion with pa- radise, or the garden of Eden, and that they were asso- ciated with a fiery display ; but he does this after having previously exhibited the cherubim with four faces, over which was seen "a fire infolding itself." Nor is this all. The king is called a covering cherub ; a term which we cannot explain, unless we call up the fact that the cheru- bim shadowed, or covered, the mercy-seat, under the levi- tical dispensation. If this be the explanation, then so distinct a reference to the mercy-seat leads us at once to the idea, that there were not only cherubim placed in a tabernacle before the garden of Eden ; but that a ritual, large and varied, including all the different ministerial ser- vices attendant on its ordinances, was established from the beginning. The argument, therefore, which demonstrates the erection of the tabernacle, and its furniture, from the beginning, irrefutably proves the divine origin of sacrifice, or the enactment of that institution by divine authority. The four faces which Ezekiel enumerates — the ox, the lion, the eagle, and the man, have been used as sacred symbols all over the world. " This uniform veneration of them," as Faber remarks, " must have proceeded from a common origin. That common origin can only be found in a period, when all mankind formed a single society. The existence of that single society cannot be placed later than the building of the tower of Babel. Consequently, the first veneration of those symbols cannot be ascribed to a more recent age than that of Nimrod. But in that age, which was marked by the commencement of a mythologi- cal system, that was afterwards carried into every region of the earth by those of the dispersion, the form of the che- rubic symbols must have been well known. Since the genuine patriarchism, and the rise of idolatry, thus chrono- logically meet together ; since the latter seems evidently to have been a perverse depravation of the former ; since the three animal figures, which entered into the compound 328 ' LECTURES ON shape of the cherubim, are the very three animal figures which have been universally venerated by the gentiles, from the most remote antiquity ; I see not how we can rea- sonably avoid the obvious conclusion, that, in whatever manner the pagans applied the symbols of the bull, the lion, and the eagle, they were borrowed in the first instance from those animals, as combined together in the form of the cherubim." You will no doubt have perceived, that, as the time of dispersion, referred to in the preceding extract, was that which occurred when Jehovah came down to confound the languages of mankind, at the building of the tower of Babel, the only cherubim, from which the gentiles could have derived their ideas, and have learned to venerate those animal figures, both conjointly and separately, were the paradisiacal cherubim. If so, then these four faces be- longed to this great antediluvian symbol, before which Cain and Abel brought their offerings, as Moses informs us ; and when, probably, the question — who was to be the heir of Adam's official honors — was visibly and peremptorily de- cided. Nor have we the least reason to believe, that those cherubim, whatever they were, were soon withdrawn. Ad- mitting that they were like the levitical symbols which were afterwards set up, and which were placed in the holi- est of all, "shadowing the mercy-seat ;" while none but the high-priest could enter within the vail, and that only on one day in the year, their permanency was as necessary in the one case, as in the other. Indeed, the universality of the cherubic emblems argues as strongly in favor of their permanency, as of their existence. Having, as I suppose, sufficiently elucidated the identity of the two representations, or the sameness of the inten- tions evolved in the paradisiacal and levitical cherubim, another question presents itself, and one which has been frequently and elaborately discussed. It is this: — what was designed by this exhibition? Some have supposed MORAL GOVERNMENT. 399 that " created spiritual angels'r were represent©! under these singular and peculiar emblems ; and that as these faces were turned to one another, and towards the mercy- seat, the angels were exhibited thereby as intensely prying into, or studying, the mysteries of redeeming love. Others have considered the cherubim to be " emblematical of the ever blessed trinity, in covenant to redeem man, by unit- ing the human nature to the second person ." These latter critics proceed to argue, "that the personality in Jehovah is in scripture represented by the material trinity of nature ; and that the primary type of the Father, is fire ; of the Word, light ; and of the Holy Ghost, spirit, or air in mo- tion. The ox or bull, on account of his horns, the curling hair on his forehead, and his unrelenting fury when pro- voked, is a very proper animal emblem of fire ; as the lion, from his usual tawny, gold-like color, his flowing mane, his shining eyes, his great vigilance and prodigious strength, is of the light ; and thus likewise the eagle is of the spirit, or air in action, from his being chief among fowls, from his impetuous motion, and from his towering and surprising flights in the air." Such speculations you may, perhaps, consider to be exceedingly fanciful, and to manifest a great deal more of doctrinal predilections, than of sound or pro- fitable criticism. The whole may remind you that the heathen interpreted these emblems much in the same man- ner, considering that these four faces were symbolic of the great deity they -worshipped ; and that for this reason Paul condemns them — because they changed the glory of the incorruptible god into an image made like to corrupti- ble man, and to birds, and four footed beasts, and creeping things." In the book of revelation, an apostle informs us, that — "in the midst of the throne, and round about the throne, were four living creatures, full of eyes before and behind. And the first living creature was like a lion, and the second living creature was like a calf, and the third living creature 28* 330 LECTURES ON had a fee as a man, and the fourth living creature was like a flying eagle. And the four living creatures had each of them six wings about him ; and they were full of eyes within : and they rest not day and night, saying, Holy, holy, holy, Lord God Almighty, which was, and is, and is to come." Again, it is said that these " four living crea- tures, with the four and twenty elders, fell down before the Lamb — and they sung a new song, saying — Thou art wor- thy to take the book, and to open. the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation, and hast made us unto our God kings and priests : and we shall reign on the earth." Here then we have these same four faces which distinguished the cherubim ; but instead of representing either angels or the trinity, they represent, in some view or other, the redeemed of the Lord, gathered out of every kindred and tongue, and people, and nation. Again, it is said of the redeemed — "they are before the throne of God, and serve him day and night in his temple ; and he that sitteth on the throne shall dwell among them." This latter clause would be more literally rendered — shall dwell as in a tabernacle above them. The same sort of phra- seology is used in reference to the Redeemer — "The Word was made flesh, and dwelt as in a tabernacle amongst us." Once more it is said — "the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God;" even then, when " God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes ; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain : for the former things are passed away." It would appear that the cheru- bim and the saints, occupy a similar position, and the Lord God is represented to dwell as in a tabernacle above both of them. The cherubim then were emblematical of the saints ; and "the fire infolding itself," which was a symbol of the MORAL GOVERNMENT. 