Srom f^e fetfirarp of (Ret>. ®.ffen %wti (grotJtm, ®. ®. Q5equeaf^e^ Bg^im to ■ • f ^ &i6rare of (prit|ceton 4&eofogtcaf ^emindr^ BX 9175 .H5 1837 v. 2 Hill, George, 1750-1819. Lectures in divinity LIBRARY OF PRINCETON FEB I 0 2005 J THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY LECTURES DIVINITY. EDINBURGH : PETER BROWN, PRINTER, ST JAMES' SQUARE. LECTURE^* DEC191911 isioki stuv DIVINITY, BY THE LATE GEORGE HILL, D. D. PRINCIPAL OF ST MARy's COLLEGE, ST ANDREWS. EDITED FROM HIS MANUSCRIPT, BY HIS SON, ALEXANDER HILL, D. D. MINISTER OF DAILLY. FOURTH EDITION, VOL. II. WILLIAM BLACKWOOD AND SONS, EDINBURGH AND T. CADELL, STRAND, LONDON. MDCCCXXXVIL CONTENTS OF VOL. II. BOOK IV. OPINIONS CONCERNING THE NATURE, THE EXTENT, AND THE APPLICATION OF THE REMEDY BROUGHT BY THE GOSPEL. Page CHAP. I. DISEASE FOR WHICH THE REMEDY IS PROVIDED, Sect. 1. Genesis iii — History of a real transaction, related after the symbolical manner 2. Effects of Adam's fall upon his posterity — Four systems — Pelagius — Arminius — Human nature corrupted — Sin of Adam imputed — Calviuistic view embraces both corruption and imputation — Adam the representative of the human race — Difficulties. €IIAP. II. OPINIONS CONCERNING THE NATURE OF THE REMEDY, 2S Sect. 1, Socinians — The Gospel the most effectual lesson of righte- ousness— Defects of this system. 2. Right acquired by Jesus of saving men from their sins, and giving them immortality — IMerits and defects of this system. 3. Catholic system, or that which has been generally held in tlie Christian church — Atonement or satisfaction of Christ. CHAP. III. DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT, . 4!) Sect. 1. Not irrational — God the righteous Governor of the universe — Honour of his laws to be maintained — Sin the trans- gression of law — Meaning of satisfaction— Acceptance of A Tl CONTENTS. Page tlie Lawgiver, and concurrence of the Substitute in the substitution of Christ — Vicarious punisliment — Why not practised in human judgments — Power of Christ over his own life — Deep malignity of sin, and exceeding kindness and love of God. StTT. 2. Whether there was understood to be a substitution in the heathen sacrifices. 3. Substitution implied in certain sin-offerings in the law of Moses — Day of atonement — Efficacy of the substitution — Nature of the sin-offerings. 4. Three great divisions of the law of Moses — The political and ceremonial law temporary — Ceremonial law emblematical of the Gospel dispensation — Intimated by the prophets — Implied in many passages of the New Testament — Epistle to the Hebrews — Confirmation of the Catholic system from the views of the Apostle Paul — Reasonings of the Socinians. Direct support of the doctrine of the atonement from Scrip- ture— Value annexed to the sufferings of Christ — His sufferings represented as a punishment of in — Effects ascribed to them — Reconciliation — Redfinvption —Forgive- ness of sins— Justification. CHAP. lY. KTERNAL LIFE, 115 Completeness of the Catholic system — Foundation of the hope of eternal life — IMcrits of Christ — Right to eternal life acquired for us by the death of Christ, confirmed by his life. CHAP. V. EXTENT OP THE REMEDY, . 128 Sect. 1. First preliminary point — The Gospel designed to be an uni- versal religion — Law of Moses a local dispensation — True character of the Gospel opened by incidental expressions — Unlimilcd commission given to the Apostles. 2. Second ])rt,';iminary point — Remedy of the Gospel only for those who repent and believe — Speculations respecting the final condition of the wicked — Subject beyond the limits of our faculties. CHAP. YI. PARTICULAR REDEMPTION, . 142 Arguments for Universal and Particular Redemption stated and compared. CONTENTS, Vll CHAP. YII. Page PREDESTINATION, , lol Sect. 1. Soeinians — Contingent events not subjects of infallible fore- knowledge— No predestination of individuals. 2. Arminians — Predestination of individuals dependent on the foreknowledge of their faith and good works, or of their unbelief and impenitence. 3. Calvinists — Entire dependence of the creature on the Crea- tor— Extent of the Divine knowledge — One decree em- bracing all that is to be, means and end — Supralap- sarians — Sublapsarians — Decree of election absolute — Good pleasure of God — Covenant of redemption — Merits of Christ a part of the decree of election — Decree of reprobation — Extent of the remedy determined by the Divine decree. 4. Points of difTerence in the three systems — Difficulties in the Arminian and Calvinistic. CHAP. VIII. APPLICATION OP THE REMEDY, , 177 Production of the character required for enjoying the blessings of the Gospel — Opinions of the Soeinians, Arminians, and Calvin- ists— Grace — Its nature and efficacy. CHAP. IX. ARMINIAN AND CALVINISTIC SYSTEMS COMPARED, 1S7 Sect. 1. Arminian system satisfying upon a general view — Three difficulties under which it labours, stated. 2. Objections to the Calvinistic system reducible to two. 3. Calvinistic system not inconsistent with the nature of man as a free moral agent— Definition of liberty — Efficient and final causes — Both embraced by the plan of Providence— Whence the uncertainty in the operation of motives arises — How removed — Gratia owycy/a— Renovation of the mind — Exhibition of such moral inducements as are fitted to call forth its powers. 4. Calvinistic system not inconsistent with the attributes of God — The ultima ratio of the inequality in the dispens- ation of the gifts, both of Nature and of Grace— Decree of reprobation exerts no influence upon men leading them to sin — Objection resolvable into the question concerning the origin of evil — Philosophical answer — Arminians recur to the same answer — The glory of Gud— Moral evil the object of liis abhorrence. CONTENTS. CHAP. X. Page SrPPORT WHtCH SCRIPTURE GIVES TO THE CALVINISTIC SYSTEM; 224 Sect. 1. All the actions of men represented as comprehended in the great plan of Divine Providence. 2. Predestination ascribed in Scripture to the good pleasure of God — System of those who consider the expressions em- ployed, as respecting only the calling of large societies to the knowledge of the Gospel. 3. Representations given in Scripture of the change of charac- ter produced by Divine Grace. 4. Objections arising from the commands, the counsels, and the exhortations of Scripture. CHAP XI. HISTORY OF CALVINISM^ . . 241 BOOK V. INDEX OF PARTICULAR QUESTIONS ARISING OUT OF OPINIONS CONCERNING THE GOSPEL REMEDY, AND OP MANY OF THE TECHNICAL TERMS OF THEOLOGY. CHAP. I. REGENERATION CONVERSION FAITH, . 262 External and effectual call — Synergistic system — Fanaticism — Calvinistic view of conversion — Faith — Different kinds — Saving faith. CHAP. II. JUSTIFICATION, . . . 272 A Forensic act — Its nature — Church of Rome — First Reformers — Socinians and Arminians — Calvinists — First and second justifi- cation—Justiiicatiou one act of God — Saints under the Old CONTENTS. IX Page Testament — Other individuals not outwardly called — Persever- ance of saints — Assurance of Grace and Salvation — Reflex act of Faith — Witness of the Spirit. CHAP. III. CONNECTION BETWEEN JUSTIFICATION AND SANCTIFICATION^ 282 Good works, fruits of Faith — Apparent contradiction between Paul and James — Solifidians — Antiuomians — Fratres liberi spiritus — Practical Preaching. CHAP. lY. SANCTIFICATION, . . . 291 Sect. 1. First part of sanctification, repentance — Its' nature- Popish doctrine — Late repentance — Precise time of con- version. 2. Second part of sanctification, a new life — Habit of right- eousness— Immutability of the moral law — Christian casu- istry— Counsels of perfection — Merit of good works — Works of supererogation. 3. Imperfection of sanctification — Anabaptists — Mortal and venial sins — Distinction unwarranted — Romans vii — Christian moraUty. CHAP. V. COVENANT OF GRACE^ . . 310 Scriptural temis — Kingdom of Christ — Union of Christ and his disciples — Adoption — Covenant of Grace. Sect. 1. Meaning of hiadya-i — Covenant of worlds — Sinaitic covenant — Abrahamic covenant — New covenant. 2. Mediator of the new covenant — Offices of Christ — Media- tores secundarii of the Church of Rome. 3. Prayer — Encouragements to it in the covenant of grace — Nature of Christ's intercession. 4. Sacraments — Explanation of the term — Signs and seals of the covenant of grace — Seven sacraments of the Church of Rome. CHAP. YI. QUESTIONS CONCERNING BAPTIS3I, . 330 Sect, 1. Prevalence of washings in the religious ceremonies of aU nations — How baptism is a distinguishing rite of Christ- X CONTEXTS. Page ianity — Opinions of the Socinians and Quakers — Immer- sion and sprinkling — Giving a name. Sect. 2. Baptism more than an initiatory rite — Opinions of the Church of Rome, and of tlie Reformed Churches. 3. Infant baptism — View of arguments for it — Godfathers and godmothers — Confirmatiou — Admission for the first time to the Lord's Supper. CHAP. vir. QUESTIONS CONCERNING THE LORd's SUPPER, 3 14 Institution — Correspondence between the Passover and the Lord's Supper — Origin of different opinions respecting it— System of the Church of Rome — Transubstantiation — Of Luther — Consubstan- tiation — Ubiquity — Of Zuinglius - A commemoration — Of Calvin —Spiritual presence of Christ — Time of observing the ordinance. CHAP. YIII. CONDITION OF MEN AFTER DEATH, . 359 Happiness of heaven — Intermediate state— Purgatory Duration of hell torments. BOOK VI. OPINIONS CONCERNING CHURCH GOVERNMENT. CHAP. 1. FOUNDATION OF CHURCH GOVERNMENT, . 3«2 Obligation to observe Ordinances. CHAP. II. OPINIONS RESPECTING THE PERSONS IN WHOM CHURCH GOVERNMENT IS VESTED, 3C 5 Sect. 1. Quakers— Deny necessity and lawfulness of a standing Ministry— Consfqueut disunion and disorder — Their prin- ciples repugnant to reason and Scripture. CONTENTS. XI Page Independents, or Congregational Brethren — Leading prin- ciple— Unauthorized by the examples of the New Testa- ment, and contrary to the spirit of its directions — Implies disunion of the Christian Society. Church of Rome — Papists and Roman Catholics — Gallican Church— Catholics of Great Britain — Unity of the Church —Grounds on which the primacy of the Pope is main- tained— Matthew xvi. 16. — Scriptural and historical view of the Church of Rome — 2 Thess. ii. — Daniel vii. — Rev. xvii. Episcopacy and Presbytery — Principles of the Episcopal form of Government— Of the Presbyterian— Points of agreement and difference — Timothy and Titus — Bisliop and presbyter — Right of ordination — Succession of bislio})S — Presbyterian form of government not a novel invention — Imparity among bishops, of human institu- tion— Opinions of ancient writers upon the equality of bishops and presbyters — First Reformers — Presbyterian parity. CHAP. III. NATURE AND EXTENT OF POWER IMPLIED IN CHURCH GOVERNfllENTj . . . 42^ Not created by the State — Erastianism — A spiritual power — Con- duct of our Lord and his apostles — Anabaptists— Church of Rome — Excommunication — The Lord Jesus Christ the head of the church — Purpose for which he gives power to his ministers — Its limits. CHAP. lY. ARTICLES OF FAITH, . . . 448 Scripture the only rule of faith — Articles of faith — Reasons for fram- ing them — History of confessions of faith — Subscriptions to them. CHAP. V. BITES AND CEREMONIES, . . 464 Conditions of Salvation declared in Scripture — What enactments the church has power to make — Liberty of conscience— Rule of peace and order — Puritans. CONTENTS. CHAP. VI. rage DISCIPLINE, . -tSO Jiuliciiil power of tlie C'liureli warranted— System of the Church of Rome— of Protestants. Index, -IST LECTURES IN DIVINITY BOOK IV OPINIONS CONCERNING THE NATURE, THE EXTENT, AND THE APPLICATION OF THE REMEDY BROUGHT BY THE GOSPEL. Having given a view of the different opinions which have been held concerning the two persons who are revealed in the Gospel, I come now to treat of the remedy which was brought by the one of these persons, and is applied by the other. It appears to nie that the best method in which I can state the most important questions in theology upon this great division of the subject, is by leading you to attend to the opinions which have been held eonceiTiing the Nature — the Extent — and the Application of the remedy. By considering these three points in succession, we shall exhaust the remaining part of the Socinian, together with. the Pelagian and Arminian controversies, and shall thus obtain, MJthout more repetition than is unavoidable upon subjects so closely allied, a complete and connected view of the capital branches of controversial divinity. VOL. II. B i: 2 ] CHAPTER I. CISEASE FOR WIIICPI THE REMEDY IS PROVIDED. The Gospel proceeds upon the supposition that all liave sinned. It assumes the character of the religion of sinners^ and professes to bring a remedy for the moral evil v/hich exists in the world. Our attention is thus called back from the remedy to the disease; for we cannot entertain just apprehensions of the nature of that provision which the Gos})el has made, unless we understand the circumstances which called for that provision; and we may ex- pect that those who have formed different systems with regard to the nature of the remedy, are not of the same opinion with regard to the disease. In one point, however, all sects of Christians agree — that there is much sin in the world. The Socinian does not hesitate to say with the Calvinist, that all have sinned ; and those fanatics who conceived that they them- selves had attained the perfection of virtue, were led, by this self-conceit, to magnify the wickedness of the rest of mankind. That men are sinners is a point concerning which those who respect the authority of Scripture cannot entertain any doubt ; for it is uniformly taught there from the period preceding the flood, when, as we read, " God saw that the \Tickedness of man was great."'- At the appearance of Christianity, the angel gave to the Son of ]Mary the name of Jesus, " for he shall save his people from their sins."t Jesus himself said, " they that are whole need not a physician, but they that are sick ;"X and Paul the apostle of Jesus, in his Epistle to the Romans, builds his whole doctrine upon the position which he proves in the com- mencement, " that both Jews and Gentiles are under sin, and that the whole world is guilty before God."§ But this position does not rest entirely upon the authority of Scripture. It is abundantly established Ijy the experience of all ages; and they who never received the revelation of the Gospel, agree with • Gcn. vi. 5. t Mat. i. 21. + Mat. ix. 12. § Eom. iii. 'J. i DISEASE rOR WHICH THE REIMEUY IS PROVIDED. 6 Christians in acknowled^inp; the fact upon ■which that revelation proceeds. The violence of liuman passions, the inefficacy of all the attempts Avhich have been made since the beginning of legis- lation to restrain them, the secret wickedness "which abounds, the horrors of remorse which rack the minds of some, the self- reproach of which those who are less guilty cannot divest them- selves, and the dissatisfaction with their own attainments which the most virtuous feel — these circumstances conspire in affording the clearest evidence, that men do not act up to the dictates of right reason, but that the conduct of all falls short, in one degree or other, of that standiird which they perceive it to be both their duty and their interest to follow. Men will differ in their opinion of the grossness and the extent of the corruption of manners, according to the opportunities which they have had of observing it — according to the degree of severity in their natural disposi- tion— according to the sentiments and principles which they had imbibed during their education, or which the reflections and habits of advanced life have formed ; but no difference in character or situation can render men wholly insensible to this corruption. Even those who plead upon system for an indul- gence to their own defects, meet Avitli numberless instances where they cannot allow others to plead the same indulgence. The vices of one rank are regarded with contempt or with indignation by another; and the easy, accommodating moralist, who resolves the vices of the age into the progress of society, looks back Avith horror upon the enormities of former times. It is true that the forms of wickedness vary according to the state of society; it is also true that some forms are marked with deeper depravity than others ; and it will not be denied by any scholar, that a concurrence of favourable circumstances has at some periods gone far to mitigate the atrocity of crimes, and to invigorate the exertions of virtue. But it is in the writings of the poets, not of the historians of antiquity, that a golden age is to be found. The authentic records of the civil and political transactions of man, from the earliest times, are full of the effects of his wickedness ; no date is fixed in these records for the first introduction of sin into the world * and all our information with regard to this most important era in chronology is derived from Scripture. SECTION I. It is well known that in the third chapter of the book of Ge- nesis the first act of disobedience is related, and that the history DISEASE FOR WHICH THE of this act is connected with a command and a threatening, vhich had been mentioned in the second chapter. This inte- restingj history demands our particular attention, -when we are beginning to speak of that state of moral evil for which the Gospel brings a remedy ; and, in order to prepare you for the information which it conveys, it may be proper to mention two extremes, which are to be avoided in the interpretation of this chapter. J. Several parts of the history cannot be understood in a literal sense. Thus, it is not to be supposed that the tree of which man was forbid 1 en to eat, had the pov.er which the name seems to imply, and which the serpent suggests, of mak- ing those who ate the fruit of it wise, knowing good and evil ; neither is it to be supposed that the serpent at that time pos- sessed those powers of speech and reason which the narration seems to ascribe to him, or that the plain meaning of these words, " the seed of the woman shall bruise the head of the serpent," expresses the whole punishment of the tempter. Several -nTiters, indeed, who are disposed to turn the Scriptures into ridicule, have stated what they call the absurdity or" the frivolousness of the literal sense, as a reason for rejecting both the narration and the books in which it is contained. But it has been well answered, that the narration bears upon the face of it the marks of that symbolical style Avhich prevailed amongst all nations in early times from the poverty of language, and which, even after it has ceased to be necessary, continues to be used, both because it is ancient and because it is expressive. In this sym- bolical style, the objects of sense are employed to represent" the conceptions of the mind ; actions or things material to represent things spiritual ; and mider words Avhich are true when inter- preted literally, there is couched some more exalted meaning. To the learned it cannot appear surprising, that the book which claims to be the most ancient should adopt a style v.hich occurs in other early productions ; that a transaction which assumes a date next to that of the creation, and the memory of which had probably been preserved amongst the first men by symbols, should be lecorded by the historian of a future age in a lan- guage which referred to these symbols ; and that circumstances might prevent him from attempting to remove the veil which this symbolical language threw over the transaction. If the rules for expounding the symbolical style, which have been investigated by the learned, are applied to the narration in the third chapter of Genesis with the same candour with which they are usually applied to every other subject, the difficulties arising from the literal sense of the words will, in a HK3IEDY IS PROVIDED. .) great measure, vanisli. It will readily be admitted, tliat^ although the tree did not possess any power of making those who ate the fruit of it wise, it might be called the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, because, the prohibition to eat of it being the tiial of man's obedience, it was made known to other beings, by means of this tree., whether he was good or evil, and he himself, in eating of it, learned by sad experience the distinction between good and evil : it will be admitted, that, if an intelli- gent spirit chose for a season to conceal himself under the body of a serpent, the actions of this spitit might, during that time, be ascribed to a serpent ; and that, if IMoses had no commission to explain the rank, the character, and the motives of this spirit, because the state of religious knowledge which the world then possessed rendered it inexpedient for them to receive this com- munication, he could in no other way record the transaction but by retaining the name of the animal under whose form the spirit had appeared ; and, if these things be admitted, it will follow that the words of the sentence, "^ it shall bruise thy head," are the most proper words that could have been used upon the occasion, because, while they apply literally to the animal, they admit easily a higher sense, in which they express the punish- ment of the spirit. 2. But although it be necessary to look beyond the literal sense of the words, in order to perceive the aptness and the significancy of this history, I must warn you against another extreme. Some, with an excess of refinement, have sought to avoid the inconveniences of the literal sense, by considering the third chapter of Genesis as an allegory, not the history of a real transaction, but a moral painting of the violence of appetite, and the gradual introduction of vice in conjunction with the progress of knowledge and the improvements of society. But, however true it may be, that vice arises from the prevalence of appetito over reason, and that men in a civilized state know vices of which barbarous times are ignorant, yet there are two reasons which seem to render it impossible for those who respect the authority of Scripture to admit this as the true interpretation of the third chapter of Genesis. 1. This chapter is part of a con- tinued history. It is inserted between the account of the crea- tion of the first pair and the birth of their tv.-o sons ; and it explains the reason of their being driven out of that place which we had been told in the second chapter had been allotted to them by their Creator. Now, not only is it inconsistent with the gravity of an historian, but it detracts in a high degree fi-om the authority of his writings, that, in the progress of relating 0 DISEASE FOR AVIIICII THE facts SO important, he slioulcl introduce a chapter M-hich, with all the appearance of ])eing a continuation of the history, is only an allegorical representation of the change of manners. 2. The references to this third chapter -svhich are found in the New Testament, are to us uncjuestionahle vouchers of its being a real history. If you look to 2 Cor. xi, 3, you will perceive that the allusion of the apostle implies his conviction of the fiict to which he alludes ; and, if you look to 1 Tim. ii. 13, 14, 15, you will find that what was only implied in the former passage is there expressly asserted. The transgression of Adam is introduced as a fact of the same authority and notoriety as his creation. The occasion of the transgression, viz. deceit — the order of the trans- gression, that the woman, not the man, was deceived — and one part of the punishment of the. transgression, viz., '-'in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children" — these three important circum- stances are mentioned in such a manner by the apostle, that the historical sense of the whole chapter may be considered as having the sanction of his authority. It appears from these remarks that we are sufficiently war- ranted by the rules of sound criticism, in adopting that inter- pretation which lies in the middle between the two extremes ; and the middle interpretation is this, to consider the third chapter of Genesis as the history of a real transaction which took place soon after the creation ; and as a history related after the symbolical manner common in early times, but exhibiting clearly under this manner the following important facts. Adam and Eve, being tempted by the suggestions of an evil spirit who appeared to them under the form of a serpent, transgressed the commandment of their Creator. In consequence of this trans- gression, the ground which God had given them was cursed, sorrow became the portion of their life, and they were sulyected to death, the sanction which God had annexed to his command- ment. Sentence was also pronounced upon the tempter. As he appeared before God in the same shape in which he tempted the woman, the whole of the sentence is applicable to a literal serpent ; and the first part of it. Gen. iii. 14, has been generally understood to imply a degradation of the serpent from the figure which he had, and the life which he led before the temptation, to the state in which we see him. But the second part of the sentence. Gen. iii. 15, although applicable to the antipathy with which the human race regards an odious and dangerous animal, admits also of a higher sense ; and, whatever it might convey to Adam and Eve, is now understood by us to be signifi- cant of that victory Avhich the seed of the woman, ?. e. a per- REMEDY IS PROVIDED. 7 son descended from the woman, was at a future period to gain, through suifering, over the evil spirit, who hud assumed the form of a serpent. This middle interpretation of the third chapter of Genesis, ■which the rules of sound criticism warrant, is very much con- firmed by its being agreeable to the sense of the Jewish Church. Bishop Sherlock, with the ingenuity and ability which distin- guish all his Avritings, has collected the evidence of this point in the third of his discourses upon prophecy, and in a dissertation annexed to them, entitled, " The Sense of the Ancients before Christ upon the Circumstances and Consequences of the Fall." His account of thehistory of that transaction is so sound and clear, that I shall give a short specimen of the manner in which he attempts to prove that what I called the middle interpretation is agreeable to the sense of the Jewish Church. We know that the books of the Apocrypha were Avritten before the days of our Saviour ; and in them we find the following expressions, which are clear evidences that the Jews of those days considered the third chapter of Genesis as the history of a real transaction, and at the same time looked beyond the literal sense. Wisd. ii. 23, 24 — " For God created man to be immortal, and made him to be an image of his own eternity. Neverthe- less, through envy of the devil, came death into the world, and they that do hold of his side do find it." Eccles. xxv. 24 — " Of the woman came the beginning of sin, and through her we all die." Dr Sherlock traces, in the book of Job, which we have reason to believe was written before any of the books of Moses, many delicate allusions to the circumstances mentioned in the third chapter of Genesis, sufficient to shew that the transaction there recorded was known to the author of this book. The words of Zophar, Job xx. 4, 5, 6, have a good moral meaning, according to any interpretation which you can give them. But if you understand by the hypocrite, as the Chaldee paraphrast has done, the tempter or accuser, i. e. the spirit who tempted by deceit, and at the same time recollect the views suggested to Eve and the punishment pronounced upon. Adam, you will find that the significancy and energy of the verses are very much improved. The twenty-sixth chapter of Job is a magnificent description of the works of creation, and it concludes with these words, '' By his Spirit he hath garnished the heavens, his hand hath formed the crooked serpent." If nothing more is meant than the formation of the animal, it appears strange that an exertion of power so much inferior to all the others should be mentioned after them. But if the crooked serpent is employed to mark the spirit who once assumed that form, this expression U DISEASE FOR WHICH THE forms a fit conclusion of the whole description, because It is the most explicit declaration of the sovereignty of God, in opposi- tion to an opinion which early prevailed, that there is in nature an evil principle independent of the good. Dr Sherlock further observes, that, in different places of Isaiah and Micah, the enemies of God are metaphorically styled Leviathan, the crooked serpent, the dragon ; that the Son of God is represented by the Psalmist as treading upon the adder, and his enemies as licking the dust; and that, in one of those figurative descriptions of the new heavens and the new earth, i. e. the blessed change introduced by the dispensation of the Gospel, which occur often in Isaiah, the concluding words are, "And dust shall be the serpent's meat." Isa. Ixv. 25. It will not appear to any person of taste that some of these allusions are of little avail in this argument, because they are expressed in few words ; for it is universally allowed that the shortest incidental reference to an historical fact, by a subse- quent writer, may be of such a kind as to afford a decisive proof of his knowledge of that fact ; and when we add to these allu- sions, what Bishop Sherlock's subject did not lead him to mention, the frequent references to this history Avhich are found in the New Testament, it seems to be a matter beyond doubt that he has given a just account of the sense of the ancient Jewish Church. Thus Paul says, Rom. v. 12, "By one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin." iSatan is styled, in the book of Revelation, xii. 9, " the old serpent which deceiveth the whole world ;" and, John, viii. 44, our Lord calls him a murderer and a liar from the beginning, avdoM-ro/iTonoc arr rjLoyj,c, y.ai -vJ/SLiffrj/u, two names which most fitly express his having brought death upon the first pair by deceit. John says, 1 John, ili. 8, '' The devil sinneth from the beginning ; for this purpose the Son of God was manifested that he might destroy the works of the devil ;" and, Rev. xx. 2, xii. 10, he represents the coming of the kingdom of God, and the power of his Christ, by " that old serpent, the accuser of the brethren, being cast down." Christians are represented as partaking in this triumph ; for as Christ, while he was upon earth, gave his disciples power over all the power of the enemy, and made the spirits subject to them, so the apostle, writing to the Church of Rome, says, Rom. xvi. 20, " And the God of peace shall bruise Satan under your feet shortly ;" and the last chapter of the book of Revelation describes, with the most marked allusion to the third chapter of Genesis, a time when all the effects of his temptation are to disappear. In Genesis, the ground is cursed, and a flaming sword guards the tree of life. In the Revelation, they who REMEDY IS PROVIDED. 9 enter tlirough the gates into the city which is there described, are said to have a right to the tree of life ; the tree grows in the midst of the street, and on either side of the river ; and the leaves of it are for the healing of the nations ; and, it is added, there shall he no more curse. The effects of the curse are exhausted with regard to all Avho enter into the city. Thus the beginning and the end of the Bible lend their authority in sup- port of each other. The transaction recorded in the beginning explains the reason of many expressions which occur in the progress of Scripture ; and the description which forms the conclusion, reflects light upon the opening. Whatever opinion we may entertain of the third chapter of Genesis when we read it singly, it swells in our conceptions as we advance ; and all its meaning and its importance become manifest, when we recognise the features of this early transaction in that magnificent scuie by which the mystery of God shall be finished. SECTION II. I HAVE judged it necessary to unfold thus fully the principles upon which we interpret the account given in Scripture of the introduction of sin. The event thus interpreted is known by the name of the fall ; a word which does not occur in Scripture, but which has probably been borrowed by Christians from Wisdom, X. 1 — " She preserved the first formed father of the world, that was created alone, and brought him out of his fall." " His fall" is expressive of that change upon his mind, his body, and his outward circumstances, Avhich was the consequence of Adam's transgression. Wishing to begin with the simplest view of the subject, I have not hitherto spoken of this event in any other light than as if it had been merely personal. But I have now to engage in those intricate questions that have been agitated concerning the efl'ects which the fall of Adam has produced upon his poste- rity. The opinions with regard to this matter may be reduced to four ; and the order of stating them is dictated by their nature, for they rise above one another in the following gradation. I . The first opinion is that which was published by Pelagius, a Briton, A.D. 410, which was adopted by Socinus in the six- teenth century, and is held by the modern Socinians. It is admitted, even according to this opinion, that Adam, by eating of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, transgressed thu b2 10 DISEASE FOR WHICH THE divine commandment and exposed himself to the displeasure of his Creator. But the consequences of this displeasure are not considered as having impaired the powers of his nature, or as extending to his posterity in such a manner as to do them the smallest liurt. He was a fallible mortal creature by the condi- tion of his being, i. e. he was liable to sin from the moment that he was created, and he would have died whether he had sinned or not. He continued, after the action recorded in Genesis, to he such as he was at his creation ; and all his posterity are born in similar circumstances. Adam was indeed driven from that paradise which had been assigned as his abode, and, by many inconveniences in his situation, was made to feel the effects of his transgression ; but these very inconveniences, while they reminded him that he had transgressed, tended to prevent him from going farther astray ; the labour with which he had to eat liis bread was a salutary discipline, and the recollection of his folly ))ecame a lesson of wisdom. The posterity of Adam, in like manner, are placed in a state of trial ; and, as their minds are as enlightened and as virtuous as his was, their situation is not more unfavourable. Death to them, as to him, is a natural event, arising from the structure of the body, and indicated by many symptoms ; and the shortness of their abode upon earth joins its influence to the common evils of life, in teaching them to a])ply their hearts to wdsdom. If Adam and Eve, by being the first that sinned, had not any examples of vice to entice them, yet neither did they behold any examples of its punish- ment ; whereas, if we are in danger of following the vices of those who went before us, yet we may learn from the history of the world, and from our own observation, to guard against the fatal tendency of the principle of imitation. The amount then of this opinion is, that our first parents, who sinned by eating the forbidden fruit, were not distinguished in any essential respect from those who sin in after ages, and that our condition is not the worse for their sin ; that, as they were to blame for yielding to a temptation which they might have resisted, so all of us, by a proper attention in cultivating our natural powers, may maintain our innocence amidst the temptations with which we are surrounded; and, therefore, that we fall sliort of that which it is in our power to do, if we do not yield a more perfect obedience to the law of God than Adam yielded. There is a simplicity in this system Avhieh appears at first sight to recommend it. It seems to be rational and philoso- phical to say, that human nature is the same now as when it proceeded from the hands of the Creator, and to resolve the REMEDY 13 PROVIDED. 1 1 changes of character which it has exhibited into the effects of the progress of society. But the fact is, that even the ancien* philosophers did not consider this as a satisfying account of many circumstances in the present condition of human nature, and the account falls so very far short of all the views which the Scriptures give upon this subject, and requires such violence to be done to particular passages, that many who are decidedl}' hostile to the Calvinistic system, finding the Pelagian untenable, have had recourse to a second opinion. 2. The second opinion may be called the Arminian, as deriv- ing its origin from Arminius, a di^'ine of the seventeenth century. It holds the middle place between the Socinian and the Calvin- istic systems. It is explained with clearness, and defended with much ability, in a l^atin treatise by Whitby, the commen- tator upon the New Testament, entitled, Tractatus de Iinpnta- tione Peccali Adami, [[Treatise concerning the Imputation of the Sin of Adam,] from which I take the account of it that I am now to give. According to this opinion, although the first man had a body naturally frail and mortal, his life would have been for ever preserved by the bounty of his Creator, had he continued obedi- ent; and the instrument employed by God to preserve h-.s mortal body from decay, was the tree of life. Death was declared to be the penalty of transgression ; and, therefore, a^i soon as he transgressed, he was removed at a distance from tlie tree of life; and his posterity, inheriting his natural mortality, and not having access to the tree of life, are subjected to death. It is therefore said by Paul, '•' By one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin, and so death passed upon all men. la Adam all die. By one man's offence death reigned by one."" These expressions clearly point out death to be the consequence of Adam's transgression, an evil brought upon his posterity i>y his fault; and this the Arminians understand to be the whole meaning of its being said, " Adam begat a son in his own like- ness, after his imngc ;"+ and of Paul's saying, " We have borne the image of the earthly.":}; It is admitted, however, by those who hold the second opinion, that this change upon the condition of mankind, from a life preserved without end to mortality, was most unfavourable to their moral character. The fear of death enfeebles and enslaves the mind ; the pursuit of those things Avliich are necessar}' to support a frail perishing life engrosses and contracts the soul ; • Rom. v. 12, 17. 1 OjV. XV. 22. t Gen. v. 3. Z 1 Cor. XV. A'.i. 12 DISEASE FOR WHICH THE and the desires of sensual pleasure are rendered more eager and ungovernable, by the knowledge that the time of enjoying them soon passes away. Hence arise envying of those who have a larger share of the good things of this life — strife with those who interfere in our enjoyments — impatience under restraint — and sorrow and repining when pleasure is abridged. And to this variety of turbulent passions, the natural fruits of the punishment of Adam's transgression, there are also to be added, all the frctfulncss and disquietude occasioned by the diseases and pains which are inseparable from the condition of a mortal being. In this way the Arminians explain such expressions as these — " By one man's disobedience many were made sinners ;" " all are under sin ;" " behold I was shapen in iniquity,"* i. e. all men, in consequence of Adam's sin, are born in these circum- stances^ under that disposition of events which subjects them to the dominion of passion, and exposes them to so many temptations that it is impossible for any man to maintain his integrity. And hence, they say, arises the necessity of a Saviour, who, restoring to man the immortality which he had forfeited, may be said to have abolished death ; who effectually delivers his followers from that bondage of mind, and that corruption of character, which are connected with the fear of death ; who, by his perfect obedience, obtains pardon for those sins into which they have been betrayed by their condition ; and by his Spirit enables them to overcome the temptations which human nature of itself cannot withstand. According to this opinion, then, the human race has suffered universally, in a very high degree, by the sin of their first pa- rent. At the same time, the manner of their suffering is ana- logous to many circumstances in the ordinary dispensations of Providence ; for we often see children, by the negligence or fault of their parents, placed in situations very unfavourable both to their jirosperity and to their improvement ; and we can trace the profligacy of their character to the defects of their education, to the examples set before them in their youth, and to the multiplied temptations in which, from a want of due at- tention on the part of others, they find themseh'cs early en- tangled. All this is the same in kind with that account of the efftcts of Adam's transgression which the Arminians give ; so that the second opinion is not attended with any difficulties peculiar to the Christian religion ; and did it exhaust the meaning of those passages of Scripture from which our know- ledge of that transaction must be derived, we should be delivered * Ron\ v. 19 ; iii. 0. Tsal. li. 5. REMEDY IS PROVIDED. 13 from some of the most embarrassing questions in theology. But we must not be afraid of following the truth, because it might be easier to stop short before we arrive at it ; and, therefore, it is necessary for me to state, that this second opinion, however plausible, does not appear to give a complete account of all the circumstances which both Scripture and experience direct us to take into view, Avhen we speak of the effects which the sin of Adam produced upon his posterity ; and that the third opinion implies a great deal more. 3. As the third opinion, which forms the foundation of what is called the Calvinistic system, is delivered both in the articles of the Church of England, and in the Confession of Faith of the Church of Scotland, I shall give the amount of it in the words of the two churches. In the sixth chapter of the Confession of Faith it is said, " Our first parents, by their sin, fell from their original righte- ousness and communion with God, and so became dead in sin; the same death in sin, and corrupted nature, are conveyed to all their posterit}^, descending from them by ordinary generation ; and from this original corruption, whereby we are utterly indis- posed, disabled, and made opposite to all good, and wholly inclined to all evil, do proceed all actual transgressions." In like manner, it is said, in the ninth article of the Church of England, "Original sin standeth not in the following or imita- tion of Adam, (as the Pelagians do vainly talk,) but it is the fault or corruption of the nature of every man, that naturally is engendered of the offspring of Adam, whereby man is very far gone from original righteousness, and is of his own nature inclined to evil." This opinion is supported in all the Calvinistic S3'stems of divinity by nearly the same arguments. But in stating the grounds of it, 1 shall take as my principal guide, IMr Edwards, formerly President of the College of New Jersey in America, who has written able treatises upon different branches of the Calvinistic system, and whose defence of the doctrine of original sin contains the fullest and acutest answers that I have seen, to the o1)jections commonly urged against that doctrine. The fundamental fact upon which the third opinion rests, is this, that men, in all countries and in all varieties of situation, are sinners ; by which it is not meant that all men are equally bad, or that every man commits every sin ; but the meaning i^, that the whole history of mankind does not afford an instimce of a perfect freedom from sin, either in any body of people, or even in any one individual. Without looking "back upon the universal prevalence of idolatry, and the enormities with which 14 niSKASE FOR WHICH THE it was accompanied in the lieathen world, even if we form our opinion of the human race from the appearances which it has exhibited in those lands that have been blessed with revelation, we shall find that a great part transgress the laws of God in a high degree, and in various respects ; that all the means employed to prevent or to correct wickedness, prove ineffectual for their amendment ; and that in the obedience of the best, there are such defects as constitute them sinners. But the universal prevalence of sin, in all possible circumstances, and under every measure of advantage, is the decisive proof of a natural propensity to sin; for we have no other method by which to judge of tendency or propensity, than by obser^-ing the same eftect in every change of situation. It is from this kind of observation we say that heavy bodies have a tendency to fall ; that animals have certain instincts ; that individuals of the human race have characteristical propensities. In like manner, the propensity of the whole race to sin is gathered from the uniformity with which the race has sinned. If the effect arose merely from external circumstances, without any natural propensity, it could not take place so steadily ; if the mind had no greater propensity to that which is evil than to that which is good, some circumstances must have occurred, in the infinite variety of events since the beginning of the world, fitted to prevent the appearance of the effect altogether, by exhibiting the human race completely virtuous. But if men have always, in one degree or other, sinned, there must be something in their nature that indisposes them for their duty, which is^'the very thing meant by a corruption of nature. While we thus infer, from the universal practice of sin, that the nature of man is corrupt, we learn from Scripture that this is not the state in which Adam Vv\as created. Solomon gives us the result of all his observations, Eccles, vii. 29, " Lo, this only have I found, that God hath made man upright ; but they have sought out many inventions." The solemnity with which the remark is introduced, and the natural significancy of the words, lead us to consider Solomon as speaking of the very great difterence between the crooked paths which men now pursue, and the state of uprightness in which the first man was made ; and the remark, thus understood, is agreeable to what v,-e may easily_ gather from laying different passages togetlier. Thus, Gen. i. 31, man was made at the time, Avhen " God saw every thing that he had made, and behold it was A'erygood;" and the formation of this part of the divine workmanship is expressed in these peculiar words, Gen. i. 27, " So God created man in his own image, y.ar uzom Qi'rj, in the image of God created he IIK3IEDY IS PKOVIDED. ]j him." The Socinians, indeed, interpret this expression as mean- ing nothing more than dominion ; man, they say, the lord of this lower world, is the image of God, the sovereign of the universe. But the words, as they are placed in Genesis, appear to imply something distinct from the dominion given to man, and antecedent to it; and that they really express the character of his mind, is manifest from the references made to them in the New Testament, where the character, formed by the Spirit of God in all true Christians, is thus described — " The new man, Avhich after God is created in righteousness and true holiness : ■which is reneAved in knowledge after the image of him that created him."'"' Any person -who has studied the Old and New Testaments together, and who has marked the perfect consistency that runs through the -whole language of Scripture, cannot enter- tain a doubt that Paul, who gives these descriptions, understood, by Adam's being created in the image of God, his being created in knowledge, righteousness, and true holiness. But Adam, who, in the day that God created him, was made in the likeness of God, is said, after he had transgressed the commandment of God, to have begotten a son in his own like- ness, after his image. Now this image of Adam, which all his posterity bear, is something very different from the image of God in which he was made ; and it is not expressive merely of mortality, as the Arminians say, but it marks, as the image of God did, a character of mind. This is manifest from the general strain of Scripture ; for the Scriptures not only declare that all have sinned, but they seem to refer the abounding of iniquity to a cause antecedent to education, example, or the operation of particular circumstances ; and in numberless places they represent the nature of man as corrupt. Of this kind are the following : — " The imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth ;" " Behold I was shapen in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me j" " The wicked are estranged from the womb, they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies;" " The heart of the sons of men is full of evil, and mad- ness is in their heart while they live, and after that they go to the dead."t To these are to be joined, from the Old Testament, several very striking expressions in the book of Job, a book regarded as at least of equal antiquity with the books of Moses, and of the more weight in this argument, that the personages introduced into it do not discover any acquaintance with tlie Mosaic dispensation. Of this kind are the following : — " Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean ? Not one ;" " What • Ephes. iv. 24. Colos. ili. 10. t Cen. viii. 21. Pri. 11, 5 ; Iviii. 3. Eeclcs. Ix. 3. K) DISEASE FOB WHTCH THE is man that he should be clean ? and he which is born of a woman that he should be righteous ? Behold he putteth no trust in his saints ; yea, the heavens are not clean in his sight. IIow much more abominable and filthy is man, which drinketh iniquity like water."* In the New Testament, the expression of our Lord-— John, iii. 6 — " That which is born of the flesh is flesh ;" and the words of his apostle, Rom. vii. 18 — " For I kno\v that in me, that is, in my flesh, dvv*elleth no good thing;" and all those pictures of the works of the flesh, which abound in the Epistles, appear to aftbrd evidence that, throughout the New Testament, the natural state of every man is represented as a state of dejn-avity and alienation from God. I have now given a general view of the train of argument which is employed to establish this fact, that human nature is corrupted by the fall of Adam. But, after the fact is established, there remain various questions with regard to the manner of the fact, which have been agitated with much heat, and with very little edification. The Church of Rome consider that universal propensity to evil of uhich we have been speaking, and to which they give the name of concupisccntia, as the natural state of man, i. e. the state in which he was created. This propensity was, in Adam, under the restraint of that superior divine principle which he derived from communion with God ; and in this restraint con- sisted his uprightness. When the superior principle was, in consequence of his transgression, withdrawn from him and his posterity, the propensity remained. But, being the nature of man, it is not in itself sinful, and becomes sin only when it is carried forth into action ; as it is said — James, i. 15 — "Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin." In answer to this system it has been justly argued, that the disorders of the passions are in themselves strong indications of depravity ; that they are opposite to the spiritual and refined morality of the Gospel, which requires purity of heart ; that co?icirpiscerdia, in several places of the New Testament, particularly in the Epistle to the Romans, chap, vii., is spoken of as sin ; and that James means that lust, which is sinful while it dwells in the heart, when it hath conceived, brings forth sinful actions. An opinion diametrically opposite to this system of the Church of Rome, Avas broached in the seventeenth century by Flaccus Illyricus, an obscure divine, that original sin is the ver}^ substance of human nature, a being operating and existing in all men. This opinion is justly regarded as monstrous, even by those who- • Job, xiv, 4; xv. 14, 15, 16. 11E3IKBY IS PROVIDED. J 7 hold the comiption of human nature in its greatest extent ; and it woukl not have found a place in this general view of opinions concerning original sin, if the mention of it did not assist you in apprehending the true system of the Calvinists upon this point. They consider the corruption of human nature, not as a substance, but as a defect or perversion of its qualities, by which they are deprived of their original perfection ; and apply- ing to this corruption various expressions in which the Apostle Paul, in his Epistle to the Ephesians, describes the state of the heathen world before Christianity appeared, they consider the natural state of man as a state in which the understanding is darkened, the heart alienated from the life of God, the affections set upon earthly things, and all the powers of the mind employed in fulfilling the desires of the flesh. This state is called by the apostle "being dead in trespasses and sins " an expression which, when taken in conjunction with the threatening to Adam, "in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die," has suggested what divines call spiritual death. This denotes an estrange- ment from God, the fountain of life, and an inability in man to return to God ; and being considered as extending from Adam through his posterity, it is, in the highest sense, the corruption of the nature of a creature who was made after the image of God. This account of the corruption of human nature does not imply that man has lost the natural capacity of knowing God, or the natural sense of the distinction between right and wrong. The same powers of reason by which he conducts the business of life, or makes discoveries in science, lead him to infer, from the works of creation, the existence and the perfections of the Deity ; and those moral sentiments, upon Avhich all the inter- course of society and the principles of legislation proceed, dictate to him that conduct which, as an individual, he ought to observe. Accordingly, the apostle to the Romans, at the very time he is proving the universal corruption of human nature, says that heathen idolatry was inexcusable, because the invisible things of God may be understood by the things which he hath made ; and, further, that the Gentiles, who have not the law, i. e. any written law, are a law unto themselves.