331 divine glory over or above the cherubim, was emblemati- cal of God's dwelling with his people. Such was not only the import of the levitical, but also of the paradisiacal, cherubim : or the cherubim at the east end of the garden of Eden, placed there in a tabernacle, with "a bright blaze of bickering lire," constituted the great antediluvian symbol of the mediatorial constitution ; or of its happy issue, when the redeemed shall be brought home to glory. If I have rightly explained this matter, you ma}7" perceive what a happy and glorious illustration of the first promise these cherubim afforded. You can understand what is meant in the fourth chapter, when the two brothers are said to bring their offerings unto the Lord ; and when Cain is spoken of as going out from the presence of the Lord to dwell in the land of Nod. You can readily conceive, not only that sacrifice was then enjoined, but that Adam must have been, by special appointment, the priest of the most high God; and how the question of birthright, as in- volving the honors of the priesthood, might awake the jea- lous ambition of Cain, as he himself was declining, and Abel was advancing, in the excellence and integrity of per- sonal character. And you can easily account for the well authenticated fact, that throughout the whole gentile world, the four faces were so highly venerated ; while every where tabernacles, and mounts, and groves, were sacred to the worship of the gods. Such a splendid and magnificent symbol, permanently located so near the garden of Eden, and serving such peculiar and holy purposes, would be as reverentially regarded, as the corresponding levitical taber- nacle was among the jews. The knowledge of its early erection by the divine hand, together with all its moral re- ferences, would be faithfully transmitted by Noah ; and, ac- quiring new importance from the history of the judgments which overtook the world, the symbol itself might, and would, be preserved, even though its evangelical allusions might have become grossly perverted. Look at the analo- 332 LECTURES ON gous history of the cross, which, as an emblem of Chris- tianity, has been so grievously abused. The particular object which, it would seem from our translation, the cherubim were designed to serve, was to guard the way to the frees of life ; or to prevent man from entering the garden, and living on the fruit of those trees. Of the importance of that object, no one, who has ever ex- amined the philosophy of human life, or who has observed ' how little confidence can be reposed in the honorable feel- ings of human beings, can have any doubt. The last lec- ture has evinced the relations which that object sustains to the theory here advanced. But, certainly, it is not neces- sary that we should have a flaming swo?-d, in order to sus- tain the political operation, and to hold man in perpetual and distressing fear. None of the jews, saving the high- priest, could enter within the holiest of all. The whole dispensation, under which they lived, was one that was cha- racterized by bondage and fear. Were any invasions on the sacred symbols ever attempted ? Give to the human mind the idea of a supernatural agency, and immediately its sense of guilt is waked, and all its fears are roused. The present emblem of the divine glory was, therefore, not to be slighted; nor could a trespass have been committed, or an invasion of the garden have occurred, without betraying a previous course of wanton violence, and debasing sensu- ality. All the fine feelings of the human heart must first have been desolated ; and society, in view both of official and private character, must have become abandoned and dissolute. Ages must have rolled by, infidelity must have been triumphant, and atheism herself have risen in fearless and haughty triumph, before an act of rebellion, so daring and desperate, could have been attempted. It is, however, by no means improbable, judging from some scriptural alLusions which shall be stated, as well as from the legendary lore of the pagan world, that such an attempt was finally made, and that it became the ostensible MORAL GOVERNMENT. 333 occasion of introducing the flood. But if that really was the fact, it verifies the statement I have made : for Moses informs us that — " God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually." The pre- vious circumstances are very rapidly told. "The sons of God," it is said, "saw the daughters of men, that they were fair ; and they took them wives of all which they chose." That is, the sons of Seth, or those who minister- ed before the cherubim, married the daughters of Cain ; and were ultimately drawn into the apostacy, which the first born of our race had commenced. God, who had long forborne with the growing infidelity, at length proclaims — " My Spirit shall not always strive with man ;" "I will de- stroy man, whom I have created, from the face of the earth." Furthermore, we are informed, that " there were giants in the earth in those days ; and also mighty men, and men of renown." Whatever influence such individuals might wield, or for whatever high and lofty enterprise they were qualified, they took the lead in iniquity. " The earth was filled with violence," and " all flesh had corrupted his way before the Lord." Noah alone " found grace in the eyes of the Lord," being "a just man and perfect in his gene- rations ; and he walked with God." The apostle Peter alludes to these melancholy occurrences in his second epistle, when he would forewarn the church of coming tribulations. "There were," says he, "false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. For if God spared not the angels that sinned" — the messengers, alluding to the official men whom Moses calls the sons of God — " but cast them down to hell, (it is tartarus in the original) and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved 334 LECTURES ON unto judgment, and spared not the old world, but saved Noah, the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bring- ing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly — he know- eth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to re- serve the unjust unto the day of judgment, to be punish- ed : but chiefly them that walk after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness, and despise government. Presumptuous are they, self-willed ; they are not afraid to speak evil of dig- nities." Jude is even more explicit. He says — " And the an- gels which kept not their first estate — principality — but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day. Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them, in like manner to these, giving themselves over to forni- cation, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an ex- ample, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire. Likewise, also, these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities. " The phrase, which occurs in our translation — in like man- ner— does not accurately render the original ; because the masculine pronoun, which has no antecedent but angels, is left out. The sentence ought to read — in like manner to these — meaning these angels ; as any one may easily dis- cover by turning to the passage in the greek testament. Of course, the angels, who kept not their first estate, could not be, as generally supposed, fallen spirits of the angelic hosts ; but must necessarily be the sons of God, or the offi- cial men of the antediluvian age. The term angel must, therefore, be understood in its general sense, or merely means a messenger ; a sense in which it is very often used. The reference to these individuals being thus plain, the de- scription of their crimes is appropriate enough. They de- ported themselves like the sodomites, and were not only given up to the most debasing licentiousness, but W€re * 2 Pet. ii. 1—10. MORAL GOVERNMENT. 335 presumptuous, despised dominion, and spoke evil of digni- ties; or they set at nought and resisted the political powers which God had "ordained" in connexion with the system of government previously established. They might, then, have grown haughty and insolent enough to have attempted an invasion of this hallowed spot, and the desecration of these hallowed cherubic emblems of the mediatorial consti- tution. And as fire was rained down from heaven upon the guilty sodomites, it is not at all improbable that some such fiery symbols of divine vengeance might have burst upon them, cleaving fissures in the ground, whence the waters of the flood issued. Whether our conjecture be correct or not, the pagan tra- ditions relate the story in that form. To give the account to you in the language of another: — "In gentile lore the titans or giants, are described as being the offspring of heaven and earth" — of the sons of God and daughters of men, as Moses would say — " but, plunging into the most audacious wickedness, they madly dared to scale the very mount of God, and to wage war against the high Majesty of the omnipotent. Their attempt, however, proved abor- tive : their ranks were broken by hot thunderbolts : and they were precipitated into the central tartarus where they lie bound with chains of brass in a dungeon of ada- mant." And why should not such traditions be common? or why should they not be considered worthy of attention, and particularly as they so nearly correspond with the ac- counts given by Moses, by Peter, and by Jude ? Gentiles and jews had a common origin ; and Moses writes with such astonishing brevity, that we know not how to explain it, unless it be by supposing that he presumed upon the knowledge of the facts, carried by tradition through all the world. Putting all these things together, it would seem that the paradisiacal cherubim formed the permanent and chief antediluvian symbol of God's gracious designs in behalf of the children of men ; and that they served a purpose, anal- 336 LECTURES ON ogous to that of the levitical cherubim, placed in a taberna~ cle among the children of Israel.* What may have been the precise import of these four faces, I feel myself unable to determine. They certainly were expressive of some things which were characteristic of manldnd. But whether they referred to certain attributes which belong to man in general, such as labor, dominion, intelligence, immortality; or whether they were intended to refer to certain periods in the history of man, and to de- scribe the character of official men during those periods, as some think was the intention of the living creatures in the apocalypse ;t orwhether they were designed to portray the general character of official men in all ages, as guided by the providence of Him whom Ezekiel represents as en- throned above the firmament in " the likeness of a man," I cannot clearly satisfy my mind. Mr. Faber supposes these symbols to have been altogether arbiirury. I cannot agree with his view; yet I can offer no reasonable conjectures, other than those which I have just stated, as to the indi- vidual signification of the animal figures, which were com- pounded together in this singular form. If the hypothesis concerning the cherubim, which has been stated, and, as I think, proved, in the preceding para- graphs, be correct, it prepares the way for the considera- tion of sacrifice, as a divine institution. If there was such a permanent emblem of the divine presence, a patri- archal and antediluvian shechinah ; or, if God was pleased, in this symbolic manner, to tabernacle with Adam and his children ; then some external services must have devolved on them, as they sought an audience before Jehovah. Call * Any one who wishes to see the suhject of the cherubim discussed at large, and with great variety of talent and literature, may consult Parkhurst's Heb. Lex. on the word : Faber's Orig. of Pag. Idol. voL 1, pp. 403 — 464; vol. 3, pp. 602 — 661. In which works references may be found to others which I have not seen : — Bates, Sharp, Hutch- inson, Spencer, Hales, &c. t See Johnstone on the Revelations, iv. 7. MORAL GOVERNMENT. 337 back our argument on the nature and necessity of religious forms. The cherubim, situated as has been described, only furnishes the tabernacle as inhabited by the divine presence. The service, appropriate, expressive, and famil- iar, must yet be provided. What was that service ? What religious forms did it prescribe ? Necessarily compelled to pursue this inquiry, we cannot be surprised to find frequent allusions and instances of a sacrificial kind ; while yet the ordinance itself may not have been distinctly traced by the historian to its origin. Incidental cases are enough. The circumstance, recorded by Moses, that "unto Adam and his wife did the Lord God make coats of skins, and clothed them," which has often given rise to the question, Whence were these skins obtained ? — the facts which occurred in the history of Cain and Abel, and which are stated in the fourth chapter — the subsequent and universal practice of offering sacrifice — and the history of the Mosaic ritual — these things, combined with the erection of the paradisiacal tabernacle, produce irrefragable demonstration, that this propitiatory service was established by divine authority. The apostle Paul affords a coincident view when, allu- ding to these early transactions, he avers that — " By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts." Sacrifice at that period, the sacrifice of life in the worship of God, is, by this inspired commentator declared to be the product of faith — to be a righteous act — to be acceptable to Jehovah — and to have obtained an immediate response from on high. God did take a part in these , transactions, both Moses and Paul being witnesses. Such are the moral connexions which sacrifice holds, down through the whole biblical history. They appeared when Noah builded an altar, and the Lord " smelled an odour of rest;" as also when Abraham, on mount Mori ah, received the approbation of the angel, and had the resurrection from the dead so beautifully por- Vol. II.— 29 338 LECTURES ON trayed to him. Both were official men, of high character and holy renown, and both are celebrated as being " the heir of the righteousness of faith." If sacrifice then has been so intimately and so constantly associated with the mediatorial system; if it has been uniformly recognised by God, and has ever distinguished holy men, any doubt of its divine original must be worse than fastidious. But further. Sacrifice has been enjoined as necessary all over the world. It is evident, too, that the right exist- ed in every nation before the commencement of authentic history ; and the idea that the gods were to be appeased in this manner, was as general as the rite itself. These facts every one knows who has any acquaintance with pagan history, or gentile mythology. Certainly a practice so singular and yet so universal, must be traced back to some common origin ; to a period and to circumstances such as these which Moses describes, when he relates that the first pair, guilty and wretched, approached to humble themselves before the Lord. No room is left for the ridi- culous charge of priestcraft, seeing that Adam was priest in his own family ; and, as other priests did after him, of- fered sacrifice at his own expense. Or, as Delany has ob- served— "After this, when fathers grew up into princes, by the increase of their families, the priesthood, we know, became an appendage of royalty : and sacrifices were then at the sacrificer's expense. "We also know that libations and offerings of several kinds, were the constant practice of private men in their own families, and that priests had no perquisites from them : nor can they, with any color of reason, be suspect- ed to have had any emolument of any kind from this practice, in any region of the earth, till more than two thousand years from the first institution of this rite ; though if they had, it is evident that the advantages derived upon any particular set of men, from any practice, are far from being a proof that such a practice had no original founda- MORAL GOVERNMENT. 339 tion, but in the subtlety and interest of that particular set of men. In truth, the supposition is as absurd as any thing can well be imagined to be ; and will affect every pro- fession under heaven, as well as the priesthood ; from the prince on the throne to the meanest officer and artisan in the commonwealth ; nay, in truth, will affect every pro- fession in the world much more than the priesthood ; be- cause that is the only profession which Was originally dis- interested in the discharge of duty proper unto it."* We shall reach the same conclusion if we inquire into the nature and design of the sacrificial rite. Its wisdom and propriety will be no inconsiderable adjuvants in sus- taining the inference drawn from its universality, and from the impossibility of tracing its origin, without following mankind up to a common parentage. But, if I mistake not, the general opinion is that the institution is altogether arbitrary; that it results neither from the light of nature, nor from the principles of reason ; and that there is no discern- ible connexion between the blood of a slain animal and the pardon of an offender's sin. From this view of the divine ordinance, though advanced and defended by men of high literary character, I am constrained to dissent. I do not think that any religious institution which Jehovah has established, is arbitrary. There is a reason, good and sufficient, for every such institution ; a reason too, which results from the object to be gained, and which is very near: — oftentimes so near that it is not perceived, merely because we are ever looking after something; distant and mysterious. All the different systems which God has created, and all the different parts of each system, are ac- curately adjusted, and sustain reciprocal relations most happily arranged. In the operations of established law, both physical and moral, the highest confidence may be * Delaney's Rev. Exam. vol. 1. p. p. 129 — 30. See also Faber'a Orig. of Pag. Idol, vol, 1, p. p. 465—496 ; and Faber's Orig. of Exp, Sac, $40 LECTURES ON reposed. God acts upon them, and men must reason and decide in consistency with them. The particular institutions which belong to the paradisia- cal state, were all enforced by good and apparent reasons. The sabbath was intended to record and memorize the creation of the world, and to wake up in the bosom of man all those feelings with which that subject should in- spire him. The social relations were formed because it was not good for man to be alone. Man was entrusted with dominion, because the intellectual powers with which he was endowed, qualified him for such an extended sphere of action ; because he acts by means of secondary agents ; and because he was made in the image of God, whose high prerogative it is to govern his creatures, and whose glory consists in conducting his administration upon the wisest and most benevolent principles. The institu- tions after the fall must be equally well sustained. The cherubim, the tabernacle, and the accompanying ritual, must all be commended to the human mind as needful and salutary. Their propriety must be perceived, and be suf- ficiently obvious to meet every objection which reason could suggest, or unbelief advance. So God defended them in his argument with Cain, appealing to his own good sense, and comparing the evangelic provisions along with the ill-humored complaints of the haughty and dis- contented rebel. — "If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted ? And if not, a sin-offering coucheth at the door." In like manner some subsequent changes in the number or the appendages of the divine institutions, are explained by a reference to circumstances. The growth of society rendered it more difficult of management, and required some new and appropriate regulations; which regulations, however, .were neither proposed nor authorized, until the necessity for their symbolical action had occurred. Within given periods excitement seems to expend itself; and MORAL GOVERNMENT. 