* ]Man, therefore, is not, according to the third opinion, so far degraded by the corruption of his nature, as to cease to be a moral agent. In every situation he appears capable of the sentiment of religion ; in every country, and under every form of society, his heart has glowed with the feelings of private affection and tenderness ; and the history of his exploits has been ennobled by many disin- * Rom. i. ii. 18 DISEASE FOR WHICH THE terested and heroic exertions. But, without any invidious detraction from those amiable dispositions and those splendid actions which constitute the principal charm of the ancient poets and historians, it will occur to you that they were either wholly unconnected with principles of religion, or that they were accompanied with superstition so gross and childish as not in reality to contradict that system which places the corruption of human nature in an estrangement from the true God. Amidst all the offices of private kindness or of public spirit which we have been accustomed to admire, men were Avithout God in the world ; and there does not appear, from the full experiment which was made under the philosophy and government of ancient times, the smallest probability that any improvement of the understanding which they could produce, or any refine- ment of the heart which they could form, Avould have recovered man from what is termed the spiritual death of the soul, so as to bring him back to the fountain of life, and restore that com- munion with God, and that image of God, which are essential to the rectitude of his nature. After ascertaining what is meant, according to the third opinion, by the corruption of human nature, it has been inquired in what manner this corruption is transmitted, how it comes about that the powers of our nature inherit from Adam this defect and perversion. But this is an inquiry in which it is impossible to attain any satisfying conclusion, because it resolves into principles of which we are totally ignorant. We infer, from various appearances, that, besides the body, which is obvious to our senses, and the growth of which may be traced from the time of its conception, every human being has a principle distinct from matter, which we call the soul. But we know not enough of the nature of the soul to form any judgment with regard to the manner of its connection with the body, or the kind of influence which the one exerts over the other. If we say, with some sects of Christians, animam esse ex traduce, that the soul is generated, like the body, by the act of the parents, we seem to approach to materialism. If we say, as the Calvinists generall)^ do, that souls are successively made by the Creator, and joined by his act to those bodies which they are to animate, we seem to form a rational hypothesis. But having never been admitted to these secret councils of the Father of Spirits, Ave find this act of his in many points to us inexplicable. Here are two substances, not only of a different nature, but, according to this hypothesis, of a different origin, most intimately joined. We feel daily the effects of their junction; yet Ave cannot pretend to assign the period Avhen it commenced, the reasons Avhich REMEDY IS PKOVIDED. 29 determined the Creator to join a soul to one body ratlier than to another, or the bond Avhich keeps together that soul and body which he chose to unite. These are questions which reason does not I'esolve, and upon which revelation does not profess to throw any light. They meet us upon many subjects in natural religion, and they recur when we attempt to speculate concerning the manner in which the corruption of human nature is transmitted. But in revelation, as in natural religion, they are questions concerning the manner of the fact, not concerning the tiict itself; and, therefore, if the Scriptures reveal, or if experience assures us, that this corruption is transmitted, the questions which may be started, and which cannot be answered, are of no more weight to shake the evidence of this fact, than questions of the same kind are to shake the evidence of the union of soul and body. We cannot doubt, from our acquaint- ance Avith the government of God, that, if the Creator infuses a soul into a body, either at the time of the conception of the body or at any subsequent period, he acts according to a general course, which is established with Avisdom ; and it appears from our experience to be part of this course, that the likeness of children to their parents extends beyond the features of their body. There are not only constitutional diseases, but constitu- tional vices ; there is a character Avhich often runs through a family for many generations ; and there are numberless instances •where the resemblance cannot be explained by imitation. The same Scriptures from which we infer that a general corruption pervades the posterity of Adam, intimate that it is transmitted by natural generation, that is to say, that the constitution of which we observe many particular instances, extends to this universal fact. But they leave the transmission of this corrup • tion upon the same footing, and in the same darkness, with the propagation of the soul ; and their silence is sufficient to check the speculations of every sober inquirer. This third opinion concerning the effects of the sin of Adam is supported by many passages in Scripture ; it appears to have been the received opinion of the Jewish church ; and some traditions of it having probably reached the heathen philoso- phers, and coming in aid of the conclusions that might be draAvn from universal experience, may have led Socrates to speak of xaxo'; s/jt-f •jr&i', a phrase equivalent to what we call natural cor- ruption ; and Plato to ascribe the causes of our vices to those first principles which Ave inherit from our parents. But there yet remains a fourth opinion upon this subject. 4. It is held by many diAdnes, it is part of the creed of the Church of Scotland, and it seems to be implied in the language 20 DISEASE FOR WHICH THE of the articles of the Church of England, although it is not there directly expressed, that the sin of Adam is imputed to his posterity ; and that, by means of this imputation, all ^Yho are descended from him are guilty before God. The opinion of those who hold the imputation of the sin of Adam, includes the truth of the third opinion ; but they hold something more ; and you will understand in what respect the fourth opinion goes beyond the third, by attending to the meaning of two terms which are of frequent use amongst those who write upon original sin, the mediate and immediate imputation of the sin of Adam. The corruption which we derive from Adam has been styled the mediate imputation of his sin ; it becomes ours only in conse- quence of our connexion with him, but it is truly ours because it infects our nature. Now, those who hold the fourth opinion say, that, besides this corruption of nature, although always in conjunction with it, there is an immediate imputation, by which the sin of Adam is counted in the sight of God as ours. Accordingly, you will find the third and fourth opinion joined in the sixth chapter of our Confession of Faith, as forming together the complete view of the effects of Adam's sin : — " They being the root of all mankind, the guilt of this sin was imputed, and the same death in sin and corrupted nature conveyed to all their posterity, descending from them by ordinary generation." The reasoning upon which this fourth opinion has been grounded is of the following kind. In those transactions which took place soon after the creation, Adam appears as the repre- sentative of the human race. The first blessing, ''• be fruitful and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it," both by the terms in which it is conceived, and by the nature of the thing, was not a personal blessing, but, although addressed to Adam and Eve, conveyed to their posterity, as well as to them- selves, a right to occupy the earth, to rule over the inferior animals, and to employ their service. Had the penalty annexed to disobedience, " in the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die," been executed as instantly as the words might have led Adam to expect, he could not have had any posterity. It was the delaying the execution of this part of the sentence which left time for the appearance of the human race upon earth ; but, in consequence of the sin of their first parents, they come into the world subject to death ; and the calamities in their persons, which mankind continually experience, are the daily execution of the former parts of the sentence pronounced upon Adam. The ground is cursed to them for his sake ; and even if we admit the ingenious theory which Bishop Sherlock has ably supported, that part of the curse upon the ground was remitted REMEDY IS PROVIDED. 21 by tlie blessing pronounced upon Noah after tlie flood, we must acknowledge that the full extent of that curse had been felt by all the inhabitants of the eartb for many generations. Here, then, are unquestionably the effects of the sin of Adam reaching to his posterity ; in other words, it is counted to them in the judgment of God as if it were their own ; so that Adam, in this sin, as well as in the other transactions between the Creator and our first parents, appears not as an individual, but as being Avhat diA-incs call a federal head, who, in the covenant that was made with him, acted for his posterity. These views, suggested by the consequences of the transac- tions before the fall, are considered as implied in an expression, Ephes. ii. 3, i^t/crs/ rsxi/a ooyric; \^hj nature children of wrath ;] and they are very much confirmed by the reasoning of the Apostle Paul, in the Epistle to the Romans, chap. v. The apostle had proved largely, in the beginning of that epistle, the universal sinfulness of mankind. From thence he had proceeded to dis- course of the richness of that grace by which sinners are justified, 2. e. brought into a state of favour and reconciliation ; and in reference to what lie had said of the manner of this justification, he thus expresses himself. Rom. v. 1 1, "^ We joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have received the atonement." At this point he looks back upon the two subjects which he had discussed, and, with the comprehension and rapidity of thought which distinguish the writings of Paul, he brings forward to the view of the Romans a striking similarity betvi'een the two subjects. The similarity is this, that both sin, and the remedy of sin, were introduced through one man. By Jesus we have received the atonement : by one man sin entered into the world. This similarity in two things diametrically opposite was of itself worthy of attention. But the apostle had a particular reason for bringing it forward and dwelling upon it, which we may gather from the preceding part of the epistle. The great dis- tinction of mankind in those times was into Jew and Gentile. Accordingly, the apostle, when he was proving the sinfulness of mankind, found it necessary to shew that the Jews in this 3'espect had no advantage above the Gentiles, and rendered his proposition, in the apprehension of those to whom he wrote, completely universal, by concluding both Jews and Gentiles under sin. But there could not be a more effectual Avay of confirming the universality of this his fundamental proposition, than b}^ recurring to the similarity which he is now going to state. For, in stating this similarity, he draws the attention of his readers from Abraham, the father of the Jewish nation, of whom they boasted^ and through whom they inherited many 22 DISEASE FOR WHICH THE blessings, to a more remote ancestor^ from whom both Jews and Gentiles were descended, and through w hom both inherited the same dismal legacy. In ascending to Adam, the distinction between Jews and Gentiles is lost, and the necessity of a Sa-vdovir is laid in that condition which is common to all mankind. This account of the occasion of introducing the discourse which we are about to consider, explains the meaning of the two Avords, hta to-oto, Avith Avhich the twelfth verse begins. A/a T(j-jTO d)6'7:i» hi' i'joc Kv^cW'Tou Tj a'jjaovia sig rev Kos/jjrj]/ ii6r^.Qi, y.a.i hia rr,g aijbaoTiag 6 ^)a'jaroc, y.ai circ/jg ng r:avrag avlhoj^-ovg 6 ^iavarog dirjy.dsv, i-p w ':Ta-vrig ri'iaDTov. Touro does not refer to any particular word in the preceding verse, but to the whole of Avhat the apos- tle had said in the former part of the epistle : — " This being the vieAV which I have given of the sinfulness of mankind, and of their deliverance, you will perceive that similarity between the tw'o which I am now to state." ' Clg--2o gives notice that the similarity is to be stated ; but the reddition of it, or the other subject similar to that mentioned in the twelfth Averse, is not formally enunciated till the eighteenth. The intervening verses, after the manner of Paul, are filled up Avith illustrations of the first subject, or Avith the mention of points of dissimilitude be- tAveen the tAvo, before the point in which they are similar is clearly expressed. The first three clauses of the tAvelfth verse have already occurred in speaking of the effects of Adam's sin, and they are not attended Avith any peculiar difficult}'. But the last clause of this verse, £^' w 'iru.^ng ■rnj.aorov, admits of three dif- ferent interpretations, and the nature of its connexion Avitli the rest of the verse appears to vary according to the interpretation AA'hich is adopted. It has been rendered, " in Avhom, A'iz. the first man, all sinned" — " unto Avhich, viz. death, all sinned" — " inasmuch as, viz. for this AA'hich is, all sinned." The first does not really express more than may be gathered from the apostle's argument, and therefore the sense is no reason for rejecting it. But it Avill occur to you, that, according to this interpretation, the antecedent, av^jw-ou, is A'ery remote, and that scA^eral mas- culine jvords haA^e intervened. The second refers the relative to the nearest antecedent, ^avaroj, and marks truly the effect or consequence of sin ; but it marks that eftect by an expression harsh and obscure. The third renders sp' cJ in a manner agree- able to the analogy of the Greek language, and the use of this phrase in classical Avriters. But it Avould have been more accu- rate to have rendered Tj/Maerov, " did sin," than " have sinned ;" and if our translation be read Avith this small coirection, " foras- much as, or upon this account Avhich is, all did sin," the last clause of the twelfth verse, in Avhich the apostle is still stating EEBIEDY IS FROVIBED. 23 the first subject, -will appear to be perfectly equivalent to the first clause of the nineteenth verse, -where the same subject is repeated. ^ All were constituted sinners by the act of this one man." The reason of this assertion is given in the thirteenth verse. " For before the law of JMoses was given, sin v/as in the Avorld." I need not refer to the book of Genesis for the sins of that period, which are there related ; for none will be disposed to deny that sin was in the world, i. e. was universally practised, before the children of Israel went out of Egypt : and yet what- ever the actions of men in that period had been, they could not have been counted to them as sins, had there been no law ; since, according to an axiom olten repeated by the, apostle, " where no law is, there is no transgression." But the apostle had clearly proved, in the first and second chapters of the epistle, that men never were left without a law, because '■' the invisible things of God, from the creation of the world, are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made," and " the nations who have not the law, are a law unto themselves." There is a primary universal rule of righteousness written on the heart of man, under Avhicli every man is born, by which every man, al- though he has no other revelation of the divine will, knows that he shall be judged, and every transgression of which is felt to be worthy of death. Had there been no such law, sin could not haA^e been attended with its penal consequence, i. e. death. The word aXXa, in the fourteenth verse, gives notice of an objection which the apostle is aware might occur to his doctrine in the thirteenth, but which he purposely brings forward because it is the strongest confirmation of his capital position, that sin and death entered into the Avorld by one man. The objection is, that sin appeared by its penal effect, death, in the interval between Adam and Moses, even over those who had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression. It is not obvious who are the persons here meant, and different interpretations have been given. It appears plain to me, that the apostle cannot mean, as some say, those Avho had not sinned like Adam, with the punishment of death before their eyes ; because the apostle had expressly said, Rom. i. 32, " that the heathen, who were filled with all unrighteousness, knew the judgment of God, that they who commit such things are worthy of death." Besides,' it is not pertinent to his argument to say here, that any ■who sinned, in the interval between Adam and" Moses, sinned Avithout knowing, as Adam did, that death is the pxinishment of sin. For his argument is this : sin cannot be counted to a person, so as to be punished in him, without a law ; but sin was punished before the law of Moses existed ; the consequence is. 24 VIS'S ABB FOR WHICH THE that there must be some laAv antecedent to the law of Mioses, and more universal — viz., the law of works given to the first parent of mankind, and extending to all his posterity. Every- one that commits sin, therefore, sins after the similitude of Adam's transgression, in this respect, that he sins against the law of his Creator, knowing that he deserves death. But who then are they that have not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, and j^et death reigns over them? They can he none other than infants, the persons of whom this clause is generally understood : that large proportion of the human race who die before their faculties are so far unfolded that they are capable of committing any sin. They die in consequence of the law given to their first parent, by which death is declared to be the punishment of sin, and their dying is a proof that his sin is counted to them as theirs. The mention of this striking fact leads the apostle to style Adam rv-cg rou /Mf/J.ovroc, an image or representation of him that was to come, of Christ, the person by whom the deliverance was to be brought. But he does not formally state the similarity between the two, until he has touched upon the points of dissimilitude. These are stated in the 15th, J6th, and IJth verses; and the amount of them is this : the value of the gift transcends the extent of the forfeit- ure, and the grace manifested in the gift goes far beyond every appearance of severity in the condemnation. I will not arrest your attention upon these points of dissimilitude now, because they will occur more properly when we come to speak of the remedy. From the mention of them, the apostle passes on to state explicitly, in verses 18, 19, the similarity between the method in Avhich sin and death were introduced into the world, and the method of our deliverance. The particles a^a (j-o-j give •notice that he is continuing his discourse, and that he is collect- ing the former parts of it in approaching to his conclusion. The similarity is this: — As by one offence all men are under the condemnation of death, as by the disobedience of one man many were constituted in the sight of God sinners, so by one righteousness all men obtain the justification of life, and by the obedience of one many shall be constituted in the sight of God righteous. The oifence of one is counted to us in such a manner, that we svifferthe punishment of sin, which a just God would not inflict upon us if we were not considered by him as sinners ; the obedience of one is counted to us in such a man- ner, that we who were sinners, are upon account of it justified, i. e. considered as righteous by a just God, and received into his favour. This whole reasoning ,(jf the apostle fciTOurs the notion of an REMEDY IS PROVIDED. 25 imputation of Adam's sin. The phrase indeed does not occur ; but the thing meant by the phrase appears to be the natural meaning of the passage ; and I know no better way in which you can satisfy yourselves that it is the true meaning, than by comparing the interpretation now given with the forced para- phrases to Avhich those are obliged to have recourse who wish to shew that the fourth opinion does not receive any countenance from the authority of Paul. Upon these two grounds — our daily experience that the effects of Adam's sin yet subsist in the Avorld, and the manner in which the apostle reasons, from this fact, that all die — there has been founded that notion which, from the religious education com- monly received in this country, is familiar to your minds, that there was at the beginning of the world a covenant in which Adam acted as the representative of his posterity. It is gene- rally said, in support of this notion, that Adam had every possible advantage for keeping the covenant, and no reasonable temptation to break it, so that human virtue could not have had a fairer trial; that human affairs could not jiroceed unless parents acted for their children, and rulers for their subjects ; and that Ave are accustomed to behold not only many instances in which indi^'iduals suffer for the faults of those who went befoi'e them, but also many kinds of civil contracts, that include posterity in transactions, which, although they had no opportu- nity of giving their consent to them, are considered, in the eye of the law, as theirs. It is further said, that our usages and ideas with regard to such transactions occur often in the Old Testa- ment, Avhere the Almighty condescends to represent that act of sovereignty by which he chose the posterity of Abraham, as a covenant made with their ancestor, and the law given by Moses as a covenant made with the Israelites in the wilderness, not for themselves only, but for their posterity ;* a covenant which both conveyed blessings to the descendants of those with whom it was made, and also laid them under many restraints ; and a covenant constituted in this manner, that succeeding generations endured many calamities, and the Jews at this day are continuing to suffer for the sins of their fathers. It is true, indeed, that we are not warranted to consider this part of the constitution of that covenant which Avas made Avith the Israelites, as in all respects a specimen of the general plan of the divine administration, because this constitution extended only to the temporal affairs of the JcAvish nation. And yet, when Ave are told by that apostle from Avhose writings our " Deut. xxix. 10—15. VOL. 11. C 26 DISEASE FOR WHICH THE knowledge of tlie new dispensation is chiefly derived, that those who have committed no sin suffer death, which entered into the world by the sin of the first Adam, it is impossible for us to avoid concluding, that, as there was a particular constitution for the JeAvish state, in which the iniquities of the fathers were visited upon the children, there may be a universal constitution for the human race, by which the sin of their first parent extends to all his offspring. It is readily admitted that difficulties appear to us to attend this constitution ; but difficulties of the same kind are perpe- tually occurring upon subjects in theology, not peculiar to this system, but nearly the same, in whatever manner we attempt to account for the origin of e-\al: and the same account maybe given of all of them. We see only in part ; but we are not qualified to judge of the ways of God without seeing the whole, because his administration embraces the whole. There may be a depth of wisdom in the constitution of which we are now speaking, that we are unable to penetrate : there may be advan- tages resulting fi-om it to the human race that infinitely coimter- balance the evils to which it gives occasion. That it is not unbecoming the Ruler of the universe, appears with the clearest evidence from hence, that a constitution of the same kind, with regard to some particulars, may be observed in the ordinary course of his providence towards all men, and in the whole history of that people of whom he condescended to appear as the immediate Governor. Although it may appear to you, from what has been said, that we are warranted to employ the notion of a covenant when we speak of the manner in which the sin of Adam is imputed to his posterity, it is proper to warn you that there is a danger of falling into very great improprieties, both in language and in sentiment, by pushing the analogy too far ; and that you must not be surprised if all the explications of this subject appear to you unsatisfactory. When you read that Adam is the root, and that, as in the communication of the juices of a tree, the guilt is necessarily conveyed from the root "to all the branches ; that Adam and his posterity constitute one moral person ; that the whole human race Avas, at the beginning, one mass, acting by its head ; and that all the individuals of that mass consented to its act, because they were in him, from whom they afterwards proceeded— you will probably feel, as I did, that they are repugnant to that distinct agency which enters into our notion of accountable beings, as essential to that character. But you will remember that those who say such things attempt to explain what they do not understand; and you will learn, by their REMEDY IS PROVIDED. 27 fallurej that it is wiser to refrain from such attempts, and to rest in what the Scriptures teach with regard to the imputation of Adam's sin, which may be summed up in a few words. The effects of the sin of Adam reach to his posterity in such a man- ner that they suffer death, which is declared in Scripture to be the wages of sin, as if his sin had been committed by them. The Scriptures, in stating the effects of Adam's sin, make no distinction between that death which his posterity visiljly suffer and that eternal destruction which is often called by the name of death ; and therefore we are not warranted to say that the dissolution of soul and body is the only effect of Adam's sin which extends to his posterity. In what manner the mercy of God Will dispose hereafter of those infants who die in conse- quence of Adam's sin, without having done any evil, the Scrip- tures have not declared ; and it does not become us to say more than is said in the excellent words of our Confession of Faith : '•' Elect infants, dying in infancy, are regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit, Avho worketh when, and where, and how he pleaseth."* With, regard to those that are grown up, the corruption of nature inherited from Adam, in consequence of which they daily commit sins of their own, is joined with the imputation of his sin ; and when we think of their situation, we ought not to allow ourselves, even in imagination, to separate the two. The amount of all that has been said concerning that situation for which the Gospel brings a remedy is this. Those who con- sider the Scriptures as declaring that the whole human race are both guilty and depraved before God, perceive in this picture the absolute necessity of a remedy ; but even those who do not admit the truth of this picture, acknowledge without hesitation that men are sinners. They differ in opinion from the former with regard to the malignity of sin, the manner in which it was introduced into the world, and the nature of that constitution under which the guilt and misery of it are transmitted ; and hence they entertain different apprehensions with regard to the nature and extent of the remedy, and the manner in which it is applied to the soul. But, as the words of the apostle, " All have sinned, and come short of the glory of God," are subscribed by every Christian, the fundamental proposition upon which the Gospel rests is universally assented to : and from this proposition we now proceed to examine the different opinions concerning this remedy. • Confession of Faith, x. 3. 28 OPINIONS CONCERNING THE CHAPTER 11. OPINIONS CONCERNING THE NATURE OF THE REMEDY. As Christians of all denominations admit that men have sinned, they admit also that the Gospel is a remedy for the present state of moral evil. They readily adopt that "faithful say- ing," Avhich the Apostle Paul declares to be " worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners." They adore the love of the Father in sending the Son upon this errand. They profess the warmest gratitude to him "^ who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity." They acknowledge that the greatest benefits are derived to the world by his sufferings ; that we " have redemp- tion through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins ;" and that by what he did and underwent for our sakcs, he is entitled to be honoured as the Saviour, the Deliverer, and the Redeemer of mankind. But under this uniformity in the language which all who receive the Scriptures are constrained to use, there is concealed much diversity of opinion ; and the nature of that remedy which it is the character of the Gospel to have brought, is one of the subjects in their speculations, upon which Christians have departed very far from one another. The opposite systems are supported partly by general reasonings, and partly by passages of Scripture. The general reasonings are by no means of equal weight upon all sides. But it is possible for able men to reason so plausibly in support of any of the opinions which have been held upon this subject, that the mind might remain in suspense, if the general language of Scripture, when fairly interpreted, did not appear decidedly to favour one of the systems : so that the question concerning the nature of the remedy, like those which we lately discussed concerning the character and dignity of the persons revealed in the Gospel, must be ultimately deter- mined by sound Scripture criticism. NATURE OF THE KEMEDY. 29 There are three systems with regard to the nature of the remedy, to which we may he able afterwards to affix more significant names from the leading features by which they are distinguished, but which it may suffice at present to mark by calling them the Socinian, the INIiddle, and the Catholic opinions. By calling the first the Socinian, I do not mean that it was held by Socinus himself, for his opinion Avent a great deal farther ; but it is the opinion held by those who now call themselves Socinians, and it is the simplest system that can be formed with regard to the nature of the remedy. I call the third the Catholic opinion, because it has been generally held in the Christian church, since the days of the apostles, and enters into the creed of almost every established church in Christendom. ^Vhat I call the INIiddle opinion arose in the course of the last century, out of a part of the system of Socinus. It is disavowed by the modern Socinians ; but it has been brought forward by some very able divines both in the Church of England and amongst the Dissenters, as the best method of steering clear of the objec- tions that have been made, either to the Socinian or to the Catholic system. I think it of importance to give a fair and complete exhibition of every one of these three systems; and the order of stating them which appears to be dictated by their nature, is to begin with the Socinian, which is the simplest ; to proceed to the Middle, which professes to be an improvement upon the Socinian ; and to end with the Catholic, which, if it is the truth, will bear the disadvantage arising fi-om the previous exhibition of two systems that are founded upon objections to it, and will approve itself to the understanding, to be agreeable both to reason and to Scripture. SECTION I. The fundamental principle of the Socinian system is this. Pure goodness, or a desire to communicate happiness, is conceived by the Socinians to constitute the whole character of the Deity. All the moral attributes of the divine nature are regarded as only modifications of benevolence ; and it is believed that nothing either exists in God, or forms a part of his government, which may not be resolved into this principle. Infinitely blessed in himself, he could have no reason for creating the human race, but to make them happy. His wisdom discerns the best means 30 OPINIONS CONCERNING THE of communicating happiness ; his power carries these means readil}'- and certainly into effect ; and although the means vary according to circumstances, the benevolent purpose from which they proceed is always the same. He hates sin, because it makes his creatures unhappy ; he forbids it, that his authority may deter them from doing what is hurtful to themselves ; he punishes it, that the experience of suffering may con-vince them of their error. Pie employs various means for their reform- ation ; he bears patiently Avith their obstinacy and heedlessness ; and at what time soever the recollection of his prohibition, the suffering of evil, or any other circumstance, brings back to their duty those who have sinned, that goodness of the Deity which Lad been exercised under the form of long-suffering during their error, becomes compassion and clemency ; he receives his return- ing children into his favour ; and, without regard to any exter- nal circumstance, or any other being, freely forgives their sins. The supreme Ruler of the universe, say the Socinians, in thus freely forgiving all sins, merely upon the repentance of the sinner, does injury to none. He only remits a part of his own right, a debt Avhich his offending creatures have contracted to him. The independent felicity of his nature suffers no diminu- tion from his not exacting all that he might claim ; the glory of his goodness is illustrated by the happiness which the pardon conveys to the penitent ; and in conferring this pardon freely, without any consideration foreign to himself, he sets his creatures an example of generosity in forgiving those offences which they are daily receiving from one another. This fundamental principle of the Socinian opinion, which seems at first sight to flow from the infinite perfection of the divine nature, and to be most honourable to the Creator and Father of all, is supported by numberless passages of Scripture, which magnify the free grace of God in the pardon of transgressors, which invite them to return, which describe the readiness with which they shall be received, and the joy that there is in heaven over a sinner that repenteth. It is supported by the many instances in which we experience the forbearance of God, that long-suffering which spares us amidst repeated provocations, and leads us by unmerited blessings to repentance. It is supported by all those candid and indulgent sentiments which dispose us to forget the offences of persons in whom we discover a change of mind, and particularly by parental affection, which, instead of being worn out by the waywardness and perverseness of children, is impatient to embrace them on the first symptoms of a return to obedience. It can easily be conceived that the arguments of which I have given a short sketch, are capable of receiving NATURE OP THK REMEDY. 31 much embellishment, and that eloquent men, by fixing the attention upon a particular view of the subject, may leave little doubt in the minds of ordinary readers, that a theory concerning the nature of the remedy offered in the Gospel, resting upon this principle as its basis, contains the whole of the truth. When this principle is applied in forming such a theory, it follows obviously from the principle, that the person Avho brought the remedy had nothing to do in order to procure the pardon of those Avho repent. This is freely and purely the effect of the divine goodness. But the circumstances of the world might render it expedient that a declaration of pardon should be made. For, if men have been sinners from the beginning of the world, as the Socinians do not deny, if the religion of the heathen was connected with much superstition — i. e. with a blind, excessive fear of the Deity — and if the Jewish religion appointed a costly burdensome method of approaching the God of Israel, which could not be observed by all the nations of the earth, there seems to be much occasion that a religion, not confined to a particular tribe, but professing to spread itself over the whole world, and appointing a spiritual worship, should declare, in the most unequivocal and solemn manner, that encou- ragement to the penitent which is derived from the essential goodness of God, Now, such declarations are known to abound in the Gospel : and they appear to the Socinians to give the religion of Jesus that importance which every one expects to find in a divine revelation. God appears there in Christ, recon- ciling the world to himself, and repentance and remission of sins are preached in the name of Christ among all nations ; not that Christ did anything to render God propitious : but he is the messenger who publishes the divine grace. His first words were, " Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand ;" his own dis- courses represent God as merciful ; his apostles, after his ascen- sion, preached the forgiveness of sins, saying, '' Repent and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out ;" and his whole religion is a standing declaration of this proposition^ which was always equally true, but the truth of which was not at all times perfectly understood, that " whosoever confesseth and forsaketh his sins shall have mercy." This proposition, say the Socinians, approves itself by intrinsic evidence to a philosophical mind. But, in order to rouse the attention of the multitude, the person employed by God to publish it to the world was rendered respectable in their eyes by many mighty works. The miracles which the power of God enabled the messenger of this grace to perform, were the creden- tials of a divine commission ; and a splendour was thrown around 32 OPINIONS CONCERNING THE liis character by the other purposes which his appearance aceom- jilished. One of these aflditional purposes was his being the instructor of the workl, Avho not only restored, by the declaration which he was commissioned to make, the natural confidence that men ought to have in the goodness of their Creator, but also taught them the Avill of God. As the Socinians do not admit that the first man possessed more knowledge and righteousness than any of his posterity, their principles lead them to deny those remains of the image of God which other Christians trace, to detract very much from the authority of the law of nature^ and to resolve all religious knowledge into the tradition of some primary revela- tion. This tradition could not fail to be obscured and corrupted in the progress of ages ; and as gross ignorance of the duties of men is known to have overspread the earth, it is manifest that there was much need of the perfect teaching of a man whose miracles were both a security that he taught the will of God truly, and a call upon men to listen to him. In this opinion of the usefulness of Christianity;, all who receive it as a divine revel- ation readily agree. But the Socinians, as if desirous to atone by this branch of their encomium upon Christianity for the dis- honour which other parts of their systems are conceived to do to that religion, go far beyond other Christians in magnifying the importance of the Gospel as a method of instruction. They represent its precepts as not only simple, clear, and authoritative, but as inculcating virtues which are neither ex[)licitly taught in the law of Moses, nor deducible from any of its principles ; and they allow the messenger of the grace of God all the honour which can accrue to his character and to his religion from the essential superiority of his precepts. In delivering to a world full of superstition and vice precepts so opposite to their maxims and manners, the messenger of the grace of God encountered much opposition : he provoked the civil and ecclesiastical rulers — he alarmed the evil passions that he endeavoured to restrain — and, after a life marked with uncom- mon difficulties and unmerited persecution, he was put to death by the violence of his enemies. His death is considered by the Socinians as the unavoidable result of the circumstances in which he published his excellent religion ; an event happening without any special appointment of heaven, according to the course of human affairs ; for, having persevered during a life of suffering in bearing witness to the truth, and being incapable of retracting, even in the immediate prospect of death, like other martyrs he sealed his declaration with his blood. The death of Christ, even although regarded merely as a natural event, is full NATURE OF THE REMEDY. 33 of instruction to his followers. The innocence of the illustrious sufferer was made conspicuous by all the circumstances which attended his trial ; the patience, the magnanimity, the piety, and benevolence, which marked the hour of his sufferings, imprint upon those who cherish his memory with affection all the lessons of his religion ; and having taught men the will of God while he lived, he suffered for their benefit, " leaving them an example that they should follow his steps." But the example exhibited in his sufferings, and the testimony which he bore by them to all that he had said during his life, are not the only benefits of the death of Christ which the modern Socinians admit. They say also, that it confirmed the truth of the promises of God ; for his death was necessary in order to his resurrection, and his resurrection not only completes the evidences of his mission, but is the earnest to mankind of life and immortality, that great blessing which he was commissioned to promise. It is this further purpose of the death of Christ which completes the Socinian scheme of Christianity ; and, therefore, in order to render the view which I am now giving a fair exposition of that scheme, it is necessary to state the pecu- liar importance which it affixes to this purpose. Not admitting any forfeiture to have been incurred by the transgression of Adam, the Socinians consider man as mortal, a creature who would have died whether he had sinned or not. Dr Priestley goes farther upon this subject than some of those who adopt his other principles have yet been able to follow him. He holds that the distinction between soul and body is a popular error, derived from heathen philosophy, but contradicted by rea- son and Scripture; that man is a homogeneous being — i. e., that the powers of thought and sensation belong to the brain, as much as gravity and magnetism belong to other arrangements of mat- ter ; and that the whole machine, whose complicated motions had presented the appearance of animal and rational life, is dis- solved at death. To Dr Priestley, therefore, the resurrection promised in the Gospel is the highest possible gift, because, according to his system, it is the restoration of existence. But even those Socinians who do not so far depart from the conclu- sions of sound philosophy as to believe that the phenomena of thought can be explained without supposing an immaterial prin- ciple in man, while they allow that this principle may survive the body, are inclined to compare the state in which it is left after the dissolution of the body, to a kind of sleep, in which all the faculties of the soul continue suspended till the resurrection. Being led, by their system concerning the fall, to infer from the present appearance of death that it is part of the original consti- c2 34 OPINIONS CONCERNING THE tution of nature, and finding no reasoning in favour of a future state amongst those who had not the benefit of revelation so clear and decisive as to satisfy a speculative mind, and no exj^licit promise in the law of JMoses, they consider immortality as a free gift which the Almighty may have bestowed upon those who died in ancient times, but a gift the assurance of which is con- veyed to the human race solely by the religion of Christ. Here, therefore, the Socinians place the great value and importance of the Gospel. Whether man consists of spirit and body united in an inexplicable manner, or whether his whole frame be only an organization of matter more exquisite than any which he beholds, he cannot infer with certainty, from any deductions of his own reason, that he shall survive that event, which, happening in the established com-se of nature, puts an end to all his labours and enjoyments upon earth. But the Gospel brings life and immor- tality to light. While it declares that the God Avho made man is ready to forgive all his wanderings, and to receive him into favour upon his repentance, it promises to reward the obedience and virtues of this short life by raising him from the sleep of death, by restoring to him, at the resurrection, whatever had been his state in the intervening period, all those capacities which death seems to have annihilated, and by introducing him to a life of endless and complete bliss. This promise corresponds with that essential goodness of the Deity from which the declaration of pardon tiows ; but it is infinitely beyond the deserts of a frail, sinful creature ; and, therefore, that it may take possession of the mind of man, that he may rest without hesitation in the certainty of the gift, and that he may derive all the comfort and improvement which the prospect is fitted to administer, it is necessary that every confirm- ation of the promise, every sensible proof which the nature of the case admits, should be given him. Now, this sensible proof is afforded by means of the death of Jesus Christ ; and hence the great advantage Avhich the world derives from that fixct. A man, say the Socinians, not distinguished from his brethren in his origin or in the powers of his nature, having been employed l)y God to teach his will and to declare the promise of pardon and life eternal to those who repent, is exposed, in the execution of this conmiission, to sufferings more severe than those which fall to the lot of ordinary men ; he endures them with patience, and the virtues of his character are illustrated by his sorrows. But, instead of being enabled to surmount them, he is delivered l)y God into the hands of his enemies, that, being put to death by their malice, he might be raised by the poAver of the Creator. In three days he returns from the grave ; and the evidence of NATURE OP THE REMEDY. 3j his resurrection is so remarkably circumstantial^ that there is not, perhaps, says Dr Priestley, any fact in ancient history so perfectly credible according to the established rules of evidence. But the resurrection of the man who promised in the name of God that at the last day all shall rise, is a demonstration in his person that a general resurrection is possible ; it is an assurance from God of the fulfilment of the promise, the most level to the apprehensions of the generality of mankind, and it is connected Avith that glorious reward upon which the Scriptures say this man has already entered. For, whatever may be the state of other men till the general resurrection, we are told that this man has ascended to heaven, and is now invested with supreme dignity and bliss. His recompense is held forth in Scripture as the encouragement and the security to his disciples that they shall in due time receive theirs ; and the encouragement and security are founded upon this circumstance, that he was a man like them, who suffered and died. So speak the apostles ; " if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him."" " Every man in his own order ; Christ the first-fruits ; afterward they that are Christ's."t And our Lord himself said to his apostles, " Ye are they Avhicli have continued Avith me in my tempta- tions ; and I appoint unto you a kingdom as my Father hath appointed unto me."X Socinus and his immediate followers admitted that pow er of Christ in dispensing the recompense of his disciples, which seems to be intimated in the last of these passages, and in such other expressions as these — his giving a crown of life, his granting to sit down with him on his throne, his raising the dead, and his judging the world. But the modern Socinians preserve the consistency of their scheme by giving figurative interpretations of all such phrases, and so resolving the accomplishment of that promise which proceeded from the love of God, purely into his power and will, without the interposition of any other being. Christ may be employed as an instrument of fulfilling the pleasure of the Almighty ; but so may angels, so may virtuous men; and it is not from any inherent power that Christ possesses, but from that example of the truth of the promise which Christians behold in his hav- ing been raised from the dead and set at God's right hand^ that they derive the full assurance of hope. This system of pure Socinianism which I have now deli- neated I shall state in a few sentences, gathered from Dr Priestley's " History of the Doctrine of Atonement." " The gi-eat • 1 Thess. iv. 14. f 1 Cor. xv. 23. t Luke, xxu. 28, 29. 36 OPINIONS CONCERNING TFTE object of the mission and death of Christ, was to give the fullest proof of a state of retribution, in order to supply the strongest niotiA'es to virtue ; and the making an express regard to the doctrine of a resurrection to immortal life the principal sanction of the laws of virtue is an advantage peculiar to Christianity. By this peculiar advantage, the Gospel reforms the world, and remission of sin is consequent on reformation. For, although there are some texts in which the pardon of sin seems to be represented as dispensed in consideration of the sufferings, the merits, the resurrection, the life, or the obedience of Christ, we cannot but conclude^ upon a careful examination, that all these views of it are partial representations, and that, according to the plain, general tenor of Scripture, the pardon of sin is, in reality, always dispensed by the free mercy of God upon account of men's personal virtue, a penitent upright heart, and a reformed exemplary life, without regard to the sufferings or merit of any being whatever." The Socinians endeavour to accommodate to this system all those expressions which Christians have learned from Scripture to apply to the Gospel remedy. The following instances may serve as a specimen of their mode of interpretation. Christ diedfor us — i. e., for our benefit — because we derive much advantage from his death. He is our mediator — because he came from God to us to declare the divine mercy. He saves his people from their sins — because the influence of his precepts and his example, supported by the hope of a future life which he has revealed, leads them from sin to the practice of righteousness. His blood cleanseth us from all sin — because, being shed in confirmation of his doctrine, and as a step to his resurrection, it furnishes the most powerful incentives to virtue ; and we have redemption, through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins — because we are led, by the due consideration of his death and its consequences, to that repentance which, under the merciful constitution of the divine government, always obtains forgiveness. ^ According to this system, then, Jesus Christ is a teacher of righteousness, the messenger of divine grace, the publisher of a future life, the bright example of every virtue, and the most illustrious pattern of its reward. As fiir as these expressions go, he is the Saviour and Redeemer of the world ; but it is not allowed t];at he did anything further to merit this character. His religion is the most perfect system of morality, delivering with the authority of heaven a more jilain, and complete, and spiritual rule of duty than is anywhere else to be found, and exciting men to follow that rule by hopes which no other teacher ■was commissioned to give. It is, in these respects, the most NATURE OF THE REMEDY. 37 effectual lesson of righteousness which ever was addressed to the world ; and in this sense only it is a remedy for the present state of moral evil. This system accords with all the principles held by those who are now called Socinians, and forms part of a great scheme, which, however blameworthy it may be in many respects, has the merit of being consistent. But to Christians who do not hold these principles in their full extent, it appears to labour under insuperable ditficulties. Those who believe in the pre-existence of Jesus cannot con- sider his death as merely a natural event, like the death of any other man ; and they look for some purpose of his dying beyond that of affording, by his resurrection, an example of a dead man brought to life, because Jesus, appearing to them in this respect essentially distinguishedfrom all other men, that he existedbefore he was born, may be also distinguished in this further respect, that he returned to existence after he died. We know that some of the ancient philosophers were accustomed to argue for a future life, from that state of pre-existence which they assigned to the soul ; and the inference is so natural and obvious, if the supposition upon which it proceeds is admitted, that, whether the Arian or the Athanasian system be adopted with regard to the dignity which Jesus had before he was born, no argument, drawn from the death and resurrection of this singular personage, can be a sufficient warrant for ordinary men to expect that they also shall be raised. Those who have a strong apprehension of the evil of sin and of the authority of the divine government, and who observe that, even amongst men, repentance does not always restore a person to the condition in which he was before he sinned, cannot readily admit that a simple declaration of forgiveness to all who return to their duty is consistent with the holiness and majesty of the Ruler of the universe ; more especially as this declaration does not barely remit the punish- ment of transgression, but is connected with a promise of eternal life — a promise which other Christians consider as restoring what had been forfeited by Adam, which the Socinians consider as so peculiar to the Gospel that it gives to man a hope which he never had before, and which all acknowledge to contain a free inestimable gift. There appears to be an expediency in some testimony of the divine displeasure against sin, at the time of declaring that such a gift is to be conferred upon penitents ; and if there are in Scripture many intimations of such a testi- mony, they who are impressed with a sense that it is expedient, will not be disposed to explain them away. Those who form their system of theology upon the language do OPINIONS CONCERNING THE of Scripture do not find themselves warranted to sink Jesus to the office of a messenger of the Divine mercy, when they recol- lect that he is said to have washed us from our sins in his own blood, and to have bought us with a price ; that repentance and remission of sins are uniformly connected with something which he did ; that, according to his command, they were preached by his apostles in his name ; and that they are said to be granted by him. Different systems have been formed for explaining such expressions ; but many Christian writers, who do not pretend to decide which of the systems is true, or whether it is becoming in us to form any system upon the subject at all, consider expressions of this kind as plainly teaching that the interposition of Christ was somehow efficacious in procuring the pardon of sin; and it appears to them that this efficacy, whatever be the nature of it, must go very far beyond the bare declaration of a proposition which was always true, that God is merciful. All these reasons for rejecting the Socinian system are very much confirmed by attending to the descriptions given in Scrip- ture of the honour and power to which Jesus Christ is now exalted. Although the modern Socinians, feeling that these descriptions are inconsistent with their system, have attempted to resolve into mere figures of speech what Socinus himself interpreted literally, any Christian who reads the New Testa- ment, not with a view to reconcile it to his own system, but in order to learn what it contains, cannot entertain a doubt that the person who appeared upon earth in an humble form, the Saviour of men, is now exalted as their Lord ; that all power in heaven and in earth is committed to him ; and that he is ordained of God to be the judge of the quick and the dead. But why is Jesus thus exalted ? Although his being preserved from that sleep of the soul which some Christians have supposed, or his being raised out of the grave from that complete dissolution which Dr Priestley's materialism teaches, may be useful to Christians as a living example of a resurrection, it cannot be said that his being advanced to the government of the universe is necessary to give us assurance of a future life. According to the Socinian system, Ave cannot discern, in the services of this man, any merit beyond that of other messengers of heaven, or even of his own apostles ; and we do not perceive any purpose which is to be attained by his receiving a recompense so in- finitely above his deserts. If the forgiveness of sin and the gift of immortality flow entirely from the mercy of God, without regard to any other being whatever, the security of them does not, in the smallest degree, depend upon the condition of the messenger by whom they were promised ; so that the powers NATURE OF THE REMEDY. 