341 while the principles of moral science must remain the same, yet the outward forms, under which they are ex- pressed, or with which they are associated, must be modi- fied. Both God and man seem, by providential experi- ments, to have ascertained the necessity for such periodical revolutions — or ages, as they have been called in both the pagan and elect worlds. Read the antediluvian and postdiluvian histories ; analyze the Mosaic law, which is so full of corrections of the prevailing corruptions of the nations, and of allowances on account of Jewish obsti- nacy. Look at the occurrences under the christian dis- pensation; call up the reformation to view, and witness the present perplexity and disquietude when the church has outgrown, and seeks to throw off, the forms of past ages. There is always sufficient reason for such ritual and political changes; and while they have been foretold by him who sees the end from the beginning, they are ever ushered in by signs, competent and distinct. The reasons for sacrifice are not very difficult of disco- very. Deny its primitive enactment, and no other ordi- nance appears to take its place ; while yet the nature of man, and the uniform mode of the divine proceeding with him, argue the necessity of, and call for, some religious forms, by which men should visibly profess their faith and their feelings, and which would be acceptable with God. The accompanying facts, developed in the history of Adam's family, as well as that of all other ages, become entirely unaccountable; or exhibit- man acting consistently with his own constitution, while God himself wholly dis- regards it. Nor only so. But Jehovah had put man un- der the mediatorial government, by declaring that " the Seed of the woman should bruise the head of the ser- pent;" and yet enjoined no duties in connexion with the gracious system. All other things are shadowed out by external ceremony; and their knowledge is both preserved and disseminated, by being associated with the actions of 23* 342 LECTURES ON mankind. As far as I can perceive, there is no subject in reference to which the sceptic's fears, or the critic's litera- ture, has been more entirely at war with the elements of society, or the facts which fill up the history of the world. The sacrificial institution consisted in the offering up of life, with a view to the pardon of sin. By sin death had just been introduced. Scarcely had the matter been ad- judicated, when the Lord himself clothed the transgres- sors with coats of skin. The facts connected with the fall, the remedy, the divine actions in setting up the taberna- cle and clothing our first parents, are all crowded to- gether, as belonging to the same general concern, and leave us no alternative. We must interpret the ordinance as a divine enactment, and explain it by the associations in which it is found. Its character is obviously mediatorial. Its reference is evidently, on the one hand, to the sin of Adam, by which death had been incurred ; and on the other, to the death of Christ, by which life should be restored. And it would, therefore, readily serve as a divine comment upon the present state of the world, by tracing up all our sufferings to sin as their cause; while it would be equally explanatory of the official relations of the promised " Seed of the woman." There is, under such a view of the or- dinance, nothing forced, nor far-fetched, nor arbitrary about it. It is evidently natural, appropriate, and expressive; and on the supposition that moral truth must be symbol- ized to the human mind, it was necessary, by such an in- stitution, to explain the moral circumstances of mankind, as well as the remedial provisions of divine grace. Certain it is — while Moses appears to take it for granted, that the nature of sacrifice, as it had existed before the Smaic ritual was enacted, was fully understood in its re- ference to the practical consequences of sin, and in its alli- ance with the doctrine of the righteousness of faith — cer- tain it is, I say, that he, and all the subsequent scriptural writers do place the Mosaic sacrifice in those connexions. MORAL GOVERNMENT. 343 Under the law, "without the shedding of blood there was no remission." Yet it never was pretended that the blood of bulls and of goats could take away sin ; or that Jehovah had any pleasure in burnt-offerings, on their own account. All these things were merely figures for the time then pre- sent. The Holy Spirit, who, as the Spirit of prophecy, is the testimony of Jesus, did thereby '-signify," or exhibit in typical form, "better things to come." With this inten- tion, these sacrificial services resembled, in appearance, that of which they were the shadow. The offering of life, and that for sin, whereby the captain of our salvation was made perfect, could not have been otherwise symbolized ; nor could the nature of the divine government, as connect- ing sin and death on the one hand, and righteousness and life on the other, have been otherwise significantly set forth. The reason of the Redeemer's righteousness, as in- cluding his sufferings, is very plain ; and that of the pre- vious emblem could not be occult. But the grand reason of any institution, is to be found in its adaptation to produce a desired effect. If there is no practical efficiency exerted, if as an actively operating cause it accomplishes nothing, the ordinance is useless. In the present case, legally speaking, righteousness secures life. Accordingly, as we have seen, by the righteousness of Christ all men are brought into a justification of life ; and his righteousness is preached to mankind as the object of their faith. Could sacrifice then, or did it, so prefigure the finished work of the Son of God, as to serve this practical purpose, and lead men to believe? If it did, the reason, and a sufficient reason, for the institution, immediately pre- sents itself to every one. Accordingly the old testament saints, including the early patriarchs, are distinguished by their faith in the promised Messiah. They looked forward to the Redeemer's day ; sung of his priestly character, of his sacrificial sorrows, and of his glorious triumphs; and en- dured as though they were fully persuaded that he would 344 LECTURES ON appear as their deliverer. All this they did, in connexion with the offering of sacrifice. But again. The object of the Redeemer's righteousness was to place mankind in a situation where they might meet their personal responsibilities ; and to furnish them with all necessary facilities, considering "the weakness of their flesh." Their obligations would then call upon them to forsake sin, and do that which is right. This end being accomplished, the designs of Jehovah, in view of the ex- istence of man, are answered. Could the ancient sacri- fice, typifying Christ, and eliciting the operations of faith, exert any agency in instituting, or sustaining, this progres- sive sanctification ? If it could, then again the reason, and a sufficient reason too, for this institution, appears with great distinctness. If any symbolic rite shall accomplish the most valuable purposes, and present the very similitude of the object desired, what more can be demanded in legisla- ting for man ? He obtains his ideas by means of his sen- ses ; and the exhibition which is capable of affording to him, through those senses, the very ideas which he needs, accords precisely with the peculiarities of his nature. That the sacrificial ceremony did occupy this very place, and serve this very purpose, is evident on its face ; is distinctly un- folded in history ; and is officially announced in the scrip- tures. How then can biblical critics or moral philoso- phers assert that, this rite results neither from the light of nature, nor the principles of reason ? They might as well represent the whole mediatorial system to be unnatural and irrational. Pardon of sin was confessedly connected with the sacri- ficial ordinance. And why should it not be so connected ? If its legal associations, its emblematic allusions, and its practical operations, were such as have been described, par- don might well be extended. What more could be desir- ed than faith in the Saviour, and the sanctification of the human spirit? Call the institution by what name you MORAL GOVERNMENT. 345 please, apply any term that may be employed to express its relations, the moral is very plain. The difficulties which critics may suggest, or philologists exaggerate, are superfi- cial.— The sanctification of the human mind is the para- mount object of concern. All the claims of the divine law quadrate with it, and every perfection of Godhead is dis- played in its own untarnished glory, when the reconciled man is brought home to heaven, redeemed and blessed. If pardon of sin shall correspond with the requisitions of the law, and with sanctified and glorified humanity, no reason can be assigned why pardon should be withheld. Accordingly, while the typical sacrifice is represented as an atonement, it is sustained in that view, only because it is associated with the reconciliation or sanctification of the human mind. Burnt-offerings, presented as a mere formal- ity, Jehovah again and again most indignantly rejects. — " Your new moons and your appointed feasts my soul ha- teth : they are a trouble unto me ; I am weary to bear them. And when ye spread forth your hands, I will hide mine eyes from you : yea, when ye make many prayers, I will not hear : your hands are full of blood. Wash you ; make you clean ; put away the evil of your doings from before mine eyes ; cease to do evil ; learn to do well ; seek judgment ; relieve the oppressed; judge the fatherless; plead for the widow." Let your own good sense decide ; — of what use can a sacrifice, or prayer, or any other form be, where the moral attributes, which should distinguish a thinking spi- rit, are wanting? But if such forms lead man to think, feel and act correctly ; if as outward means they represent to him moral things under visible symbol ; if they become the occasion and opportunity of his expressing his own desires and intentions, or of his exemplifying before others that which is right — what rational objection can be urged against them? Or if, when they are rejected, the very principle of human action, and of social intercourse, is abandoned, by what argument can such dereliction be justified ? 346 LECTURES ON The idea of merit figures so largely in religious contro- versy, and is so distinctly discerned at every turn we take ; that it is very likely it may have distorted the views which anxious moralists have formed on the subject of sacrifice. What merit can there be in a burnt-offering ? Hecatombs might smoke, and rivers of oil might flow, but what merit would be evinced? An ordinance, constructed on this prin- ciple, cannot be traced to reason, nor to the light of nature. The practical effect on the spirit of man, produced by an excitement that is created, and under which his own pow- ers are called out into action — an effect which elevates while it sanctifies, which controls the lusts of the flesh, overcomes the world, and enables the believer to rise supe- rior to temptation — is the only object which regeneration can contemplate. This effect constitutes the worth of the righteousness of Christ, as well as of its various emblems, both ancient and modern. Discarding this theological fig- ment of merit, or substituting the loftier thought of practi- cal agency acting consistently with our intellectual nature ;. any ordinance might command confidence, and recom- pense the heart that devotedly ministers under its direc- tion. This idea, duly appreciated and conscientiously sus- tained, can alone guaranty the contemplated benefits of religious forms. With all the light that the new dispensation affords, the nature of its ordinances, simple and expressive as they are, has been misapprehended. Theologians have commenced their argument on erroneous principles ; and those princi- ples throw their shade over every matter belonging to the systems, of which they are a part. By Adam's sin, all men are brought into temporal, spiritual, and eternal death, we have been taught. Consequently all personal respon- sibility is absorbed in the imputation of that sin. Then again, a corresponding operation is predicated of Christ's righteousness in relation to the elect; and personal respon- sibility is merged in a second imputation. Many, it is true, MORAL GOVERNMENT. 347 have condemned this doctrine ; but I do not see that they have fairly and fully met the argument of its advocates. How should they ? Both parties start from the same point, and carry with them the same original principles ; and the doctrine referred to, casts its gloom over every theory with which it is brought into contact. Look at the facts. Baptism has been represented by some to be regeneration. By others, it has been de- clared altos-ether irrational to administer that ordinance to infants ; because, it is said, they cannot understand the objects proposed. A type or symbol cannot be the iking, which is typified or* symbolized ; and methinks, any one might discern that it is therefore utterly impossible, that baptism should be regeneration. And if the blessing sym- bolized by baptism, may be brought to infants, there can be no impropriety in administering the symbol, which is nothing more than an outward exhibition of that blessing. — "The promise is to you and your children;" — "of such is the kingdom of heaven." Thus the scriptures often speak, endeavoring to impress on the minds of the religious com- munity, a sense of the interest which Jehovah takes in their offspring. On what principle then, can an outward sym- bol of that interest be rejected as improper and absurd ? — Without touching the question, whether baptism has been a designed substitute for circumcision, I yet call up the fact that Jewish children were circumcised ; while it was utter- ly impossible that they should understand its import, as a " seal of the righteousness of faith." But circumcision was a symbol, shadowing out certain blessings, as consti- tuting an inheritance in which parents and their children had a common right. If one instance of such a use of an external religious form, has occurred, and that under the positive direction of Jehovah himself; surely they have gone far astray, who pronounce a second instance to be ab- surd. But that instance stands not alone. All our chil- dren live under the light of sun, moon and stars ; they en- 348 LECTURES ON joy the protection, and feast upon the bounties of a divine providence, most profoundly philosophical in all its opera- tions ; while, perhaps, neither they nor their parents un- derstand any thing of the accurate and varied connexion between cause and effect, which is so constantly and mi- nutely exhibited. This dogma, if carried out, would stop the course of nature, and leave mankind to starve and die, unless they should become philosophers. It is mournful to observe how inconsiderately men reason on religious subjects, when they have some sectarian trifle to sustain. They forget the analogies of nature, and drop entirely the most familiar principles belonging to physics, the moment they enter the region of morals. It is no wonder there are so many sectaries, and so many controversies. Thus men close their eyes on the constituent elements of the divine works, and then undertake to explain them. These two views of baptism, which I have quoted, seem to me to be very much alike. They both mistake the type for the thing typified. The Lord's supper has been treated in the same man- ner. The bread has been represented to be the literal flesh, and the wine to be the literal blood, of the Re- deemer. Here the misconstruction is so palpable and egre- gious, that it is matter of wonder, that christian ears should ever have heard it uttered. But, even those, whose pre- judices call for no such impropriety, and who instantly re- ject it when stated, feel all the superstitious awe which that view of the ordinance would inspire. Many have refused to commemorate the Saviour's death through a long life, who have mourned over and anxiously sought to correct their error, when on a bed of death ; as though the ele- ments really possessed some intrinsic virtue to save the soul, in the last extremity. Others comply with the in- junction ; but year after year they approach the table with trembling steps, and handle the symbols with fearful hearts, as though they were about to "eat and drink damnation" MORAL GOVERNMENT. 