39 which the Scriptures ascribe to that messenger are a mere waste, and his exaltationj unlike any other work of God^ is without meaning. Such are the objections which Christians of different de- scriptions are led, by their principles, to urge against the Socinian system of redemption. Many able and serious men, who felt the force of these objections, could not reconcile their minds to the third system, which they found to be the general faith of the Christian church; and hence has arisen a middle system, which, as it is certainly clear of the objections that have now been stated, appears to some to comprehend the whole doctrine of Scripture upon this subject. SECTION II. The Middle system is founded upon a part of the doctrine of Socinus, which the modern Socinians have thrown out — viz., the power given by God to Jesus Christ after his resurrection. But many additions were made to this article in the course of the last century, and it has been spread out by several writers into a complete and beautiful system. My knowledge of it is derived from an Essay on Redemption, written by an English clergyman, John Balguy, and republished by Dr Thomas Balguy ; from a book entitled " Ben Mordecai's Apology for becoming a Christian," consisting of letters upon the peculiar doctrines of Christianity, written by Mr Taylor, another English clergyman ; and from a volume of sermons published by Dr Price, the celebrated English Dissenter, who, rejecting both the Socinian and the Calvinistic systems, gives to this the name which I have borrowed from him, calling it the Middle system. Availing myself of these sources of information, I shall give a short exposition of the Middle system, which may enable you to form a conception of the manner in which the parts of it are linked together, and of the principles by which it is supported. The fundamental principle of the Middle system is, that, under the government of a righteous God, a distinction ought to be made between innocents and penitents. It is allowed that God, who is accountable to none, may freely forgive the sins of his creatures ; it is allowed that, being infinitely merciful, he has no delight in punishing them ; it is allowed that repentance, without which no sinner can be received, is a commendable dis- position. But, after all these things are granted to the Socinians, 40 OPINIONS CONCERNING THE it is still conceived to be right in itself, that those who have sinned should not feel their situation in every respect the same as if they had uniformly obeyed the commands of their Creator; and it is considered as a lesson which may be useful both to themselves and to other parts of the universe, that the restora- tion of the human race to the divine favour should be marked by some circumstances sufficient to preserve the memory of their tran'jgression. It is observed that, in the course of human aifairs, the effects of the vices of some are often repaired by the virtues of others — repaired not only to society, but to themselves. When they become sensible of their misconduct, they do not always find it possible, by any personal effort, to extricate themselves from all the evils in which they are involved, or to recover that place in society which they had forfeited ; but they are relieved by some generous interposition ; their professions of repentance are accepted at the intercession of a respectable friend, for the sake of something Avhich had been done by another ; and their re-establishment in their former condition, which was not due to themselves, thus becomes a part of the tribute paid by society to that uniform virtue which is felt by all men to be worthy both of confidence and of reward. Upon this principle pro- ceeded the pleading of Appius in his own defence : " Majorum raerita," says Livy, " in rempublicam commemorabat, quo poe- nam deprecaretur."* [^To deprecate punishment to himself, he dwelt on the services of his ancestors to the republic] In like manner Tacitus says, " Plautio mors remittitur ob patrui egregium meritum/'t [^The sentence of death is remitted to Plautius on ac- count of the extraordinary merit of his uncle.] And Cicero, pro- ceeding upon his knowledge and experience of the sentiments of mankind, delivers this general rule, " Oportebit eum, qui sibi ut ignoscatur postulabit — majorum suorum beneficia, si quae exta- bunt, proferre.":]: QHe who pleads for pardon to himself, should bring into notice any good deeds which his ancestors have done.] So we read in the Old Testament that God was merciful to the children of Israel for Abraham's sake ; § that he pardoned their idolatry at the intercession of Moses ;(| and that he accepted the prayer of his servant Job for the three friends, who had not spoken of him the thing that is right.^ These, and other instances of the same kind, in the history of Scriptur ?, according with what we often behold amongst men, and corresponding also with our apprehension of the essential difference between the merit of those who have always obeyed, * Liv. iii. 56. f Tac. Ann. xi. 30. t C'lc. de Inv. ii. 35. § Pa. cv. 42, 43, |1 Exod. xxxii. f Job. xlii. NATURE OF THE REMEDY. 41 and of those who only repent of their sin, are considered in the Middle system as an opening of the great scheme revealed in the Gospel. Jesus Christ, the first horn of every creature, by whom God made the worlds, the purest and the most glorious being that ever proceeded from the Father of all, beheld the miserable con- dition of the human race, the forfeiture which they had incurred by the transgression of Adam, and the multiplied offences which they are daily committing against the majesty of heaven. Prompted by love to the souls of men, he left the bosom of the Father, laid aside the glories of his nature, and became a man of sorrows, that he might extricate from evil those whom he had made. All the scorn and persecution which he received while he went about doing good to men ; all the amazement and agony which his pure spirit sustained amidst the iniquities of those with whom he dwelt ; all the bitter sufferings which marked the end of his life upon earth — .were the voluntary acts of a person who had devoted himself to the accomplishment of a most gra- cious purpose. They were accepted by God, who, not willing that any should perish, had given the Son of his love to be in this manner the deliverer of the human race ; and they were rewarded by the powers conferred upon him after his resurrec- tion. His reward added to the dignity of his character, by placing him at the head of the creation, and rendering the most exalted spirits subject to his dominion. But it was not the prospect of any increase of his personal glory which called forth his exertions. He had no need to be greater or happier than he was before he visited this earth; and he would not appear in a light so truly exalted, had he come here merely with the view of holding a higher place in heaven when he returned thither. The joy set before the Redeemer of the world, for which it is said he endured the cross, the recompense in the prospect of which he left the mansions of bli^s, and drank the bitter cup given him by his Father, is to be gathered from such passages in the New Testament as the following : — John v. 26, 27; vi. 39; xvii. 2. Acts v. 31. Heb. ii. 9, 10; v. 9. The idea which is plainly expressed in some of these pas- sages, and which appears to be implied in all of them, is this : that there was given to the Son of Man, after his sufferings, the power of recovering a lost worldj of removing all the evils which sin had introduced, of raising men from death, which is the punishment of sin, and of bringing those that repent to eternal life. All this is the reward of the services of the Re- deemer; that is, although it redounds to the advantage of the penitents, it is not given to them as what they earn for them- 42 OPINIONS CONCERNING THE selves, but it is given to him as his recompense ; and in this exalted sense are fulfilled the words which the evangelical pro- phet Isaiah introduced into his prediction of the suiferings of the Messiah ; " he shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied ; by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many."* Jesus Christ did see of the travail of his soul, and was satisfied; in other words, he received his reward by justi- fying many> The natural recompense of disinterested exertion, and the purest joy which a benevolent mind can taste, is an enlargement of the power of doing good. Feeble dependent creatures like us are glad to receive, as a reward of the good which we do from love unfeigned, an extension of the sphere of our private enjoyments, and an establishment of our own security. But he who is styled in Scripture the Son of Man, and the brightness of his Father's glory, submitted to suffering purely for this pur- pose, that he might receive from his Father the right of commu- nicating happiness ; and the more complete and irretrievable on the part of man the forfeiture by sin had been, and the more extensive and precious the blessings which the Redeemer is empowered to convey, so much the more exquisite and glorious is his reward. This system derives considerable support from its preserving that striking contrast between the first and the second Adam, which we found the Apostle Paul marking in the fifth chapter of his Epistle to the Romans. ^' As by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one many shall be made righteous." The punishment of Adam is transmitted to those who do not sin after the similitude of his transgression. But the evils which flow from this constitution, meet in the Gospel Avith a remedy perfectly analogous to the disease ; for the reward of Jesus Christ is communicated to those who are very unlike himself ; and, according to the IMiddle system, it is literally by his obedience that many are made righteous. The Middle system is further supported by its exhibiting, in a most pleasing and instructive light, that essential difference between those who have uniformly obeyed God, and those who only repent of their transgressions, which we expect to find under the government of God. That exalted Being, who, in making the worlds, fulfilled the commandment of God, and in whom the Father was always well pleased, by coming to this earth to do the will of God, had an opportunity of displaying, before angels and men, in a degree more eminent than they had * Isaiah, liii. II.. NATURE OF THE REMEDY. 43 ever belield, humility, oljedience, resignation, patience, fortitude, generosity; and tliis transcendent excellence of virtue was crowned vnih a reward the most illustrious which the Father ever bestoAved, and the most delightful to him vipon whom it was conferred — the power of extricating the human race from all the evils which they had incurred by sin, and of restoring to them the gift of immortality which they had forfeited. In this method of saving sinners, there is a continual memorial of the evil of sin, and a lesson to all the intelligent creation of God, that, without some very singular interposition, those who have sinned cannot obtain pardon. For, although the Son of God was connected with the human race from the time that by him God made the worlds, a much closer connection was necessary, in order to their being saved from sin ; and the constitution by which penitents are received into the divine favour, is such as to make them feel a constant and an entire dependence upon their Redeemer. It is by his power that they are delivered from the eifects of their transgression : the accomplishment of their salvation is premial to him, not to them — that is, all that they receive is given them, not upon their own account, but upon account of what he hath done. At the same time, this method of checking the presumption of sinners, is a bright dis- play of divine love. God the Father provides a method for receiving his returning children into his family ; and he rewards the generous exertion of his own Son, by opening the mansions of heaven to those whom his Son shall bring thither. In all the steps of their progress heavenward, they experience the grace of the Redeemer, and daily reap the fruit of his reward ; and when they shall at length enter the city of the living God, their numbers and their felicity will redound to his honour. " These are they," as one of the elders about the throne said to John, in the Revelation, "which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb." " They follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth ;" and the new song that is sung by every creature in heaven has a peculiar significancy when it proceeds from their mouth, " Worthy is the Lamb that was slain, to receive power, and honour, and glory, and blessing." Many of the passages of Scripture, which Christians are accustomed to apply to the remedy brought in the Gospel, receive an interpretation at once more exalted and more natural from those Avho hold the Middle system, than from those who hold the Socinian. According to the ]\Iiddle system, Jesus is said to be the propitiation for our sins, because by his meri- torious obedience he hath procured our reconciliation with God. 44 OPINIONS CONCERNING THE He is said to have given himself an offering and a sacrifice to God for us, because he devoted himself to death in order to accomplish our salvation. He is our mediator, because through him we have access to the Father. He is our advocate, who maketh intercession for us, because all that we ask and all that we receive is for his sake, because nothing is due to us, but all that heaven can bestow is due to the perfection of his obedience; and we are saved by him, because, with the same grace which led him to suffer for our sakes, he imparts, to those who repent, the gifts which he hath received from bis Father, accounting their salvation his reward. A system which gives such views of our dependence upon our Redeemer, follows out those lessons of humility by which the Gospel has for ever excluded the presumption of sinners and the boasting of those who are saved; and it may be regarded as a commentary upon these words of the apostle, " All things are yours, and ye are Christ's, and Christ is God's ;"* and upon the words of our Lord himself, '' To hira that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne."t The JMiddle system, which I have now delineated, has the merit of being beautiful and consistent. As far as it goes, it proceeds, in a great measure, upon the language and the views of the New Testament. It appears to unite, in the pardon of those who repent, the rectitude which becomes the Judge of the universe, with that compassion which we feel ourselves so willing to ascribe to the Deity. It gives penitents all that security for being restored to the divine favour, and for obtain- ing the reward of eternal life, which can arise from the power of their Redeemer ; and it seems so peculiarly calculated to illustrate his glorj--, that, in the affectionate admiration with which it is natural for Christians to regard him, the heart inclines the understanding to receive it as the whole truth. But there are two objections to this system, which, with a great part of the Christian world, are suthcicnt to counterbalance these advantages, so far as to satisfy them, that, although a great part of this system may be true, it is not a complete account of the Gospel remedy. The first objection is, that the ]\riddle system plainly involves in it the Ariau opinion concerning the person of Christ. It presents to our view a being, who, by performing a hard service in the government of God, acquires new powers, and is advanced to a degree of supremacy, and a capacity of conferring happi- * 1 Cor, iii. 22, 23. f Rev. iii. 21. NATURE OF THE RE3IEDY. 45 ness, wlilcli lie did not formerly possess. But tills view of Christ is totally inconsistent with the Athanasian system. Those who believe that Jesus Christ is truly and essentially God, think that they are naturally led, by the manner in which his exaltation is spoken of in Scripture, to consider it as part of the o/xoK),'ho hold it connect the promise and the hope of life everlasting with the obedience of Jesus Christ. The doctrine of the atonement or satisfaction of Christ is not necessarily connected with a belief in his divinity; for this doctrine was ably defended by Dr Clarke, and it is held by many who avow that they do not consider the Son as truly God. But it is impossible for any one Avho believes that Jesus Christ is a mere man, to entertain such an opinion of the value of his sufferings, as to think that they could be a sacrifice for the sins of the world, and a satisfaction to the justice of God. A denial, therefore; of the pre-existence of our Saviour, and a denial of the doctrine of satisfaction, are the two leading features of Soci- nianism, and they necessarily go together ; whereas all, as far as I know, without exception, who believe in the Trinity, and a part of those who consider Jesus as the most exalted creatiu'e of God, embrace that part of the Catholic opinion which Ave are now to state — that is to say, they believe that, as this glorious person could not suffer in the form of God, he was made in the likeness of men^ and dwelt amongst us in the body prepared for him, for this purpose chiefly, that he might suffer for the sins of men ; that the sorrows of his life, the agony of his last hours, and the bitterness of his death, were the punishment due to our transgressions, which it pleased the Father to lay upon him, and which he cheerfully undertook ; and that the sins of those Avho repent and believe are forgiven upon account of this substitution of Jesus Christ in their stead, which is called his vicarious suffering. It is well knoAATi that the general strain of Scripture favours this opinion ; for we meet with numberless expressions of this kind : — " Christ was delivered for our offences ; he suffered for sins, the just for the unjust ; by his stripes we are healed ; he hath made peace by the blood of his cross ; he hath given him- self for us an offering, and a sacrifice of a sweet smelling savour." But it is not by a bare enumeration of such texts, than which there is nothing more easy, that the Catholic opinion is to be established. For those who oppose it do not deny that it appears to be favoured by the language of Scripture. But they maintain that it is liable to so many objections, and in particular is so contrary to the moral attributes of the Deity, that it cannot be true, and that they woidd not believe it even although it were taught in Scripture more plainly than it is : and they say, further, that this opinion, though apparently favoured by Scripture, is not necessarily implied in the langu- age there used ; that the phrases employed by those who hold it —-viz. vindictive justice, vicarious suffering, substitution, and 48 OPINIONS CONCERNING THE NATURE OF THE REMEDY. satisfactioiij are of human invention ; and that the expressions in Scripture which have been conceived to warrant such phrases admit of a milder intei-pretation. This being the manner in which the Catholic opinion is com- bated, those who defend it have to shew, in the first place, that it is not irrational or unjust ; for, if it were, it could not form, as they say it does, the most important article in the Christian revelation ; and, in the second place^ after they have fairly stated and vindicated their opinion, it remains for them to shew that it is unquestionably the doctrine of Scripture, that the views there given of the method of our redemption by the suf- ferings of Christ, correspond with the language which they employ in stating their opinion, and with the principles upon which they rest the vindication of it. I shall follow this natu- ral division of the defence of the doctrine of the atonement ; and I think that I shall thus be able to furnish you with a com- plete view of the kind of argument employed to prove that it is agreeable to reason, and that it is taught by Scriptui-e. C 49 ] CHAPTER III. DOCTRINE OF THE ATONE.MENT. The first thing necessary for those who defend the Catholic opinion respecting the Gospel remedy, is to shew that it may he stated in such a manner as not to appear irrational or unjust. The objections urged against it are of a very formidable kind. Christians avIio hold other systems concerning the Gospel remedy unite Avith the enemies of revelation in misrepresenting this doctrine ; and if you form your notion of it from the accounts commonly given by either of these classes of writers, you will perhaps be disposed to agree with Socinus in thinkings that, whether it be contained in the Scriptures or not, it cannot be true. It has been said that this doctrine represents the Almighty as moved with fury at the insults offered to his Supreme Majesty, as impatient to pour forth his fury upon some l)eing, as indif- ferent whether that being deserves it or not, and as perfectly appeased upon finding an object of vengeance in his own inno- cent Son. It has been said that a doctrine which represents the Almighty as sternly demanding a full equivalent for that which was due to him, and as receiving that equivalent in the suffer- ings of his Son, transfers all the affection and gratitude of the human race, from an inexorable being who did not remit any part of his right to another being who satisfied his claim. It has been said that a translation of guilt is impossible, because guilt is personal, and that a doctrine which represents the inno- cent as punished instead of the guilty, and the guilty as escap- ing by this punishment, contradicts the first principles of justice, subverts all our ideas of a righteous government, and, by hold- ing forth an example of reward and punishment dispensed by heaven, without any regard to the character of those who receive them, does, in fact, encourage men to live as they please. These objections are the more formidable, that they have received no small countenance from the language of many of the most zealous friends of this doctrine. The atonement presents VOL. II. D 50 DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. a subject of speculation most interesting to the great body of the people who are always incapable of metaphysical precision of thought ; it enters into loose and popular harangues delivered by many who are more accustomed to speak than to think ; and the manner of stating it has been too often accommodated to prejudices which are inconsistent with truth and adverse to morality. It is not surprising that in such circumstances the mistakes of the friends of this doctrine have given much advant- age to the misrepresentation of its enemies ; and it is upon this account very necessary for you, the great object of whose study is to acquire just and enlarged apprehensions of the wliole scheme of Christian doctrine, that you may be able to defend that truth which you understand; to beware of forming your notions of this capital article of our faith from the incorrect superficial state- ments of it which may come in your way. Happily for your instruction, the objections to this doctrine have called forth some of the greatest masters of reason in its defence. Grotius, whose comprehensive, vigorous mind was illuminated by an intimate acquaintance with jurisprudence, wrote, in answer to Socinus, a treatise, De Snlisfaclione Christi, which is both a fair exposition and a complete vindication of the doctrine ; and the reply published by Crellius, an adherent of Socinus, was answered, in the end of the seventeenth century, by the learned and able Bishop Stillingfleet, who, in his discourse on the sufferings of Christ, has unfolded and illustrated the lead- ing principles laid down by Grotius, and by applying them to the acute reasonings of Crellius, has shewn how ready a solution they afford of every objection. Dr Clarke, Avith that accuracy of thought and that precision of language which are his charac- teristics, has explained within a short compass, in a sermon upon the nature of the sufferings of Christ, and elsewhere occasionally, the true principles of this doctrine. The general circulation of Dr Clarke's works has rendered these principles familiar to many who have not leisure to study the more elaborate treatises of Grotius and Stillingfleet ; they are now pretty generally under- stood, and you will find them spread out, and applied with much propriety to the form in which some modern writers have brought forward the ancient objections, in two treatises jmblished not many years ago, the one entitled, Jesus Christ the Mediator between God and Man, by Tomkins ; the other. Vicarious Sacri- fice, by Elliot. Availing myself of these helps, I shall now proceed to state that precise notion of the doctrine of the atonement, upon which the reasonableness of it is rested by those who know best how to defend it. This fair statement of the Catholic opinion will DOCTRINE OP THE ATONEMENT, 51 involve in it an answer to the objections whicli I mentioned, and will prepare us for discovering, by a critical examination of various passages of Scripture, the evidence that it is there taught, and the views of it which are there siven. SECTION I. The first principle upon which a fair statement of the doctrine of the atonement proceeds is this, that sin is a violation of law, and that the Almighty, in requiring an atonement in order to the pardon of sin, acts as the supreme lawgiver. So important is this principle, that all the objections to the doctrine proceed upon other views of sin, which, to a certain extent, appear to be just, but which cannot be admitted to be complete without acknowledging that it is impossible to answer the objections. Thus, if you consider sin as merely an insult to the majesty of heaven, God the Father as the person offended by this insult, and that wrath of God of which the Scriptures speak, as something analogous to the emotion of anger excited in our breasts by the petulance of our neighbours^ it would seem, according to the notions which we entertain, more generous to lay aside this Avrath, and to accept of an acknowledgment of the offence, than to demand reparation of the insult ; and it may be thought that the Almighty, in requiring another to suffer before an offence which is personal to himself can be forgiven, discovers a jealousy of his own dignity unbecoming that supreme majesty which is incapable of being tarnished by the conduct of his creatures. In like manner, if, because our Lord sometimes calls trespasses by the name of debts, we stretch the comparison so far as to make it a complete description of sin — if, following out the similitude, we consider the Almighty as a creditor to whom the sinner has contracted a debt, and forgiveness as the remission of that debt which would have been paid by the punishment of the sinner —there does not occur from this description any reason why the Almighty may not as freely forgive the sins of his creatures, as a creditor may remit what is due to himself; and, therefore, when, instead of doing so, he requires payment of the debt by the sufferings of his Son, he appears in the light of a rigorous creditor, who, having insisted upon his own, although the per- son originally bound was not able to pay, receives it from a surety, so that all that grace of God in the forgiveness of sin, wMch the Scriptures ^^extol^ is without meaning, for when the 52 DOCTRINE OF THE AT0NE3IENT. del)t is paid, the liberation of the debtor is a matter of right not of favour. Further, if the intrinsic evil of sin is the only thing attended to, and the sinner be considered in no other light than as a reasonalde creature ^vho has deformed his nature, and -whose character has become odious, it may be thought that repentance is the proper remedy of this evil. ]\Ien, not being qualified to judge of the sincerity of those who profess soitow for their past trespasses, would act unwisely if they pardoned every person who appears to be penitent ; but it is impossible that the Supreme Being can be mistaken in judging of the hearts of men ; and, therefore, if the hatefulness of their conduct be the only cause of alienation, \Ahenever he discerns in them the marks of true reformation, that cause no longer exists, and the sinner, by a real change upon his character, returns into favour with his Creator. According to this vieSv of the mal:ter, all that is neces- sary for dispensing forgiveness is an effectual method of promot- ing reformation ; and the Socinians appear to give a complete account of the Gospel of Christ, when they say that it saves us from our sins by leading us to forsake them. Thus many of the principal objections against the doctrine of atonement remain without an answer, when we confine our notions of sin to these three views of it. But, although it be true that sin is an insult to the majesty of heaven, by which the Supreme Being is offended, that it is in some sense a debt to the Creator, and that it cannot be beheld bj^ a pure spirit without the highest disapprobation, there is a further view of it not directly included under any of these ; and all the objections which I mentioned arise from the stopping short at some one of these views, or at least employing the language peculiar to them, without going on to state this further rie^Y, that sin is a violation of the law given by the Supreme Being. But it is under the character of a lawgiver that the Almighty is to be regarded both in punishing and in forgiving the sins of men ; for, although by creation he is the absolute lord and proprietor of all, who may, without challenge or control, dispose of every part of his works in what manner he pleases, he does not exercise this right of sovereignty in the government of his reasonable creatures ; but he has made known to them certain laws, which express what he would have them to do, and he has annexed to these laws certain sanctions, which declare the rewards of obedience and the consequences of transgression. It is this which constitutes what we call the moral government of God, of which all those actions of the Almighty that respect what is right or wrong in the conduct of his reasonable creatures, form a part, and under which every man feels that he lives; for. DOCTRINE OF THK ATONEMENT. 53 although this moral government be administered with very unequal measures of instruction to the subjects, there is no situation in which the human race have the use of their faculties, without recognising, in one degree or other, the law of their nature ; and whether this knowledge be derived from sentiment, or reason, or tradition, or written revelation, everything which to them is sin may with accuracy be defined the transgression of a law. If the Almighty, then, is to be regarded as a lawgiver, we must endeavour to rise to the most exalted conceptions which we ai-e able to fonn of the plan of his moral government ; and for this purpose it is necessary that we should abstract from every kind of weakness which is incident to the administration of human governments, and lay hold of those principles and maxims which reason and experience teach us to consider as essential to a good government, and without which it does not appear to us that that expression has any meaning. Now, it is the first principle of every good government, that laws are enacted for the benefit of the community. The happi- ness of the whole body depends upon their being observed, for they would not have been enacted, if the ol)servance of them had been a matter of indifference to the public. Hence every person who violates the laws, besides the disrespect which he shews to that authority by which they were enacted, besides the hurt which individuals may sustain by his action, does an injury to the public, because he disturbs that order and security which the laws establish. It is therefore essential to the excellence of government, that there succeeds, immediately after disobedience, what is called guilt, i. e. the desert of punishment, an obligation, to suffer that which the law prescribes. Accordingly, in the code of laws of many northern nations, who were accustomed to estimate all crimes at certain rates, a murderer not only paid a sum to the relations of the deceased, as a compensation for their loss, but he paid a sum to the king for the breach of the peace.* And in all countries, that which is properly called punishment does not mean the putting the rights of a private party, who may have been immediately injured, in the same state in which they were before the trespass was committed, but it means the reparation made to the public by the suffering of the criminal, for the disorder arising from his breach of the laws. The law generally defines what the measure of this suffering shall be, and it is applied to particular cases by criminal judges, who, being only interpreters of the law, have no power to remit * Tac. Genru xiL 54 DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. the punishment. It is true that, in most human goremments, a power is lodged somewhere of granting pardon, because, from the imperfection which necessarily adheres to them, it may often be inexpedient, or even unjust, that a person who has been legally condemned should suffer ; and there are times when the legislature sees meet to pass acts of indemnity. But it is only in very particular circumstances that the safety of the state admits the escape of a criminal ; and in most cases the supreme authority proceeds, not with wrath, but from a calm and fixed, regard to the essential interests of the community, to deter other subjects from violating the laws, by exhibiting to their view punishment as the consequence of transgression. If we apply these maxims and principles, which appear to us implied in the very nature of good government, we shall find it impossible to conceive of God as a lawgiver, without thinking it essential to his character to punish transgression ; and the perfection of his government, far from superseding this exercise of that character, seems to render it the more becoming and the more indispensable. It is not that the wickedness of men can hurt him, that his throne is in any danger of being shaken by their combinations, or that his treasures may be exhausted if his subjects do not pay what they owe him ; it is not from any such, emotion as personal injury excites in our breast ; but it is because his laws are founded in the essential difference between good and evil ; because they are adapted with wisdom and goodness to the circumstances of those to whom they are given, and because the happiness of the whole rational creation depends upon the observance of them — that guilt under the divine govern- ment is followed by punishment. Hence you will observe that what divines call vindictive or punitive justice, far from deserving the opprobrious epithets with which it has been often loaded by hasty and superficial Avriters, belongs to the character of the Huler of the universe, as much as any other attribute of the divine nature ; for, if the goodness of the lawgiver, and the excellence of his laws, do not lead men to observe them, it remains for him to vindicate their authorit}^ and to preserve that order for the sake of which they were given, by employing the punishment of transgression as the mean of preventing the repetition of it. This mean is employed according to the natural course when the sinner bears the punishment of his own transgression ; and he can have no title to complain, although he endures the whole of that suffering which the law prescril)es. In human govern- ments, those who execute the laws seldom have much liberty of choice in the exercise of punitive justice, because they are DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. 55 either merely the interpreters of law, or are accountable to some higher authority ; and even when they feel no such external restraint, their imperfect knowledge of the effects of their own decisions makes it appear to them safer and Aviser to follow the established course. But the Almighty, who has an entire com- prehension of the whole circumstances of every case, may perceive that different manners of exercising punitive justice are equally well calculated to attain the ends of punishment. As he giveth not account of his matters, he cannot be restrained, by any circumstance foreign to himself, from adopting that manner which appears to him best suited to the circumstances of the case ; and even our understandings can discern, in the situation of a guilty world, the strongest reasons for departing from that method of exercising punitive justice which lays the whole punishment of transgression upon the transgressor ; for, if all men are sinners, and if death, which is declared to be the punishment of sin, cannot possibly mean that those who die for their sins shall be happy hereafter, but must include the disso- lution or the future misery of the sinner, it is manifest that the supreme Lawgiver, by exercising punitive justice in this manner, would have put an end to the existence of the human race, or rendered them for ever wretched ; and therefore, if there is any manner by which the ends of punitive justice can be attained in a consistency with the salvation of the hu.man race, it appears to us, judging a priori, that it is becoming the Almighty to adopt this manner, because, in so doing, he acts both as the Lawgiver of the universe and as the Father of mankind. In the substitution of Jesus Christ, according to the Catholic opinion, there is a translation of the guilt of the sinners to him ; by which is not meant that he who was innocent became a sinner, but that what he suffered was upon account of sin. To perceive the reason for adopting this expression, you must carry in your minds a precise notion of the meaning of the three words, sin, guilt, and punishment. Sin is the violation of law ; guilt is the desert of punishment which succeeds this violation ; and punishment is the suffering in consequence of this desert. When you separate suffering from guilt, it ceases to be punishment, and becomes mere calamity or affliction ; and, although the Almighty may be conceived, by his sovereign dominion, to have the right of laying any measure of suffering upon any being, yet suffering, even when inflicted by heaven, unless it is connected with guilt, does not attain the ends of punishment. In order, therefore, that the sufferings of the Son of God might be such as it became the Lawgiver of the universe to inflict, it was necessary that the sufferer, who had no sin of his own, should .">(} IJOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. be considered and declared as taking upon him that obligation to punishment which the human race had incurred by their sins. Then his sufferings became punishment, not indeed deserved l)y sins of his own^ but due to him as bearing the sins of others. Although the sufferijigs of Jesus Christ, in consequence of this translation of guilt, became the punishment of sin, it is plain that they are not tbnt very punishment ^vhich the sins deserved ; and hence it is that they are called by those who hold the Catholic opinion, a satisfaction for the sins of the world. The word satisfaction is known in the Roman law. from which it is borrowed, to denote that method of fulfilling an obligation which may either be admitted or refused. When a person, by the non- j:)eiformance of a contract, has incurred. a penalty, he is entitled to a discharge of the contract, if he pays the penalty ; but if, instead of paying the penalty itself, he offers something in place of it, the person who has a right to demand the penalty, may grant a discharge or not, as he sees meet. If he is satisfied with that Avhieh is offered, he will grant the discharge ; if he is not satisfied, he cannot be called unjust ; he may act wisely in refus- ing it. According to this known meaning of the word, the sufferings of Christ for sin have received the name of a satisfac- tion to the justice of God, because they were not the penalty that had been incurred, but were something accepted by the Lawgiver instead of it. It appears even to us inconsistent with the character of the Law^giver of the universe, and many reasons iji his universal government which we are not qualified to perceive may have rendered it in the highest degree unfit, that an act of indemnity, by which the sins of all that repent and believe are forgiven, should be published to the human race without some awful example of the punishment of transgression. It pleased God to exhibit this example in the sufferings of his own Son. By declaring that the iniquities of the whole world were laid upon this person, he transferred to him the guilt of inankind, and thus shewed them, at the very time when their sins are I'orgiven, that no transgression of his law can escape with impunity. It folloAvs from the account which has been given of a satis- faction for sin, that it cannot procure the pardon of the sinner without the good will of the lawgiver, because it ofl'ers some- thing in place of that which he was entitled to demand ; and for this reason the CVitholic opinion concerning the nature of the remedy brought in the Gospel, far from excluding, will be found, Avhen riglitly understood, to magnify the mercy of the Lawgiver. Those who know best how to defend it never speak of any con- test bet\'\een the justice and the mercy of God, because they DOCTRINE OF THK ATONEMENT. 0/ believe that there is the most perfect harmony amongst all the divine perfections ; they never think so unworthily of God as to conceive that his fury was appeased by the intex'position of Jesus Christ ; but they uniformly represent the scheme of our redemp- tion as originating in the love of God the Father, who both provided and accepted that substitution by which sinners are saved ; and they hold that the forgiveness of sins is free, because, although granted upon that consideration which the Lawgiver saw meet to exact, it was given to those who had no right to expect it, and who could have fulfilled their obligation to punishment only by their destruction or their eternal misery. One essential point in the statement of the Catholic opinion yet remains. Allowing that it became the IJuler of the universe to exhibit the righteousness of his government, by punishing transgression at the time when remission of sins was preached in the Gospel, and that we are thus able to assign the reason of that translation of guilt, without which a guilty Avorld could not be saved, it may still be inquired upon what principle an inno- cent person was made to suffer this punishment; and it is one part of the objections to the Catholic opinion, that no reason of expediency, not even mercy to the human race, can render it right or fit that he who had done no sin should be punished as a sinner. When the Socinians are asked in what manner they can account for the sufferings of Jesus Christ, who, even in the judgment of those who lower his character to that of a peaceable mortal, must be allowed to have suffered more, although he sinned less, than other men, they resolve them into an act of dominion in the Creator, the same kind of sovereignty by which he often sends the heaviest afilictions upon the worthiest persons, and, disposing of his creatures at his pleasure, brings good out of evil. But this is an account to which those Avho hold the Catholic opinion cannot have recourse, because their whole system proceeds upon this principle, that the Almighty is to be considered, in every part of this transaction, not as an absolute proprietor, who does what he will with his own, but as a righteous governor, who derives the reasons of his conduct from the laws which constitute his Government. In the Catholic opinion, therefore, the consent of him who endured the sufferings is conjoined with the act of the Lawgiver, Avho accepted them as a satisfaction for sin ; and it is by the conjunction of these two circumstances, the consent of the sufferer and the acceptance of the Lawgiver, that the sufferings of Christ are essentially distinguished from all other instances of vicarious punishment. The ordinary coui'se of liuraan affairs, and the Scripture his- d2 58 DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. tory, furnisli many cases in which persons suffer for the sins of others. It is part of the positive laws of many states, and of the general constitution of nature, that the effects of transgres- sion extend beyond the lives and fortunes of those by whom it was committed, and that children, subjects, or other con- nections, thus endure a larger portion of evil than it is likely they would have endured had it not been for the sins of those who went before them. You will find cases of this kind brought forward, and very much dwelt upon, even in the most masterly vindications of the Catholic opinion ; but I own it appears to me, that the principles upon which the Catholic opinion is defended, destroy every kind of similarity between these cases and the sufferings of Christ. In all such instances of the exten- sion of punishment, persons suffer for sins of which they are innocent, without their consent, in consequence of a constitu- tion under which they are born, and by a disposition of events which they probably lament ; and their suffering is not sup- posed to have any effect in alleviating the evils incurred by those whose punishment they bear. The constitution by which punishment is thus extended, has a striking similarity to the effects produced by the fall of Adam upon his posterity. It suggests a general analogy, by which the second or the fourth opinion upon that subject may be vindicated ; but it is wholly inapplicable to the sufferings which procured the remedy. Cases which appear to be more similar, are those in which parents or friends, from affection and choice, submit to much labour and pain, by which they are able to mitigate the afflictions of others, and often to extricate them from danger or sorrow. Such cases intimate, as has been Avell said by Bishop Butler, that the general constitution of the universe is merciful, i. e. that evils, however deserved, are not left without remedy ; and the generosity and willingness which bring the remedy, have been considered as suggesting an analogy favourable to that which I call the JMiddle opinion. But all such cases fall very far short of the Catholic opinion ; for, although persons, in certain situations, may con- ceive it to be their duty, or may feel an inclination to make an exertion of benevolence painful to themselves and profitable to others; and although the enthusiasm of affection has sometimes produced a wish to bear for others all that they had deserved — yet, from the nature of the thing, there cannot be in such cases a legal su])stitution. No person is entitled to give a formal consent that his life shall be taken by God in place of that of another, because his own is entirely at the disposal of his Creator ; and it would be presumptuous in him to offer to the Almighty to suffer the punishment of another man's sins, for DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. 59 every man has to bear his own iniquity, and every man may know, that, if God were to enter into judgment with him, this is a load more than sufficient for him. When you turn to human judgments, you will find nothing exactly similar to what is called a satisfaction for sin by the sufferings of Christ ; and a little attention will satisfy you that the dissimilarity is not accidental, but is founded on the nature of things. In those cases in which the penalty incurred by breach of contract, is a sum of money or a prestation that may be performed by any one, he who pays the sura or does the service for the person originally bound undergoes, what may properly be called, vicarious punishment ; but he cannot be said to make satisfaction, because he does the very thing which was required, and the liberation of the pannel becomes, in consequence of such substitution, a matter of right, not of favour. In those cases in which the penalty incurred is a punish- ment that attaches to the person of the pannel — as imprisonment, banishment, stripes, or death — human law does not admit of substitution, because, in all such cases, there cannot be that concurrence of the acceptance of the Lawgiver, and the valid consent of the substitute, without which substitution is illegal. Corporal chastisement, and imprisonment for a limited time, are intended not only as examples to others, but as a method of reforming the vices of the criminal — they are a medicine which must be administered, not to another, but to the patient. Perpetual imprisonment, banishment, and death, are inflicted upon those whom the law considers as incorrigible ; and besides being examples, are intended to prevent the danger of any further harm being done to the community by the persons who are thus punished. But, if another were punished in their stead, the danger would still exist ; at least it is impossible for human government to judge how far the lesson, administered by the punishment of another, Avould correct the vice of those who deserved to have suifered it. There Avas a circumstance in the practice of ancient nations, which may appear to furnish an exception to these remarks ; for it is known that, in the intercourse of states, hostages were often given as a security that a treaty should be fulfilled ; and that, in private causes, persons called av-i-^v^oi pledged their own lives for the lives of those who had been convicted of a capital crime. If the nation did not fulfil the contract, the hostage was put to death ; if the criminal did not appear, the surety was executed. But there are two essential points of dissimilarity between these cases, and the subject of which we are now speaking. The first is, that neither the nation nor the 00 DOCTRINE OF TIIK ATONEMENT. CI Iiiu'iial was liberated by this vicarious suffering. Tlic criminal was aincnaljle to the sentence of the law whenever he was apprehended, although the uvri-^-jy^og had suffered ; and the nation was considered as having broken the treaty, although it had sacrificed its citizen. And tlms in the suii'erings inflicted upon hostages and sureties, there was not that translation of guilt by which the pujiislinient of one person takes away the obligation of another to suffer punishment. But the second point of dissimilarity is still more essential. Supposing it had been understood as a part of the law of nations, that the punish- ment of a hostage cancelled the obligation of a treaty ; suppos- ing it had been part of the criminal jurisprudence of any country, that one subject might be carried forth to execution in place of another, who had been condemned to die — still such substitution Would have been unjust : it might have expressed the sentiments of those times with regard to vicarious punishment, but it could not have reconciled that punishment Avith the eternal law of righteousness, because no man is entitled to consent that his life shall be given in place of the life of another. He has power to dispose of his goods and of his labour, in any Avay that is not contrary to the laws of God or the regulation of the com- munity under whose protection he lives ; but he has not power to dis])ose of his life, which he received from his L'reator, which he is bound to preserve during the pleasure of him who gave it, and of the im])rovement of which he has to render an account. A man, indeed, is often called to expose his life to danger, in the discharge of his duty ; and it is not the part either of a man or of a Christian, to A^alue life so much as, for the sake of preserv- ing it, to decline doing what he ought to do. But that he ni;iy be warranted to make a sacrifice inconsistent with thi- first law of his nature, the law of self-preservation, it should be clearly marked out to him to be his duty, by circumstances not of his choosing. It is true, also, that the first principles of social union give the rulers of the state a right to call forth the subjects in the most hazardous services, because a nation cannot exist unless it be defended by the members. But if, in consequence of this connection with the community, a good citizen should not feel himself at liberty to decline when he is sent as a hostage, and if he should be put to death because the nation from which he came did not fulfil the treaty, the illegality of the substitu- tion would only be transferred from the individual who did his duty in obeying, to the community who took the life of a sub- ject, not to defend the state, but to leave the state at liberty to break its faith. To the avrr^v/^rji of the ancients there was not the apology of a public order. Theirs was a private act. DOCTRIKK Oi THE ATONEMENT. 61 proceeding often, it may be, from the most laudable sentiments, but exceeding the powers given to man, and upon that account invalid. The purpose of this long deduction was to account for what might at first sight appear an objection to the Catholic opinion, that of all the instances commonly alleged as similar, there are none which can properly be called a satisfaction by vicarious punishment ; and the amount of the deduction is this : The imperfect knowledge which every human lawgiver has of the circumstances of the case, disqualifies him from judging how far the ends of punishment may be attained l>y substitution, so that it is Aviser for him to follow the established course of justice, which lays the punishment upon the transgressor : and in capital punishments the law of nature forbids substitution ; be- cause no warmth of affection, and no apprehension of utility, warrant a man voluntarily to sacrifice that life which is the gift of God to him, merely that another who deserved to die might live. For these reasons I said, that, in everything which seems to approach to a substitution amongst men, there is wanting that concurrence of the acceptance of the laAvgiver, and the consent of the substitute, without which substitution is illegal. But these two circumstances meet in the substitution of Christ ; and it is this peculiar concurrence which forms the complete vindi- cation of the Catholic opinion. Jesus Christ was capable of giving his consent to suffer and to die for the sins of men, because he had that power over his life which a mere man cannot have. Death did not come upon him by the condition of his being; but, having existed from all ages in the form of God, he assumed, at a particular season, the fashion of a man, for tliis A'ery cause that he might suffer and die. All the parts of his sufferings were known to him before he visited this world ; he saw the consequences of them, both to mankind and to himself: and, with every circumstance fully iu his view, he said unto his Father, as it is written in the volume of God's book concerning him, " Lo ! I come to do thy will, O God!"* His own words mark most explicitly that he had that power over his life which a mere man has not : " Xo man taketh my life from me, but I lay it do^vn of myself: I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again ;"f and upon this power, peculiar to Jesus, depends the significancy of that expression which his Apostles use concerning him, " he gave himself for us," /'. e. with a valid deliberate consent, he acted in all that he suffered as our substitute. " Hcb. X. 7. t John, x. 18. G2 DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. It aflFords a favourable view of the consistency of the Catholic opinion, that the very same dignity of character which qualified the substitute to give his consent, implies the strongest reasons for the acceptance of the Lawgiver — the other circumstance which must concur in order to render vicarious suffering a satis- faction to justice. The support which the human nature of Jesus received from his divine, enabled him to sustain that wrath which the Lawgiver saw meet to lay upon a person Avho was bearing the sins of the world. The exalted character of the sufferer exhibited to the rational creation the evil and heinous- ness of sin, which the Supreme Lawgiver did not choose to for- give without such a substitution ; and the love of God to the human race, which led him to accept of the sufferings of a sub- stitute, was illustrated in the most striking manner, by his not sparing for such a purpose a person so dear to him as his own Son. These grounds of the reasonableness of the Catholic opinion, which we deduce from the character of the substitute, have no necessary connection with some assertions which occur in many theological books. It has been said that our sins, being com- mitted against the infinite majesty of Heaven, deserve an infinite punishment ; that none but an infinite person could pay an equivalent, and, therefore, that God could not pardon sin with- out the sufferings of his Son. This manner of speaking, which pretends to balance one infinite against another, must be unin- telligible to finite minds ; and as far as it can be understood, it appears to be unjustifiable ; because it ill becomes creatures whose sphere of observation is so narrow, and whose faculties are so weak as ours, to say what God could do or what he could not do. It has also been said that such was the value of the suf- ferings of Christ, that one drop of his blood was sufiicient to wash away the sins of the Avorld. This is a manner of speaking which appears to be both presumptuous and false ; because, under the semblance of magnifying the Redeemer, it ascribes cruelty and injustice to the Father in the measure of suffering which he laid upon his Son. Neither are we warranted to say that the purpose of making an atonement for the sins of men contains the whole account of the sufferings of Christ ; because there may be in this transaction what the Scriptures call a mani- fold wisdom to us unsearchable ; reasons founded upon relations to other parts of the universe, and upon the general plan of the divine government, which we have not at present the capacity of apprehending. It is of great importance to vindicate the Catho- lic opinion from that appearance of presumption which the language of some of its zealous friends has annexed to it. But DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. 63 such language is by no means essential to the statement of this opinion. We do not say what God could have done, or what were all the reasons for his doing what we think the Scriptures tell us he has done ; but we say that, in the revelation which is given of the dignity of Jesus Christ, we discern both that he was capable of giving consent, and that he is such a substitute as it became the Lawgiver to accept. It appears then to follow, from what has been stated, that, when the sins of the penitent are forgiven upon account of the substitution of the suiferings of Christ, the authority of the divine goA^ernment is as completely vindicated as if transgressors had sutJered all the punishment which they deserved ; at the same time, the most tender compassion is displayed to the human race, so that the Supreme Lawgiver appears both merci- ful and just. The harmony with which the divine perfections unite in this scheme is considered, by those who hold the Catho- lic opinion, as a strong internal evidence that it is the true inter- pretation of Scripture. For it has been often said, and it must always be repeated Avhen this subject is discussed, that, had the Gospel been a simple declaration of forgiveness to all that repent, men would have felt that a general act of indemnity, so easily pronounced, was an encouragement to sin ; and, instead of being deeply impressed with the richness of that grace from which it flowed, might have regarded it as an ordinary exertion of divine goodness, of the same rank with those bounties of Providence Avhich are daily communicated. Whereas the preparation, the solemnity, and the expense which, according to the Catholic opinion, attended the pronouncing of this act, both enhance the value and guard against the abuse of it. When we behold the Son of God descending from heaven, that he might bear our sins in his body on the tree, and the forgiveness of sins preached through the name of a crucified Saviour, we read in the charter which conveys our pardon, that there is a deep malignity in sin, and we learn to adore the kindness and love of God which, at such a price, brought us deliverance. All those declarations of the placability of the divine nature, which the Socinians cjuote in support of their system, are thus allowed by the Catho- lic opinion their full force. We say, as they do, that the Lord God is merciful and gracious, and ready to forgive; and, although we contend that pardon is dispensed only upon account of the sufferings of Christ, yet, far from thinking that the love of God is in this way obscured, we hold that this manner of dispensing pardon is the brightest display of the greatness of the divine mercy. But we claim it as the peculiar advantage of the Catholic opinion, thatj according to it, the display of mercy is conjoined G4 DOCiRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. Avith an exliibition of the evil of sin ; and when we advance to other parts of tlie subject, we say, further, that the remedy thus procured is dispensed and applied in a manner wisely calculated to give the most enectual check to those abuses of which so striking an instance of the divine compassion is susceptible. SECTION IL We have seen that, from the nature of the thing, nothing exactly similar to vicarious punishment is to be found in the transactions of men with one another. But, if vicarious punishment is the foundation of the Gospel remedy, that analogy which, from other circumstances, we know to pervade all the dispensations of reli- gion from the beginning of the world, leads us to expect, in the previous intercourse between man and his Creator, some inti- mation of this method of saving sinners. As soon as we turn our attention to this subject, we are struck with the universal use of sacrifice. A worshipper bringing an animal to be slain at the altar of his God, presents an obvious resemblance, which has been eagerly laid hold of by those who defend the doctrine of pardon by substitution; and yet you will find that much discussion and an accurate discrimination are necessary, before any sound and clear argument in favour of that doctrine can be warrantably drawn from this general practice ; for, in the first place, many of the sacrifices of the heathen were merely eucha- risticid expressions of gratitude for blessings received, or festivals in honour of the deity worshipped by the sacrifice, at which he Avas supposed to be present, and in which it was conceived by the vulgar that he partook. Even the votive and propitiatory sacrifices, i. e. those which expressed a wish of the worshipper, and his earnest desire to obtain the favour of the deity, may be considered as only a method of supplication, in which a solemn action accompanied the words that were used ; or as a bribe, by which the worshipper, presenting what was most precious in his own sight, solicited the protection of his god. But, in the second place, although there were sacrifices among the heathen which approached nearer to the notion of a sulisti- tution, it is not certain whether they were of divine or of human original. To some the universality and the nature of the prac- tice taken together, appear to furnish a strong presumption, or even a clear proof, that it was in the beginning commanded by God ; whilst others think, that, by attending to the state of the DOCTRINE f F THE ATONE.MENT. {;5 mind under the influence of religious emotions, and to the early mode of" speaking by action, a reasonable and natural account can be given of the introduction and progress of sacrifice, ■with- out having i-ecourse to the authority of the Creator : and there are many to Avhom it appears a strange method of defending a peculiar doctrine of revelation, to have recourse to a practice Avhich, although it originated in sentiments dictated to all men by particular situations, and might at first be innocent and ex- pressive, is known to have degenerated, in process of time, not merely into a frivolous service, but into cruel and shocking rites. I know few subjects upon which more has been written to less purpose than the origin of sacrifices. The only facts which are certainly known with regard to this subject are the following: — No command to ofler sacrifice is found in the book of Genesis — yet Cain and Abel, the two first sons of Adam, brought offer- ings to the Lord, and the offering of Abel was of the firstlings of his flock ;* Job, who is not supposed to have been acquainted with the books of Moses, oflFered burnt-offerings according to the number of his sons ;t and all the nations of the earth, of whom it is at least doubtful whether their religion was derived from the Mosaic law, introduced sacrifices into the ceremonial of their worship. Now these facts are so few, and they run back into a period of which we know so little, and in which they are so naked of circumstances, that it is possible for men of ingenuity and fancy to give a plausible appearance to any kind of reasoning upon them, and thus to accommodate their opinion of the origin of sacrifices to the general system of their opinions upon other subjects. I should go very far out of my province if I entangled myself in the labyrinth of opinions upon this problematical subject. But there are two points totally independent of any of the particular systems that have been formed concerning it, which it appears to me of much importance for those who defend the Catholic opinion to carry along with them. The one is, that, amidst the multiplicity of heathen sacrifices, there were some in which the people understood that the victim was substituted in place of the offerer, and suff"ered the whole or a part of the punishment which the offerer deserved. I do not inquire into the origin of this kind of sacrifices, because, whatever were the steps by which they were introduced, and whether they were the earliest or the latest sacrifices, it remains equally true that they were known and used by ancient nations, and that this is * Gen, iv. 3, 4, t J"b, i. 5. Ob DOCTRINE OP THE ATONEMENT; a fact of which the classics furnish the most abundant and various evidence. The anger of the gods, excited by some transgression, and signified by prodigies or calamities, was supposed to be averted by sacrifices, which for this reason were called averrunca, i. e. ham divinam averlentia. [[Means of averting the anger of the gods.] This was implied in the action of the worshipper, when he presented such sacrifices, viz. his laying his hands upon the head of the victim while he con- fessed his sins, and uttered the solennia verba ; Qhe form of sacred words;] and the same thing is expressed in these words of Ovid, "banc animara vobis pro melioi'e damns ;"* [[we give this life to you in the stead of a better ;] and of Horace, " mac- tata veniet lenior hostia ;"t [[the Deity will come in a kindlier manner when a victim has been slain \\ and in terms often used by Livy upon such occasions, " pacem exposcere deum."J []To implore peace of the Deity.] As the animal was supposed to bear the anger due to the offerer, it was believed that the more precious the victim, and the more nearly connected with the offerer, the gods would the more certainly be appeased. Hence arose the splendid hecatombs of which we read in Homer ; and hence too the human sacrifices, and the offering of children by their OAvn parents, of which we read amongst many nations. Thus Cajsar says of the Gauls, " pro vita hominum nisi vita horainis reddatur, non posse aliter deorum immortalium numen placari arbitrantur."§ [[They think that the immortal gods can- not be otherwise appeased than by giving the life of a human being for the life of men.[] Justin says of the Carthaginians, *' homines ut victimas iramolabant, et impuberes — aris adniove- bant, pacem deorum sanguine eorum exposcentes."|| [[They sacrificed men as victims, and laid children on the altars, imploring peace from the gods through their blood.] The following lines of Virgil shew that the idea of a victim suffering for the sins of another was familiar to the poet and his country- men. They are put into the mouth of Sinon, who, pretending to have escaped out of the hands of the Greeks, by whom he had been destined for the altar, is brought before Priam. AVc •niilu jam patriam anliquam spes ulla videni'i, Kec dulces natos exoplatumqne piirentem ; Quos illi fors ad poenas ob nostra reposcent Effugkii et culpam hanc mistrurum mode pictbunl.^ • Ovid. Fast, vi, 162. f Hor. Carm. i. If). J Liv. iii. 7. § C»s. De B. G. vi. IC. jl Justiii. Hist, xviii. 6. '^ Virg. Eu. ii. lo'J. DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. 67 [But now what farther hopes for me remain To see my friends or native soil again, ]My tender infants or my careful sire, Whom they returning will to death require. Will perpetrate on them their first design, And take the forfeit of their heads for mine ? Drvden.] No words can mark more significantly the nature and the effect of vicarious sufferinnr, than the heautiful lines in which Juvenal describes the act of the Decii, in devoting themselves to death for their country ; an act which Livy had called p'mcnlum omnis deorum irae* [^An expiation for every cause of anger to the gods.J Plebeiae Deciorum animae, plebeia fuerunt Nomina : pro tolls legionibus hi tamen, et pro Omnibus aii.ri/iis, atque omni plehe Latina, Sufficiunt Dis infernis, Terraeque paren'i : Pluris enim Decii, quam qui servantur ab illis.-f' [From a mean stock the pious Decii came ; Small their estate and vulgar was their name ; Yet such their virtue that their loss alone Then* country's doom, they, by their own, retriev'd, Themselves more worth than all the host they saved. Dryden.] The second point which may be gathered from the heathen sacrifices, independently of any speculation with regard to the origin of sacrifice, is intimately connected Avith the first. It is this : as the practice of substituting a victim to bear the wrath due to the offerer was nearly universal, an idea which could not fail to become so familiar to the minds of all men was every- where expressed, so that in the languages of all nations there are found various words which were significant of this idea, and the meaning of which evaporates if you throw it aside. Every language must be interpreted according to the sentiments and customs of those who used it. Whether these sentiments and customs be founded in nature or in prejudice, is a matter of another consideration : but since the persons amongst whom they prevailed spoke according to their views of things, we speak unintelligibly, or with a design to mislead, if we employ their words without recollecting their ideas; and when we profess to • Liv. Hist. viii. 9. -j- Juven. Sat. viii. 234. 68 1X)CTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. interpret ancient books, we err against the first rules of criticism, if, instead of adopting the interpretation suggested by ancient manners, we attempt to bend the words which occur there to ideas which we may believe to be right, but which we must acknowledge to be new. It is known to every classical scholar, that, in the language of the best Greek writers, ayo; denotes a crime which was to be expiated by a sacrifice ; that ayw^w and ayta^o), which are de- rived from ayo;, denote the act of expiation ; that /ca^a/jw, with many of its derivatives, was also applied to this effect ascribed to sacrifice ; that }Xacc/.o} denotes the method of propitiating the gods by sacrifice ; and that the force of these words, or the end conceived to be obtained by substituting something else in place of the punishment due to the offender, was expressed in Latin, by pio, e.rpio, luslro, purijico, placo, and the like. All these are what we call voces s/gi>atae, i. e. words which, when applied to sacrifice, are appropriated to a particular idea, and they were diffused through ancient languages, by an opinion Avhich Pliny has thus described : " Yetus priscis temporibus opinio obtinuit, februa" (an old Latin word, for which piacidu and p'mmhia came to be afterwards used) " esse omnia, quibus malefactorum conscienti.v purgarentur, delerenturque peccata." [It was an old opinion, that all those things are expiatory offerings, by which the consciences of evil doers are cleansed, and their offences are blotted out.] From the Latin words now mentioned, there have been trans- fused into modern languages, and particularly into ours, several single words and phrases significant of this opinion ; and many of the Greek words passed with the universal language of ancient Greece to the other nations, and particularly to the authors of the Septuagint translationof the Old Testament, and to the writers of the New Testament, in whose works every (sound critic must understand them, unless some notice is given of a different acceptation, according to that which he knows to have been their received sense in the country from which they came. Having gathered these two points from the sacrifices of other nations, we proceed to direct our attention to that people whose history forms a large part of the Scriptures which Christians receive. DOCTRINE OF THE AT0NE31ErNT. 69 SECTION III. It pleased the Almighty to select the posterity of Abraham from tlie surrounding tribes, and out of the son whom he gave that venerable patriarch in his old age, to raise a nation, Avhom, by a succession of wonderful events, he reared and formed for himself, till they were ready to be planted in that land which his promise to Abraham had marked out as their habitation. The whole plan of their civil government, and all their religious institutions, had been prescribed in the intercourse which Moses their leader was permitted to hold with the Almighty during their long pilgrimage from Egypt to that land ; and when they settled there, the minutest parts in the ceremonial of their worship were exactly conformable to the pattern which had been shewn to Moses upon the mount. Now, sacrifice constitutes a very large part of this ceremonial ,* so that, amongst the people of Israel, the question with regard to the origin of sacrifices had no existence ; and every circum- stance relating to the quality of the victims, the purpose and the manner of offering them, was there regulated by the express appointment of Heaven. It cannot be denied by any wlio receive the Scriptures, that the sacrifices prescribed in the law of Moses were of divine institution. But it has been said by many, that, in the multi- plicity of these sacrifices, there was an accommodation to that taste which the people of Israel had acquired during their long residence in Egypt, the ancient nursery of superstition ; and from thence it is insinuated that the JeAvish sacrifices do not afford a sound argument in favour of any particular opinion, AAdth regard to the nature of the Gospel. The observation upon which this inference is meant to be founded, may be true to a certain extent, i. e. we may suppose that the Almighty, who, in all his dealings with his creatures, remembers tbeir infirmities, gave this people such a dispensation of religion as they were qualified to receive ; and, accordingly, we are accustomed to vindicate the acknowledged imperfection of the Mosaic dispen- sation by saying that it was suited to the circumstances of the world in those days. But the slightest attention will satisfy you, that to say the Mosaic ritual was accommodated to the acquired taste of the people, is to assert a proposition which cannot be admitted, without very great limitations. Forty years Avere spent in the journey from E;jypt to Canaan for this declared purpose, tijat the whole generation who had lived in Egypt, 70 DOCTHINE OF THE ATONEMENT. might perish before the people were settled in their new habita- tion. Those whom Joshua led into Canaan were ordered to exterminate the former inhabitants, that they might not be enticed to imitate their idolatry. They were warned against inquiring how these nations had served their gods ; and they were taught to regard many practices which they had left in Egypt, and which they found in the nations around Canaan, as an abomination to the Lord. " The Lord spake unto Moses saying, speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, I am the Lord your God. After the doings of the land of Egypt wherein ye dwelt, shall ye not do ; and after the doings of the land of Canaan whither I bring you, shall ye not do : neither shall ye walk in their ordinances. Ye shall do my judgments, and keep mine ordinances, to walk therein : I am the Lord your God."* Indeed it is impossible to read the books of Moses without feeling that, as the posterity of Abraham were, in the language of the law,t a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a peculiar people, holy unto the Lord, so one great object of their ritual was to preserve them from the surrounding idolatry, by keeping their minds so much occupied with the service Avhich the true God had appointed, as to leave them neither leisure nor inclination to go after other gods. In this view, it must appear not only unworthy of God, but inconsistent with the very end for which the nation was formed, that there should be imported into this ritual from their idolatrous neighbours any practice inconsistent with reason and justice ; and we are entitled to assume it as a principle, that all those directions with regard to sacrifice which are found in the Jewish law, were agreeable to the nature and the perfections of that God by whose authority Moses delivered them to the people. When we apply this principle in examining the Mosaic ritual, we immediately discover that a substitution of the victim for the oiferer, which we had found amongst the sacrifices of all heathen nations, was there consecrated by the express appoint- ment of God. It is not meant that all the Jewish sacrifices implied this substitution. Some, as the feast of tabernacles, were national festivals in commemoration of the blessings by which the God of Israel had distinguished his people ; others, as the offerings of the first-fruits, were an acknowledgment of the returning bounties of Providence ; and many of the peace- ofFerings and freewill-offerings mentioned in the law, were expressions of the devotion and gratitude of individuals, called forth by the particular events of their life.^But in, all bumt- * Levit, xviii. 1—4. -j- Exoc'. xix. 5, G. 1 Tef, ii. 9. DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. J{ offerings there were circumstances strongly expressive of a con- sciousness of guilt in the worshipper ; and many of the burnt- offerings were called trespass and sin-offerings, a name which conesponds with all the ceremonies that attended them, in conveying to us this idea, that the death of the victim was instead of that death which the worshipper deserved. Of every burnt-offering of the herd the law thus speaks : — "If his offering be a burnt-sacrifice of the herd, let him offer a male without blemish. — And he shall put his hand upon the head of the burnt-offering, and it shall be accepted for him to make atone- ment for him."* The making atonement or propitiation has precisely that notion in the law of Moses which the words appear to us to imply, viz. the turning away the wrath of God it so that every burnt-offering of the herd implied an acknowledgment that the worshipper deserved wrath, and was an appointed method of turning it away. In the tres- pass-offerings and sin-offerings, the manner of turning away wrath by the substitution of a victim to bear it, is still more directly expressed ; for it appears from Leviticus iv. v. vi. that the ceremonies to be observed in such offerings consisted of the following parts. The worshipper, being conscious of his sin or his trespass, brought an animal, his own property, to the door of the tabernacle. It was understood by the nature of the animal, by the manner of his bringing it, or by the words which he uttered, that he was not bringing a freewill-offering, a simple expression of gratitude and devotion, but that he was bringing an offering for the sin which he had sinned. He laid his hands upon the head of the animal, and being understood by this action to transfer to it the guilt which he had contracted, he slew it with his own hand, and then delivered it to the priest, who burnt the fat and a part of the animal upon the altar, and who, having employed part of the blood in sprinkling the altar, and in some cases the worshipper, poured all the rest at the bottom of the altar. And thus, says the laAv, "the priest shall make an atonement for him as concerning his sin, and it shall be forgiven him." The most particular directions are given with regard to the manner of disposing of the blood of all sin- offerings, and the Israelites were not permitted to eat any manner of blood ; the reason of both which parts of the law is given in the following words : — " I will set my face against that soul that eateth blood, and will cut him off from among his people ; for the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you upon the altar, to make an atonement for your souls ; • Le^-it. i. 3. f Numb. xvi. 46—48. 72 DOCTKINE OF THE ATONEMENT. fcr it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul."* The force of the reason lies here. As death was the sanction of the commandment given to Adam, so every person who trans- gressed any part of the law of Moses became guilty of death ; for the law spoke on this wise, " the man which doth those things shall live by them ;"t and therefore it followed, that he who did them not was to die in his trespass. Now, in a sin- oifering, the life of an animal was presented instead of that life ■which the sinner had forfeited. To mark this in the most significant manner, all the blood, in which is the life of the animal, was employed in the sacrifice ; and to remind the people that blood made an atonement for their souls, they were not permitted at any time to use it for food. Sin-offerings and trespass-offerings were presented occasion- ally by individuals. But there was one stated day of the year, called the day of atonement, when the sin-offering was pre- sented, with peculiar solemnity, for the whole congregation of Israel.^ Upon that day, the high-priest, having first presented a bullock as a sin-offering for himself and his house, took of the congregation two goats, upon which he cast the lots ,* and the lot determined which of the two should be offered, and Avhich should be sent away alive. There being no individual for whom the first Avas peculiarly offered, the high-priest himself pre- sented and slew it ; and then he took of the blood of both the bullock and the goat, and carried the blood into the holy of holies, the inmost recess of the temple, where stood the mercy- seat, which w^as conceived to be the residence of the God of Israel, and was distinguished by the shechinah or cloud of glory, the visible symbol of the divine presence. Into this holy place no other person ever entered ; and the high-priest only upon the day of atrnement. The blood, which he carried with him, he sprinkled upon the mercy. seat and before the mercy- seat ; and then he came out, and sprinkled it as usual upon the altar. After he had thus, by the blood of the one goat, recon- ciled the holy place and the tabernacle, he laid both his hands upon the head of the other goat, called the scape-goat, and confessed over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions in all their sins, putting them upon the head of the goat, and sent him away thus bearing all their iniquities into the wilderness. AVhat remained of the other goat and of the bulloek w^as carried forth out of the camp, and burnt. While the Slosaic ritual thus clearly presents, in many of its * Lcvit. xvii. 10, 11. "f Gal. iii. 12. Levit. xviii. 5. J Levit. xvi. DOCXniNE OF THE ATONEMENT. 73 sacrifices, A^carious punishments, or an atonement for sin, hy the life of an animal Avhich the proprietor substituted, accord- ing to the appointment of the lawgiver, in place of his own life, it limits the efficacy of this substitution to certain cases marked in the law. These cases appear to me to be three. The first respects what is called in the law uncleanness, which is described in several chapters of Leviticus. It might be con- tracted without any fault by certain diseases, in the discharge of pious offices, by touching a dead body, and in various other ways ; and it had the effect of excluding a person from joining with his countrymen in the services of the temple. If he pre- sumed to approach while the uncleanness continued, he incur- red the penalty of death ; but after purifying himself by sacri- fice offered in a certain manner, he was restored to the privileges of the sanctuary. Tlie second case respects ^vhat may be called sins of ignorance. When a person unwittingly sinned in the holy things of the Lord, or did any of the things forbidden in the law, although he wist it not, he was guilty. But, upon his bringing the sacrifice, prescribed in Leviticus, iv. v.. the priest made an atonement for him concerning his ignorance wherein he erred and wist it not; and it was forgiven him. The third case is mentioned in the beginning of Leviticus, vi. It respects those sins which admit of full restitution being made to the person immediately afi'ected by them : as when a thing is taken away by violence, or fraudulently detained from the right owner. The law ordered the person who had committed such a sin, in the first place, to restore the principal, and to add the fifth part more thereto, as a compensation for the loss or anxiety which the owner had sustained by the want of his property ; and, after he had, by this restitution, put the rights of the private party in the same state in which they were before, the law admitted him, although the sin Avas done with knowledge^ to make an atonement by sacrifice for his trespass against the Lord. " He shall bring his trespass-offering unto the Lord : and the priest shall make an atonement for him before the Lord : and it shall be forgiven him." The effect of sacrifice did not reach to any sin not compre- hended under one of these three cases. Thus it is said in general, Numb. xv. 30, 31, " The soul that doeth ought pre- sumptuously, because he hath despised the Avord of the Lord, and hath ])roken his commandment, that soul shall utterly be cut oft", his iniquity shall be upon him." And this general expression of " doing ought presumptuously" is particularly applied to tAVO kinds of sins : ^/irst, to such sins as blasphemy and idolatry, Avhich indicated a contempt of the God of Israel ; A'OL. II. E 74 DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. secondly^ to such sins as adultery and murder, \vhlch admit of no restitution to the injured person. Neither kind could he atoned for b}"- any sin-offering, hut were punished -with death. Accordingly, David, -who had been guilty of both adultery and murder, does not propose to bring any sin-offering, but speaks of a broken heart, as the only sacrifice which, in such a case, could be presented.* Of murder it is said, " Blood it dcfileth the land ; and the land cannot be cleansed of the blood that is shed therein^ but by the blood of him that shed it."t As it sometimes happened, horever, that the murderer could not be foimd, the land was permitted to expiate the defilement which it had contracted, by a sin-offering, and the murderer was con- ceived to carry the guilt with him. The detail which I have now given appeared to me necessary, in order to convey to your minds the true notion of the sin- offerings under the law of Moses. They are not to be regarded merely as emblematical of holiness ; for, although they certainly had a moral import, of the same kind as that which is often inculcated in the Old Testament by such expressions as these, " circumcising the heart, washing the lieait from Avickedness, he that hath clean hands," yei the words of the law by which the sin-offerings are appointed imply a great deal more than the emblematical lesson of holiness, Avhich may be drawn from other parts of the ritual. Neither are they to be regarded merely as memorials of the placability of God towards those who had sinned; for had this been their only use, they would not have failed in the case of those heinous sins where the fears of con- science rendered such memorials the most necessary. But they are to be regarded as part of a constitution given by God to a particular nation ; a constitution which, for wise purposes, ap- pointed a variety of observances, which declared that whosoever continued not in all things written in the book of the law to do them, was accursed and guilty of death ; but which admitted in certain cases of relaxation of the punishment threatened, upon the substitution of the life of a victim shtin by the offender, and delivered by him to the priest to be offered to the Lord. God dwelt amongst this people upon a mercy-seat, towards which all their worship was directed. But this mercy-seat was approached only by the high-priest, and never by him without blood, which ]iad been shed as an atonement for the sins of the people. The method of dispensing pardon, in the cases and to the extent in which it was dispensed amongthis people, was by vicarious suffer- ing ; and the lawgiver, by appointing this method, gave, at the * Tsahii; li. 17. t NuKb. xx.w. S3. DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. *Jo very time when he appeared merciful, an awful display of thfe purity of his nature and tlie authority of his laws. This example of vicarious punishment, which we have found in the Old Testament, is a sufficient answer to many of the ob- jections against the Catholic opinion ; because Avhatever may have been the origin of expiatory victims amongst the heathen, the sin-offerings of the law, being part of a ritual which every Christian believes to be of divine institution, constitute an ana- logy in favour of the substitution of Christ, furnished by the express appointment of God. But this part of the Mosaic ritual is much more than an example, under the government of God, of somewhat strictly analogous to the substitution of Christ ; for when it is considered with all the circumstances which belong to it, and all the light which it has received from inspired writers, it appears not only to vindicate the reasonableness, but to afford a conclusive argument in favour of the truth of the Catholic opinion. SECTION IV. The connection betv/een the IMosaic and the Christian dispens- ations may be assumed in this part of our course, because Ave formerly found that it forms a capital branch of the evidence of Christianity. We saw, in reviewing the deistical controversy, that the Mosaic dispensation was preparatory to the Christian ; that the change was intimated by the prophets ] that the time and place of the new dispensation had been exactly marked out ; and that even predictions, which, Avhen they were uttered, appeared to relate to events in which the prophets or their con- temporaries had a part, received their full accomplishment in those events Avhich constitute the character of the new dispensation. In order to illustrate the force of that argument which those who hold the Catholic opinion derive from this connection, it is proper to attend to the three great divisions of the Mosaic dis- pensation, which may be styled the moral, the political, and the ceremonial law. The moral law comprehended all those pre- cepts, whether in the decalogue or in the books of Moses and the prophets, which, being founded in the nature of God and the nature of man, do not derive their obligation from tempo- rary and local circumstances, but are in all situations binding upon reasonable creatures. The Socinians represent the moral law of JMoses as essentially defective, and they say that the Gospel has superinduced many new precepts. But other Chris- 76 DOCTRINE OF THE AT0NE3IENT. tians, "wlio entertain more honourable apprehensions of the ori- ginal state of man. and who hare not the same reason for taking this nu'thod of magnifying the Gospel, hold that^ as morality is in its nature unchangeable, the moral precepts of every true religion must be the same ; and that what the Socinians call new precepts, are only interpretations by which the great pro- phet, following out the true spirit of the law, vindicated the "word of Moses and the prophets from those false glosses, and those absurd limitations, by which a succession of Jewish teachers liad perverted their meaning. This opinion is defended at great length by a particular review of the Ten Commandments, in that chapter of the Ordinary Systems which is entitled De De- calogo. It is well illustrated in the section of Calvin's Institutes de Uecalogo — a most useful part of that valuable book. The opinion is clearly supported by the reason of the thing, by the respect with which our Lord and his apostles always speak of the moral law, and by the resemblance manifestly borne by those precepts of the Gospel, which the Socinians call new, to both the Avords and the spirit of the Old Testament. The political law comprehends all those regulations which respected the civil government of the people of Israel, the decision of controversies, the private lives of the subjects, and their intercourse with one another. Although these re- gulations were of divine appointment, yet, being given to a particular nation, they are not binding upon any other nation, except in so far as it chooses to adopt them into the code of its own laws : and even to that nation to whom they Avere given, the possibility, and consequently the o] 'ligation of observing these regulations A-aried with circumstances. For the political liberty of the nation AA-as abridged in their captivities, in the desolations Avhich different conquerors sj^read over the country, and in their subjection to the Roman empire ; and it Avas com- pletely taken awnj Avhen the city Avas rased to the ground, and the remnant Avho surviA^ed the calamities of those days Avere scattered over the face of the earth. The Jewish State, Avhich was at first literally a theocracy, in Avhich God acted as the im- mediate ruler, and Avhich AAas afterAvards administered by judges, then by kings, then by princes or governors dependent upon other nations, has long ceased to be. The Jcavs, although sepa- rated by many of their customs from the people amongst Avhom they live, noAvhere exist as a nation ; it is said that they have lost that distinction of tribes Avhich Avas an essential part of their civil constitution ; and the Almighty, as if to shew that the ] urpope for Avhich he gave this singular constitution has been iiccomplishcd, has continued them aboA'e 17('0 years in a situa- DOCTRINE OP THE ATONEMENT. 77 tion wliich renders the observance of their political law imprac- tical )le. The ceremonial law comprehends all those directions concern- ing the method of approaching the God of Israel, from which the IMosaic dispensation derives its peculiar character as a religious institution, and, in particular, the various sacrifices ordained by Moses, of which we have found sin-offerings to form a large part. But the regulations which constitute the ceremonial law had respect to particular seasons of the year, to a particular place, and to a particular succession of men, by whom many of the services were to be performed, and through whose hands all the sacrifices were to pass ; and therefore, in the present situation of the Jews, when it is impossible for them to assemble at the prescribed season, or in the place which God chose, and when the order of priesthood is lost in the confusion of tribes, the ceremonial law cannot be observed. From this review of the three great divisions of the IMosaic dispensation, it appears that the ceremonial law, like the political, is, in this respect, essentially distinguished from the moral — that it has a precarious temporary existence. The moral law is always the same. But the ceremonial law was not given till after the world had existed more than two thousand years — it was then given to only a particular people — and the present situation of that people, which has put an end to their political law, renders it impossible to observe the ceremonial. Unless, then, we say, that there was no true religion in the world before the days of IMoses, which the Jews, who boast of their descent from Abraham, will not say ; and unless we say, also, that there has been no true religion in the world since the destruction of Jerusalem, which no Christian will say ; we must admit that the ceremonial law is not essential to the worship of God, but consists of positive institutions, which, however Avisely they may have been adapted to particular circumstances, have nothing in their nature inconsistent with change or repeal. Thus the precarious nature of the ceremonial law is incontro- vertil)ly estalilished by that expiration of this law, which is a matter of fact arising necessarily from the present circumstances of the nation to Avhom the law was given. But this fact cannot be regarded as an unexpected consequence of the fortune of war ; for it is the fulfilment of prophecies contained in the saci-ed books of that nation. All those intimations of a new covenant, which constitute part of the evidence of Christianity, point to the abolition of the ceremonial law. They speak of a time when the ark of the covenant shall no more be remembered nor 78 DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. visif) d," Avlion there shall be an altar to the Lord in the rai0 DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. that the ceremonial law of Ikloses and the dispensation of the Gospel have that intimate kind of connection Avhich consists in the former beinj? emblematical of the latter ; and these specula- tions are beautifully illustrated and confirmed hy attending to the manner in Avhich the New Testament gradually unfulds this typical nature of the Jewish ceremonies. The later projthets, "we have seen, had announced that sacrifice was to cease, and had said that the Messiah was to make his soul an offering fur sin, and to make an end of sins. Accordingly, no sooner did Jesus appear in public, than John, the forerunner of the IMessiah, marked him out by these words, " Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world ;"* thus directly apply- ing to Jesus as his character, what Isaiah had used as a simile, " he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter."t After Jesus had, by his public discourses, by his private intercourse with his dis- ciples, and by the succession of miracles which they beheld, con- firmed their attachment, and obtained a declaration of their faith in him as the Christ, he spake to them privately of his suffer- ings. Afterwards he said to them more plainly, " The Son of Man came to give his life a ransom for many.";}: At the last supper w^hich he ate with his disciples before he suffered, he spoke of his blood being shed for many for the remission of sins ; and upon that occasion he intimated, both by action and by words, the connection between his sufferings and the Jewish sacrifices. On the first day of unleavened brfad, when the law required the passover to be killed, he sat down with his dis- ciples at the domestic feast, which every master of a family in Israel was then holding ; and before he arose from the feast he instituted the memorial of his death. § This circumst.ance natur- ally led his disciples to connect that event with the passover which they were eating ; and this inference was confirmed by that significant expression uttered by Jesus while he was sit- ting with them, the full import of which we now understand, " A\'ith desire I have desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer ; for I say unto you, I will not any more eat thereof until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God ;" i. e. the event which is to happen this night is the fulfilment of the passover. AVhether the apostles entered into the meaning of this expres- sion at the time of its lieing uttered, we know not; for the divine wisdom, which guided the minutest actions of our Lord's life, restrained him from disclosing to them hastily the typical nature of the Jewish ritual. As according to the flesh he came • John. i. 29. •\ Isaiah, liii. 7. % Matt.' XX. 28. § Luke, xxii. 14—20. DocrniNE OF Tiii: atone:.ient. 81 of David, and was thus born under the law^ it was part of his entire obedience to the will of God^ to comply in all things Avith the law of Moses ; and the principal of his compliance was thus expressed by himself, when John the Baptist discovered a surprise at his coming to be baptized by him, " Suffer it to be so now, for thus it becoraeth us to fulfil all righteousness.* There would have been an unfitness in his appearing to disparage that ceremonial, which continued in force till his death, while he was daily observing it. But, in the interval between his resurrection and his ascension, after he had fulfilled the passcver by dying on the cross, he shewed, by an interpretation of all the hints which he had given during his life, in what sense he was the end of the law. " Those are the words which I spake unto you while I was )'et with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me."f He had been accustomed while he was with them to apply to himself many expressions in the ancient Scriptures of the Jews ; but now " he opened their understandings that they might understand the Scriptures ; and beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself." Accordingly his apostles who heard this discourse, and Paul, who was enlightened by a special revelation, appear in the book of Acts building their preaching of the Gospel upon this foundation, that they said, " none other things than those which Moses and the prophets did say should come, that Christ should sutler, and that he should be first that should rise from the dead.":}: Now, although the prophets foretell that Christ should suffer, there is not, in the books of Moses, after the original promise respecting the seed of the woman, any prediction that the Shiloh, the prophet, the Star out of Jacobs there foretold, was to suffer ; and we are at a loss to conceive how anything in these books can be considered as an intimation of the sufferings of the iMessiah, except the types that are to be found in the sacrifices of the law. It seems natural, therefore, to presume that our Lord, upon that occasion when he opened the understandings of his disciples that they might understand the Scriptures, explained to them these types, and that from thence they learned to speak as they do of the typical nature of the Jewish sacrifices. John the Evangelist, in relating the circumstances of our Loi'd's death, introduces the last word which he uttered, rsTiXzerai, '■• it is finished," in a manner which shews that he • Matt. iii. 15. f Luke, xxlv. 27, 44, 45. + Acts, xxvi. 22, 23. {12 DncTxaNi: or tiii: atonement. reft'iTcd it to the fulfilment of the Scriptures: and having mentioned that^ when the soldiers came to Jesus, they did not hreak his legs, as they liad broken the legs of those who were crucified with him, the Evangelist leads us back to a direction given about the paschal lamb, " For these things were done that the Scriptures should be fulfilled ; a bone of him shall not be broken.""' The Apostle Paul says, in one place, " Christ our passover is sacrificed for us :"t in another place, " Christ gave himself for us an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweet-smelling savour.";}: He says that the law was a school- master to bring us unto Christ ; that Christ is the end of the law ; that the meats, and drinks, and washings under the law, Avere a shadow of things to come, but the body is of Christ :§ and by all these incidental expressions, he has prepared us for ihat full account of this matter which we receive in the Epistle to the Hebrews. It appears from several circumstances, that the Epistle to the Hebi-ews was written a few years before the destruction of Jerusalem ; an event which of necessity put an end to the ceremonial law, by rendering the observance of that law imprac- ticable. The epistle is addressed to the Hebrews, i. e. natural born Jews, who had been educated in reverence for the law, who had suffered persecution from their countrymen for having embraced Christianity, and who, after they had resisted this fiery trial, Avere assailed by reasoning. The unbelieving Jews represented the Gospel as an innovation upon a system which was confessedly of divine original, a presumptuous attempt to supersede the law Avhich the God of Israel, in terrible majesty, gave })y JMoses, and an insult to the wisdom and piety with Avhich their ancestors had cherished the national faith. For many years after the ascension of Jesus, his apostles had shewn much tenderness to the prejudices of the Jews. But as the destruction of Jerusalem approached, they found less occasion for reserve in arguing against these prejudices. There was no unfitness in explaining the precarious subordinate nature of the Mosaic system, when the Avhole fabric Avas just about being dissolved ; and it pleased God, in the reply which the apostle to the Ilebi-CAvs enabled the Christian Jcavs to give to the argu- ments of their adversaries, to furnish Christians in all ages Avith a most instructive vicAV of the continuity of the two dispensations ; a view Avhich, Avhile it opens many circum- stances respecting the use of the laAv of Moses, implied indeed • .John, \ix. 2G— 37. f 1 Cor. v. 7. + Eplie?. v. 2. § Cal. iii. 24. Eoni. x. 4. Col. ii. Ui, I?. DOCTRINE OF THE ATONE.VEXT. 83 ill other parts of Scripture, but nowhere tlse so clearly taujht, assists us in deriving, from the connection between the hiw and the Gospel, the fullest illustration of the truth of that opinion concerning the nature of the Gospel remed}^, which considers the death of Christ as a vicarious sacrifice for sin. The plan of the first ten chapters of the Epistle to the Hebrews may be thus shortly delineated : — The apostle begins with unfolding the dignity of that Person by whom the Gospel was given ; the glory which originally belonged to him, as the Son of God, and the Creator of the world ; and the honour with which he is now crowned, after having accomplished that gracious purpose, in the conduct of which he appeared, for a little, lower than the angels. A message brought by this exalted Person claims particular attention : ]Moses was faithful as a servant, but Christ comes as a Son over his own house ; and all the instances in which the blessings of the Mosaic dispensation were forfeited by unbelief, and disobedience to the word spoken by angels received punishment, are lessons of reverence and attention to the word spoken by Him who has a name that is above every name. The appearance of this messenger was not unexpected, for God had declared of old times in the law, that he was ordained to the office which he undertook. The same dispensation which established the Levitical priesthood, spoke of a time when that priesthood Avas to be changed ; and taught those who submitted to it to look for one who was to arise, not according to the lineal succession of the house of Aaron, but Avho pertained to the tribe of Judah, a tribe which had never given attendance at the altar, and who was called after another order. This new order is named the order of Melchisedek, because in the book of Genesis a person of this name is men- tioned, who, being king of Salem, and a priest of the most High God, received tithes of Abraham. He was a priest, there- fore, in the days of Abraham, the great-grandfather of Levi. But as the house of Aaron, and the whole tribe of Levi, Avere descended from Abraham, it was not possible to give any more express intimation of a change of that priesthood which was after the order of Aaron, than by declaring that the new priest was after the order of Melchisedek, a priest whose descent, although left in such perfect obscurity by Scripture, that he is said to be " Avithout father, Avithout mother, without descent," could not possibly be counted from Levi, because his office existed in the days of Abraham, that illustrious progenitor to AA'hom the Jcavs traced back all the privileges of their nation. While intimation was thus given in the laAv itself of a com- plete change of the Levitical priesthood, no change or succession C4 DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT, was spoken of in the new order ; but it was declared and con- firmed l)yan oath, tliat the person who should arise, after the order of Melchisedek, Avas to be a priest for ever. In this respect, therefore, he was manifestly superior to all the priests who had brcn called aft»r the order of Aaron, that while the individuals were not suffered to continue, by reason of death, and the whole order was at length to be abolished, he had an unchangeable priesthood : and he was superior to them in this further respect, that all their ministrations, and all the appurtenances of divine service M'hich they used, were only shadows and faint images of the manner in which he Avas to exercise his office. The tabernacle of Moses was indeed made according to a pattern shewed to him by God in the mount; but the heavenly things to be accomplished by the unchangeable priesthood, having been ordained by God from the beginning, were in his con- templation at the time when the pattern was shewn; and the tabernacle, formed in the intermediate space according to that pattern, was only an example and shadow of these heavenly things. Such is a general view of the argument in the first ten chapters of the Epistle to the Hebrews, containing a complete answer to the reasonings of the unbelieving Jews, They said that the Gospel was an innovation upon the JNIosaic system, a presumptuous attempt to supersede the revelation given to their fathers ; and, therefore, that it became every person who believed in the divine institution of the law of Moses, Avithoufe examining the contents of the new faith, instantly to reject its claim. But the apostle shews that the Gospel was given by a glorious Personage, superior to all the former messengers of heaven ; a personage whose appearance had been announced in the law of Moses, whose office as a priest had been there declared to be unchangeable, and whose actions in fulfilling that office were shadowed forth and prefigured by all the insti- tutions of the laAV. Far, therefore, from their being any impiety to the God of Israel, any derogation from the respect due to Moses, any apostasy from the Jewish religion, in embracing the Gospel, it was the duty of every obedient and intelligent dis- ciple of Moses to receive him who is the end of the law. That branch of the argument in which the apostle represents the sacrifices of the law of Moses as figures and shadows of the sacrifice on the cross, deserves particular attention. The follow- ing passages of the epistle will sufticienfly exhibit it : — Heb, viii. 5. A£/7,aa is a part taken from a thing as a method of shewing the rest. Its comjtound ij--o6sr//j,a, in this verse, is a more obscure method of shewing ; not a specimen but a figure. DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. 