349 to themselves. Their single inquiry is — " am I a christian?" A very important question, it is true. The ordinance should certainly be observed in a becoming manner, and with pro- per views and feelings. But an inquiry, embracing such like matters, belongs to every duty we perform, to every trial we endure, and to every privilege we enjoy. Man, as personally responsible, should possess a spiritual mind, sanctified affections, and a good conscience in all things. The question here is, wherein is the Lord's supper distin- guished 1 or what is its peculiarity ? That peculiarity should be the special matter of thought, when we consider the obligation which the ordinance imposes on us. There- in the Lord Jesus symbolically exhibits himself as crucified for us, as loving us unto the death, and giving himself for us. There is nothing so alarming in this, that the people should be afraid to draw nigh, and contemplate and enjoy the testimony, or representation, of his love." On our part, he requires, that we should " show forth," proclaim, herald, or preach, his death; with a view of exciting the attention, and achieving the reformation, of those who are around us. What is there either painful, or forbidding, in a ceremony which looks to such results? Are you a patriot, and do you love your country ? Are you a father, and do you love your children ? Are you a friend, and do you love your compa- nions ? Would you not seek their welfare ? Are you afraid to let them understand that Jesus is the Son of God, and that he died for you ? Or would you lead them, by absent- ing yourselves on such occasions, to suppose, that you do not believe in the Saviour of the world? Or as long as you do not keep this sacramental feast, do you not feel that the obligation, to live a holy life, is comparatively light ? But the view of the Lord's supper, implied in the pre- ceding observations, is too simple for the popular feeling on the subject. It is not mystical enough to be acceptable, where early impressions and sectarian prejudices reign, with their supreme and desolating sway. The bread must Vol. II.— 30 350 LECTURES ON be the literal body, and the wine the literal blood, of our crucified Redeemer, some how or other : not admitted, but most positively denied, in words ; yet in practical effect most deeply, however unconsciously, felt. To inspect the real feelings of the heart, and be aware of all the subtlety of the motives it may secretly recognise, is a process of self-examination, which few have either moral vigor or discrimination enough to carry fairly out. If the fact be not as I have stated, the remark must have so much veri- similitude, that it would be difficult to distinguish its differ- ence from any other view which can be truly asserted. A similar misinterpretation of an outward ordinance, or an official agency, attends the ideas which have been in- dulged in relation to the ministry of reconciliation. They have been invested with the power to forgive sins, and ab- solve the ignorant, but troubled, offender. A beautiful offi- cial gradation has been invented, which conducts the eye of an admiring and unsuspecting professor up from a sim- ple deacon, by a race of bishops and archbishops, until you reach the pope himself. The most splendid revenues have sustained a most heartless sinecure ; and a priestly domi- nation has beggared the conscience of the saints. Even where such proud prentensions have been courageously as- sailed, still a fragment, if rot the whole, of the wilting po- licy has beeji preserved. The sectary follows the dictation of the councils that belong to his party ; and views their books as the consecrated relics of gigantic and saintly minds. It has not been lorg since it was thought a sin, worthy of exemplary discipline, for a member of one denomination to hear a minister belonging to another. And even now, it may be viewed as extremely hazardous to listen to, or to read, an argument, which may have been prejudged, and censured as aside of ordinary rule or a prescribed and idol- ized formularly. How important, but how completely mis- placed, are external ordinances ! How can the human mind enlarge, or the human conscience acquire vigor, under such MORAL GOVERNMENT. 351 an ecclesiastical administration ? Personal responsibility is the costly sacrifice, which multitudes have offered on this altar of idolatrous ceremony. If no warning can obtain an audience, why — be it so. Under such circumstances — Jesus wept. — Ere long the w'orld will weep. If we interpret new testament ordinances on such prin- ciples, it is no wonder, that a difficulty has been felt on the subject of the early sacrifice ; or that a discussion, in refer- ence to it, should have assumed the form of an inquiry — whether it corresponded with reason ? or whether it could be derived from the light of nature ? But literary and liber- al men would have saved themselves from a mere verbal argument, and would have rendered a more substantial ser- vice to the religious community, if they had expended the effort, which they have made in a half-religious and half-literary controversy, on the original sacrifice, or on the mistaken views of christian ordinances, that have rendered us all so superstitiously timid. One question more remains. Jehovah-Elohim is repre- sented to have created this paradisiacal tabernacle, in which the cherubim were placed, at the east end of the garden ; and to have made the coats of skin, in which our first pa- rents were clothed. In what form — the form of God, or the form of man — did he officially act at that time ? It may readily be answered, that if the curse had not yet been executed, though it had been pronounced ; or if the ground had not yet been thrown under that physical influence which rendered it an instrument of death ; Adam might have still beheld the original form, under which Jehovah was manifested unto him. But whether the curse had then been executed or not, it has been already observed, that change is the property of form; that Christ was transfigured^ changed his form, or was metamorphosed, before his dici- ples ; that Eve said — I have gotten a man, Jehovah his very self; and that such appearances, in human form, were afterwards presented to the early patriarchs, in Jehovah's 352 LECTURES ON official transactions with them ; as well as that the ideas of a virgin-born Saviour, or various emanations from the gods in the form of man, were common among the heathen — all which no one can trace up, more than he can trace up sa- crifice, or explain the cherubic symbols, and the sacred mounts and tabernacles, without arriving at this early scene that has given rise to our present question. The ordinances then created, gave to religious services all the character and peculiarities they sustained, throughout the world till Christ came. In either case, it appears to me, that every difficulty is removed ; and that the direct agency, attributed to Jeho- vah-Elohim in these matters, is satisfactorily explained. CONCLUSION. . I have finished the proposed analysis of the first three chapters of Genesis ; and have discussed the various gene- ral principles of the government of God, which those chap- ters present to our view. If you have carefully attended to the doctrines I have advanced, you must have discover- ed that no essential evangelical truth has been questioned. The form, in which the subjects belonging to both law and gospel have been stated, may be very different from that, with which you are familiar ; but the things them- selves have been very distinctly asserted, and very earnest- ly advocated. My only crime is, that I have attempted to explain the system of Christianity, by going back to "the beginning" as the great prophet himself did ; and to offer some argu- ment in elucidation and defence of its doctrines, which I have thence derived, and which I have supposed to be ra- tional and demonstrative. A mighty offence truly, that the abandonment of Christianity should be inferred ! God for- bid, that I should not " hold the Head." — " God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus MORAL GOVERNMENT. 353 Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world."