85 2x/a presents the outlines of the body from Avhich it proceeds. T-j-rog is a mark made U])on an object by striking it; an impression —John, XX. 25 — Tov ru'TTcv tmv rjXojv ; [The mark or print of the nails ;] hence the likeness of the striking body which remains in the body struck ; in general, a figure or representation, Heb. ix. 9 — 14 — 9, --a^aQoXri, coUocalio, placing two things by the side of one another, in order to observe their points of resemblance and dissimilitude ; such a representation of the things that were to come as it was proper for persons living in that time to have before them. — 10. " Carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation ;" i. e. ordi- nances which had the effect of making a person righteous before God, in respect of the flesh, but did not reach the con- science, lying upon them, imposed, till the fit season of making things right by another covenant. — 11. " A tabernacle not made with hands ;" i. e. not in the manner in which the tent of JMoses was made. This is a circumlocution by which the apostle gives notice that he is using the phrase figuratively for the body of Christ. — 13. The water of separation, mentioned Numbers xix., was thus obtained. A red heifer was killed and burnt ; the ashes were gathered and kept in a clean place ; and some of the ashes were put into a vessel and running water was added to them. A bunch of hyssop dipped in this water was employed to sprinkle every person who upon any account had touched a dead body, before he was permitted to approach the tabernacle. Eveiy- thing that was separated from other uses for the service of God was, by that separation^ holy. Everything that was employed for the ordinary purposes of life was, by this common use, unfit for the service of God. Hence -/.oivog, impure; zoivooj, poll/io. The sprinkling with hyssop did not make the person a better man than he was, or obtain remission of his sins: it only removed that accidental defilement, or unfitness for the service of God, which he had contracted. — 14. A/a ro-j TLvsv/xarog aiojviov. [[Through the Eternal Spirit.]] The Holy Ghost is represented throughout the New Testament as having a part in all the actions of our Lord — as given to him without measure — and as descending upon him at his baptism. It is said that our Lord w^as led by the Spirit — that by the Spirit of God he did mighty works — that he was raised^ quickened, justified by the Spirit. So here the Spirit supported him in his sacrifice on the cross. Every victim was required by the law to be blameless. He was without sin. The water of separation purified from the touch of a dead man. His offering purified from dead works, or those sins which defile the conscience. Heb. ix. 21 — 24. Aurov^yia, public service.— 22. ^'/j^ov, 8G DOCXniNE OF TIIK ATONEMENT. f almost.] " Almost all tilings are by tlie law purged witli blood." Poor persons were allowed, upon some occasions, to bring offerings in which no animal was slain. Xw^/;, [[without] referring to that expression in the law — " Blood maketli atone- ment for the soul." — 24. Kvrir-o'rra in 1 Pet. iii. 21, means what Ave call the antitype : here, the type or impression representing another thing. Ileb. X. 11 — 18. In this passage the apostle argues from the nature of the offerings under the law, and from the daily repeti- tion of them, that they did not take away sin ; and he quotes the ancient Scriptures, which promised forgiveness of sin as one of the blessings of the new covenant, in proof of the perfection of the sacrifice offered under that covenant. The passages above referred to suggest the following remarks, which are so clearly grounded upon the words and the reason- ings of the apostle, that I think it enough barely to mention them without adding any illustration. 1. The apostle ascribes a certain effect to the Jewish sacrifices, which he calls purifying the flesh, and which we find it easy to interpret by our know- ledge of the Mosaic law. 2. This effect was attained by the shedding the blood of those victims which were offered day by day, and year by year, according to the commandment of God, and by the priests sprinkling the blood upon the altar. 3. An effect of a very superior kind is said to be attained under the Gospel, which the apostle calls purifying the conscience, making the worshippers perfect, and which he explains by the remission of sins. 4. In describing these two effects, he uses the two words -/M^aoiZ^M and ayia^o. which, in the language of ancient Greece, denoted what we call expiation by sacrifice. 5. Agree- ably to this received meaning of these words, he represents the superior effect as attained by the one sacrifice for sins, which the High Priest of our profession offered, when he gave his body on the cross once for all ; and by his carrying his own blood into heaven. 6. And he represents the manner of attain- ing the inferior effect, as intended by God to be a shadow, a figure, a type of that manner of attaining the superior effect which had from the beginning entered into the counsels of heaven, and with a view to which all the services that pertained to the inferior effect had been established according to the pattern shewn to Moses. When we lay these parts of the apostle's argument together, this conclusion seems clearly to follow, that in his apprehension the offering of Christ upon the cross was a true sacrifice for sin, which has as real an influence in procuring the forgiveness of siuj and so relieving the conscience from a sense of guilt, as the DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. 87 sacrifices under the law had in removing those legal defilements which rendered men unfit to approach the tabernacle. As this conclusion is the most direct confirmation of the Catholic opinion, the Socinians have employed all their inge- nuity to evade the necessity of drawing it ; and their reason- ings upon this subject, as far as I have been able to collect them, may be reduced to the two following heads :— 1. They say that the whole language and reasoning of tjie apostle to the Hebrews is merely an allusion to Jewish customs ; that it was natural for an apostle of Jesus, who had been bred at the feet of Gamaliel, to endeavour to avail himself of the education in which he tells us he had profited above his equals, in order to do honour to the new faith which he had embraced ; that in all his writings Paul discovers a propensity to use bold figures of speech ; and that there was a peculiar propriety in the figure which pervades this Epistle, because it tended to magnify the religion of Jesus in the eyes of those to whom he was writ- ing. Men Avho have been accustomed to reverence the splen- dour of the Mosaic institution, could not instantly be reconciled to the simplicity and spirituality of the faith of Christ. The apostle, therefore, decking out the Gospel in trappings borrowed from the law, presents to the HebrcAvs a sacrifice, a tabernacle, and a High Priest; and although he knew that the only effect of the death of Christ is to furnish motives for that repentance, the consequence of which is forgiveness, he accommodates the sacrificial terms of the law to give this efi*ect a more venerable appearance. The prejudices of the Jews were soothed by this accommodation ; but it was not intended for other Christians ; and we miss the design of a writer, whose principle it was to become all things to all men, if we form our notions of the Gospel from a manner of expressing himself, which condescen- sion to persons of a particular denomination led him to assume. This account of the Epistle to the Hebrews cannot proceed from persons Avho entertain an exalted idea of the inspiration of Scripture. It is indeed inconsistent with the lowest degree of inspiration which can be supposed necessary to render the Scriptures a safe guide into all truth. The account is incorrect in representing this vicAV of the connection between the sacri- fices of the law and the sacrifice of the cross, as peculiar to the Epistle to the Hebrews ; for although particular circumstances led the writer of that epistle to give a fuller illustration of the subject than is elsewhere to be fouad, yet we discover traces of the same connection, both in the law itself, and in different places of the New Testament ; and there is not the smallest inconsis- tency between all that is said by this writer and anything that is S8 DOCTRINK OF THE ATONEMENT. said in any other part of Scripture. The account is dishonourahle to this writer, because it represents him as arguing falsely, and using both words and reasonings, with an intention to mislead. You -will be satisfied of the dishonour which this account does to the writer of the epistle, if you attend to the following circumstances : — (1.) The words xa&atooi and aytaZ^oj, which had a received meaning in the sacrifices of those nations to whose language they belong, are applied by the Apostle, according to that sense, to the sacrifices under the law ; and in the same discourse they are applied to the effects of the death of Christ. But there cannofc be a greater abuse of figurative language than to employ words, first literally, then metaphorically, and in the progress of a long argument often to alternate the literal and the metapho- rical sense of them, without giving any notice of the change. (2.) But the purport of the Apostle's argument does not admit of our understanding these words metaphorically. Whatever Avere the motives which led the Apostle to argue in this manner, it is unquestionably the purport of his argument to shew, that Christ is a High Priest, that his death was an offering, and that this offering attained the end of sacrifice. Now, such an argu- ment requires the use of the words xat)a/gw and ay;a^w, not in a metaphorical, but in the literal sense ; for if these words apply to the sacrifices of the law literally, and to the sacrifice of Christ metaphorically, then the whole argument is a sophism, and the Apostle is guilty of something much worse than an abuse of figures — he is a false reason er. (o.) The Apostle says expressly that the sacrifices under the law were shadows, figures, types of the true sacrifice of the cross ; i. e. instead of applying the words -/.adaigoj and dyia'^oj, in allusion to the law, he maintains that the truth of the terms is found under the Gospel, and that the law was an allusion to this truth. You will observe, that, as a shadow must present the outlines of the body from which it proceeds, as a ru'rog, in the primary sense of that word, must express the figure of that body by the stroke of which it Avas formed ; so in the use which we are accustomed to make of the words type and antitype, there must be a resemblance between them, because it is by means of this resemblance that the one thing becomes the type of the other. What we call a symbol is an arbitrary sign of something past or present, whose meaning depends upon inven- tion ; and we understand that any one thing may be made the sign of another, as sounds of thought, and written characters of sounds. But what we call a type is a sign of something future, whose nature is expressive of the thing typified; aud there DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. 89 could be no connection between the two, if the thing typified were destitute of that which is characteristical of the type. Hence, when we say the Jewish sacrifices were typical of the JMessiah, we mean by the use of the w'ord typical, that their nature somehow corresponded to the design of his coming. Had they attained the end of sacrifice completely, there would have been no need for his becoming a sacrifice ; had they not attained it in any measure, they would not have been types of hia sacrifice ; but by purifying the flesh, i. e. rendering it lawful and safe for persons to approach the tabernacle, who, from legal uncleanness, or sins ot ignorance, could not have approached it without death, and yet leaving the consciences of the worshippers in the same state as before, they were in their nature fitted to typify, i. e. to exhibit by an imperfect resemblance, that sacrifice which relieves the conscience, and by which " all that believe are justified from all things, from which they could not be justified by the law of JMoses." The logical propriety of terms, therefore, requires that we ascribe a certain effect to the Jevvisk sacrifices, and that we ascribe a higher effect of the same kind to the sacrifice of the cross. But this is the very thing which the Apostle does ; for we found, by an analysis of his argument, that he speaks of both effects as real. And thus, if we only give the words zaJa/soj and ayiaZ^Cfi in his discourse the same interpretation which we are accustomed to give them in the writings of the ancient Greeks, he appears to be strictly accurate in the use of the term mroc ; whereas, if we give these two words a new interpretation, by which we make him guilty of an abuse of figurative language, and a kind of false reasoning, we also fix upon him the absurdity, that he calls one thing a type of another, although the thing typified wants that which is characteristical of the type ; so that the type mentioned by the Apostle, instead of being an imperfect representation, has more than the antitype : and the things to which these names are applied, have not that resemblance in kind, without which the names have no meaning. (4.) To all that has been said, it must be added, in the last place, that the Apostle is not here handling an argument, but he is addressing a great body of people, converted from .Judaism to Christianity; and he professes to relieve their minds from the apprehension of impiety in forsaking the law of Moses, by stating, that all the sacrifices which had been offered for ages according to the law were superseded by that one sacrifice on the cross, which, being the truth shadowed forth by them, rendered further offering unnecessary. The argument was most satisTving to those Jews Avho received it upon the authority of 90 DOCTRINE OF THFJ ATONKMKNT. the Apo«;tle. But if he only spoke in accommodation to their prejudices, he dealt unfairly with them ; because, whenever they discovered, by their intercourse with other Christians, that the death of Christ was in reality no saci'ifice, the scruples which the Apostle had professed to remove would naturally revive ; and since he had assumed it as a principle, that, without shed- ding blood there is no remission of sins, it would appear to them their safest course to return to that religion in which they certainly knew that blood made an atonement for the soul. This last reason is stated in its full force in a passage of this Epistle, xiii. 9 — 14 ; in reading which it must be remembered, that the ceremonies of the law were familiar to the persons whom the Apostle is addressing ; that he combats teachers who endeavoured to draw them back from the simplicity of the Gospel to the observance of these ceremonies ; and that his epistle was written about eight years before the destruction of Jerusalem. From these four reasons it seems to follow, that, unless we hold the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews to be both an inconclusive and a sophistical reasoner, we cannot admit the first position, by which the Socinians endeavour to evade the argument in favour of the Catholic opinion drawn from that Epistle ; but we must consider the manner in which the Jewish sacrifices are there spoken of as involving this principle, that the offering on the cross did efficaciously take away sin by the substitution of a victim for the sinner. 2. But if it should be found impossible to resolve the reason- ing of the apostle into a bare accommodation to Jewish customs, or a moral lesson — if there must be something substantial in that which the Mosaic ritual shadowed forth, a second position is adopted by those who deny the truth of the Catholic opinion. It is the refuge to which the early followers of Socinus betook themselves, in order to evade the reality of the sacrifice of the cross ; and it coincides with that which I called the !Middle opinion concerning the nature of the Gospel remedy. They said that under the law the priest made the atonement ; that it was not the victim, Avhicli was of little value, and was slain by the offerer himself, but the oblation of the victim by the priest, which procured forgiveness ; and that, on the great day of atonement, the most important part of the ceremony was the high priest entering into the holy of holies, and appearing before the mercy-seat for the people. They learned from the Epistle to the Hebrews, that these typical parts of the law Avere fulfilled by the priesthood of Christ ; they found the apostle stating the superior excellence of his priesthood as consisting in DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. 91 tills, that he went not into the holy place made with hands, but into the true holy place, i. e. heaven, there to appear in the presence of God for us ; and they understood the apostle as saying that it is his entering there which makes him a priest ; for so they interpreted these words, lleh. viii. 4, " If he were on earth he should not be a priest." Upon these grounds they conceived that the priesthood of Christ commenced when he ascended to heaven, and that he is said to be a priest for ever upon this account only, because he continues without intermis- sion, through his power and favour with God, to take away the guilt of our sins. The amount, then, of the second position is, that Christ was not truly a priest, and that he did not offer any real sacrifice while he was iipon earth ; but that his sufferings were merely a preparation for his priesthood which is exercised in heaven. The imperfection of this system is obvious to any person wlio carries the whole subject in his mind. The priests indeed made atonement, but it was by the blood of the victim which had been slain. The high priest entered in, once a year, into the holy place, but it was with the blood of the goat and the bullock, both of which he had on that day slain with his own hand ; and he reconciled the holy place by sprinkling it with the blood. " Every high priest taken from among men," says the apostle, Heb. viii. 3, 4, " is ordained for men in things pertaining to God, that he may offer both gifts and sacrifices for sin ; where- fore it is of necessity that this man have somewhat also to offer." Jesus then performed the office of a priest in offering a sacrifice, but he did not complete the office by that act ; for, in order to fulfil the types of the law, it was necessary that he should carry the blood which he had offered into the holy place. Upon this account he went into heaven ; and this is the meaning of these words of the apostle, " If he were on earth he should not be a priest," i. e. if he had remained on earth after his sacrifice, no part of his actions would have corresponded to the entrance of the high priest into the holy place. But his appearance in heaven is stated, in various places of the Epistle, as subsequent to his sacrifice, and as deriving its efficacy from the blood which he has carried thither. AVe are led to consider him as completely a priest, because there are in his case both the mactation and the oblation of a victim ; and the nature of the victim is con- joined with the place where it continues to be presented to God, in all the views of the excellence of his priesthood. Thus, according to our interpretation of the apostle's reasoning, every part of the JMosaic ritual finds its accomplishment in the priesthood of Christ ; and the analogy between the two dispens- 92 DOCTRINK OP THE ATONEMKNT. ations is so entire and so exact, that we are satisfied of the truth of the whole reasoning. According to that system which is adopted in the second position, a large portion of the ceremonial of Jewish sacrifice has no counterpart under the Gospel : Jesus bears the name of a priest without having done what is charac- teristical of that office ; and that method of procuring the hlessings of the Gospel which the Scriptures reveal, is confounded with the power and the tenderness which the High Priest of our profession exhibits in dispensing them. SECTION V. The argument upon which we have dwelt so largely appears to me conclusive. But it is not desirable that so important an article of our faith as that which the Catholic ojiinion involves, should rest upon a single view of the subject, or upon the pertinency of a particular kind of phraseology ; and therefore, in order to shew that this opinion is unquestionably the doctrine of Scripture, and that the phrases employed in stating it, although not used by the inspired writers, are clearly warranted by the revelation which they have given, it is proper to take a more enlarged survey of the language and the views upon this subject which the Scriptures present. "VVe shall meet in this survey with some of the sacrificial terms which we have lately been considering ; but if we find that, even Avhen a resemblance to the Jewish ritual was not the leading idea, the amount of what the inspired Avriters say concerning the Gospel remedy is per- fectly agreeable to the Catholic opinion, we may rest without hesitation in the conclusion which they taught us to draw from that resemblance. It is known to those who search the Scriptures, that the discourses of our Lord and the writings of his apostles abound with allusions to passages in the Old Testament, even when no express quotation Is made ; and therefore it is not surprising to find in one passage the ground-work of all that we read in the New Testament concerning the doctrine of atonement. That passage is Isaiah, llii. The prophet, in many places of his book, blends with the des:crli)tion of the Messiah's kingdom events of his own time, as types of that glorious period ; but in this chapter he appears to have lost sight of every inferior personage, and his mind is completely occupied with the illustrious deliverer that was to come to Zion ; particularly with the nature, the DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. 93 character, and the effects of his sufferings. The ancient Jews understood this chapter to refer to the Messiah, although they certainly did not enter into the true meaning of all the parts of it. But to us it is interpreted by the manner in which the Avriters of the New Testament relate those events which the prophet there foretold ; and when we avail ourselves of the light which his prediction and their commentary throw upon one another, we are enabled to arrange that support which the Catholic opinion derives from the general language and the views of Scripture, under the three following heads : — the bitter- ness of the sufferings of Christ taken in conjunction with the innocence and dignity of the sufferer ; the character uniformly given of his sufferings as a punishment for sin ; and the various descriptions of the effects of this punishment. These three points, collected from Scripture in one complex view, constitute the evidence, that the doctrine of pardon by the substitution of the sufferings of Christ in place of the punishment due to sinners is the doctrine of Scripture. 1. The first point to be attended to is Avhat may be called the value of the sufferings of Christ ; because, had they been of little value, they could not have answered that purpose which is assigned to them in the Catholic opinion. I need not particu- larly quote the well-known texts of Scripture, which place this value in the bitterness of the sufferings cheerfully undergone by an innocent and exalted person. The whole history of his life is a commentary upon the significant words of the prophet, " He is a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief;" for he Avas not a stranger to any kind of affliction, and, in the hour of liis greatest distress, every alleviation was removed from him. To the meanness of his condition, the scorn and persecution of his enemies, the pains of his body, and all the visible circum- stances by which death to him was aggravated, there falls to be added what the New Testament calls an agony, >vhich is de- scribed, Mark, xiv. 33, 34; Luke, xxii. 41 — 44; John, xii. 27. In these passages we meet with the following terms, ytvoiMivog i\i ayo)via ; [^being in an agony ;] -^v'/jri /zou riraoa-/.rai ; \jny soul is troubled y\ tso/Xutoj ioi; '^avarov ; [[exceeding sorrowful unto death ;] iyJaij^Znadui, to be amazed, or in that state of mind which we express by the word horror; to be astonished, stupified with grief; to lose for a little the power of exercising the mind ; ahr^ijjoviiv, extra populi consorliuni dcgere, hominum vestis:ia vUart\ Qo live without any intercourse with others, to avoid the foot- steps of men,] to have the mind stupified and absorbed in its own feelings. The expressions used by the historians, paint the utmost distress of mind, during which the human nature of 94 DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. Jesus shrunk at the prospect that lay before him ; and the apostle to the Hebre\v.s manifestly refers to their description when he says, Heb. v. 7, " Who in the days of his flesli, -wlien he had offered up prayers and supplications, with strong crying and tears" Those who consider Jesus as merely a man, and who by consequence must consider his sufferings as no atonement for sin, find it impossible to give a reasonable account why, in the prospect of death, an event which to him surely was no great evil, he should discover an agitation of mind so unlike that firmness which many other men have displayed in circum- stances to outward appearance exactly similar. But those who hold the Catholic opinion consider this agony as the fulfilment of the words of Isaiah, liii. 10, "It pleased the Lord to bruise him ;" and of these words, Isaiah, Ixiii. 3, where the Messiah says of himself, '• I have trodden the wine-press alone, and of the people there was none vnth me." They connect this agony with the words spoken by Jesus on the cross, " My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me ?" and although they presume not to explain in what it consisted, yet as they believe that the wrath of God due to the sins of the world was laid immediately iTpon Jesus, they find no difficulty in conceiving that his spirit, left without the wonted measure of suppoit and comfort which it derived from its union with the Word and from the presence of his Father, experienced a darkness and desertion in compari- son with which all the sorrow that man can inflict is light. Some have applied to this agony that article of the creed, " he descended into helh" But as we know that these words meant, according to the sense of those who first introduced them into the creed, that the soul of Jesus went into the region of departed spirits at the time when his body was laid in the grave, so if we believe there is no such region, we are not warranted by the language of Scripture to apply to the sufferings of Christ an expression which ■will seem to us to convey that they Avere the same in kind as the punishment of the damned. Whatever was the nature of the agony which shook and troubled the spirit of Jesus, it was connected with entire resig- nation, lie said, in the time of it, '•' Not as I will, but as thou wilt ; for this cause came I to this hour:" and at all other times he spoke of his sufferings with a readiness to encounter them, which magnifies his character, and adds to their value. The innocence of Jesus was illustrated by his sufferings ; for, as the prophet Isaiah had said, liii. 8, 0, according to Bishop LoAvth's transla- tion, " he was taken away by an oj>prcssive judgment ;" " he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth ;" so it appeared, upon the trial which he undcr^^•entJ that all the DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT, 95 malice of Lis enemies could not convict him of sin. One of his companions on the cross, while he acknoAvledged that he himself received the just reward of his deeds, declared of Jesus that he had done nothing amiss ; and the disciple who betrayed him, after having been intimately acquainted with his private as well as his public life, is introduced in the Gospels repenting of his foul deed, and bearing the most unexceptionable testimony to his Master, in these words, " I have sinned in that I have betrayed the innocent blood." In this manner does the New Testament place the innocence of Jesus fully in our view, at the very time when it describes his sufferings. But it represents him as much more than innocent ; for, as I stated formerly in relation to the importance of the doctrine of the Hypostatical Union, tlie general strain of the New Testament leads us to conjoin the peculiar value which is there affixed to the suffer- ings of Jesus with the peculiar dignity of his person ; and we can clearly discern, in those purposes of the incarnation of the Son of God which the Scriptures declare, the reason why they have dwelt so largely upon the divinity of his character. Thus his condescension is said to consist in this, that he Avho was in the form of God, and thought it not robbery to be eqiud with God, humbled himself, and became obedient to the death of the cross;* " hereby perceive we," says John, " the love of God, because he laid down his life for us ;"+ the love of the Father is com- mended to us in different places, by his giving his only begotten Son, his beloved Son, and delivering him to the death ibr us ; and Jesus is never classed with martyrs or other righteous men, who " loved not their lives unto the death ;" but the apostles, in speaking of his blood, affix to it a preciousness infinitely beyond that of any blood which ever was shed. 2. The second point to be collected from a general survey of the language and the views of Scripture is this, that the suifer- ings of Christ, the peculiar bitterness of which derived such a value from the innocence and dignity of the sufterer, are not stated as mere calamity, but are always described under the characters which belong to a punishnient of sin. God is never represented as exercising, in the sufferings of his Son, that right of sovereignty which belongs to the Lord and Proprietor of all, but as inflicting what was due to the transgression of his law ; and Jesus Christ, who is essentially distinguished from all other men in this respect, that he did not know sin, is represented in these sufferings as bearing the sins of others. The different expressions by which this character of the suf- • riiil. ii. 6— P. t 1 JoLn, iii. 10. 96 DOCTRINE OF THE ATONICMENT. ferings of Christ is intimated, may be reduced to two general classes : — (1.) The first includes all the prepositions in the Greek lan- guage that are employed to mark substitution. As it is said by Isaiah. " he was wounded for our transgressions," so it is said in the New Testament that " he was delivered for our oftenoes, that he died for us, that he suffered for sins, the just for the unjust."* These expressions certainly suggest the notion of a substitution, in which the sufferings and death of one person are instead of the sufferings and death which the sins of others deserved. But Socinus has led the way to all who hold any part of his system, in attempting to elude this notion, by saying, that Christ's suffering for sins means nothing more than his suf- fering for this end, that we might be led to forsake our sins ; and that his dying for us only means his dying for our advan- tage. No person who is accustomed to study language will assert in aiiswer to this interpretation, that ^br necessarily im- plies substitution, because every scholar knows that even when lie is able to ascertain the primary meaning of a preposition, he often finds that primary meaning so qualified by the words with vhich the preposition is joined, that in different situations it appears totally different. We say in English, Christ suffered for sins, and Christ suffered for us ; but every one understands the preposition for to have different meanings in these two phrases. ^Ve explain the first, Christ suffered upon account of sins ; the second, Christ suffered instead of the sinners. And this ambiguity is not peculiar to the English ; in Greek also the same preposition jtso is employed to express these different ideas; for we read, 1 Pet. ii. 21, 2 Cor. v. 15, X^igrog s'xa&iv, a'lri&avsv iiTs^ r,iim ; [^Christ suffered, died for us f\ 1 Cor. xv. 3, a'Xi&aviv vm^ Tuv aijjaoTioiv '/i/jbojv [|Christ._died for our sins.] The proper mean- ing of iiTso is over, above. It suggests primarily the notion of covering ; and this may be applied, either to the covering a per- son from danger, or to the covering a thing from sight. The phrase i-mo ri>j.m may denote any kind of benefit which we derive from another person ; but it marks with peculiai' fitness his sus- taining that harm which we should have sustained, had we not been covered by him. It cannot be denied that classical writers use bm^ in situations where a substitution is plainly implied ; and the Scriptures intimate that there is a peculiar emphasis in the application of this preposition to the sufferings of Christ. For although the apostle Paul, Col. i. 24, speaks of roic rrahi'Maci fj,fjv iirrso >j/j.uv, \jny sufferings for you,] yet he asks, 1 Cor. i. 13, * Rom. iv. 25 ; v. 8. 1 Pet. iii. 1 8, DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. 97 (ifi TlauXog effrav^udr^ u-tb^ vfiojv ; [^was Paul crucified for you ?] intimating that, even although his enemies should crucify him, his crucifixion could not give him that kind of connection with Christians which arose from the crucifixion of Christ. In the other phrase, uts^ a/xa^r/wi/, u'tti^ cannot denote advantage ; and without a violent ellipsis it cannot be understood of the final cause ; for the end of Christ's sufferings was not our sins, but the remission of our sins. But it is naturally understood, according to a frequent use of this preposition, of what Ave call the ante- cedent cause ; that cause which, having a previous existence, produces an action. Sins existed before Christ died, and their demerit produced his sufferings ; therefore it is said, wridavs'j vTs^ a.;MaoriMV, |^he died for sins,] as we read in Isocrates, ute^ d> dovTig Toic '^^soic dixas,''-' [^paying the penalty to the gods for them,] and often in Latin, pro injuriis ul. isci. [^To take vengeance for injuries.] The antecedent cause is expressed in different places of Isaiah liii. by the preposition dia, the preposition most com- monly used in that sense. Kr^av/jyariffdrj dia rag a./j,aPTiag rj/jyuv— dice rag avofjjiag avTc^v Tra^iho&ri ; \\e was wounded for our trans- gressions— he was delivered for their transgressions ;] and the apostle Paul appears to have copied this expression, Rom. iv. 25; yet, in that verse, ^/a is also used to mark the final cause ; for, while our offences were the antecedent cause which pro- duced the sufferings of Christ, our justification is the end obtained by his resurrection, riso/ is also used in the Greek Testament for this purpose, as Rom. viii. 3 ; 1 Peter iii. 18. IliS,! a'Ma^Tim means, in relation to our sins; and the nature of the relation is to be gathered from the Septuagint, where what is rendered, in our English Bible, " he shall bring for his sin which he hath sinned," runs in the Greek, oisn inoi rrig ccira^- Tiag rig ^fia^rs. This expression, therefore, is one of the many instances in which the New Testament leads us back to the sacrifices of the law. There is one Greek preposition yet remaining, avn, which our Lord himself uses, Matt. xx. 28 ; from whence the apostle Paul, I Tim. ii. 6, probably formed the compound word avriXvr^ov, |^ransom.] It is well known that avri, which properly expresses that one thing is set over against another, conveys the nature of commutation, substitution, succession ; and it was impossible to find any preposition which could have marked more precisely this idea that the life of Christ is given instead of many. Even avr/, however, may be used by the best writers in a looser sense, for the advantage of; and no scholar • Isoc. Plat. p. 716. Edit, Basil. VOL. II. P VO DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. Tvoulcl clioose to rest an important article of faith upon the strict acceptation of a preposition. We do not^ therefore, argue, that because Ave find i/rrso, oia, and a^ri employed upon this sub- ject, the Catholic opinion is unquestionably the doctrine of Scripture. But •ne maintain that, if there >vas in the death of Christ a substitution of his sufferings for the punishment of sin, it could not have been more naturally or significantly expressed than by these prepositions ; and that the meaning which a reader whose mind is unwarped by system feels himself dis- posed to affix to them, and the violent interpretations which are necessary in order to evade that meaning, create a strong presumption in favour of the truth of this opinion. (2.) But there is a second class of expressions in Scripture in which that character of a punishment for sin, which seems to be signified by the use of these prepositions, is directly applied to the sufferings of Christ. Isaiah, after having said " he was wounded for our trans- gressions, and he was bruised for our iniquities," adds, " ca/os/a iipri'jrig i-ir auro-j, rw /xcoXwcr/ aurou rifjjug laSrifjjiv ; the chastise- ment of our peace was upon him, by his stripes we are healed." Again, " avoian, he shall bear their iniquities, avr^ny/,i, he bare the sin of many." This language of the prophet is copied, ] Peter ii. 24, and it is referred to, Ileb. ix. 28. The signifi- cancy of the preposition kkz in the compound verb avri^iy/.i lies in this, that, as Jesus was lifted upon the cross, he may be said to have carried our sins upward when he bore them ; and that this circumstance was attended to in the use of this compound verb appears not improbable, when we find the apostle, Ileb. vii. 27, applying the same verb ava;pi^(j} first to the sacrifices of the law which were lifted upon the altar, and then to the offering of Christ upon the cross. There are tw^o ways in which Socinus and his followers en- deavour to evade the force of the expression avriviy/.iv aiJ^a^riag. They admit that, according to the usual sense of the verb, the phrase is properly rendered as in our translation, " he bare our sins." But they say that, as the nature of the thing does not admit of a literal translation, we are to consider the phrase as equivalent to another which is used in difterent places by the apostle John, " his taking away sins," i. e. his leading us to for- sake them. But it is a forced mode of interpreting Scripture, to have recourse to an unusual sense of a phrase, when that sense manifestly omits a part of the information given concern- ing the subject to which the phrase is applied. For although it be true that Jesus is said, John i. 29, 1 John iii. 5, ai^nv aiia^Tia;, Qto take away sins,] yet the precise mode of taking DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. 99 them away is declared to be by bearing them ; and, although the scape-goat, which carried the sins of the children of Israel into the wilderness on the day of atonement, may be considered as a type of Christ's taking away sin, yet the scape-goat was only one part of the ceremonies prescribed for that day ; and when all the ceremonies are laid together, if the scape-goat denoted that the sins were taken away, for the very same reason, the other goat which was killed on that day must be considered as a type of his blood being shed for sin. The other way in which Socinus and his followers endeavour to evade the force of the expression avr^Miy/.i^ aiJMoriai, is by saying, that bearing our iniquities, if that translation be admitted, means nothing more than that they were the occasion of his suffering ; as a person is said in the Old Testament to bear the sins of his ancestors, when he sutlers calamities in his person or his fortune, which he would not Lave endured if they had been innocent. But this method of evading the natural sense of the phrase by no means answers the purpose for which it is resorted to. For it may be observed in general, that that part of the constitution of nature by which posterity may be thus said to bear the sins of their ancestors, is in reality an extension of the punishment of sin, which is declared by God in the second commandment, " visiting the iniquities of the fathers upon the children." This extension of the punishment of sin demon- strates in a striking manner the painful nature of transgression, and calls in the natural affection of parents for their offspring as a guard to their own innocence. In every case, therefore, where bearing the sins of others is allowed to mean suffering of which these sins are the occasion, that suffering is truly the punish- ment of sin. But with regard to this particular case, it is to be observed, farther, that we are not left to suppose that the con- nection between sin and the sufferings of Christ was incidental, or merely the result of the general constitution of nature ; for we are taught, by a variety of the most precise expressions, that this connexion was specially constituted by God, and that in it are to be found the reason and the intention of the sufferings of Christ. Isaiah says, " the chastisement of our peace was upon him ;" but chastisement always means suffering connected with a fault, intended either for the correction of the person who endures it, or for an example to others. As chastisement which includes death cannot be designed to correct the sufferer, and as Jesus stood in no need of correction, the chastisement which he endured must be considered as exemplary ; and its being called " the chastisement of our peace" clearly means that the punish- 100 DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. ment without which we conld not be restored to peace with God, was borne by him. The same thing is more fully expressed by Isaiah, as his words are rendered by Bishop Lowth — " The Lord made to meet upon him the iniquities of us all. It Avas rerjuired of him, and he was maile answerable." There are two striking expressions to this purpose used by the apostle Paul. The one is in 2 Cor. v. 21. The apostle vindi- cates the personal innocence of his IMaster by saying that he did not know sin. At the same time, in order to shew tiiat he was counted and treated as a sinner, not merely in the judgment of men. but in the judgment and by the appointment of God, lie says that God hath made him to l)e sin. This most signi- ficant manner of markinjj the connection between his sufferinofs and sin is taken from the Septuagint, Lev. iv. 29 ; v. 9 ; where a sin otfering is often called aiJM^TTiixa, afxa^ria, because it was offered for sin ; and the Latin writers intimate the same con- nexion in a similar manner, when they use piaculum both for the crime, piacnla commissa, and for the victim by whose death the crime was supposed to be expiated. The other expression of the apostle Paul is, Gal. iii. 10, 13. The reason assigned for the kind of death which Jesus died clearly implies a substitution for sinners. The Jews employed other methods of taking away the life of a criminal. But they did, in some cases, hang upon a tree the body of a person who had been put to death for a crime. They were forbidden by their law, however, to allow the body to remain all night upon the tree. Deut. xxi. 22, 23. — " If a man have committed a sin worthy of death, and he be to be put to death, and thou hang liim on a tree, his body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but thou shalt in any wise bury him that day, (for he that is hanged is accursed of God,) that thy land be not defiled." The reason of this order is plainly no part of the civil punish- ment ; that was completed by the death of the criminal, and by the infamy of his hanging upon a tree ; it is merely a declara- tion of the light in which the person who had suffered this civil punishment was viewed by God, The law also said, " Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things that are written in the book of the law to do them." All men as transgressors of the law, were subject to this curse ; and Jesus, in order to redeem them from the curse, was made a curse for them, by hanging on a tree ; for when we consider that he who had power to lay down his life, had certainly power to choose the manner of lay- ing it down, and that the Scriptures expressly say, " he was delivered bv the ' determinate counsel and foreknowledge of DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. lOl God ;"* we cannot but consider his choosing to hang upon a tree, a situation declared bj the ceremonial law to be accursed of God, as intended to demonstrate to the world, that, although he himself continued in all things written in the law to do them, his death was not merely the infliction of human law upon an inno- cent man, but a suffering which in the sight of God was penal. By this variety of the most marked expressions do the Scrip- tures present to us the sufferings of Christ under the character of punishment, /. e. as suffering which could not, from the nature of things, be the very punishment which the sinner deserved, but which was laid upon an innocent person for the sins of others. 3. To complete the argument in favour of the Catholic opinion which arises from a general survey of the language and views of Scripture, Ave have now to attend to the different classes of expression by which the effects of the sufferings of Christ are described. (1.) The first class comprehends all those expressions in. which the words reconciliation, propitiation, atonement, and making peace, are connected with the sufferings of Christ. Of this kind are the following: Col. i. 19, 20. 1 John ii. 2; iv. 10. Rom. iii. '25 ; v. 11. "It pleased the Father, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself. He hath set him forth to be a propitia- tion through faith in his blood. By him we have now received the atonement." The verbs translated reconcile are xaraWaaei/), avoKaraKKad- 6'j> ; and the noun rendered atonement is ncirayXayn. The verbs mean nothing more than a change from one state to another ; but the situation in which they are introduced determines the change to be from enmity to friendship. The words rendered propitiation are derived from iXaffxu ; a verb known in the Greek classics to denote propilium reddo, the action of the per- son, who, in some appointed method, turned away the wrath of a deity ; and a verb used by the authors of the Septuagint to express the action of the priest, who, by presenting the sin-offer- ing, made atonement for the offerer. As these actions are precisely similar, both are expressed by the verb in the middle voice. Homer says, o(p^ rii^iv 'Exas^yov iXaffdiai, 'n^a Pi^ag :f Qthat thou mayest propitiate Apollo, having offered sacrifice to him :'] and it is said of the priest in the Septuagint, i^iXagirai, or e^iXaffaro. moi aiia^riai.X {^He shall make an atonement concerning sin.] But when the intercession of Moses had, upon * Acts iL 23. t Hoia- IL i- ^^1- t Levit. v. 102 DOCTRINE OP THE ATONEMENT. one occasion, turned away the wrath of God, this ofFect is expressed hy the verb in the passive, iXaffOrj Ki/a/o;." []The Lord was propitiated.] As the use of the verb iXaazu) in the Septu- agint is thus exactly agreeable to the classical sense of it, it seems natural to understand, in the same sense, the words derived from that verb which are applied in the New Testa- ment to express the effects of the death of Christ. The words are umc/Jjo:, which having been applied in the law to the sin- offering, is applied, 1 John ii. 2, and iv. 10, to our Saviour ; and iXasrri^iov, Rom. iii. 25, which may be rendered, as in our English Bible, propitiation, by supplying ^^u/xa, [^sacrifice,] but which from the analogy of Koirrioiov, [^ judgment -seat,] (SovXrjrri^iov, (^council- room,] liuc/acrjj^/ov, Qiltar,] supplying /S»j/xa, [[tribunal,] should rather be translated propitiatory or mercy-seat; a sense of the word which has been eagerly laid hold of by some of the Socinians, but which appears to be not less adverse to their system than the word propitiation, because the mercy-seat never was approached without blood. There is only one place in the New Testament, Heb. ii. 17, in which the verb //.acrxa) is applied to our Saviour. Although the construction be not exactly the same as in the Septuagint, where the noun is governed by cso/, it is plain that the sense of the verb is totally changed if it be translated, as the Socinians propose, taking away sin, i. e. destroying its power in the sinner ; for here is a third person intervening between God and the sins of the people, whose action in turning away wrath is expressed, as in Homer and in the Septuagint, by the middle voice of /Xatrxw. It appears, then, that the amount of all the expressions com- prehended under the first class, is precisely that which the apostles have sometimes stated, when, speaking of the death of Christ, they say, " we are saved from wrath by him :" and no person who reads the Scriptures can be at a loss to know what that wrath is. For, although, in the refinement of some modern systems, it is counted a degradation of the Supreme Being to ascribe to him what has been called punitive justice, there are no views of the divine government more fi-equent or more clear in Scripture, than those upon which this attribute is rested. When we open the Old Testament, we find justice and judgment accompanying mercy in the descriptions of the Almighty, and many of the passages which have been quoted in proof of the placability of the divine nature, contain this clause — " who will by no means clear the guilty."t The history of the Old Testament abounds with examples, in Avhicli the * Exod. xxxii. 14. Exod. xxxiv. C, 7. DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. 103 hati'ed of sin often ascribed to the Almighty was made manifest by awful punishments of the wicked ; and one of these examples is thus interpreted by Jude — Sodom and Gomorrah 'r^oKiivrai diiy/xa., rrv^og aiuvov dr/.'/jv v~s^ouSai.* [Are set forth for an ex- ample, sutt'ering the vengeance of eternal fire.] John the Bap- tist introduces the new dispensation, by declaring that, if any one believed not on the Son of God, rj opy/j Qsov fx^ivsi et' avrov.f [The MTath of God abideth upon him.] The character of the new dispensation is thus drawn by Paul, Rom. i. 18. wrrozaXu-- nrai yag (j^yri Qsou a'-x ovgavov sti TaSav aSiQiiav xai adixiav avd^ui- Twy, [for the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodUness and unrighteousness of men,] not a transient emo- tion, but a fixed purpose to punish transgression. This expression of the law, s,ao/ ixdixrjgig, lyoi ai/racroSwffw, , [vengeance is mine, I will repay,] is quoted as the principle of that punishment of which he shall be thought worthy who despises the Gospel.;}; lletributive justice is thus accurately described, 2 Thess. i. 6, E/TTS^ di/iaiov Ta^a 0sw a.vra'TroQovvai roig ^XiQovdiv v/j.ag ^Xz-^'/v [seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompense tribulation, to them that trouble you,] and although immediate and temporal calamities are not the standing method of executing retributive justice, as they were in part under the former dispensation, yet the future judgment which the gospel reveals, and unto which the wicked are said to be reserved, is called rifjjs^a opyrig, [the day of AATath,] and is described both by our Lord and his apostles, in terms which imply the most complete display of what those who hold the Catholic opinion mean by the punitive justice of the Supreme Lawgiver. Such are the descriptions of the Almighty which pervade the Scriptures ; and they clearly explain to us that effect of the death of Christ which is marked by the first class of expres- sions. The Gospel, proceeding upon the truth of these descrip- tions, assumes, as its principle, that without shedding of blood there is no remission of sins ; and declaring that the blood of bulls and goats could not take away sins, it deduces from thence the necessity of a better sacrifice. It asserts, Heb. ii. 10, that it became him by whom and through whom are all things, to make the Captain of salvation perfect through sufi'erings; s-r^Bcnv avTuj, i. e. that there was a fitness in them resulting from the character of the Supreme Ruler ; and by representing them as vicarious punishment, with which reconciliation and atonement are connected, it teaches clearly that the wrath of God is turned • Jude 7. t John ili. 30. X Heb. x. 28—30. 104 DOCTRINE OF THE AT0NE3IENT. away from the sinner, Ly the punishment which he deserved, beinf^ laid upon another. The Socinians endeavour to evade the argument drawn from the first chiss of expressions, by maintaining that reconciliation means nothing more than the taking nvcay the enmity which we entertained against God ; that it is nowhere said in Scripture that God is reconciled to us by Christ's death, but that ^^e are everywhere said to be reconciled to God ; that the suflPerings of Christ can produce no change in God, and that the change must be brought about in man ; that there can be no need of recon- ciling God to man, when he had already shewn his love to man so far as to send his Son to reconcile man to (lod. But in addition to what has been said of the punitive justice of God, I would farther observe, that, as the term which we translate reconciliation implies a previous enmity or variance which was mutual, so the Scriptures explicitly declare, by all those views of the Almighty which I have been collecting, that there was an enmity on God's part ; and the exhortation to lay aside the enmity on our part proceeds upon this foundation, that the enmity on God's part is taken away by the death of his Son. A/aA/.arrsT^a/ [to reconcile] and words connected Avith it are live times applied in the New Testament with respect to God : Rom. V. 10, 11 ; xi. 1.'). Ephes. ii. IG. Cob i. 20, 21. In this last passage particularly there is implied a previous enmity or variance which was mutual. The words are twice used with respect to man ; Matt. v. 24. 1 Cor. vii. 11. In both these passages, the meaning is, see that he be reconciled to thee ; for in both the person addressed has done the injury. The verb cy.A>.arrs(jdai occurs in the same sense in the Septuagint version of 1 Sam. xxix. 4. If you read 2 Cor. v. 18 — 21, the passage upon which the Socinians ground their argument, you will be satisfied that their method of interpreting reconciliation leaves out half its meaning. Here is a previous act of God, who hath reconciled all things to himself by Jesus Christ, who does not count to men their trespasses, and who committed to the apostles of Jesus the word or the ministry of reconciliation ; and subse- quent to this act of God there is the execution of that ministry, by their beseeching men to be reconciled to God. The ministry is distinct from the act of God, because God does not immedi- ately receive all sinners into favour by his Son, but requires something of those to whom the word of reconciliation is pub- lished, in order to their being saved by it. But the ministry could not have existed had not the act of God, reconciling all tuings to himself, previously taken place ; and, accordingly, the DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. 105 very argument by which the apostle urges the exhortation com- mitted to hira is this — " for he hath made him to be sin for us," t. e. God hath provided a method by which we may be assured that his anger is turned away from us ; it only there- fore remains that ye return to him. (2.) The second class comprehends those expressions in which we read of redemption ; as 1 Peter, i. 18 ; Eph. i. 7- " Ye were redeemed Avith the precious blood of Christ ; we have redemption through his blood." As our English word redeem literally means, I buy back, so ALiraooi, aTo/.t^r^ijC/;, the Greek words used in the New Testament, are properly applied to the action of setting a captive free by paying Xoraov, a ransom ; and thus the sufferings of Christ are presented under the particular view of a price, by the payment of which we are set free. Those who deny the truth of the Catholic opinion, attempt to withdraw the support which it appears to receive from this class of expressions, by the following reasoning. It is impossible, they say, to apply these expressions in their literal acceptation to the effect of the sufferings of Chiist ; for, as a ransom is always paid to the person by whom the captive is detained ; and as we were the servants of Satan, these expressions literally understood would imply that the death of Christ was a price paid to Satan. Since we must depart from the literal sense, it seems most natural to understand redemption as equivalent to deliverance ; for we read in the Old Testament of God's redeem- ing his people from trouble, from death, from danger, when no price is supposed to have been given ; and ]Moses, who was the instrument employed by God to deliver his people from the bondage of Egypt, is called — Acts, vii. .3.5 — /.yrPij-j^j. But if redemption means nothing more than a deliverance from sin, as effectually as if a ransom had been paid, the second class of expressions gives no real support to the Catholic opinion ; and is not inconsistent either with the Socinian opinion, which ascribes the deliverance to the influence of the doctrine and precepts of the Gospel, or Avith the Middle opinion, which ascribes it to the power acquired by the Redeemer. This reasoning proceeds upon a principle which is readily admitted; that both the English and the Greek words are oft«n extended lieyond their original signification. Although they denoted primarily deliverance from captixaty by paying a ran- som, they are applied to deliverance from any evil, and they are used to express deliverance by any means. Almost all other words, which originally denoted a particular manner of doing a thing, are susceptible of a similar extension of meaning, and it is the business of sound criticism to determine, by considering f2 106 DOCTRIKE OF THE ATONEMENT. the circumstances of the case, hoAv far the primary signification is to be retained, or with what qualifications it is to be under- stood in every particuhir application. Now, when we judge in this manner of the second class of expressions, the following remarks naturally present themselves. 1. It is not necessary to depart from their literal meaning, AA'hen theyare applied to the effect of the death of Christ. For,according to the true statement of the Catholic opinion, we arc considered as under the sentence of condemnation which our sins deserved, as prisoners waiting the execution of the sentence, and as released by the death of Christ from this condition. Deliverance from the dominion of sin and the power of Satan is a secondary effect, a consequence of the application of the remedy ; redemption of our bodies from the grave is another effect still more remote. Both are mentioned in Scripture ; but the immediate effect of the death of Christ is, our deliverance from punishment, what the apostle calls the curse of the law ; and this punishment being in the power of the lawgiver by whom it was to be inflicted, the ransom in consideration of which it is remitted and the condemned are set free, may be said to be given to him. 2. Although a captive may be released without any ransom, and although >.uw, [I pay,] or verbs derived from X-jtc^ov, [a ransom,] may be employed most naturally to express such a gra- tuitous release, yet this extension of the primary meaning of these words is excluded from the case to which they are applied in the New Testament, because a Xur^ov is there expressly mentioned. When a Greek author, in relating the release of a prisoner, speaks repeatedly of a-~ona, or Xvr^a^ [ransoms,] as Homer does in the first book of the Iliad, it cannot be supposed that the redemption was without price. Every one feels this effect of introducing the noun Xvr^ov, when the captive was detained by force under the power of an enemy ; and the significancy of the noun is not in the least diminished, when the prisoner is redeemed from a captivity which the Scriptures represent as judicial. The X-jr^ov indeed, in that case, is not a price from which the lawgiver is to derive any advantage ; it is the satisfaction to justice upon which he consents to remit the sentence : but still the mention of a X-jt^ov is absolutely incon- sistent with a gratuitous remission. 3. The Septuagint has used the Xvr^ov in two places, to denote the consideration upon which a judicial sentence was remitted. There was the Xur^a -^•jyjic,, [the ransom of the soul, or life,] — Exod. xxx. 12 — KJ, called in our translation the atonement-money ; half a shekel given for the service of the sanctuary by every one who was numbered, upon all occasions when the number of the people DOCTRINE OP THE ATONEMENT. 107 was taken, that there might be no plague among them. There was also Xvr^a 'rroooroToxuv. [The ransom, or redemption, of the first-bom.] The first-born of every animal was sacred to the Lord. But God declared — Numb. iii. 12, 46-51 — that he took the whole tribe of Levi, instead of the first-born of all the tribes, on which account they are called Xursa Tiuroroxojv ; and as the whole number of the tribe of Levi fell short of the first- born males of all the other tribes by some hundreds, the Lord required for every one of this odd number the sum of five shekels, which is called in our translation, the redemption- money, in the Greek, Xur^a rojv vy^sovaZ^ovruv. [The redemption of those above the number.] Here, then, is Xvr^ov, which is known to denote, in classical writers, a ransom paid in order to procure the release of a captive, applied in the Septuagint, by a most natural extension of meaning, to the consideration given for deliverance from death; an evil which the person so delivered could, in no other way, have escaped, any more than the captive could have recovered his liberty without the ransom; and the same idea is followed out in the New Testament. For as Paul says, 1 Cor. vi. 20, Tiyo^aadriTs ri>j.ric ; [ye have been bought with a price ;] and as Peter, i, 18, in describing the price, has a manifest reference to the atonement- money and redemption-money of the law, so the price by which we are bought and redeemed is called. Matt. xx. 28, Xvr^ov avri To?.Xwy ; [a ransom for many ;] and 1 Tim. ii. 6, avriXvr^ov ii'rs^ Tjcvrw)', [a ransom for all.] Whether, then, we interpret the New Testament according to the classical Greek, or according to that which has been called the Hellenistical Greek, i. e. the Greek spoken by those Hebrews who, living mostly in the Grecian cities, used that universal language, but corrupting it by many Hebrew idioms ; we cannot avoid considering the second class of expressions as suggesting that something was given for our deliverance. And thus, the second class of expressions, by which the Scriptures mark the eftects of the death of Christ, exactly coincides as to its amount with the first. The first class represents the wrath which the sins of mankind deserved, as turned away by the sufferings which another endured ; the second class represents prisoners under sentence of death for sin as set free, upon account of the sufferings by which another paid a ransom for their souls. (3.) The third class comprehends all those passages in which forgiveness of sins is connected with the death of Christ. The words commonly used in the Greek Testament for this purpose are a(pirifM/, [I send from me,] and apiSig, [the sending away.] The verb^ which signifies mitto a me, may be applied 108 DOCTUINE OF THE ATONEMENT. in many different situations ; the meaning is always understood to be qualified by the circumstances of the case, and may easily be accommodated to that which v\e mean by forgiveness. For, as every sin involves an obligation to punishment, when the Lawgiver sends away from him the sin, he cancels the obligation, and declares his resolution not to inflict the punish- ment which the transgression of his law deserved. The Socinians argue, from the frequent use of this expression in the New Testament, that forgiveness of sin is an act of the same kind with the remission of a debt. Af!/»3/z,/is applied, in classical writers, to both acts ; for we read a^/7),«,/ gs to-j ^csoug, [I forgive thee the debt], and a)v KarayyiXXircci. [Forgiveness of sins is preached to you.] And the means employed by this man are explained in such passages as the following: — 1 John i. 7, " The blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth us from all sin ;" Rev. i. 5, " To him that washed us from our sins in his own blood." And still more expressly, Matt. xxvi. 28, and Ephes. i. 7 i in which " Scapulae Lexicon, io verb, «?ri^. DOCTRINE CP THE AJONIMKNT. 1C9 last passage the remission of sin is introduced as the explication of that redemption, or release from the sentence of the law, which was purchased hy the blood of Christ, and both are ascribed to the riches of the grace of God. It is plain, there- fore, that to the writers of the New Testament, there did not appear any inconsistency between the forgiveness of sins, and the laying the punishment of them upon another ; and by declaring the intimate connection between these two, they give their sanction to that leading principle in the statement of the Catholic opinion, uhich distinguishes the act of a lawgiver, Avho, in forgiving sins, has respect to the authority of the law, from the act of a creditor, who, in remitting a debt, disposes of his property at his pleasure. (4.) The last expression by which the Scriptures mark the death of Christ, is that in which we are said to be justified by his blood, and through faith in his blood. I mean not to speak at present of many questions respecting that act of God called justification, which will find their proper place under the application of the Gospel remedy ; but, as the change upon our condition, which is implied in the word justi- fication, and which is ascribed to the efficacy of the blood of Christ, corresponds most exactly with the principles upon which the reasonableness of the Catholic opinion rests, I cannot better conclude the defence of that opinion, than by illustrating this particular view of the subject. And for that purpose I shall take, as the ground of my observations, that part of the apostle Paul's writings, in which he discourses fully of justification through the death of Christ, I mean Rom. iii. 19 — 31. The word drAuiou [I justify] is used both in the Septuagint and in the Greek Testament, in a sense to which nothing perfectly analogous occurs in classical writers. The sense is called forensic, i. e., it expresses the act of a lawgiver or judge pronouncing a person righteous in the eye of the law, so as to be acquitted from all obligation to punishment. Rom. viii. '33,Tig syx-aXsirsi xaroc ExXsxrw!/ ©sou; ©sog 6 dixaioojv rig 6 xaraytoivoiv ; [who shall lay anything to the charge of God's elect ? It is God that justifieth. Who is he that condemneth ?] the word is used in the same sense by the Psalmist, Ps. cxliii. 2. Ka; (lti siffiXO'/jg ng -/.oiaiv (Lira rou douXou ffou,. or; ou dixaiudi^ffirai ivuTiov ffov Ta.g Poiv. ("And enter not into judgment with thy servant, for in thy sight no flesh living shall be justified.] The apostle, who had just been quoting the ancient Scriptures of the Jews, seems to have had this passage of the Psalms in his view, when he says, Rom. iii. 20, hioTi £^ iq^y'ji'j voniO-j ov brA.aiu]dr](JsTai icctSa cag^ evwt/c/c aurov' difx, yao vo/zov s-vriyvuffig a/xa^riag. [Therefore, by the deeds of the 110 DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight ; for by the law is the knowledge of sin.] This is the conclusion from the preced- ing part of his discourse, in Avhich he has proved that all, both Jews and Gentiles, are under sin, and the Avhole world ivobiKCi rw @('M. [Guilty before God.] It is plain, therefore, that the justification or acquittal of men in the sight of God cannot arise out of the works of the law ; for if, as the apostle has shewn, a law was given by revelation to the Jews, and was WTitten upon the hearts of the Gentiles, it would appear, Avhen they came before their Judge, that all of them knew what sin was, and, therefore, that all of them deserved to be condemned for being sinners. But how can those who deserve to be condemned as sinners be justified by a righteous God.'' The apostle had asserted, Rom. i. 17, that a method of doing this was revealed in the Gospel ; which method is the explication of that saying found in the law, " The just by faith shall live." But before he comes to illustrate and confirm this assertion, he throws in a long discourse, the purport of which is to shew that there is not upon earth a person Bixaiog it, teyoiv, [justified by works,] and, therefore, that if there is such a thing as justification, it cannot be bia vofMu. [By law.] Having established this point, which is the foundation of the Gospel, he repeats his assertion in the 21st verse, with an addition, which he is now entitled to make ; yyiig vo/jLov, i e., abstractedly from law, independently of the precepts contained in the jMosaic system, or •written on the hearts of men ; and yet not in opposition to the laAv, for this method of justifying men was witnessed, i. e., foretold and foreshown by the law and the prophets. The method of justifying men, which is independent of law, and yet was witnessed by the law, is called most significantly, dr/.aio(f-jvri Qiou. [[Righteousness of God.] The meaning of this name is in part explained by its being opposed, Rom. x. 3, to idia dr/.aioffuj\i or oia vo,aou, [by works or by law,] by this addition, 5/a cridTiug InGou X^iStou ; [by faith of Jesus Christ;] and he says it extends to all who believe, whether Jews or DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. Ill Gentiles, because in tliis respect there was no distinction between them, that all stood in need of the revelation of such a method, since by having sinned they had come short of that approbation which proceeds from God, and their actions, however agreeable to the maxims and customs of the world, could not, when tried in his righteous judgment, entitle them to a sentence of ac- quittal. The necessity of a method of justifying men, not formerly revealed, being now fully proved, and the method being discrimi- nated from every other by the names applied to it, the apostle proceeds to illustrate the propriety of these names, by explaining what it is. His explication is found in the 24th, 25th, and 2()th verses. The apostle has introduced into this short descrip- tion the great principles upon M'hich the reasonableness of the Catholic opinion rests, and the chief of those Scripture ex- pressions by which the truth of it is proved. He begins with ascribing this method of justifying men to the free grace of God. As far as they are concerned, justification is granted to them du^sav, as a free gift ; because their works did not entitle them to acquittal, and had it not been for the goodwill of the Lawgiver^ they must have been condemned. But this free gift is dispensed in a particular manner. The Lawgiver does not simply justify, but he justifies through the redemption that is in or by Jesus Christ. AcToXuTiud/g [[redemption] suggests that the vz'o^ixoi [[iruilty] were delivered from the execution of the sentence of the law by the payment of a ransom ; and necessarily implies the good-will of the ransomer. This interpretation of the word is confirmed by our being told, immediately after, that the iTodiKOt were delivered, not merely by the power, but by the blood of the ransomer ; for the apostle adds, " whom God set forth or ex- hibited to the world, iXadryj^iov dia Trig msriug iv rw uvtov a//jt,ari." \^A propitiation through faith in his blood. J Whether '/XaGrr.nov be translated a propitiation or a propitiatory, the amount is the same. Either way his blood is the mean of turning away wrath ; and we found formerly that there is not only consistency, but the most intimate connection between his blood propitiating the Lawgiver, and being the ransom by which the vTodixoi are set free. The purpose for which God chose this particular manner of displaying his grace in justifying sinners is next mentioned. Eig £('Sj/^/v 7r,g dixaiocuvr^g abrov, croog ivon'^iv Tr,g diKatoduvrig alrov. [To declare his righteousness, to declare his righteousness.] This repetition is a proof that the two intervening clauses are to be considered as a parenthesis, thrown in to illustrate the propriety of this method of declaring the righteousness of God. 112 DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT. The intervening clauses are thus rendered in our translation : ''For the remission of" sins that are past, through the forbearance of God ;" but they might be more literally rendered, " upon account of the passing by of former sins in the forbearance of God." H^oyiyovoTuv marks the sins committed before setting forth the propitiation, i. e. before the time of the Gospel. The Ta^ig/g of these sins is rendered in our translation, the remission of them ; yet it is remarkable that the apostle does not here use atpisii, the word used for remission, both by our Lord and by the apostle himself, at all other times, and formed from apriiMi, the verb used in the Septuagint for forgiving sin. It is probable that the apostle had a reason for this singularity ; and many attempts have been made to find a reason in the diflferent signification of the two Avords. The truth is, that the joining aipsaig [the sending away,] and -Tra^idii [the sending by the side] to a,(iagrjj/>t.arwv, [of sins,] is an application of both words, almost peculiar to the sacred writers ; and that neither the etymology of va^in/j^i, [I send by the side,] nor the practice of classical authors, entitles us to say that it marks a less complete degree of forgiveness than afirjf/jt. [I send away.] This passage, therefore, gives no countenance to a system Avhich has been formed with regard to the extent of the Gospel-remedy, that those who lived under the Mosaic dispensation did not obtain entire deliverance from the punishment of sin till Christ came ; and there is no other passage which warrants us to consider the forgiveness of sins committed before that period, as different in kind, with respect to its effects upon the sinner, from the forgiveness of sins committed after it. But when it is recol- lected that the sacrifices offered by the Jews did not purify the conscience, and that the heathen, who had no direction from heaven, often violated the laws of morality in the manner of offering their sacrifices, it is manifest that the forgiveness which was dispensed before the Gospel could not be in consideration of any satisfaction which was then made to the divine justice; and, therefore, that this time may be called avo^ri Qioj, a time of forbearance ; or, as the word is often rendered in classical writers, induciae, a truce, during which the punishments due to the sins of men were suspended in so far, that the human race was allowed to exist, and to enjoy the bounties of Provi- dence, although the whole world was guilty before God ; and many, whose names are mentioned in Scripture with honour, obtained forgiveness, although we cannot avoid considering them also as concluded under sin, because there is not a just man upon earth that liveth and sinneth not. The forgiveness grafted daring this truce, may most fitly be UOCTUINK OF THK AT0NE3IENT. 113 called '^a^iUii ; because, however complete in respect of the persons to -whom it was granted, it " sent bj their side," trans- mitted to another time, the punishment which their sins deserved. This interpretation of the word corresponds exactly with an expression of the same apostle in his discourse at Athens; Acts, xvii. 30. Tovf /j,sv ovv yj^owug rr\g aymag b^i^ihMv 6 Qiog, ravuv nraoayyiKku roig avd^Miroig 'jraSi itatrayjiX) furavonv, [The times of this ignorance God winked at ; but now com- maudeth men everywhere to repent.] And these two expres- sions, Avhen thus considered as explaining one another, place in a striking light the signihcancy of the two clauses which I called a p '.reuthesis. A truce, during which there was a sus- pension of the punishment due to sin, and the supreme Law- giver overlooked transgressions, rendered the more necessary a demonstration of his justice ; and, therefore, in the time that now is, when the purposes for which the truce was continued so long are accomplished, and ro TrXjj^w/ia rou ^goi/ou, the fulness of time foretold by ancient prophets is arrived, he hath set forth his Son as a propitiation, who, in shedding his blood, endured the wrath due to sins which had been committed, to the end that God, when he now justifies graciously those who could not be justified by their own works, might appear to be righteous. Now we see that the sins which God appeared to pass by in former times, when he granted forgiveness, were not forgiven without the shedding of that blood Avhich was of infinitely greater value than the blood of bulls and goats, being the propitiation ordained and accepted of God, and in the fulness of time set forth, through faith in which all that believe are justified. The apostle, after stating that boasting is efi*ectually excluded by the method of justification which does not arise out of works, and that every charge of partiality in the Supreme Being is removed by the riches of that grace which extends, without distinction, to all that believe, subjoins, vofiov ouii xara^yoxjiiiv bia Trig cr/ffrsws ; /i>) yi\ioiro' aXKa vo/iov laruiiiv. [Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.] The objection is a natural one. If the method of justifying men, which God has now set forth, is %wg'5 voimu, apart from law, we seem to render the law idle, useless ; and we encourage men to transgress it. Far from it, answers the apostle. By the punishment, in this propitiation, of past sins that had seemed to be overlooked, and by justification, through faith in the blood of Christ, we establish the law ; or God thus demonstrates to the world that transgressors have no hope of escaping with impunity ; Avhereas, if no such propitia- 114 DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT, tion had been set forth, the impunity of the old world, and the justification of those who could not be justified by their own works, might have encouraged men to continue in sin. Other interpretations of this passage have been given. But if it appears that by understanding every word in its natural and usual acceptation, we bring out a sense of the whole passage consistent with the context, and agreeable to other parts of the apostle's writings, there is the strongest internal evidence that we have interpreted the apostle rightly ; and, in that case, there is here an apostle of Jesus giving, in a full and formal discourse, the most explicit confirmation of the Catholic opinion. He presents to us the Supreme Being under the character of a law- giver, and he states the death of Christ as an event intended to establish the law by exhibiting the punitive justice of the Lawgiver. At the same time, far from considering this method of vindicating the divine authority as inconsistent with the love of God to man, he ascribes the justification which is thus dis- pensed, to the free grace of God. He does not, as the Socinians do, place the love of God in this, that he forgave sins without reference to any other being ; but he says, Rom. v. 8, that " God commendeth his love to us, in that, while we were sinners, Christ died for us ;" and he does not, like those who hold the Middle opinion, rest our deliverance from the evils of sin merely upon the power acquired by our Redeemer ; but, having presented, as we have seen, the death of Christ under the character of a punishment by which the justice of the Lawgiver is demonstrated, he unfolds the same idea when he says, Rom. v. 9, 11, "Being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him ; and not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement." Grotius de Satisfactione Christi. Stillingfleet on the Sufferings of Christ. Clarke. Tomkins' Jesus Christ the Mediator. Elliot's Vicarious Sacrifice. Law's Theory of Religion. Warburton. Macknight's Comm. on the Hebrews, and Essay on the Mediation of Christ. Magee ou the Atonement. C J15 ] CHAPTER IV. ETKRNAL LIFE. In order to complete the view contained in the Catholic opinion of the nature of the Gospel remedy, we have yet to consider in ■what manner it connects the hope of life eternal with the inter- position of Jesus Christ. According to the Socinian opinion, Jesus Christ is simply the messenger who brought from God, together with the assurance of pardon, the promise of life eternal to all who repent ; and, according to the Middle opinion, he received from his Father, in recompense for his sufferings, the power of giving eternal life, so that all those who receive this inestimable gift receive it upon his account as the partakers of his reward. There is another opinion upon this subject found amongst the many hypotheses with which the works of the ingenious and eccentric Bishop Warburton abound. It is mentioned occasionally in former parts of his works, and from him it descended to Bishop Hurd, and some of his other admirers amongst the English clergy ; but he reserved the full elucidation of it to the ninth book of the Divine Legation of Moses, which was published by Bishop Hurd after his death, as a supplement to his works. This ninth book, which professes to be an attempt to explain the natvire and genius of the Christian religion, and " to furnish the key or clue which is to open to us, and to lead us through all the recesses and intricacies of the last dispensation of God," unfolds with much pomp, but with a very slender degree of evidence, the following system, the amount of which may be given in a few words. Warburton considers pardon on repent- ance as a doctrine of natural religion, which is published indeed in the Gospel, but which did not in any measure depend upon the vicarious sacrifice of Christ, because the law of nature teaches us that repentance is the means of recovering the favour of God, when it has been forfeited by a breach of that law. So far he coincides with the Socinians. But he differs from them IIG ETERNAL LIFE. in asserting, and in proving most ably, that the death of Christ was truly a vicarious sacrifice ; and the peculiarity of his system lies in his finding room for the necessity of such a sacrifice, although he contends, that, from the principles of natural religion, it may be collected that God will, on the sincere repent- ance of oft"enders, receive them again into favour. The place which he finds for it is this : — Immortal life, he says, is a thing extraneous to our nature ; not necessarily inferred from the relation between the Creator and the creature ; and no part of the natural reward of good conduct. It was not conferred upon man when he was first created, but was the sanction of that particular covenant which God made with our first parents some time after their creation, when he placed them in the garden of Eden. It is a free gift which was originally sus- pended upon the condition of obeying a positive command, which was forfeited by the transgression of that command, and which is restored in the Gospel. The whole character of the Gospel, according to Warburton, lies in this — that it is the restoration of the free gift of immortality ; and faith in the blood of the Son of God is the positive command, upon which God the giver has been pleased to suspend his gift. Abstinence from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was the condi- tion of the original grant ; faith in the blood of the Son of God, as a vicarious sacrifice, is the condition upon which the restoration of the grant is suspended ; both are positive commands, deriving all their value from the pleasure of him who appointed them, but for that very reason both are indispensable conditions of the gift. If there is any truth in the principles upon which we rested the doctrine of atonement, this account of the Gospel is a most incomplete theory ; and I have mentioned it only because the contrast may serve to illustrate that part of the Catholic opinion which I am now going to state. In Warburton's system, the gift of immortality w'liich was purchased by the sufterings of Christ is detached from the pardon preached in his name, the former being peculiar to the Gospel, the latter being the common doctrine of natural religidu ; and redemption and justification are appropriated, in this system, to the price paid and accepted for the particular gift of eternal life, without being supposed to have any reference to the means of restoring tlie sinner to the favour of God in general. The Catholic opinion, on the other hand, takes the gift of eternal life, which is the termination of the remedy, in connection with all the steps that prepare and qualify us for the termination ; and, by thus embracing the whole of the Gospel revelation, instead of forming a system ETERNAL LIFE. 117 upon a partial view, it both appears to give a natural interpre- tation of the separate branches, and also derives much support from the harmony with which they unite. There is not in this part of the Catliolic opinion, that op- position to other systems wliich we found in the former part. The Catholic opinion agrees with the Socinian as to the promise of eternal life which God has given us in Christ ; with the Middle as to the power of the Redeemer in conferring it ; Avith Warburton's system as to the free restoration of that which had been forfeited, and could not be claimed. But it differs from nil the three in comprehending points Avhich they omit, and in maricing connections which they overlook ; and therefore, I have not here to engage in that kind of controversial discussion which was necessary in stating the doctrine of atonement, but merely to give a delineation of what those who hold the Catholic opinion consider as a complete account of the nature of the Gospel remedy. The foundation of the hope of eternal life is laid in what the Scriptures call reconciliation. For, if all men are under the sentence of condemnation, and so children of wrath, that sen- tence must be reversed in order to their being delivered from wrath, before they can look forward with the expectation of good to other states of being. This order is beautifully stated b)'' the Apostle Paul in several passages, such as the following — ■ Rom. V. 1, 2 — " Therefore, being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God." The condemnation pro- nounced upon the first transgression included a sentence of death ; " dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return ;" a sentence which, although not immediately executed upon the transgressors, has ever since retained its power over their posterity ; for death, which entered into the world by sin, 3/;)X^£, passeth upon all men. If this event, Avhich withdraws men from their abode upon earth, and puts an end to the present exertion of their faculties, were in reality, Avhat it appears to be, the termination of their existence, the evils introduced by sin could not be said to receive a remed}', because this part of the sentence of condemnation, although suspended for a little, would in t!ie end be fully executed. The Gospel, therefore, professing to bring a remedy for these evils, and yet not professing to de- liver men from returning to the dust, reveals a resurrection of the body from the dust, with Avhich it is mingled after death, and thus opens to man the possibility of Receiving hereafter, in his whole nature, that complete remedy which is not adminis- 118 ETERNAL LIFE. tered here. This prolongation of existence, beyond the period when it is forfeited by that sentence to ^vhich all the posterity of Adam are subject, may be stated as the first branch of the reversal of the sentence ; and in the New Testament it is uni- formly ascribed to the interposition of Jesus. Ileb. ii. 14 — " lie took part of flesh and blood ha dia rou Savarou xaraiyrifffi rov to y.pa- Tog zyjj\ra, to'j '^avarov, roursart rov diaQoXov ; that through di ath he might render unavailing the power of him who has the power of death." 2 Tim. i. 10, -/.araiyrjaavTog /u.iv rov'^avarov, (pc/jrioairog de t,^r,v Kui a^dagSiav bia rou svayyiXiou- [Having rendered death unavailing, and brought life and immortality to light by the Gospel.] 1 Cor. XV. 57, " Thanks be to God who hath given us the victory over death through our Lord Jesus Christ." It is not meant by these expressions that the world had no hope of immortality till Jesus came. From the beginning of the world, in all countries, and in every state of societ}^ men have looked forward to another life. Although the promise of life eternal formed no part of the sanction of the law of Moses, yet the hope of such a life is often expressed in the Psalms, and by the prophets : it had become a part of the national faith of the Jews before Jesus came, and we find both our Lord and his Apostles adducing proofs of a future state, out of their ancient Scriptures. Jesus, therefore, is said, to have brought life and immortality to light, not that he was the first who taught it — not merely because his manner of teaching it was free from the obscurity and hesitation which appeared in every former teacher who spoke of this subject — but principally because that which he did, took away the obstacle which no other had power to remove. Death intervenes by a judicial sentence between the present life and that future life for which man looks. No other teacher had authority to say that this judicial sentence would be re- versed by a restoration of the life which it took aivay. But Jesus, having by his death procured an acquittal from the sen- tence, renders death ineffectual for the purpose of preventing the future life of man ; so that immortality when taught by liim may be as readily embraced and as firmly believed as if death did not intervene. But, although an acquittal from the sentence of death is necessary in order to our future existence, the hope of what we call life eternal does not necessarily arise from this acquittal. For mere existence in a future state, even when supposed to be free from those pains which would render it a curse instead of a blessing, does not satisfy the desires of the human soul. In looking forward to other states of being, it pants for enjoying there the happiness of its nature ; and it is manifest that there ETEKNAL LIFE. 110 is a -wide difference between a prolongation of life after it had been forfeited, and a right to the greatest blessing which the Father of spirits can bestow — the perpetual enjoyment in his presence of those benefits which he may resume when he will, and of a measure of them supposed to be infinitely superior to all that he is seen at present to bestow. It is agreed, there- fore, by Christians of all denominations, that what we call eternal life is the gift of God ; an expression which they have learnt from the Apostle Paul, who uses it in a situation which shews that he meant to give it all its significancy. Rom. vi. 20. " The wages of sin is death ; but the gift of God, ro ya.^i6n.(i rov Qeov, is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord." The hope of a gift does not go beyond probability without a promise from the giver ; and therefore all Christians agree in consider- ing eternal life as the promise which God hath promised us. But those who hold the Catholic opinion are distinguished from the Socinians by connecting this promise with that which Christ has done, i. e. by considering this gift of God as not only pro- mised to men lay Jesus Christ, but as given them upon his account. In this respect the Catholic and the Middle opinions appear to agree. But while the Middle opinion considers this gift as conferred by the power of the Redeemer upon those whom he chooses to make the partners of his reward, the Catholic opinion establishes a more intimate connection between our right to eternal life, and that which was done by our Saviour upon earth. Concerning the nature of this connection, there is some Tariety in the language of those who hold the Catholic opinion, A distinction has been made between the passive and the active obedience of Christ. Those who made the distinction under- stood, by the passive obedience of Christ, all the sufferings ■which he underwent for our sins ; by his active obedience, all the piety, resignation, humility, and benevolence which rendered his life the most perfect pattern of righteousness. The former being penal, were considered as the satisfaction to the justice of God : the latter, being a fulfilment of the law which says, " the man that doeth them shall live in them," were considered as meritorious of a reward. It was said, therefore, that we are saved from wrath by the sufferings of Christ, and that we acquire a right to eternal life through the merits of his obedi- ence. But, in this, as in many other instances, an attempt was made to distinguish things naturally indivisible. The passive and the active obedience of Christ cannot be disjoined. For, in all that Jesus sufi'ered there was obedience to God and good 120 ETERNAL LIFE. will to man, and the virtues of his character •were illustrated and enhanced by the situation in -which he displayed them. The great body of Catholic divines, therefore, have followed the sacred \vriters, to whom this distinction is altogether un- known. They generally ascribe our redemption to the blood of Christ, because his death was the most illustrious act of obedi- ence, and the conclusion of the life which for our sakes he had led upon earth ; but they shew us, by various expressions, that they do not exclude the efncacy of the sorrows and the virtues of that life. Thus the Apostle says, Rom. v. 19, " By the obedience of one shall many be made righteous ;" an expression which does not, as those who hold the Middle opinion maintain, resolve the suiferings which we call penal merely into a virtuous exertion, but which conjoins this last act with all the submission to God displayed by Jesus from his incarnation jw-^xf ^avarov. []Unto death.] Phil. ii. 8. In like manner, the Scriptures, in order to shew that the efficacy of the death of Christ was not confined to the deliverance from punishment, which is generally spoken of as the immediate effect of that event, represent it in different places as having procured for us also eternal life. Heb. ix .12, 15, "By his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. He is the mediator of the new testament, that, by means of death, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance." 1 Thess. v. 9, 10, " Christ died for us, that whether we wake or sleep, i. e. whether we be found alive or dead at the general resurrection, " we should live together with hira." Thus, in the language of the New Testament, Acts, xxvi. 18, apiffig ufia^Tiuv [^forgiveness of sins] and nXri^cg iv Toii riyiaG/jt.tvoi; [^inheritance among them that are sanctified] are conjoined as flowing together from the interposition of Christ : and agreeably to this language, the active and passive obedience of Christ, words seldom used in modern times, are considered as constitut- ing together what are called his merits — what the apostle, Rom. V. 18, calls, h dr/.aioj[J!,a, Qone righteousness,] which he opposes to the iv 'TTa^a-zTUf/ya [^one offence] of Adam. He does not mean one single act of Jesus, but the merit or righteousness arising out of all his actions and all his sufferings taken in one complex view, through which righteousness the free gift comes upon all men, ng dixaiuaiv X^ur^g. QUnto justification of life.] For Jesus, who was infinitely blessed and glorious in himself, and who, possessing all things from the beginning, was incapable of re- ceiving a personal reward, undertook that economy which the ETKllNAL LIFE. 121 Scriptures reveal for our sakes ; and all the merit arising out of the execution of it is imputed or transferred to us, i. e. counted jis ours, so that we derive the benefit of it. lie was made " sin for us, that Ave might be made the righteousness of God in him." 2 Cor. V. 21. The same thing is expressed. Gal. iv. 4, 5. Jesus was made under the law in two respects ; in respect of the sanction of the law, the curse due to trangressors which he endured, and in respect of the precepts both of the ceremonial and of the moral law which he fulfilled. In his suffr-rings and in his actions, he did the will of his Father ; and this obedience, being yielded in the human nature which he assumed in order to accomplish our deliverance, is considered as yielded in our stead and for our sakes : the merit of it is counted to those to whom the remedy of the Gospel is applied, so that upon account of it we are both delivered from the curse of the law, and " receive the adoption of sons." This last expression, wliich is commonly used in the New Testament to mark the change produced upon the condition of Christians by Christ's having made peace, manifestly includes that right to eternal life which they acquire through him. From enemies they become " child- ren of God, and if children, then heirs, heirs of God, and joint heirs with Christ." Heaven is the house of their Father, their city, their country, or, as our Lord has expressed it, " the kingdom prepared for them from the foundation of the world," which they are called to inherit. But, if that account of the eft'ect of Adam's transgression, upon ■which the Catholic opinion proceeds, be founded in Scripture, his posterity are not qualified to take possession of this inherit- ance. The corruption which they inherit from their ancestor, being an estrangement from the fountain of life, upon which account it is known by the name of spiritual death, is diametri- call}' opposite to that intimate communion with God implied in life eternal ; and as this corruption is sufficient, independently of all outward evils, to make men wretched upon earth, so, if it were carried with them beyond the grave, they would find, even in that state where pure spirits enjoy supreme felicity, the misery inseparable from sin. That the remedy, therefore, may corre- spond to the extent of the disease, and that Jesus may truly accomplish the purpose for which it is said he was manifested b}' destroying the works of the devil, it is not enough that ho abolished death, or rendered death ineffectual for preventing thrt future life of man, and purchased by his merits an everlasting reward ; bis religion must also confer upon his followers those qualifications and dispositions by which they may be meet for entering into life. Whether this change upon tlic character of VOL. II. G 322 ETKnXAL LIFE. men is accomplished by the moral influence of doctrine, precept, and exarajde, or by the eflicacious influence of the Spirit, and how tliis last, which the Scriptures seem to declare, can be reconciled with that liberty which enters into all our conceptions of an accountable agent, are questions which belong to that division of our subject Avhich I called the application of the remedy. But that there is such a change, in whatever manner it be effected, is unequivocally declared in such expressions as the following. All those whom Christ delivers from punish- ment, and to whom he gives a right to eternal life, are " made fice from sin;" they "become the servants of God ;" they "put off the old man, which is corrupt j" they "put on the newman, which is renewed after the image of God ;" they are " dead unto sin, and alive unto God through Jesus Christ ; a peculiar people, zealous imto good works."* These expressions, and many others ♦/f the same kind, paint a character of mind, and a general tenor of life, which constitute the beauty, the health, and dignity of the human soul, and from which there result that "peace which passeth all understanding" here, and the capacity of en- joying supreme felicity hereafter. From what has been said, the propriety is evident with which the two words salvation and redemption are employed to denote eternal life piu-chased by Christ ; as Heb. v. 9, " being made perfect', he became the author of eternal salvation, aiTiog ffdjryjPiag aictiViov, unto all them that obey him." And Ileb. ix. 12, " having obtained eternal redemption, aimiav XutoujSiv sb^a/jjBiog." As the happiness of heaven is obtained for us in the same man- ner with the acquittal from the sentence of condemnation, and is the entire removal of the evils Avhich sin had introduced, this completion of the undertaking of the Redeemer is most fitly designed by the words which primarily denoted the acquit- tal : and the ej)ithet aiomog [eternal] is significant of the very same thing which John has expressed in his description of the city of tlic living God, where the tree of life grows, the leaves of which are for the healing of the nations ; Rev. xxii. 3, Kai vav -/.aravads/jLa ova iSrai in, [and there shall be no more curse,] i. e. the curse pronounced upon man, when he was driven from the tree of life, is completely removed when he is re-admitted to it, and it shall return no more. Thus Jesus, by giving what is called. Rev. xxii. 14, "a right to the tree of life," does indeed destroy the works of the devil : he is the second Adam, who restores all that the first had for- feited J and the completeness of the remedy which he brought, * Rom. vi, Eplics. iv. 21—24. Titus, ii. 13, 1-1. ETERNAL LIFE. 123 cannot be better expressed tlum in the words of Paul; Horn. v. 21, " that as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Clirist our Lord." We have now seen the manner in v.hich the hope of eternal life, or a right to tlie tree of life, is connected with what Christ did upon earth. But a right so infinitely above their deserts, conferred by the free grace of God upon those Avho were under sentence of condemnation, transcends all our experience of the divine goodness, and all our conceptions of generosity ; and therefore, " God, willing to shew more abundantly unto the heirs of promise the immutability of his counsel," liath con- firmed this right by all the discoveries, given in Scripture, of the present condition of that person fiom whose merits it is derived. The resurrection of Jesus may be mentioned as the first branch of the confirmation of that right acquired for us by his death. Had Jesus, after dying for our sins, continued under the power of the grave, doubts must have arisen in every mind impressed with a sense of guilt, whether his blood was able to take away the sins of the world. But, when all the sufferings which he endured as the punishment of sin were concluded by his being restored to life, here was a fact presented to the senses of mankind, containing plain and incontestible evidence that the effects ascribed to his sufferings were attained ; because the Supreme LaAvgiver, in loosing him from the pains of death, declared that he accepted that atonement which his death offered. Accordingly, it is said, Rom. iv. 25, that Christ " was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justifica- tion :" i. e. we know by his resurrection that we Avho had offended are, upon account of his sufferings, accounted righteous before God ; and it is said, 1 Pet. i. 3, that " God hath begotten us again unto a lively hope, by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead ;" i. e. his resurrection is an experimental assur- ance of our victory over death. 1 But the Scriptures reveal much more than the resurrection of Jesus, or his bare return to life : and the full security given in the Gospel for our attaining the exalted reward which is included in the complete redemption procured by his death, is found in all the circumstances that are revealed concerning the life which he now lives with God. For if, as the apostle reasons, lloni. v. 10, " when we were enemies we were re- conciled to God by the death of his Son ; much more being reconciled we shall be saved by his life ;" i. e. if his death had the effect of propitiating the divine wrath, much more shall hii ]24 ETKRNAL LIFE. life insure eternal salvation to those who are now no longer enemies. Eternal life having been acquired for us by the death of Christ, and yet being a distant reward, the Gospel affords us this most satisfying security for its being at length conferred, that the person who died to acquire it is alive for evermore, and has the keys of hell and of death." It is not necessary, in this place, to dwell upon the illustra- tion of the various points which belong to this subject. I shall only bring them together in one view, to shew distinctly how they unite in constituting that security of which I now speak. Jesus Christ, who gave his flesh for the life of the world, is himself the giver of life. He is revealed as the Creator of the worlds, from whom the life of all the inhabitants of the earth originally proceeded. He displayed upon earth the power of rais- ing from the dead whom he would ; he directs us to consider these occasional exertions as a specimen of that power with which he shall raise all men at the last day ; and he sa3's that "power is given him over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as the Father hath given him."t There can be no doubt, therefore, that the Son of God, who hath life in himself, "is able to save to the uttermost them that come unto God by him." That he is willing to exert his power in giving eternal life to those whom he redeemed, is an inference clearly deduced from his death. A Being who did the will of the Fatlier, in dying that we might live through him, who revived that he might be Lord of all, and whose purposes do not admit of alteration, either from the mutability of his own mind or from external opposition, cannot be conceived to leave unfinished the gracious purpose for which he suffered, but will in due time put us in possession of the right which he acquired for us at such a price. The force of this inference is illustrated by the various lan- guage in which the Scriptures express the intimate connection between Christ and the persons for whom he died. They are those whom God hath given him ; the subjects of his kingdom; tlie members of his body ; the flock which he gathers into his fold, and which he defends from every enemy ; his sheep, who hear the voice of the good shepherd, and follow him. In the felicity which this peculiar people, whom he hath purchased for himself by his own blood, attain through him, he sees the travail of his soul ; and the praises which are represented, in the book of the Revelation, as proceeding from the company which he hath redeemed to God, publish the glory of his name to the • Rev. i. 17, 18- t J^liu xvii. 2. ETKRXAL LIFE. 125 whole intelligent creation. He was not ashamed to call them brethren, for lie took part with them of flesh and blood ; and even now that he is set down on the right hand of God, he has not laid aside the nature which he assumed ; for he is still called the Sou of Man. He appears in the presence of God for us, a merciful and faithful high priest ; and, touched with the feeling of our infirmities, he maketh intercession for uSj and is our advocate with the Father. Not that he uses any words to move God ; but that, in virtue of the blood which he shed on the cross, and with which he is said now to sprinkle the mercy-seat iu heaven, he procured us access to the Father^ and presents our prayers and services, which, when offered in his name, are " spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God by him." The high priest of the Jews, entering upon the day of atone- ment into the holy of holies, with the blood of the bullock and the goat, and with the names of the children of Israel upon his breastplate, was a striking type of the intercession of Christ. But there are two essential points in which the antitype excels the type. The one is, that the high priest of the Jews entered once a- year upon a stated day; but the intercession of Jesus continueth ever, (Heb. vii. 24, 23,) so that at all times we may " come boldly to the throne of grace." The other is, that noiia but the high priest ever entered ; whereas Jesu-, who entered into the true holy place, after having obtained eternal redemp- tion, has, by his entering, opened and made manifest a way for us. He is our forerunner, rr^tjd o/mq 'o-rso tj/mmv, Heb. vi. 20 ; our hope " entereth into that within the vail," whither he is gone ; and although we yet remain in the outer court while he is mak- ing intercession, we know assuredly from his words, that where he is, there shall also his servants be." This assurance is con- firmed by the nature of the blessings which his intercession procures. When he ascended on high he received gifts for men, which are continually imparted to those who derive from him a right to eternal life. The Holy Spirit, by whom these gifts are distributed, is called the Spirit of Jesus, and is said to be sent by him :t and he is not only the source of comfort, and the cherisher of hope, but he is expressly styled, Eph. i. 14, ailoc- Cwv rjjj xXriPovo/jbiac Ti/muv, " the earnest of our inheritance." The significancy of this expression will appear, by attending to the difference between an earnest and a pledge. A pledge is a security for some future payment, which is delivered up as soon as the pnyment is made ; and therefore it may be, and generally is, of a kind totally difierent from the payment. An earnest is • Johnxiv. 3. t 1 Pet. i. 11. John xv, 2G. 126 ETERNAL LIFE. a part of tlie payment gi^'en as an acknowletlf^ment that the whole is due, the same in kind -with that which is to follow. In this sense tlie Spirit is called the earnest of our inheritance, hecause the life formed upon earth by the influences of the Spirit, is the temper of heaven already begun in the soul. It is much more than a preparation for heaven : it is an assurance which a Cbristian has within himself, given to him by the Lord of life, that he shall certainly reach heaven. For, as the apostle speaks, Col. iii. 3, 4, that life Avhich we lead is supported by the invisible ii)fluences of the Spirit, whom Christ, who sits on the right hand of God, sends into the hearts of his people. The springs of this life are withdrawn from the eyes of men ; but they are hidden with Christ ; and they will become manifest at that time when he by whom we live shall appear, and Ave, who have risen with him to a new life, shall be partakers of his S'o'"/'- ... A\'hile Christians are thug sealed by the Spirit unto the day of redemption, Jesus is in heaven preparing a place for them. He directs, by the power that is committed to him, every event for the good of that church which he purchased for himself; and Avhcn all the purposes of divine Providence are accom- plished, he shall be revealed from heaven as the judge of men. We are to appear before the tribunal of him who died, that we might live, and we are to receive from his hands the crown of life. The particulars which I have now brought together, unfold the full amount of that expression of Peter, " Thou hast the Avords of eternal life :"* and of that expression of Juhn, " This is the record, that God hath given us eternal life, and this life is in his Son."t It was purchased for us by him ; the power of conferring it resides in him ; he prepares us for it, and he Avill at length bestow it. From this \\v^y of the connection betvreen the hope of eternal life and the interposition of Christ, there arises also the signifi- cancy of that name Avhich is given to him, the mediator of the New Testament, the mediator between God and man ; (Xieirrtg. Ileb. ix. 15. 1 Tim. ii. 6. He is not merely Inlcr-iumcins Dei, the messenger who, coming from God to man^ declared the divine purpose ; but he is a person who, standing between God and his offending creatures, offers on our part a satisfaction to the divine justice, and brings us from God an assurance that the s;itisfaction is accepted. He becomes in this way, Ileb. vii. 22, 'KPiiTTovog diuOr,y.rjg iyyvoc. tlie snrtty of a better covenant, * Jthn yi. Gij. t 1 John v. 11. ETERNAL LIFE. Ii27 ■\vliicli being confirmed by the deatb of the surety, acquires tlie i^ature of a testament, an irrevocable deed, because the death loses its effect unless the blessings of the covenant are conferred upon those for whom the surety died. Yet, by his reviving after he died, he becomes himself the dispenser of these bless- ings, and is in this most eminent sense a mediator, that, having procured us access to the Father by his death, he ever lives to make intercession. His mediation is effectual, because it pro- ceeds upon the merit of what he did for our sakes ; all the riches of divine grace are connected with this merit ; and the nature of the gospel remedy may be thus described according to the Catholic opinion : — It is pardon and eternal life, or a complete redemption from the evils of sin, obtained and con- ferred through the mediation of a person Vv'ho, having offered himself a sacrifice for sin, and being now set down at the right hand of God, is emphatically styled " the Captain of Salvation, the author and finisher of faith." To those who have a slight impression of the nature of that condition which called for the remedy, there may appear to be a superfluity of condescension in this mediation. But they who think of the fears and suspicions which are natural to guilt, which are often described in Scripture, and which are there confirmed by an awful exhibition of the punitive justice of the Lawgiver, will perceive the utility and fitness of all that pro- vision which is made for overcoming the distrust, and reviving the hopes, of those who are justified by the blood of Christ. By the gracious condescending views which are given of the present condition of that person who died for sins, in order to procure for men the most glorious reward, the Gospel becomes the religion of those to whom it is addressed, the humble, the con- trite, the poor in spirit; and by .Jesus, we "believe in God, who raised his Son from the dead, and gave him glory, that our faith and hope might be in God."