— God forbid that I should "know any thing among you save Jesus Christ and him crucified." " For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ ; for it is the power of God unto salvation, to every one that belie veth ; to the jew first, and also to the greek." Any accusation, which would rapidly and harshly arraign my ministrations, and condemn my well intentioned efforts to explain " the truth as it is in Jesus," would be both unkind and unright- eous. "But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged of man's judgment." Long since have I com- mitted myself and my ministry to the providential care of the Master himself: and with him am I still willing to leave the high official interests, which have assigned the present task. But it has become, by a vast deal, too common for professors to criticise the personal religion of those around them; and by doing it, they have but too often, and most un- warily, exposed their own gross deficiencies. Had I supposed, however, in framing and delivering such a systematic arrangement of scriptural subjects, as has been pronounced in your hearing ; about ^ich there is a great deal of seeming novelty ; and which, step by step, conflicts with so many sectarian prejudices, and long established max- ims— had I supposed, that the whole should have been at once fully apprehended and accurately repeated, I should have betrayed my utter ignorance of the intellectual and moral character of religious society. Living in an age when an old excitement has run down, and when a new one. whose causes and extent are scarcely perceived, is carrying forward the human mind to act under a different social or- ganization— undertaking a serious discussion of elemental principles, when so many others are seeking to control so- ciety by reiterated appeals to feeling, or are inducing an expenditure of public zeal in social combinations — and even questioning the wisdom and policy of many of the popular movements, from which almost every one tells me 30* 354 LECTURES ON so much good is proceeding — the most I could expect would be attention, toleration, and candor. How far even these have been, or may yet be awarded, in response to a course of lectures, which possibly might be prejudged and unhesitatingly condemned, even while they were unheard, I shall leave to your own judgment to decide. Read so- ciety for yourselves. The principles of sectarian policy are not very deep. Its story is too old, and has been too often recited on the theatre of ecclesiastical strife while its advocates have too frequently outwitted themselves, and too visibly desolated the high and holy interests committed to their charge, for any reflecting man to be deceived. Harsh and cruel, disingenuous and uncandid, imperious and un- relenting, it shall have its own reward ; and, sooner or later, be overtaken by a retributive providence. The Lord himself will institute a righteous inquisition ; when, as Jesus said to his disciples, in reference to the envious pha- risees — " Every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up." In all our collisions, or in the excitement of temper and the crimination and recrimi- nation to which the^may lead, we should every one habit- ually recollect, that the Lord himself is judge over all the earth. If, in the course of the discussion which I have pursued, any remark has escaped me, which may be justly censured as giving unnecessary offence, or wantonly inflicting pain ; if I have proved myself reckless of any brother's feelings or interests, and thus swerved from the integrity, or cor- rupted the purity, of the ministerial character, I am not above craving pardon. He who was "in the form of God and made himself of no reputation, but took upon him the form of a servant and was found in the likeness of men," thus humbled himself, on purpose to teach us — "That no- thing should be done through strife or vain glory ; and that in lowliness of mind, each should esteem others better than themselves." If truth be severe, and reflections on the MORAL GOVERNMENT. .355 character and tendency of public doings, uttered for the sake of needful and seasonable illustration, be considered offensive ; I can only reply, that while the sense of duty was thus evinced, and an appeal, unreserved and fearless, was thus made to your understandings, nothing unkind was intended. If I were conscious of the power to avenge any supposed, or real, offence, }'et I should consider the op- portunity that invited its exercise, as aloud and peremptory call scrupulously to analyze the feelings of my own heart. A more salutary or important lesson has not been taught us, than that which the Redeemer thus pointedly expresses — V If ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will vour Father forgive your trespasses." No intention, not even the slightest, has been cherished, throughout the preceding observations, to wound any man's feelings, to injure any man's standing, to curtail any man's influence, or in any way to indulge in unhandsome and fretting personalities. My contest has been with principles, and not with men : and if I have spoken of theologians, I have merely used a gene- ral term, without designing to make personal allusions. — Though utterly unconscious that such an apology for any hasty expression of feeling is necessary ; yet, if it be ne- cessary, I cheerfully make it. Again, dear brethren, suffer me to remind you, that I am not attempting, by any show of artful reasoning, to make a stealthy approach to a lordship over your consciences. I covet no influence, but that which truth awards ; or which the Master, in his own holy and condescending providence, would sanction and bless. "A man," said John the bap- tist, when certain disputants would rouse his jealousies on account of his Master's apparent popularity — "a man can receive nothing, except it be given him from heaven." I have no secret policy to sustain, nor painful misgivings to conceal. Your submissive credence is not asked to any thing of which you are not personally convinced. When Noah, Job, or Daniel, could save neither son nor daughter 356 LECTURES ON by their righteousness ; it would be the height of folly and impiety, for any man, to decoy you from a distinct and lofty sense of your personal responsibility, by setting forth his own vicarious pretensions ; or to seek to convert your love of truth into an idolatrous confidence in himself. No, brethren, no. You must search the truth for yourselves ; and, by individual fellowship with the Father, and his Son, Jesus Christ our Lord, become conscious of the evangelic realities which have been set before you. If any respect or affection, which you may have invariably extended to me for my work's sake, should avail to rouse you to de- liberate and pra3*erful thought ; and, if the truth as it is in Jesus should leave its hallowing and heavenly impres- sions on your own spirits, I could neither ask, nor desire, more. The services I render, are purely ministerial ; pre- parative to higher relations in glory ; and without the most distant desire after artificial importance, or ghostly power. I beseech you, in the language of our beloved Lord — " Call no man your Father on the earth : for one is your Father, which is in heaven. Neither be ye called Masters ; for one is your Master, even Christ." I may be wrong. The theory that has been exhibited to your view, may be very defective. Should such be the fact, the investigation which has yielded the principles of christian philosophy here carefully developed, has distinctly taught me, that a christian man should ever preserve his mind open to conviction ; and be ready to receive truth from whatever source it may be derived. Progress in knowledge is as much a characteristic of christian living, as progress in holiness can be. The controvertist, who — " muffled in the zeal and infallibility of his own sect, will not touch a book nor enter into debate with a person that will question any of those things which to him are sacred" — who boasts that he has passed from childhood to a man's estate, without ever changing his views — who thinks that the mere fact of such a change is a disgraceful dereliction — and who MORAL GOVERNMENT. 357 solemnly determines that he never will, while he lives, al- ter his ideas — may have learned his catechism well, and may have received a very distinct impression from the signet of sectarian authority; or, with peculiar accuracy, and en- thusiastic fondness, " May grind divinity of other days Down into modern use •J"t but he is the mere child of early prejudice. He has not reviewed the course, nor ascertained the value, of ever- changing circumstances, under which God himself may have modified all his providential proceedings. A higher service could not be rendered to such a man, than to in- duce him carefully to examine his creed, and diligently to study himself : or to apprize him that he has taken on trust, what he supposes himself to know. He mistakes his talent ; overrates his strength ; finds fault without the pow- er of defending his inconsiderate remarks; becomes "ex- ceedingly mad" when he cannot answer; and gets rid of his difficulties, by refusing to look at them. Minds, thus unhappily drilled, were readily preoccupied by false views mistaken for vital religion, and crucified their long-promis- ed Messiah. Such minds revolted from the simplicity of the gospel, and succumbed to papal jurisdiction, when the reformers called them to contemplate and confide in the righteousness of the Son of God. Such minds are never prepared for the revolutions through which society must necessarily