* " I Pet. i. 21. [ 128 : CHAPTER V. EXTENT OP THE REMKDY. Having treated of the nature of tlie remedy which the Gospel brings, I proceed now to give an account of the different opinions which have been held concerning the extent of that remedy. But, before I enter upon the controrerted questions on this subject, I wish to direct your attention to two prelimi- nary points. In the first all Christians agree ; and the differ- ences respecting the second do not distinguish any great bodies of Christians, but are confined to a few individuals. SECTION I. The first preliminary point is, that the Gospel appears framed and designed by God to be the religion of the whole human race. As the Almighty Father made of one blood all nations to dwell upon the face of the earth, we cannot suppose that the paternal affection with which he looked down upon those whom he formed after his own image, will be in the smallest degree affected by the varieties of climate and situation ; and all the conceptions of enlightened reason lead us to presume, that, if their moral state render them the objects of his compassion, the exercise of that compassion will not be bounded by any lines so capricious as those which the confines of different states mark upon the globe. Accordingly, the declaration made by the Almighty immediately after the first transgression intimates, by the form of the expression, an idea most becoming the sove- reignty of Him who speaks, tbat all the children of Adam were somehow to partake of the fruits of that victory v.liith the seed EXTENT OF THE KE:.IKDV. 1'J9 of the woman was to gain over the tempter ; and tlie promise made to Abraham, that in his seed all tlu; families of the eartii were to be blessed, conveys the most explicit assurance, that, at some future time, a dispensation, commensurate in extent with the population of the earth, was to proceed from the descendants of Abraham. The dispensation given by Moses to the posterity of tlie patriarch was of a very different kind. It was confined, by the terms of its promulgation, to the land of Judea ; the various ceremonies Avhich It prescribed were such as the inhabitants of countries remote from Jerusalem could not perform ; and the object of all the institutions was to preserve, in a small district, a peculiar people, holy unto the Lord ; while the rest of the Avorld were left in ignorance and idolatry. The partiality from which this local dispensation appears at first sight to have flowed, is a favourite subject of declamation with deistical Avriters. It is stated as an unanswerable proof that the Jewish religion is unworthy of the Supreme Being. The boasted peculiarity of the children of Israel is ranked by these writers amongst the other forms of superstition which national vanity and a concur- rence of circumstances maintained for ages in particular districts; and as Jesus and his apostles assert the divine authority of Moses, and build Christianity upon the law given by him, their claims of being the messengers of heaven are represented as very much shaken by this degradation of Judaism. This plausible objection is fully answered in all the able defences of Christianity ; particularly by Leland, in his View of Deistical Writers, and by Clarke, both in his Evidences of Keligion, and in some of his Sermons. The subject is also treated in Shaw's Philosophy of Judaism ; in Shaw's Considera- tions on the Theory of Religion ; in Jortia's Discourses on the Truth of the Christian Religion ; in Warburton's Divine Lega- tion of Moses ; and in various treatises on the harmony of the divine dispensations. I shall endeavour to state, in a short compass, the idea which these writers have fully elucidated. The children of Israel were not distinguished by a special revelation upon account of any peculiar excellence of character, which rendered them, more than other nations, the objects of the divine favour ; but they were raised up, in the Avisdom of Providence, as tlie instruments of preserving iu the Avorld, amidst abounding idolatry, the knowledge and Avorship of the true God, and of conveying to future ages the hope of that Deliverer Avho had been promised from the beginning. To qualify them for this important office, they were separated from the surrounding heathen by circumcision, by a burdensome g2 139 EXTENT or THE REMEDY. ritual, and by many express prohibitions against intermarrying Avith their neighbours. But it -vvas not meant that they should remain unknown. The geographical situation of the land •which God had given them, brought them Avithin the view of those nations who make the most conspicuous figure in ancient history. The commerce which they were obliged to maintain with other nations, the fortimes of some individuals of that chosen race, and many circumstances in the history of the nation, particularly their captivities and their dispersions, drew the attention of the world to the singularities of their establish- ment. Some knowledge of their law Avas, by these means, carried abroad ; and from the laud of Judea, as from a light shining in a dark place, there proceeded rays, which, in the midst of heathen superstition, prevented the darkness fiom being universal. It is difticult to estimate the degree of aid which the efforts of human reason derived from the revelation granted to the people of Israel. But the researches of Bryant, in his Ancient Mythology, and of other learned men, seem to place it be3'ond doubt, that this aid Avas more considerable than a superficial, uninformed observer would apprehend. And Avhen •we consider the successive changes in the political state of the Jews, and the situation of the Roman empire at the time of the birth of that extraordinary personage of whom there had been a general expectation, there appears to be the best reason for regarding the whole conduct of the Almighty towards his chosen people, as part of that preparation by which he opened to the Avorld the universal and spiritual religion, which, in the fulness of time, was published by his Son — a preparation which in none of its parts Avas so rapid as to our imaginations may appear desirable, but Avhich it Avould be presumptuous in us, upon that account, to pronounce unsuitable to the circumstances of the case. The laAv of JMoses, then, AA-as a local dispensation intervening between the promise made to Abraham, that in his seed all the families of the earth should be blessed, and the fulfilment of the promise. It originated in the promise, it announced the great event Avhich Avas the accomplishment of the promise, and it terminated Avith that event. A great part of the study of a Christian divine lies in tracing the connection betAA'een the pre- paratory dispensation and that to Avhicli it jiointed ; and the more intimately that he is acquainted Avith this connection, the better able Avill he be to vindicate the God of the Jcavs from the charge of partiality. One thing is obvious, that this narroAV confined religion gaA'e notice of a dispensation that Avas to be \iniversal. David says, in Psalm xxii. Avhich is a continued prophecy of the Messiah, " All the ends of the Avorld shall EXTENT OF THE REMEDY. 1.11 remember and turn to the Lord ; all the kindreds of the nations shall worship before him :" and the Jewish prophets intimate^ by various expressions, that the partial instruction whicli the law of Moses attbrded, was to be succeeded by a kind of teach- ing not confined to any one people, but under which nations that had been strangers to the true God were to know and worship him. It is true that the national vanity of the Jews, flattered by their peculiar privileges, gave other interpretations of such prophecies. They either conceived that the dispensation of the J\Iessiah, by subjecting the nations of the earth to their dominion, was to exalt them to the empire of the Avorld, then held by the Romans ; or, if their minds did rise to some conception of a spiritual change upon the world, it Avent no further than this, that other nations were to exchange the idolatry in which they had been educated for an observance of the ceremonies given of old from JMount Sinai. They did not think that the chosen people of God could ever be made to descend to that erjuality with the heathen which is implied in supposing that the oifer- ings made in other countries are as acceptable to God as those presented at Jerusalem. Far less did it occur to their minds that the whole city was to be laid waste, and the temple of Solomon rased to the ground ; and that this effectual abolition of the ceremonies of the law Avas to prepare the world for receiv- ing a spiritual religion, clearly discriminated from that local system. These prejudices of the Jews, founded upon a literal interpretation of their own sacred books, and possessing the minds of all ranks, required much attention at the first publica- tion of the Gospel ; for Jesus appeared as the Messiah of the Jews, claiming to be that son of David whom their prophets had described as a mighty prince ; and his religion, deriving a great part of its internal evidence from its perfect consistency with that former revelation of which it is the fulfilment, was to go forth from Judea to enlighten the ends of the earth. The order of Providence, then, required that Christianity should be preached first to the Jews ; and it was necessary that, if they did not embrace the promise made to their fathers, the manner of its being preached to them should be such as to render their infidel- ity inexcusable, and to vindicate the justice of the severe pun- ishment ordained for their nation. This is the key to a great part of the New Testament ; and I do not know any views which persons who expound the Scrip- tures to the people have more frequent occasion to bring forward and to apply^ than those which I liave now stated. From these views we derive the reason of our Lord'ti confining his personal ]P)f2 EXTENT OF THE RKMKDV. ministry to the Jews, and forbidding the apostles, when he sent tlicm forth during his a!)ode upon earth, to go into the way of the Gentiles. From hence we are able to account for the slow opening of the universal character of Christianity ; and we learn to admire the skill and address with which our Lord employed general expressions, parables, and action, gradually to unfold tliis oftensive truth. The name by which he commonly designed himself, " the Son of IMan," was most expressive of his connec- tion with the whole human race. In his discourses with the Jews, he frequently called himself the light of the world, and many words dropped from him, which, howsoever they were understood by his hearers, appear to us intended to mark the full extent of his gracious undertaking.* " Other sheep I have which are not of this fold ; them also I must bring, and there shall be one fold and one shepherd." " I, if I be lifted up," referring to the manner of his death on the cross, " will draw all men to rae."t Several of his parables convey, under a thin disguise, the future extension of his kingdom, the rejection of those Avho thought they had an exclusive title to its privileges, and the introduction of those whom the Jews held in contempt.']: Our Lord began his public ministry at Jerusalem by driving the buyers and sellers out of the temple ; and he repeated this action a little before the crucifixion. The action appears to an ordinary reader to be merely a transport of zeal. But if you road the enlightened commentary of Bishop Hurd at the end of the first volume of his sermons, you will regard it in a much higher light, as a symbolical action, intimating, in the most significant manner, that the house of GJod was to become, under the Christian dispensation, a house of prayer for all nations. The only place in the temple allotted for the devout heathen, or proselytes of the gate, who chose to come up to Jerusalem, that they might there worship the God of Israel, was an outer court, in which many things necessary for the service of the temple Avere exposed to sale. Our Lord, by driving the buyers and sellers out of this court, vindicated the rights of the Gentiles, who had been insulted during their devotions by the uproar of a fiiir ; and although he did not proceed so far as to bring them into the sanctuary, yet by this mark of his attention he gave a pledge of the fulness of that grace which was soon to be revealed to them. Accordingly the commission given to the apostles immedi- ately before his ascension, was unlimited. " Go, make disciples of all nations. Ye shall be witnesses to me unto the uttermost • Mat. viii. 11. f John x. IG; xii, 32. J Mat, xx. xxi. xxii. EXTKNT OK THE REMEOV. 133 part of the earth. And he said unto them, that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem."* Tlie gift of tongues, con- feiTcd upon them ten days after his ascension, qualified them for executing this unlimited commission ; and the miracles ■which they were enabled to perform, constituted an evidence of their divine mission equally intelligible to men in all countries, and fitted to bring universal conviction. Paul, who was added to the number of the apostles after the ascension of Jesus, was told by a special revelation, at the time of his conversion, that he was to be sent far from Jerusalem to the Gentiles ;t and Acts X. relates the manner in which the minds of the other apostles, who still retained many of the prejudices of the Jews, were opened to conceive the true character of the Gospel, and to understand the extent of their own commission. Peter was instructed in a vision not to call that unclean which God had cleansed ; he then received a command to preach the Gospel to Cornelius, a devout heathen ; and his preaching was accom- panied with a descent of the miraculous gifts of the Holy Ghost upon Cornelius and his family. These three circumstances — the vision, the command, and the gifts of the Holy Ghost — appeared to the other apostles to constitute a full vindication of his con- duct ; and although they had blamed Peter when they first heard of his going in to the Gentiles, they were satisfied, after he expounded to them the whole matter, that, by the Gospel there is '•' granted to the Gentiles also repentance unto life." As soon as this enlarged idea took possession of their minds, it formed one great subject of their discourses and their writings ; and we see them labouring to bring it forth to the admiration of the world. "While Paul avails himself of his Jewish learning to prove that the Gospel is the end of the law, his epistles abound with the declaration of that mystery, i. e. that part of the conduct of Divine Providence formerly unknown, which had been revealed to him, that the Gentiles should be fellow- heirs, and partakers of the same promise in Christ by the Gospel. He magnifies the grace of God, who now appears not the God of the Jews, bur the God of the Gentiles also, "rich in mercy to all that call upon him ;" and he dwells upon this distinguish- ing excellence of the Gospel, that under it there is neither Jew nor Greek, circumcision nor uncircumcision, but that Christ is all in all. The Evangelist John, who wTOte his Gospel long after the rest, in relating a saying of Caiaphas the high priest, adds these words of himself, that Jesus Christ " should die, not * 3Iat. xxviii. 19. Acts i. 8. Luke xxlv. 40, 47. f Acts xxii. 21. 134 EXTENT OF THE REMEDY. for that nation only, hut that also he should gather together in one the children of God Avhich were scattered abroad ;"* and in the hook of the Revelation, where he Avrites hy the command- ment of Jesus the things shewn to him in vision which were to he hereafter, he mentions an angel whom he saw flying in heaven, having the Gospel to preach to them that dwell upon the earth ; and he says that he beheld a great multitude of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, standing before the throne and before the Lamb.t I have thought it of importance thus to bring together, in one view, the Scripture account of Christianity as an universal religion — as offering a remedy which, in this respect, corre- sponds to the disease, that it is not confined to any one nation, but may be embraced by men of .every country. It is a branch of the evidence of Christianity, that there is nothing in its nature to prevent the universal publication of it, and that there is a tendency in the general course of things to bring about this event. And, although the accomplishment of the prediction, that it is to be preached to all nations, has been delayed, there cannot fairly be drawn by reasoning or analogy any presump- tion that the prediction will never be accomplished. We are thus warranted to apply to the Christian religion that character which it assumes to itself as the religion of mankind : we discern one sense in Avhich it may with propriety be said that " God will have all men to be saved, and that Christ is the propitiation for the sins of the ■\^•hole Avorld ;" and we perceive the significancy of tlie expression of Paul, " I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ ; for it is the power of God unto salva- tion to every one that believeth, to the Jew first, and also to the Greek." SECTION II. The second preliminary point is, that the extent of the remedy brought in the Gospel, is limited by the terms in which it isolfered. As Jesus gave his apostles a commission to j:)reach repentance and remission of sins in his name among all nations, they executed their commission in such words as these, " Repent and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out. Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved." " I • Joliu xi. 4'J -:.2. t Rev. xiv. C ; vii. 9. EXTENT OF THE RE3IEI)V. 133 testified," says Paul, "both to tlie JeAvs, and also to the Greeks, repentance towards God, and faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ."^- From these passages, which accord witli the general strain of the New Testament, it seems to follow, that the Gospel, Avhich is the religion of sinners, and professes to bring a remedy for the evils of sin, is a remedy only to those who repent and believe. Although different sects of Christians, therefore, may disagree as to the description of repentance and faith, as to the manner in which they are produced, and the connection between them and the efficacy of Avhat Christ did ; it does not appear possible that any sect which receives the Scriptures, can deny that a certain character or state of mind, Avhich is there expressed by repentance and faith, is required in all who partake of the remedy, and consequently that the extent of the remedy is limited by this requisition. This acknowledged point, that whosoever repents and believes shall be saved, is the great subject of preaching : and as it is the only point respecting the extent of the remedy, which is clearly and incontrovertibly revealed in Scripture, so it is of infinitely greater importance than all the controverted points. They are matters of speculation, upon which it is natural for the human mind to form some opinion. The opinion may be more or less agreeable to the most rational conceptions of the divine attributes, to the views incidentally given in Scripture, and to the great end of Christianity. There is truth or error, there is consistency or inconsistency, in the sentiments entertained upon this as upon all other subjects ; and, as the Ciiurch of Scotland has adopted a particular system of opinions concerning the extent of the remedy, it is decent and fit that those who desire to be her ministers should be well acquainted with the grounds of that system. But it is not necessary that these grounds, or that the system itself^ should be explained to the people. We fulfil the office which is committed to the ministers of the Gospel, when we call our hearers to repent and believe, in order that they may be saved ; and all those teachers who agree as to the character of the Person by whom the remedy was brought, and as to the nature of the remedy, may discharge this duty with the same fidelity and the same energy, although they differ in their speculations as to many points that respect the extent of the remedy. The Socinians, who differ from all other Christians as to the nature of the remedy, cannot be expected to agree with them as '' Acts, iii. 19; xvu 31; xx. 21. 133 EXTENT or THE REJiEDV. to the extent of it. Considering the pardon of those who repent as flowinfT from the essential goodness of God, without reference to anything that Christ has done, they must conceive that pardon is dispensed at all times, and in all places, with equal liberality ; and considering eternal life not as purchased by Jesus Christ, but as the free gift of God to creatures naturally mortal, they conceive that this gift will be bestowed upon all virtuous men that have lived, from the beginning of the world, under any dispensation of religion. They allow that Christianity was of great advantage to the world, by bringing assurance of these truths ; and that those who lived in the ancient world were in the same situation with the inhabitants of countries ■where the Gospel has never been published, without that com- fort under a consciousness of infirmities, and those incitements to well-doing, which Christians may derive from the Gospel. But if, on this account merely, they fail in their duty, their situation will plead indulgence for their failings ; and if they attain nearly the same degree of virtue as Christians, without the same advantages, they are still better entitled to partake of that exuberant grace by which our Father in heaven rewards the services of his children. There is a system with regard to the nature of the remedy, which considers the loss of immortality as the only forfeiture incurred by the sin of Adam, and the restoration of forfeited life as the blessing purchased by Christ. Those who hold this system are led I)y their principles to consider the purchase of the second Adam as of the same extent with the forfeiture of the first : they allow^, with the Socinians, that those who never heard of Christianity are destitute of many advantages for the improvement of their minds which that revelation alibrds ; but they do not conceive that the extent of the remedy is, in any measure, dependent upon the cxt.'ut of the publication. They bring down the cifect of the death of Christ to a right which he has acquired of giving immortality to a race of beings by whom it had been forfeited, and they look upon an universal resurrec- tion as the accomplishment of his undertaking. If both these systems are essentially defective as to the nature of the remedy, there must also be a defect in their manner of stating the extent of it. Christians who consider the death of Christ as an atonement, upon account of which the sins of those that repent are forgiven, have many points to take into view before the}^ can determine the manner in which this atonement reaches either those to whom it has been preached, or those to whom it has not. But although we are not yet prepared for stating that system with regard to the condition of persons who EXTENT OF TIIK Ri:MEr)V. 1^7 have not heard of the Gospel, which results from the Catholic opinion concerning the nature of the remedy, it may be proper to mention, tmder this second preliminary point, a sjjlendid speculation concerning the final state of the wicked, which has arisen out of some of the principles formerly delineated. If, according to the Socinian system, the essential goodness of God incline him at all times to pardon transgression, we cannot suppose that he will prolong the existence of creatures naturally mortal, only that he may continue, through all eternity, to punish the sins committed during a few years upon earth: and if, according to the Middle system, it is the character of the Gospel to restore forfeited life to the whole human race, it seems to follow that the restored life cannot, in any case, ho merely the capacity of enduring everlasting punishment, since, upon that supposition, the restoration of life, which is stated as a universal blessing, would to many be the greatest curse. These two systems, therefore, tend to produce the belief that those who have been wicked shall, after a certain time, be either annihilated or reformed. The annihilation of soul and body, according to the Socinian system, is the natural mortality of man left to operate upon those Avho reject the ofter of eternal life made in the Gospel : according to the IMiddle system, it is the curse which Adam con- veyed to his posterity, Avhicli the Gospel offers to remove from all, and which it effectually removes from those who have lived virtuously. As the sins of those who reject this offer deserve a punishment more severe than any that is inflicted in this life, they are raised at the last day that they may receive according to their deeds ; but, after they have endured asuflicient measure of punishment, they are left to relapse into that death, that extinction of being, in which the whole human r;ice would have remained, had it not been for the grace of the Gospel. If the souls and bodies of all that have been wicked are at length annihilated, the final effect of the sins committed in this life will be a loss of existence in the universe, but not a perpetuity of misery ; for, after a certain time, no beings of the human race shall exist but those who, in consequence of the virtues which they had displayed upon earth, are made happy for ever. Others conceive that the Avicked shall not be annihilated, but, after a certain time, reformed. Considering the soul of man as naturally immortal, and thinking it unworthy of the ruler of the universe to adopt, as a method of conducting his government, the destruction of a number of beings whom he had made to live for ever, they endeavour to reconcile the future misery of the wicked with their system concerning the nature of the Gos- 138 EXTRMT OK TIIK RKTiIKDV. pel rcmefly, l)y supposing that the punisliments wliich are en- dured after (l(!atli, hciriff inteudccl, like many of tlie cahimitics of this liie, to cftrn^et the vices of those upon wlioni thev are inflicted, sliall terminate in their reformation. If it he admitted tliat goodness constitutes the whole moral ch;iract(!r of the Deitv, that, as with respect to his understanding he is liglit, so Avitli respect to his will lie is love, and nothing hut love, it will fol- low, thiit what are commonly called his other attrihutes are only modifications of goodness, the necessary result of this primarv attrihute ; that Justice, wliich is g(!ncrally stated as opposite to goodness, is nothing else hut a constant desire of giving to his reasonahle creatures what their moral state requires. Those who are docile and tractahle, he leads hy gentle methods to the perfection of their nature ; those whose passions are impetuous, and whose hearts are liard, he suhdues hy afHietions, that they may become partakers of his holiness. The discipline of this life, which often appears liarsh, is only the expression of his fatherly love administering salutary chastisement ; and as tliis discijiline does not produce its efrcet with regard to all during the short time tliat is allotted to them upon earth, he continues the chastisement in a future state, where it is administered with a severity suited to the depravity of the sufferer, and is pro- longy its own gf)od aifcctions to take an interest in the prosperity of other heings, is ready to entertain them njion very slender evidence. ]5ut it is of much importance for students of divi- nity to rememher tliat t]ies(.' prosj)eclsdo not constitute an essen- tial T)art of theology. TUay extend far, very far indeed, hcyond the limits of our ohservation or our cai)aciti(;f5. They rest upon conjectur(;a, not upon reasoning; upon incichiital expressions of Scripture, which admit of other interpretations ; u|)()n analo- gies Aviiich, even when they are most |)oinled and numerous, amount only to prohahility, whl<;h are easily overstrained hyamind ])leasing, and they may h(( jdausihie ; hut (hey are the sjieculations of crea(ure3 %vho forg<'t that tlnjy "are hut of yesterday, and know nodiing," ami who, Kt«'i)]»ing hcyond the humhle and soher province that is allotted to man, presujn(( to instruct the Anci(!nt of Days. It is the charact(!r of sound theology, not to suhject the adminis- tration of (iod to our conjectures and lluKU-ies; hut, in the firm persuasion tliat he is able to do all his pleasure, and that he will do that which is right, to in<]uin! with reverences and with dili- gence what he has done, and what he has said he will do, and to make the information which iScripturc affords upon these points, the measure of our hopes, and the rule of our «-onduct- Although, therefore, 1 Judge it proper, in openiug that great division of the subjects id' theological controversy iipon which we now enter, to mention speculations that have been indulged EXTKNT Ol- Tin; RKMEDY. 141 rfiDconiinp; tlin firiiil contlition of tlioso wlio rcjfft tlio salvation of tin; (iospc), it is not to Ix; supposod tliat tlicso Kpcfiilations constitute the points which divide the opinions of the (Christian world in ro;,'ard to the extent of the remedy, ''hey are the speculations of individual writers, or they arise inciflentally from general systems, i'ut they are not the characteristicul tenets of any great hody of (Jhristians ; and whatever similarity there rnay aj)j)ear in the name, the questions concern ini^ uni- versal anrl particular redemption have a very diffVrf-nt ohject. "With these ut they differ as to the destination of the death of Christ — Avhether, in the purpose of the Father and the will of the Son, it respected all mankind, or only those persons to Avhom the bene- fit of it is at length to be applied. The doctrine of universal redemption is mentioned as one of the distinguishing tenets of the Pelagians. It forms the subject of one of the five points Avhich comprehend the Arminian sys- p.'jiTicuLAR iikiji:m!'ii()N. in tern. It is hold by all tho Luthornn churches. It socnis to be taupcbt ill one of the articles of the Church of Jui^larifl, and several piutr-j of ihe Liturgy ; and it is avowed by tlie great body of English divines as the doctrine of Scripture and of their Church. This doctrine will be understood from (he second of the five Anainiau points, -which is thus expressed: "Jesus Christ, the Saviour of the world, died for all men, and for every individual, so as to obtain for all, by his death, reconciliation and remission of sins; upon this condition, however, that none in reality enjoys the benefit of this remission but the man Avho believes." l)r M'hitby, in Ids discourse on the five points, thus explains the doctrine : " When we say Christ died fur all, we do not mean that he hath purchased actual pardon or reconciliation or life for all ; this being in effect to say that he procured an actual remission of sins to unljelievers, and actually reconciled Cod to the impenitent and disobedient, which is impossible. lie only, by his death, hath put all men in a capacity of being justified and pardoned, and so of being reconciled to and having peace with God, upon their turning to Cod, and having faith in our Lord Jesus Christ; the death of Christ having rendered it con- sistent with the justice and wisdom of Cod, -with the honour of his majesty, and with the ends of government, to pardon the penitent believer." According to this doctrine, the death of Christ is an universal remedy for that condition in wliich the posterity of Adam are in^'olved by sin — a remedy equally intended for the benefit of all. It removes the obstacles which the justice of God opposed to their deliverance. It puts all into a condition in which they may be saved, and it leaves their actual salvation to depend upon their faith. The remedy may in this way be much more extensive than the application of it. But. even although the offer of pardon were rejected by all, it would not follow that the atonement made by the death of Christ was unnecessary, for the offer could not liave been given without it ; and whatever recep- tion the Gospel may meet with, the love of God is equally conspicuous in having provided a method by which he may enter into a new covenant with all who had sinned. This doctrine appears to represent the Father of all in a light most suitable to that character, as regarding his children with an equal eye, providing, without respect of persons, a remedy for their disease, and extending his compassion as far iis their misery reaches. And it appears to represent the satisfaction which Christ offered to Divine justice, as opening a way for the love of God to the whole human race being made manifest by the most enlarged exercise of mercy. These views are supported 144 PARTICULAR RKWKr.lPTION. by the general stniin oi" Scrip'ure, and l)y many very significant expressions Avliich occur in the New Testament.* It is said that Jesus Christ is the Saviour of tlie ■\vorkl ; that he died for all ; that he gave himself a ransom for all ; that he tasted death for every man.t The extent of the grace of God in our justifi- cation seems to be compared with the extent of the effects of Adam's sin in our condemnation, j. Large societies of persons professing Christianity, all of whom Ave cannot suppose to be of the number of those who shall be finally saved, are addressed in the Epistles as those for whom Cl)rist gave himself; and there are expressions in some of the Epistles which seem to intimate that he died even for those who perish. § False teachers, who brought in damnable heresies, are said, 2 Pet. ii. 1, to have been bought by the Lord. All to whom the Gospel is revealed are commanded to believe in Christ for the remission of sins, which seems to imply that he has made atonement for their sins ; and to give thanks for Christ, which seems to imply that he is a universal Saviour. Jesus marvelled at the unbelief of those among whom he lived ; he upbraided them because they repented not ; he besought men to corao to him ; and he bewailed the folly of the Jews, saying, as he wept over their city, " if thou hadst known in this thy day the things which belong to thy peace."|| Even the Almighty, both in the Old and in the New Testament, condescends to use entreaties and expostula- tions, as well as commands: — " What cuuld have been done more to my vineyard that I have not done in it ? Oh, that my people had hearkened unto me !"^ " God hath given unto us," says the Apostle, " the ministry of reconciliation, to wit, that God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself. Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us ; we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God."'^'^ The establishment of a Gospel ministry continues this ambassadorship in every CInistian country, and may be regarded as a standing witness of the universality of redemption, because these expos- tulations which the servants of Christ are commissioned to use in the name of God, appear to be without meaning, unless we suppose that God hath done everything on his part, and that it rests only with us to embrace the remedy which is offered. In giving this general view of the arguments by which the * John i. 20 ; iii. IC. 1 Tim. ii. 4 ; iv. 10. 2 Pet. iii. 0. t John vi. .-)!. 1 Tim. ii. 6. Ileb. ii. 9. 1 Johnii. 2. J Kom. V. 18. § 1 Cor. viii. 11. Rom. xiv. 15. II ]Mark, vi. (J. Matth. xi. 20, 28. Lul?e xix. 41, 42. % Isaiah v. 4. Psalm. Ixxxi. 13. ** 2 Cor. v. 18, 19, 20. PAUTirULAT? RKDKMPTION. 145 advocates for tlie doctrine of" universal redemption support flicir opinion, I have separated them as much as possible from those more intricate questions of theology whicli will meet us as we advance. But even from the simple manner in which I have stated them, it is plain that they admit of much amplification. Some of them are susceptible of rhetorical embellishment ; others lead into a large field of Scripture criticism ; and there are others, the force of which cannot be estimated till after a review of the whole Calvinistic system. These arguments are spread out at length, not only by professed Arminian writers, but by many English, divines, particularly in BarrovA''s Sermons upon the doctrine of universal redemption, and in the second of Whitby's Discourses upon the five points, entitled " The Extent of Christ's lledemption." These two writers have given a collection of all the texts of Scripture which appear to establish this doctrine, and a very favourable specimen of the mode of reasoning by which it is commonly supported. Any person who examines with candour the arguments now stated, will acknoAvledge that they have considerable weight. I mention this, because I do not know any lesson more becom- ing students of divinity, than this — not to despise the reasonin;;s of those Avith Avhose opinions they do not entirely agree. The longer they study theological controversy with that sobriety and fairness of mind which is essential to the character of every inquirer after truth, they Avill perceive the more clearly how little acquainted with the Aveakness of the human understanding, and Avith the intricacy of many of the points that have divided the Christian Avorld, are those Avho state their opinions in the petulant, dogmatical manner often assumed by smatterers in knoAvledge, as if there AA'ere not a shadoAV of reason but upon their OAvn side. In the question which Ave are noAV treating, it requires a thorough acquaintance Avith the Calvinistic system, and much compass of thought, to apprehend the full force of the ansAvers that may be given to the arguments of universal redemption ; and I warn you rather to AAait for the conviction AA'hich Avill arise from a view of all the j)arts of that system, than to expect that arguments equally plausible, in favour of particu- lar redemption, are immediately to be stated. The foIloAving observations, hoAvever, Avill, upon reflection, open the sources of these arguments. 1. Those Avho hold that the destination and intention of the death of Christ respected only such as shall finally be saA'ed by him, appear to be AA-arranted by many expressions Avhich occur in the Ncav Testament ; such as the folloAvIng : — John, x. 1 1, 15, "I lay doAvn my life for the sheep ;" that is, as the expres- A'OL. II. H I4G PARTICULAn REDEMPTION. sion is explained in the context, for those Avho " hear and follow me ;" John, xi. 52 ; xv. 12, 13, 14 ; Eph. v. 25. 2. As the persons to -whom the intention of Christ's death appears in such expressions to be restrained, are found in all places of the world, there is a propriety and significancy in the general phrases employed elsewhere to denote them : and when some of the texts commonly urged in proof of universal redemp- tion ai-e examined particularly, there will be discovered in the context, circumstances which indicate that the general expres- sions there used were intended to mark the indiscriminate extension of the blessings of the Gospel to men of all nations. Thus, because the benefit of the Jewish sacrifices was confined to that nation, John the Baptist, when he saw Jesus coming to Jiim, marked him out to the people as " the Lamb of God, which tiiketh away the sin of the Avorld ;"'"' that is, of all those in every place who are forgiven. So John, in his first epistle, speaking as a Jew, says of Jesus, " He is the propitiation for our sins ; and not for ours only," that is, not for the sins of us Jews only, " but also for the sins of the whole world." t So the apostle Paul says of Jesus, he " gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.":}: But if we attend to the scope of the discourse of Avhich these words make a part, which is an exhortation to pray for all men, and a command to all men in every place to pray, it will be perceived that the apostle's argu- ment does not necessarily require any farther meaning to be affixed to these words than this — that Christ gave himself a ransom, not merely for that peculiar people who are sometimes called in the Old Testament the " ransomed of the Lord," but for all in every place who shall obtain redemption. 3. Although deliverance from the evils of sin, the great blessing purchiised by the death of Christ, is peculiar to those Avho shall finally be saved by him, yet there are blessings which the public- ation of the Gospel has imparted to others ; and there is strict propriety in saying that the love of God to mankind which appears in creation and providence, and by which God is good to all, has produced the manifestation and the death of Christ, although the benefits intended by that event for those who shall finally be saved are very much superior to the benefits Avhich it may be the instrument of conveying to the whole human race. To a great part of the world the Gospel has communicated the most valuable knowledge : it has delivered many nations from gross superstition and idolatry ; it has explained the duties of men more clearly than any other method of instruction ; it * John, i. 29. f 1 Johu, ii. 2. + 1 Tim. li. C. PARTICULAR RKDEMPTION. 117 furnishes restraints upon vice and incentives to virtuous exertion that are unknown to civil legislation ; and Ly all these nictliods it contributes to the prosperity of society, and to the welfare of the individual. These common benefits of Christianity are sufficient to explain many expressions in the epistles addressed to Christian societies, without our being obliged to suppose that all the members of these societies were in the end to inherit eternal life. In respect of these common benefits, we understand the following passages, Heb. vi. 4, Ileb. x. 29, and 2 Peter, ii. 1. For all who had an opportunity of hearing the Gospel, had tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come ; they were sanctified through the blood of the covenant ; and, in the language of Peter in his first epistle, they ^vere "■ redeemed with the blood of Christ, from their vain conversation which they had received by tradition from their fathers." Amongst the number thus redeemed, were the false teachers of whom he speaks in his second epistle. They had relinquished the errors in which they Avere educated : they had professed themselves the servants of Jesus, and were bound to him as their Lord ; but by bringing in damnable heresies, they denied the Lord that bought them. The apostle Paul seems to refer to this distinction between the common benefits which all professing Cbristians derive from the death of Christ, and the complete salvation of those who are called his sheep and his friends, when he says, 1 Tim. iv. 10, " God is the Saviour of all men ;" not only in respect of his preserving providence, but in respect of that %«?/; GMTYiOioz [grace which bringeth salvation] which, through the kindness and love of God our Saviour, hath appeared to all men — " specially of them that believe ;" that is, he is in a much more eminent sense the Saviour of them that believe, than of other men. 4. It should be considered that, although the advocates for universal redemption do not allow that there is any weight in the two preceding observations, yet they are obliged, upon their own principles, to admit that many of those expressions, from which they infer that Christ died intentionally for all men, require a limitation ; for, if faith in Christ be the condition upon which men become partakers of the propitiation which he offered to God, it seems to follow that all who have not the means of attaining this faith are excluded from the benefit of the propitiation. But it is certain that the ancient heathen world did not know the nature of that dispensation the promise of which was confined to the Jews ; and it is manifest that a great part of the Avorld at this day have never heard of the Gospel. Were the offer of pardon that is contained in the 340 PAr.TicLLAR nicnicMrTioN. Gospel actually made to all the children of Adam, there would he an appearance of truth in saying that all men were thereby put into a condition in which they might be saved, and that it depended upon themselves whether or not they embraced the offer. But if the efficacy of the remedy is inseparably connected with its being accepted, it cannot be, in the intention of the Almighty, a universal remedy, since he has withheld the means of accepting it from many of those for w horn it is said to have been provided. The words of the apostle, then, " God will have all men to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth," must receive from the event an interpretation different from that which is the most obvious ; and all the other texts urged in favour of universal redemption are in like manner limited by the imperfect publication of the Gospel. The Arminians them- selves acknowledge that there is a secret which they cannot penetrate — a deep and unsearchable counsel, in leaving so many nations without the possibility of attaining to tlie truth ; and all their attempts to reconcile an intention in God to save the inhabitants of these nations, with the grossness of the super- stition in which they are involved, and the insuperable obstacles which education, example, habit, and situation oppose to their believing in Christ, are unsatisfying and defective ; because they either proceed upon the principles of the Socinian doctrine, that men may everywhere be saved by acting up to the light of nature, or they approach to some part of the C'alvinistic system, respecting the eflfectual and irresistible operation of the grace of (iod upon the soul ; which the Arminians profess to renounce. 5. To those who hold the doctrine of particular redemption, it appears that the event, in those countries where the Gospel has been published, clearly indicates that there was not in the Almighty an intention of saving all men by the death of Christ ; for it is plain that many of those Avho have every opportunity of l)elieving in Christ, either reject his religion, or shew, by their conduct, that they do not possess that faith Avhich entitles them to partake in the benefits of his death. With regard to them, therefore, his death is in vain ; and if God intended that they should be saved, his intention fails of its effect. But it seems, when we hold such a language, that we speak in a man- ner unbecoming our circumstances, and inconsistent with those views of the Almighty which are suggested by reason, and are clearly taught in Scripture. " Known to God are all his works from the beginning." The whole scheme of the universe, which derived its existence from his pleasure, was present to the Creator at the instant when he said, " Let there be light." The actions of his creatures, which form a most important part PARTICUrAR REDEMPTION. 149 of tliat scheme, were to him the object of a foreknowledge in- finitely more clear and certain than our knowledge of th;it which is before our eyes. The perfections of his nature exclude the possibility of any change in the divine mind ; and those events which to us appear the most unexpected and irregular, fulfil " the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his will." If these views of the Almighty are just, and if our minds are able to follow out the consequences which necessarily result from them, we cannot conceive him susceptible of that disappoint- ment, regret, and alteration of measures which we often experi- ence by the failure of our schemes ; but we must admit that the original intention of the Creator and Ruler of the universe, always coincides with the event which takos place under his administration. Since many, therefore, to whom the Gospel is published, appear, as fiir as we can judge from our own observ- ation, and from the complaints of Scripture, to remain under the Avrath of God, we do not seem to draw an unwarrantable conclusion, when we infer from the event, that it was not a part of the intention of the Almighty to deliver them from wrath, by the death of his Son. In the same manner as many who have the means of improvement do not attain knowledge or skill, and some who have talents and opportunities for rising to wealth and lionour, pass their days in obscurity and indigence ; so many to whom the offer of eternal life is made through -Jesus Christ, put it far from them. In both cases, the blessings of God are abused, and men do not reap the temporal and spiritual benefits, which, had it not been for their own fault, they might have reaped ; but in neither case is the intention of God disap- pointed ; for he foresaw the use which they would make of his blessings, and all the consequences of their conduct entered into the plan of his government. These views of the Almighty seem to correct that desire of magnifying the love of God to mankind, which has led many to ascril)e to him an intention of saving all men, although he knew that a great part of the human race were not to be saved. They seem to suggest, in place of this defective intention, a destination more worthy of the sovereignty of the Ci'eator — ' a destination of saving those who shall in the end be saved ; and there are many places of Scripture in which the destination, that we are led in this manner to deduce from the perfection of the divine nature, seems to be intimated. I refer at present only to .John vi. where our Lord says repeatedly, that he gave his life for the world, and where he speaks also of those whom the Father hath given him : — " The bread of God is he who J 50 PARTICULAR REDEMPTION. Cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world. The bread that I will giA-e is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world. All that the Father giveth me shall come to me. This is the Father's will, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, hut should raise it up again at the last day." Here are the doctrines of particular and of universal redemption seemingly taught in the same discourse. The ex- pressions of the one kind must he employed to qualify the expres- sions of the other kind ; and it cannot be said that we pervert Scripture, when, adhering to the particular destination of saving those who shall be saved, which reason teaches and Jesus Christ declares, we give the other expressions such an interpretation as renders them consistent with that destination. This fifth observation has conducted us to the threshold of those intricate questions in theology which arise out of the different conceptions formed by Christians of the nature and the manner of the divine foreknowledge. To the views entertained of this attribute, we may trace the different opinions concerning the doctrine of predestination ; and therefore from this point i shall begin — under a deep sense of the difficulty of the subject, and of the reverence and humility with which it becomes us to speak of the counsels of the Almighty — to state these opinions. Barrow's Sermons. Wliitby on tlie Aniiiniaii Points. C 151 ] CHAPTER YII. OPINIONS CONCERNING PREDESTINATION. SECTION I. The opinion -whicli is to be stated first, because it appears to be the most simple, may be called the Socinian- It is the system of those who attempt to get rid of all the difficulties in which the divine foreknowledge seems to involve the subject, by denying that this attribute belongs to the Almighty to the extent in which it is usually understood. Socinus and his immediate followers admitted that God knows all things whicli are knowable. But they abridged the objects of divine know- ledge, by withdrawing from that number those events whose future existence they considered as uncertain. Their manner of reasoning was this. Everything that now is has a real exist- ence, which is the subject of knowledge. Everything tliat is past had at some former time a real existence, which is also the subject of knowledge. Everything that is necessarily to happen at some future time maybe known by a mind capable of tracing the nature of the connection, by which it proceeds out of that which now is. Thus all the changes in the material world arise, according to certain general laws, out of its present condition. If any being, therefore, is perfectly acquainted with that con- dition, and with the operation of those laws, he sees the future in the present ; and, in general, every event, the futurition of which is certain, may 1)e the subject of infallible knowledge. But there are events which appeared to Socinus contingent, in this sense of the word, that they do not arise from anything preceding, as their cause. They may be, or they may not be ; and as he thought that they were not certainly future, he thought also that it was impossible for any being to know certainly beforehand that they were to happen. Amongst this 152 OPINIONS CONCERNING PKEDESTINATION. number he ranked the fleterminations of free agents, all those actions which proceed from the will of man ; for, as the actions of men follow the choice which they hare made, and as he who chose one thing might have chosen another, it appears that there is no previous circumstance necessarily and unavoidably pro- ducing this or that action ; and from hence Socinus inferred that everything done by men acting freely is, by its nature, incapable of being the subject of that infallible foreknowledge commonly ascribed to the Almighty. According to this system, there cannot he any such decree with regard to the salvation of particular persons as is meant by the word predestination ; for, as the remission of sins is connected in Scripture with faith and repentance, and as the determinations of free agents are supposed to be unknown to God, he must be ignorant whether any persons will attain that character, without which they cannot be saved. The only decree respecting the salvation of men, Avhich Socinus admits to have been made from the beginning, and to be unchangeable, is this general conditional decree, that Avhosoever repents and believes in Jesus shall have eternal life. This decree is applied to particular persons, when they appear to possess the character which it describes ; and by this application, what in its original form was merely the declaration of a condition, becomes an absolute peremptory decree, giving eternal life to those who have been faithful unto death. But it is unknown to God what number of such persons there may be, or whether there may be any. Although he has provided means for the recovery of mankind, he is as ignorant of the efficacy or the result of these means as any of the children of men ; and all the expressions in Scripture, which we are accustomed to consider as spoken after the manner of men, are understood by Socinus to be the literal descriptions of the state of a being who waits with anxiety for what men will do, who is grieved at their obstinacy, who repents that he has done so much for them, and who is liable to meet with total disappointment in the end which he proposed to himself. If this system appears to remove some of the difficulties which attend other systems, it purchases this advantage by bringing the character of the Deity so far down to a level with human weakness, as to sap the foundations of religion. If God does not foresee the determinations of free agents, he cannot foresee the consequences of their determinations. But if it be con- sidered how very much the state of the moral world depends upon actions that proceed from choice, how far the history of the human race has, from the beginning, been affected by the OPINION'S CONCERNING PRKDKSTINATION. 