pass ; nor have they grasped the political prin- ciples on which society is constructed. And if they are now mingling in the controversies which are abroad in the earth, the millennium itself, as the coming period of intel- lectual, but earthly, glory, is often denominated, will lose its beauty and interest in their eyes. I pray you, look well to this matter; personally and honestly investigate it, as though it could not require too great an expenditure of thought, or be too often associated with humble and anx- 358 LECTURES ON ious prayer. To repeat it — I may be wrong ; and, if so, should be thankful to be corrected. But more will be ne- cessary to produce this, than mere dictatorial assertion, or authoritative criticism. These are very common in theo- logical circles, and can affect no one who understands his subject, or has any respect for himself. On such high con- cerns no man may be magisterial. Yet even if the theory advanced be inaccurate, there is no principle urged, nor doctrine stated, about which chris- tian men and ministers, both good and intelligent, have not differed in opinion. In every age, almost, have these sub- jects been freely canvassed ; and different sects have never gained any thing by their long cherished hostilities. Cal- vinists and arminians, established and dissenting churches, have alike to look back with complacency upon a long line of revered and holy men, who lived like saints ; and died like soldiers of the cross, reposing in the arms of the great Captain of their salvation. And why may not men differ now, as well as heretofore, and still be loved and hailed as brethren ? Why all this contention ? On what moral prin- ciple is it, I pray you, that a man may not utter and main- tain his sentiments, because his brother, frail and fallible like himself, happens to espouse different sentiments ? Is it really a fact, that a professor, who, thinking for himself, cannot coincide with the majority, has therefore abandoned the gospel, and turned traitor to the Prince of peace ? Is mind to be scorned and scouted, when, appearing near the altars of the Son of God, she asks after the reason of his institutions ? Are immortal spirits, on their way to an ever- lasting communion with intellectual beings, to be con- demned as criminal, because they would learn to think un- der the superintending care of the Holy Spirit? Are we to be told in pettish and angry tones — "all these topics, which are necessarily deeply mysterious, have been exam- ined a thousand times before; and no one may be pre- MORAL GOVERNMENT. 359 sumptuous enough to hope that he shall throw the smallest portion of light on the interesting but perplexing themes ?" Shall the promise of divine teaching inspire no confidence ? and is every one bound down under an irreversible fate, which renders it impossible for the human mind to appre- hend, or explain, that which God has professedly revealed? If certain premises infallibly lead to unhappy and distract- ing conclusions, shall we be forbidden to inquire after the accuracy and wisdom of those premises ? Or, finding that they have been unquestioned and unexamined, down through a long line of theological writers, and multitudes of generations, who were prohibited the use of every guide save some artificial system, or "permanent creed," shall the mighty aggregate of tremulous and submissive disci- ples foreclose inquiry, and compel us to receive what we do not understand, and dare not investigate ? They who can abide such intellectual vassalage, must be left to enjoy their unenvied immunities ; and to nurse their prejudices, and sustain their personal religion, by an overaction both imprudent and hurtful. Every pure and holy mind would long to enjoy abetter companionship, and a holier intercourse among the ransomed of the Lord ; and desire to show to the world, that different opinions on the philosophy of mo- rals, like different opinions on the philosophy of physics, may only argue a variety of intellectual powers, and of the circumstances under which those powers are developed. — This promised and prescribed uniformity in the perceptions of religious truth, is purely chimerical. Theologians, in expecting it, have necessarily been disappointed ; and scep- tics, in demanding it, or calling for a unity which admits of no versatility of general character, have comdemned the purest philosophy, when they supposed themselves to be assailing Christianity. Having yielded to a request, often and kindly urged, to prepare these lectures for the press, I now lay my publica- 360 LECTURES ON tion on the altars of the sanctuary, and before him, to whom every christian, and every minister, should be able to appeal for the purity of his motives. Nor would I cher- ish any other anxiety about it, than that it may do good and not evil ; and more particularly, that young men, who are in great danger of mistaking the present agitation of society, may be led to the only refuge — the Lord Jesus Christ. They may not be aware, how far the influence of past ages is in conflict with the advance of science, or opposed to the strong sense of personal responsibility, which is pervading both church and state. Ardently should we all desire that these may not be driven into infideli- ty; and, to the utmost of his power, every one should la- bor to explain to them the principles of the christian sys- tem. Young ministers might be the sympathizing coun- sellors of the companions of their youth. But, perhaps, even some of them, distracted by the multitude of systems, which theological seminaries are very tenderly rescuing from the grave, may be helplessly hanging on the arm of some ecclesiastical father, who can scarcely realize that his son has become a man. Or, it may be that, confiding in the strength of their position, or complacently reposing on the promises of an evanescent popularity, or fearing some inquisitorial outrage to which the law of their party may subject them ; they may not have forecast enough to di- vine, nor courage enough to prepare for any probable changes. — May God save our young men from the impend- ing ruin ! Should my volumes fall intotheir hands, may he so sanctify the general discussion, as to lead them to estimate their personal responsibility, and to induce them to think for themselves. Dear brethren — I often look forward to the coming times, with a feeling that is painfully intense, and in the anxious musings of my own heart, ask myself, how our children shall fare amid the religious distractions and political tur- moils, which have commenced their apparently ill-omened MORAL GOVERNMENT. 361 career ? The ancient mode of religious instruction, by which the memories of children were stored with the abstractions of a heavy catechism, and under the imposing but decep- tive idea that it was a form of sound words, has sunk in- to disuse, as it ought to have done. The substitute which should have been adopted, or a prayerful parental effort diligently to teach " the statutes and commandments of the Lord" as they are distinctly stated in his own bible, has not been faithfully employed. The rising generation are growing up in comparative ignorance of divine truth, to betray, I fear, their moral imbecility or perverseness, when their fathers shall be lying in the dust. Great reliance is re- posed in some periodical excitement, to produce which much undignified and violent effort is made ; and religious ceremonies are increasing, while spiritual intelligence is becoming more and more defective. The christian, who loves the church, and yearns over the souls of men — the moralist, who can scan human character, or estimate the worth of causes by the effects which are produced, cannot calmly look at the scene that is spread out before him. I speak to you with all the candor and frankness of one who has nothing to fear, excepting that he may go wrong ; and nothing to desire, but his Master's approbation and blessing. I pray and beseech you to bring your children to the mercy-seat, and importunately to implore the glori- fied Saviour to bless them. Unfold to their view the trea- sures, the exceeding riches of grace and glory, which the bible conveys to your fire-sides and to your bosoms. Teach them to plead for the Spirit of the Lord to rest upon them. And when you die, leave them the blessings of your faith, and charge them never to forget that the bible — the bi- ble— is the charter of their heavenly hopes, and the coun- sellor in their earthly sorrows. May God give his Spirit to you and your children ! and discover to you and them the unutterable value of his bi- ble ! May the light of his countenance guide and cheer Vol. 11—31 362 LECTURES ON you throughout your earthly pilgrimage ! and bring you at last, regenerated, redeemed, and glorified, to dwell with him forever, in his high and holy habitation ! END OF VOL. II. a"^ C V* Princeton Theological Seminary Libraries 1012 01198 2149