153 conduct of creatures who might have acted otherwise, we must be sensihle that a being who had not the foreknowledge of that conduct, was, from the beginning, ignorant of by much tlie greatest part of the transactions that were to take phice in the world which he made. The whole train of prosperous and calamitous events that were to befal families and nations was hidden from his eyes. Instead of appearing in the exalted light of the author of a plan by which the affairs of the universe are ordained and arranged for the good of his creatures, he becomes a spectator of unlooked-for occurrences, and his power and wisdom are employed merely in directing events as they arise to his view. His measures are perpetually traversed by evils which he had not foreseen ; and while he is occupied from day to day in applying remedies to the disorders which he discovers in different parts of his works, new emergencies shew that some other remedy might have been better suited to the case. From the following expressions of Socinus, it will appear that I have not exaggerated, in painting that degradation of the Deity which necessarily results from abridging his foreknow- ledge : — " No absurdity," says Socinus, " will follow from supposing that God does not know all things before they happen. For of what use is this knowledge? Is it not enough that (lod perpetually governs all things, and that nothing can he done against his will ; that he is always so present by his wisdom and power, that he can both discern the attempts of men, and hinder them if he pleases ; that he can turn all that man can do to his own glory ; and that he may, when he sees proper, appoint before-hand in what manner he shall accommodate his actions to the attempts which man may make ?""'•' The answer to all such questions is this, that it is irreverent, and contrary to the idea of an infinitely perfect Being, to ask. Is it not enough for him ? that even we are able to form the notion of a much higher degree of perfection than is stated in the questions; that the characters of Creator and Ruler of the universe imply much more ; and that the Scriptures uniformly ascribe to God the foreknowledge of the determinations of free agents. The moral conduct of many individuals was foretold before they were born ; the behaviour of the people of Israel for a succession of ages, the treatment which they were to receive from the Egyptians, the Babylonians, and other nations ; the peculiar kinds of wickedness which were to prevail in the neighbouring kingdoms ; the obstinacy of the Jews in rejecting the JMessiah; • Socini Pra?lect. cap. 8. h2 Ii4 OPINION'S CONCERNING rREDESTINATlON. the circumstances of his suft'erings; the destruction of Jerusalem, and the corruptions of Christianity — all these are the subjects of predictions so particular, as to shew the most intimate knoAv- ledge of the future sentiments and actions of men ; for the events which I have enumerated, and many others which occur in reading the prophetical parts of Scripture, are of such a kind that they derive their complexion and character, not from any circumstances in the material world, but from the volitions and determinations of the free agents Avho were concerned in bring- ing them about. It cannot be said that the predictions of Scripture declare only what is probable ; for, besides the apparent improbability of many of the events foretold, and the immense extent of time, and space, and operation, to which, the predictions reach, it is obvious that all of them are delivered, not in the language of conjecture, but with the most solemn asseveration, in the name of the God of truth ; and it is hard to form any conception more unworthy of the Supreme Being, than that he should conduct his government by declaring, as certain, future events, concerning which he himself, at the time of the declaration, was doubtful. Socinus, and some later writers who tread in his steps, sensible that the probability of the events foretold does not afford a satisfying account of the predictions that are found in Scripture, have recourse to a system, with regard to the exertion of the divine foreknowledge in particular cases, of which I shall endea- vour to give a fair exposition. They hold that God is able to foresee future events whensoever he pleases, because he can make a particular ordination with respect to them ; ])y which means, events in their own nature contingent become certainly future, and so are the subject of infallible foreknowledge. Thus many blessings foretold in Scripture, are good things which God had resolved to send by the actions of men ; many evils foretold are punishments, Avhich he had resolved to inflict by the same means ; many sins foretold are the consequence of his punishing former sin, by withdrawing that grace which would have restrained from future transgression ; and the whole series of predictions that respect the IMessiah, results from the ordination of the Almighty concerning the deliverance of man- kind. But we must not infer, it is said, from those extraordi- nary cases in which God chooses to foreordain, and consequently to foresee what is future, that his forekuoAvledge of future events is universal. The greater part of the determinations of free agents, he leaves in their natural state of uncertainty : they may choose one course, or they may choose another ; and the OPINIONS CONCERNING PREDESTINATION. 155 course wliicli they are to follow, is unknown to him till they have made their choice. It is admitted by the framers of this new system, that the ordination of God gives events that certainty which renders them capable of being foreknown ; and this principle is bor- rowed from that system of theology which it was their object to overturn. What is peculiar to tliem is, that they confine this ordination to particular extraordinary cases, and suppose all others exempted from it. But a foreknowledge, exerted at some times and not at others, constitutes a most imperfect kind of government ; for the occasion of its being exerted at any particular season, can be nothing else than the state of tlie world at that season : but as this state arises out of that whicli went before, and as the propriety of the measures taken in re- ference to it, is very much affected by that which is to come after, a Being who is supposed ignorant of the great series of events in the universe, is unqualitied for making any extraordi- nary interposition. The framers of the new system, were ob- liged to account for the multitude of predictions respecting the Messiah, by ascribing the whole scheme of his appearance to the ordination of the Almighty. But that scheme, according to the account given of it in Scripture, embraces the introduction, the propagation, and the removal of sin, i. e. the Avhole history of the determinations of the human race, or of their moral con- duct from the beginning to the end of time. The ordination of this scheme, therefore, necessarily includes the foreknowledge of the moral conduct of men ; and we cannot withdraw that moral conduct from the number of the objects foreknoAvn by God, without supposing that he Avas unacquainted with the reasons of that scheme, which we allow that he ordained. It appears, then, that the partial admission of the divine fore- knowledge, to which necessity has driven the Socinians, does not answer the purpose for which it was resorted to : and that this system carries with it its own confutations in presuming to restrict the operations of the Supreme Mind. Reason and Scripture concur in teaching that no bounds can be set to the Almighty. Our faculties may be unable to rise to the exalted conception of a Supreme INIind, to whom all things that have been, that now are, and that shall be, are equally present. But the plain declarations of Scripture supersede our speculations. There we read that all his works are known to him from the beginning ;■•' that all things are naked and open in his sight ;t • Acts XV. 18. t Ileb. iv. 13. li"6 OriNIOXS COXCERMNG PRKDKSTINATION. tliat the purposes of his heart endure throughout all genera- tions.* The power of foretelling future events, which reason teaches to he essential to his nature, is there chained hy him as his prerogative ;t it is often occasionally exerted in uttering pre- dictions : and as well from the nature of these predictions as from the manner in which the power is elsewhere spoken of, we are led to conclude that it implies a perception of all the actions of his creatures, which is not sul)ject to mistake, which is incapahle of receiving any accession, and which extends with equal clearness and facility through every portion of space and every point of duration. That ahridgment of the objects of the divine foreknowledge which Avas first introduced by Socinus, and is peculiar to those Avho follow him, has not been adopted by all who are called >Socinians. Dr Priestley writes thus, in the first part of his " Institutes of Natural and Revealed Religion," which treats of the being and attributes of God : — " God having made all things, and exerting his influence over all things, must know all things, and consequently be omniscient. Also, since he not only or- dained, but constantly supports all the laws of nature, he must be able to foresee what will be the result of them, at any distance of time ; just as a man who makes a clock can tell when it will strike. AH future events, therefore, must be as perfectly known to the Divine JMind as those that are present ; and as we can- not conceive that he should be liable to forgetfulness, we may conclude that all things, past, present, and to come, are equally known to him; so that his knowledge is infinite." Dr Priestley takes no notice of the distinction which 8ocinus made between those events which, arising from necessary causes, are certainly to be, and those which Socinus called contingent, such as the determinations of free agents. The reason is, that Dr Priestley, being a professed materialist, considered the operations of mind as taking place according to the same laws of nature with the motions of body. There does not appear to him any more uncertainty in the one than in the other, and therefore both are, in his opinion, equally the objects of divine foreknowledge. If the doctrine of the universal prescience of God unavoidably involves the principles of materialism, it must be renounced by all who hold that the soul is essentially distinct from the body ; but if the doctrine can be defended without having recourse to these prin- ciples it is not a sound aigument against the truth of the • Ps. xxxiii. 11. -j- Isa. xlvi. 0, 10. OPINIONS CONCERNING PREDESTINATION, ]r>7 doctrine, ■whatever discredit it may thereby suffer in the opinion of the ignorant or careless, that a materialist finds it perfectly reconcileable Avith his system. SECTION II. Arminius, who lived in the beginning of the seventeenth cen- tury, may be regarded as the founder of the system of opinions generally held by those who, Avhile they admit the dignity of our Saviour's person, and the doctrine of atonement, do not hold the other doctrines of Calvinism. lie and his followers re- nounced the peculiar tenets of Socinus with regard to the divine prescience. They considered the most contingent future events as known to God : but the power by which such events are foreknown, appears to them essentially diflFerent from the fore- sight of those events which arise by a continued chain of causes. It is a power of which they do not pretend to form any distinct conception, Avhich they are content to resolve into the superemi- nent excellence of the divine nature, and the existence of which they do not attempt to establish by reasoning, but simply deduce from experience. The Scriptures, we have seen, abound with predictions of a series of contingent events, involving number- less determinations of free agents. But if contingent events were certainly foretold, it is manifest that they were certainly foreknown by that Being from whom the prediction proceeded ; and if the fact be once established, that God foreknows contin- gent events, it is admitted by the Arminians, that all the diffi- culty which we feel in accounting for the manner of the fact, does not constitute any argument against the truth of the fact. Socinus proceeded upon a maxim, which has been repeated after Aristotle in many a system of logic — De futuvis contiiigentibus non datiir detcrmhiata Veritas. [[Concerning future contingen- cies, there is no determining wdiat is really to happen.] Enter- taining no doubt of the truth of this maxim, he apprehended that the certain foreknowledge of events destroyed their con- tingency, and therefore he concluded it to be impossible, or a contradiction in terms, for contingent events to be certainly foreknoAvn. But Arminius and his followers learned to con-ect the maxim of Aristotle ; and it is now universally understood amongst philosophers, that future events, which are in tlieir own nature contingent, may be certain, and consequently may be foreknown. This Aviil be understood from a Tamiliar example. 158 OPINIONS CONCKRNING PREDESTINATION. Whether I am to write a letter to-morrow or not is a matter purely contingent. If no foreign cause interpose to take from me the power which I now possess, I may write, or I may refrain from Avriting. Both events are equally possible ; hut one of the events will certainly happen ; and of the two pro- positions, I will write to-morrow, I will not write to-moiTOW, one, although I do not know which, is at this moment true. The truth which now exists, whether it be perceived by any being or not, will be known at the end of to-morrow to me, and to any person who attends to my employments through the day : and if there is any being who possesses the faculty of knowing the truth beforehand, the determination of my mind is not in the least affected by his knowledge. Although it is certain when the day begins what I am to do, and although the event which is then certain may be known to some being whose understanding is more enlarged than mine, I feel no restraint through the course of the day ; but I write or I do not write, I read or I do not read, I go abroad or I remain at home, accord- ing to circumstances. TVe say, then, that contingency is inconsistent with that necessary determination to one event which excludes the possi- bility of another ; but we say that it is not inconsistent with the certainty, that, of two events, either of which might happen, one is to happen ; and therefore we hold there is no contradiction in saying that a contingent event may be certainly foreknown ; for, as Dr Clarke writes, " Foreknowledge has no influence at all upon the things foreknown ; and it has therefore no influence upon them, because things would be just as they were, and no otherwise, though there were no foreknoAvledge. It does not cause things to be. The futurity of free actions is exactly the same, and in the nature of the things themselves, of the like certainty in event, whether they can, or whether they could not, be foreknown."* It is this possibility of foreseeing future contingencies, such as are the determinations of free agents, which distinguishes the Arminian system of predestination from the Socinian. Both systems proceed upon the general declaratory deci-ee, that "who- soever believeth in Jesus Christ shall be saved," as the first in order, and as becoming peremptory with regard to every indi- vidual after he has persevered infaith. But, Avhereas, the Socinian scheme supposes the number and the names of the individuals that shall be saved to have been from the beginning unknown to God, and consequently the decrees respecting them to be • Sennon on Omniscience of GoJ. OPINIONS CONCERNING TREDESTINATION. ] 5!) made at such times as their faith appears to him, the Arminians do not conceive so unworthily of God as to think that anything new and unexpected can present itself to his mind, and tliat his decrees are successively made according to emergencies ; but they consider all the grounds upon -which the conditional decree is at length to become peremptory with regard to individuals, as from the beginning known to God. The amount of their tenets may be thus shortly stated : God, who wills all men to be saved, and who gave his Son to bo the Saviour of the world, that who- soever believeth in him should not perish, foresaw, before the fouiadation of the world, the use which men would make of the means of salvation provided for them in Christ. Upon the foresight of the faith and good works of some, he determined, from all eternity, to give them, upon account of Christ, and through Christ, eternal life ; and upon the foresight of the un- belief and impenitence of others, he determined, from all eternity, to leave them in sin and subject to condemnation. According to this system, predestination, or the decree that some persons shall he saved and others condemned, rests upon the prescience of God, by Avhich, says Arminius, in the declar- ation of his opinion, God knew, from eternity, what persons, under the administration of the means necessary for producing faith and repentance, were to believe, and what persons were not to believe. By all who hold this system, such a decree is represented as exhibiting at once the goodness and the justice of God : his goodness, in providing a Saviour, and offering the means of salvation ; his justice, in rewarding men according to their works, giving eternal life to those who make a proper use of the means, and condemning only those who abuse them. There is, in the language of the Arminians, an antecedent will in God to save all men; that is, a Avill previous to the con- sideration of the circumstances of individuals, that all men may be saved ; a will m hich does not rest in bare desire, what the schoolmen call rclleilas, but appears carried forth into action in the means w hicli he has provided to accomplish the end. There is in God a consequent will to save only some persons, and to condemn others ; that is, a wnll consequent upon the consider- ation of the conduct of individuals, and corresponding to that conduct. The difference, say the Arminians, between the antecedent and the consequent will of God, is owing entirely to the sins of men ; everything has been done by him that is necessary for their salvation ; and, if they did their part, the antecedent and the consequent Avill of God Avould coincide, and all men would be saved. And thus, by admitting that the actions of moral agents may ]G0 OPINIONS CONCERNING PREDESTINATION. be free, although they are foreknown, and by building upon the divine foreknowledge of these free actions the decree respecting the final condition of mankind, the honour of the divine per- fections appears to be maintained ; the limitation of the extent of the remedy in the Gospel is seen to arise from no other cause but the fault of those to whom it is offered ; and the strongest motives are held forth to engage us to " give all diligence in making our election sure." But plausible and unexceptionable as this system at first sight appears, there are difficulties under which it labours, and imperfections that adhere to it, which will open upon us by degrees as we proceed in the exi^osition of the Calvinistic system of predestination. SECTION TIL The characteristical feature of the Calvinistic system is, that entire dependence of the creature upon the Creator, which it uniformly asserts, by considering the will of the Supreme Being as the cause of everything that now exists, or that is to exist at any future time. This principle is fruitful of consequences which, when they are followed out and applied, give to the doctrines of Christianity ihat peculiar complexion knoAATi by the name of Calvinism ; and from this principle results that view of the divine prescience which is the ground-work of the doctrine of predestination that I am now to delineate. Of things impossible there can be no knowledge. The same character by which they must remain for ever in the class of nonentities, so that not even omnipotence can bring them into existence, withdraws them from the number of those subjects of which any mind can form a distinct conception. But all things that are possible may be conceived ; and the more per- fect any understanding is, the more complete is the representation of things possible in that understanding. To the Supreme I\Iind, therefore, there are distinctly represented, not only all the single objects Avhicli may be brought into existence, but also all the possible combinations of single objects, their relations, and their mutual influences on the systems of which they may compose a part. Out of this representation of possibilities which is implied in the perfection of the divine understanding, the Supreme Being selects those single objects, and those combinations of objects, which he chooses to bring into existence ; and every circum- stance in the manner of the existence of that which is to be. OPINIONS CONCERNING TREDESTINATION. 1()1 thus depending entirely on his will, is known to hira, because he has decreed that it shall be. The representation of all things possible in the divine undei-- standing has been called by theologians Scienlia simpUcis iniel/i- genticv : and the knowledge which God, from eternity, had of all that he was to produce has been called scienlia vixioui.i. Amongst the objects of the former knowledge are to be ranked all those things the reality of which would have been the same although no creature had ever been produced — such as the existence of God, his attributes, and all those abstract propo- sitions which are eternally and immutably true. AVe attain the knowledge of abstract propositions by rising to them from the contemplation of particular objects ; but this is a tedious method, suited to the imperfection of our natures. The truth of the propositions is totally independent of the existence of the parti- cular objects by which they are suggested to us. That three angles of a triangle are equal to two right angles would be true, although no triangle had ever been drawn. By a perfect mind the truth of such general propositions is recognised before the objects are produced ; and the knowledge which the Su|)renie Being has of the possibilities of things, necessarily involves a knowledge of these abstract propositions ; because the very circumstance which renders the existence of many things im- possible is, that they cannot exist without a contradiction to some of those abstract propositions which are always true. In defining scienlia visionis, I called it the knowledge Avhich God, from eternity, had of all that he was to produce. The reason why the words ' from eternity' were inserted in the definition, requires particular attention upon this subject. Since the infinite perfection of the nature of God excludes the idea of change in his purposes, of increase to his knowledge, or of succession in his perception of objects, it follows, that the choice, out of things possible, of those which he determined to bring into existence, was not made in time, at the successive periods at which his creatures appeared ; but that the whole plan of what was to be produced was for ever present to his mind. There was a time when all the objects of the scientin visionis were future. At that time their futurition — that is, their beirg to pass in succes- sion from the state of possibility to the state of existence — was known to God, merely as being the result of his own determin- ation. After the execution of this determination commenced, some of the objects of the scienlia visionis became past ; others became present, and others continued future. But all are equally in the view of the divine mind. There is to him no more fatigue or imperfection in the remembrance of what is past, or the fore- 162 OPINIONS CONCERNING PREDESTINATION. sight of what is future, than in the perception of what now is. Indeed, there is an impropriety in using the words remembrance or foresight, when we speak of the knowledge of God ; and it is only the narrowness of our conceptions, and the poverty of our language, which compel us to apply such terms to his clear, unvarying intuition of the whole series of objects which derive their existence from his pleasure. The two kinds of knowledge which have now been explained, are understood, in the Calvinistic system, to comprehend all that can be known. There are no conceivable objects but those of which it can be affirmed, either that they may be, or that they may not be. Of things Avhich may not be, this only can be distinctly known, that they are impossible ; and a being who knows all the things that may be, knows also what are the things which may not be ; for everything that does not enter into the complete representation of things possible, which is present to his mind, is known, by that circumstance, to be impossible. Scientia shnplicis intelligentice, then, exhausts the subjects of knowledge, in respect of the possibility or impossibility of their existence ; but it does not imply any knowledge of the actual existence of those things which are possible ; for from this proposition, a thing may be, this other proposition, it shall be, does by no means follow. Hence scientia simplicis iulcUigenlice was called by the schoolmen scientia indefinita, as not deter- mining the existence or the non-existence of any object out of the Deity. But scientia visionis, on the other hand, was called scientia dejinila, because the existence of all the objects of this knoAvledge, whether they be past, present, or future, is deter- minate ; in other words, it is not more certain that what is past has had an existence, and that what is present now exists, than that what God foresees as future shall exist hereafter. If, there- fore, scientia visionis be joined to scientia simplicis intelligentice, everything that can be known is comprehended ; in other Avords, if nothing can exist without the Avill of the First Cause, and if the First Cause, who knows all things that are possible, knows also what things he Avills to produce, then he knows everything. There is nothing that does not fall under one or other of these kinds of knowledge. We have already seen that all which can be known of things that may not be, belongs to the scientia simplicis intelligentice ; and of the things that may be, either a thing is possible, but not future, and then it belongs to this kind of knowledge also ; or it both may be and shall be, and then it belongs to the scientia visionis. To state the thing still more plainly, all things which may exist are either things which shall be. or things which shall not be ; the latter remain amongst OPINIONS CONCERNING PREDESTINATION. 1G3 things possible, the objects of scientia simplicis intelligenliie ; the former pass from tlie number of thinn;s barely possible into the number of the objects of scientia visionis. Those -who consider all the objects of knowledge as compre- hended under one or other of the kinds that have been explained, are naturally conducted to that enlarged conception of the extent of the divine decree from wliich the Calvinistic doctrinfe of predestination unavoidably follows. The divine decree is the determination of the divine will to produce the universe — that is, the whole series of beings and events that were then future. The parts of this series arise in succession ; but all were, from eternity, present to the divine mind ; and no cause that was at any time to operate, or no eft'ect that was at any time to be produced in the universe, can be excluded from the original decree, without supposing that the decree Avas at first imperfect, and afterwards received accessions. The determination to produce this world, understanding by that word the whole combination of beings, and causes, and effects, that were to come into existence, arose out of the view of all possible AA^orlds, and proceeded upon reasons to us unsearchable, by which this ■world that now exists appeared to the divine wisdom the fittest to be produced. I say, the determination to produce this world proceeded upon reasons ; because we must suppose that, in forming the decree, a choice Avas exerted, that the Supreme Being was at liberty to resolve either that he would create or that he would not create ; that he would give his work this form or that form, as he chose ; otherwise we withdraw the universe from the direction of a Supreme Intelligence, and subject all things to blind fatality. But if a choice was exerted in forming the decree, the choice must have proceeded upon reasons ; for a choice made by a wise being, without any ground of choice, is a contradiction in terms. At the same time, it is to be remembered, that, as nothing then existed but the Supreme Being, the only reason Avhich could determine him in choosing ■what he Avas to produce, was its appearing to him fitter for accomplishing the end which he proposed to himself than any- thing else which he might have produced, Hence scientia visionis is called by theologians scientia libera. To scientia simplicis intelligcntia; they gave the epithet naturalis, because the knowledge of all things possible arises necessarily from the nature of the Supreme Mind ; but to scientia visionis they gave the epithet libera, because the qualities and extent of its objects are determined, not by any necessity of nature, but by the will of the Deity. Although, in forming the divine decree, there was a choice of this Avorld, proceeding upon a representation of 164 OPINION'S CONCERNING PnEDESTINATION. all possible worlds, it is not to be conceived that there was any interval between the choice and the representation, or any succession in the parts of the choice. In the divine mind, there was an intuitive view of that immense subject, which it is not only impossible for our minds to comprehend at once, but in travelling through the parts of which we are instantly bewildered ; and one decree, embracing at once the end and the means, ordained, with perfect wisdom, all that was to be. The condition of the human race entered into this decree. It is not, perhaps, the most important part of it when we speak of the formation of the universe, but it is a part which, even were it more insignificant than it is, could not be overlooked by the Almighty, whose attention extends to all his works, and which appears, by those dispensations of his providence that have been made known to us, to be interesting in his eyes. A decree respecting the condition of the human race includes the history of every individual : the time of his appearing iipon the earth ; the manner of his existence while he is an inhabitant of the earth, as it is diversified by the actions which he performs, and by the events, whether prosperous or calamitous, which befall him ; and the manner of his existence after he leaves the earth — that is, his future happiness or misery. A decree respecting the condition of the human race also includes the relations of the individuals to one another ; it fixes their con- nections in society, which have a great influence upon their happiness and their improvement ; and it must be conceived as extending to the important events recorded in Scripture, in which the whole species have a concern. Of this kind is the sin of our first parents ; the consequence of that sin reaching to all their posterity ; the mediation of Jesus Christ, appointed by God as a remed}- for these consequences ; the final salvation, through the Mediator, of one part of the descendants of Adam ; and the final condemnation of another part, notwithstanding the remedy. These events arise at long intervals of time, by a gradual preparation of circumstances ; and the operation of various means. But by the Creator, to whose mind the end and the means were at once present, these events were beheld in intimate connection with one another, and in conjunction with many other events to us unknown ; and consequently all of them, however far removed from one another as to the time of their actual existence, were comprehended in that one decree by which he determined to produce the world. Hence, it may be observed, how idly they are employed who presume to settle the order of the divine decrees, and how insig- nificant are the controversies upon this subject, which, in the OriXIONS CONCERNING PREDESTINATION. 165 days of our fathers, divided those who were agreed as to the general principles of Calvinism. One side were called Supra- lapsarians, because, in their conceptions of the order of the divine decrees respecting the human race, they ascended above the fall, and considered God as regarding men before they were created, and as resolving to manifest his attributes by the whole series of events Avhicli he ordained concerning the race, from the creation of ^dam till the consummation of all things. The other side were called Sublapsarians, because they rose no higher than the fall, but considered God as regarding men in the wretched situation to which that event had reduced them, as providing means for their recovery, and as conducting some to eternal life by these means, while he left others in misery. The distinction was allowed, even at the time when it engrossed the attention of theologians, not to be essential : but the good sense of modern times has almost effaced the remembrance of it ; because it is now understood that Ave may employ such illustrations and arrangements of the subject as we find most useful to assist our conceptions, and that we may differ from one another in these illustrations and arrangements, without forsaking the general principles which I have been delineating; provided we remember that, although the narrowness of our faculties obliges us to conceive of the divine decree in parts, these parts Avere in the diAane mind Avithout separation and without priority ; and that, AA'hether Ave ascend higher or lower in our statement of that part of the diA'ine decree Avhich Ave call the doctrine of predestination, that doctrine is intimately con- nected Avith a series of events, the beginning and the end of Avhicli our minds are incapable of folloAving. Having thus unfolded that vicAv of the divine foreknoAvledge upon Avhich the doctrine of predestination rests in the Calvinistic system, I shall next explain some of the terms commonly used by those Avho hold this doctrine, that the true meaning of the Calvinists may be fully understood, before Ave proceed to com- pare their system Avith those formerly stated, or to examine the difficulties Avith Avliich it is attended. For this purpose, I quote the foUoAving Avords of our Confession of Faith, chapter iii. " 3. By the decree of God, for the manifestation of his glory, some men and angels are predestinated unto everlasting life, and others foreordained to everlasting death. " 4. These angels and men, thus predestinated and foreor- dained, are particularly and unchangeably designed ; and their number is so certain and definite, that it cannot be either increased or diminished. " 5. Those of mankind that are predestinated unto life, God, 166 OPINIONS CONCERNING TREDESTINATION. before the foundation of the world Avas laid, according to his eternal and immutable purpose, and the secret counsel and good pleasure of his Avill, hath chosen in Christ, unto everlasting glory, out of his mere free grace and love, without any foresight of faith or good works, or perseverance in either of them, or any other thing in the creature, as conditions or causes moving him thereunto ; and all to the praise of his glorious gi-ace. " 6. As God hath appointed the elect unto glory, so hath he, by the eternal and most free purpose of his will, foreordained all the means thereunto. Wherefore they who are elected, being fallen in Adam, are redeemed by Christ, are effectually called unto faith in Christ, by his Spirit working in due season; are justified, adopted, sanctified, and kept by his power through faith unto salvation. Neither are any other redeemed by Christ, effectually called, justified, adopted, sanctified, and saved, but the elect only. " 7. The rest of mankind, God was pleased, according to the unsearchable counsel of his own will, whereby he extendeth or withholdeth mercy as he pleaseth, for the glory of his sovereign power over his creatures, to pass by, and to ordain them to dishonour and WTath for their sin, to the praise of his glorious justice." I quote also the seventeenth article of the Church of England, in the meaning and even in the expression of which there is a striking agreement with part of the preceding paragraphs from the Confession of Faith. " Predestination to life is the everlasting purpose of God^ whereby (before the foundations of the world were laid) he hath constantly decreed by his counsel, secret to us, to deliver from curse and damnation those whom he hath chosen in Christ out of mankind, and to bring them by Christ to everlasting salva- tion, as vessels made to honour. Wherefore they which be endued with so excellent a benefit of God, be called according to God's purpose, by his Spirit Avorking in due season ; they, through grace, obey the calling ; they be justified freely ; they be made sons of God by adoption ; they be made like the image of his only begotten Son Jesus Christ ; they walk religiously in good works ; and at length, by God's mercy, they attain to everlasting felicity." These quotations suggest the following propositions, which may be considered as constituting the Calvinistic doctrine of predestination, and in which there is an explication of most of the terms. 1. God chose out of the whole body of mankind, whom he viewed in his eternal decree as involved in guilt and misery, OPINIONS CONCERNING PHEDESTINATION. 167 certain persons who are called the elect, ■whose names are known to him^ and whose number, being unchangeably fixed by his decree, can neither be increased nor diminished ; so that the whole extent of the remedy offered in the Gospel is conceived to have been determined beforehand by the divine decree. 2. As all the children of Adam were involved in the same guilt and misery, the persons thus chosen had nothing in them- selves to render them more worthy of being elected than any others ; and therefore the decree of election is called in the Calvinistic system absolute, by which word is meant, that it arises entirely from the good pleasure of God, because all the circumstances which distinguish the elect from others are the fruit of their election. 3. For the persons thus chosen, God, from the beginning, appointed the means of their being delivered from corruption and guilt ; and by these means, effectually applied in due season, he conducts them at length to everlasting life. 4. Jesus Christ was ordained by God to be the Saviour of these persons, and God gave them to him to be redeemed by his blood, to be called by his Spirit, and finally to be glorified Avith him. All that Christ did in the character of INIediator, W'as in consequence of this original appointment of the Father, which has received from many divines the name of the Covenant of Redemption ; a phrase which suggests the idea of a mutual stipulation betAveen Christ and the Father, in which Christ undertook all that work which he executed in his human nature, and which he continues to execute in heaven, in order to save the elect ; and the Father promised that the persons for whom Christ died should be saved by his death. According to the tenor of this covenant of redemption, the merits of Christ are not considered as the cause of the decree of election, but as a part of that decree ; in other words, God Avas not moved by the mediation of Christ to choose certain persons out of the great body of mankind to be saved ; but, having chosen them, he conveys all the means of salvation through the channel of this mediation. 5. From the election of certain persons, it necessarily follows that all the rest of the race of Adam are left in guilt and misery. The exercise of the divine sovereignty, in regard to those Avho are not elected, is called Reprobation ; and the condition of all having been originally the same, reprobation is called absolute in the same sense with election. In reprobation, there are two acts, Avhich the Calvinists are careful to distinguish. The one is called Preterition, the passing by those who are not elected, and withholding from them those means of grace which are 168 OPINIONS CONCERNING rREDESTINATION. provided for the elect. The other is called Condemnation, the act of condemning those who have been passed bj, for the sins which they commit. In the former act, God exercises his good pleasure, dispensing his benefits as he will; in the latter act, he appears as a Judge, inflicting upon men that sentence which their sins deserve. If he had bestowed upon them the same assistance which he prepared for others, they would have been preserved from that sentence ; but, as their sins proceeded from their own corruption, they are thereby rendered worthy of punishment ; and the justice of the Supreme Ruler is mani- fested in condemning them, as his mercy is manifested in saving the elect. SECTION IV. I shall in this section advert to the points of difference in the three systems Avhich have been mentioned, and to the diifi- culties in which the peculiarities of the two systems, that admit of being compared, are supposed to involve those by whom they are defended. The Socinian and Calvinistic systems are so diametrically opposite, that they do not admit of being compared ; for the Socinian, withdrawing future contingent events from the fore- knowledge of the Supreme Being, either proceeds upon the principles of materialism, according to which the actions of men are events of the same order, arising unavoidably by the same laws of nature, with the phenomena of the heavens and the earth ; or, it excludes the possibility of an eternal decree respect- ing the future condition of men. The first of these alternatives is adopted by Dr Priestley : the second was adopted by Socinus and his followers. But neither the one nor the other presents what can appear, to those who hold the received principles of natural religion, a system of predestination. Accordingly Socinus says,* that all those places of Scripture which treat of the divine decree of saving certain men, are to be so explained, Ut 7ion ceri'i (juidain homines nominatim intdligantur, scd genus quoddam honiiniim. [That not some particular men may be understood individually, but a certain kind or description of men]. And one of his followers, speaking in the name of the Socinians, says, that they reject, as hurtful to piety and contrary Sociu. Pra^lcct. cap. 13. OPINIONS CONCERNING PREDESTINATION. 961 to Scripture, both the predestination and reprobation of indivi- duals, and also the foreknowledge that some are to make a right use of their liberty, and others to abuse it ; and that they assert nothing more than this, that God has predestinated to eternal life all whosoever shall, to the utmost of their power, continue to the end in obedience to his precepts, and that he has repro- bated all whosoever shall not obey. Ilaque elcctio et leprobatio in genere prorsus est certa et immutahUis, in individuo aiiiem mutabilis est.'"^ [Therefore, election and reprobation as to the genus or kind, are altogether certain and unchangeable; but vs to the individual, are subject to change.] The Arminian system agrees with the Calvinistic in admitting that contingent events, such as the determinations and actions of men, are foreseen by God ; and this fundamental principle, without which there can be no predestination, being common to both, it is possible to compare the manner of its being applied in the two systems. Both agree in admitting that there is a peremptory decree by which the Supreme Being, from all eternity, unalterably fixed the everlasting condition of man ; but the precise difference between them is this : — The Arminian s hold that God made this peremptory decree upon the foresight of the faith and good works of some^, of the infidelity and impenitence of others : i. e. God, foreseeing from all eternity that some would repent and believe, elected them to everlasting life ; and foreseeing that others would continue in sin and unbe- lief, left them to perish. The Calvinists, on the other hand, say, that the faith and good works of the elect are the consequences of their election, and are foreseen by God, because he determined to produce them ; that, being the fruits of his determination, they cannot be regarded as the cause of it ; and, therefore, that the election of some, and the reprobation of others, are to be resolved into the good pleasure of God, acting indeed upon the wisest reasons, but not originally moved by the foresight of any circumstance in the former rendering them more worthy of being elected than the latter. The first thing to be attended to, in comparing these two systems, is the manner of that foresight upon which the Armi- nian system rests, and from which result all the points of differ- ence between it and the Calvinistic. It is a foresight of the faith and good works of some, in consequence of which they are elected ; of the infidelity and impenitence of others, in conse- quence of which they are reprobated. But this is a foresight which the Arminians do not class either under scientia simplicis • Stapfer. iii, 415, VOL. II. " I 170 OriKIONS CONCKRNIKG PRKDESTINATION. inlelUgentue, or under scienlia visionis : — not under the first, ■tvhieli is conversant about things possible, or those abstract relations which are independent of actual existence ; whereas this foresight is conversant about objects which are certainly to exist, and whose future existence, as foreseen by God, has power to produce a decree: not under the second, which is the know- ledge of all things that God has determined to produce ; whereas this foresight is conceived to be antecedent to the determina- tion of God, being the cause of his decree respecting the condi- tion of those persons whose conduct is foreseen. To this kind of foresight, thus distinguished from scientia simplicis infel/igerilue, and from scientia visionis, they gave the name o^ scientia media, considering it as in the middle between the two. The term was first , invented by Molina, a Spanish Jesuit, and a professor of divinity in Portugal. It was the lead- ing principle of a book which he published in 1588, entitled, ^' Liberi arbitrii concordia cum gratiae donis, divina prajscientia, providentia, predestinatione, et reprobatione ;" [^The agree- ment of free-will with the gifts of grace, divine foreknowledge, predestination, and reprobation f\ and it has been adopted by all who hold the system of Arminius. Scientia media is the knowledge, neither of events that are barely possible, nor of events that are absolutely decreed by God, but of events that are to happen upon certain conditions. When it is applied to the doctrine of predestination, there arises out of it the following system : — God from eternity took into his view the natural dis- positions of men, the circumstances in which they were to be placed, and the objects which were to be presented to them. From this view, he foresaw the conduct which they were to pursue, and he made their conduct, thus foreseen, the measure according to which he determined to administer the means of grace, and to fix their everlasting happiness or misery. To state the matter more shortly : God foresees what the conduct of men will be in certain situations ; upon this foresight, he determines their situations ; and thus, by sciodia media, the free agency of man is reconciled with that prescience which is implied in the conception of a perfect Mind who rules the universe. The Calvinists do not admit that the kind of knowledge called by this new name, is really different from the two species formerly stated, under which it appears to them that all the objects which can be known are comprehended ; and the reasoning which they employ is to this purpose. If it is meant, by scientia media, that God knows every supposable case ; that all the combinations which can arise in every situation were present to his mind ; and that he is as well accjuainted with OPINIONS CONCEUNING PRKDKSTINATION. J 71 what might have happened in any given circumstances as Avilh what will hapjien : this is scientia simplicis i)delligevl'uE. If by scientia media, or, as it is sometimes called, conditionate foreknowledge, be meant that God sees what is to be, not singly, but as depending upon something going before it, this is scientia visionis ; for nothing stands alone and unrelated in the universe — every event arises out of something antecedent, and is fruit- ful of consequences. What is called hypothetical necessity— by which no more is meant than this, if one thing is, another shall be — pervades the whole system of creation, and is the very thing which constitutes a system. Events, therefore, are not to be considered as the less ordained by God, because they are dependent upon conditions, since the conditions are of his appointment, and the manner in which the event depends upon the conditions is known to him ; so that, if the conduct of men be considered as arising out of their circumstances, their temper, and the objects pi-esented to them, it is as much a branch of the scientia visionis as the circumstances, the temper, and the objects out of which it arises. But if by scientia media we mean not merely the knowledge of all that is possible, not merely the knowledge of all future events in connection with all present circumstances, but the knowledge of an event that is to be, although it did not enter into the decree of God, it follows, from the principles stated in the preceding section, that there can be no such knowledge. 1. For every future event derives its futu • rition fiom the decree of God. To say, therefore, that God foresees an event before he has decreed that it shall be, is to say that he views as future an event which is merely possible ; in other words, that he views an event not as it is. 2. But could we suppose that some events were future, which God had not decreed, his knowledge of these events would be reduced to that kind of conjecture which we form with regard to what shall be, from attending to all the previous circumstances out of Avhich it may be conceived to arise, instead of being that clear, infallible, intuitive prescience of the whole series of causes and effects, which seems essential to the perfection of the divine understand- ing. 3. And still farther, supposing that, in some inconceivable manner, future events, not decreed by him, Avere as certainly foreknown as those which he had decreed, here would be a part of the universe withdrawn from the government of the Supreme Ruler ; something that is to come into existence independently of him, the futurition of which, being antecedent to his will, becomes the rule of his determination. Upon these principles the Calvinists, maintaining the sove- ]72 OPINIONS CONCKRNING Pill DESTINATION. reignty of the Deity, reject the third sense of scientia media, ■which is the only sense that is of any use in the Arminian system. They conceive it impossible that anything which is to he in the creation, can be the foundation of the divine decree concerning the creature, because every circumstance respecting the existence of the creature, is dependent upon the divine will ; and they adhere to their own division of the divine knowledge as complete, because the things which may be, and the things which God hath ^villed to be, comprehend all the objects that can be known. There are several passages of Scripture which the Arminians adduce in proof of scicntia media. Of this kind is the following. 1 Sam. xxiii. 10 — 13, " David saidj O Lord God of Israel, thy servant hath certainly heard that Saul seeketh to come to Keilah, to destroy the city for my sake. Will the men of Keilah deliver me up into his hands .'' Will Saul come down, as thy servant hath heard .'' And the Lord said. He Avill come down : they will deliver thee up. Then David arose and departed out of Keilah : and it was told Saul that David was escaped from Keilah, and he forbore to go forth." Saul's coming down, and the people's delivering up David, depended upon the condition of David's remaining in the city. As the condition did not take place, the event did not happen : and therefore, here, it is said, is an instance of an event not decreed by God, (for then it must have happened,) yet foretold by him ; in other words, here, it is said, is an instance of scicntia media, the foreknowledge of an event depending upon a condition. But the Calvinists consider this as an instance oi' scicntia simplicis inteUigentiiv. Amidst the possible combinations of objects which are present to the divine mind, this was one, that if David remained in Keilah, Saul would come down, and the people of the city would deliver him up. The connection between his remaining, Saul's coming down, and the conduct of the people, was what God saw ; and at the request of David he declared that connection. But we must entertain as low an opinion of the divine foreknowledge as the Socinians do, if we suppose that he foresaw the actual existence of any of the events thus connected. To the scicntia simplicis intelligeiifia' there appeared a chain, of which David's remaining in Keilah was one link : to the scicntia visionis there appeared another chain, of which it was not a link. God knew what would have happened in the one case — he knew what was to happen in the other ; but it is a sophism to say that he foresaw what would have happened, when he knew it was not to happen ; and this sophism is at the OPINIONS CONCERNING PREDESTINATION. 173 hottora of all the reasonings adduced to prove that there is in God the certain foreknowledge of any events but those whiih he has decreed to be. In the same manner, the Calvinists explain that expression of our Lord, Mat. xi. 21, which appears to be a still clearer instance of scientia media : — " Wo unto thee, Chorazin! wo unto thee, Bethsaida ! — for if the mishty works which were done in you had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes." Here is a declaration, const'- quently a knowledge of the event which would have happened, had the constitution of the universe admitted of the works of our Lord being done in Tyre and Sidon. This event was possible, before the Creator adopted that constitution of the uni- verse Avhich now is — it would have taken place had a particular constitution been adopted ; but its existence being excluded by the decree which, adopting the present constitution, includes the objects about which scientia visionis is conversant, it remains amongst the objects of scientia simplicis intelligentice. So all the promises of happiness which men shall realize if they prove obedient, all the expressions of regret at their missing the hap- piness which they might have attained if they had been obedient, and all the threateningsof misery which they shall incur if they disobey — all conditional propositions of this kind, with which the Scriptures abound, are to be considered not as intimations of the knowledge which God has of the futurition of any of these events, but merely as enunciations of one branch of that liypothetical necessity which pervades the system of the uni- verse— the branch by which happiness is connected with virtue, and misery with vice. Such is the different manner in which the Arminians and the Calvinists conceive of the foreknowledge of God. The Arminians, admitting that all events, of whatever kind, are foreknown by the Supreme Being, but desirous to exempt the actions of men from the influence of his decree, have adopted the term scientia media, in order to express a species of know- ledge in the divine mind different from scientia simplicis intel. ligentia', and from scientia visiotiis. But to the Calvinists, this new term, invented by Molina, appears to be an attempt to establish a distinction where there is not a difference : for, according to them, everything that is to exist is decreed by God ; it derives its futurition from his decree, and it is foreseen because it is decreed. This difference in the manner of conceiving of the divine foreknowledge, is the foundation of the difference between the Arminian and the Calvinistic systems, all the distinguishing 174 OPINIONS CONCERNING PREDESTINATION. features of which are instantly perceived, ivhon the diflerent con- ceptions of the divine forekno^vh dge, that have been explained, are applied to the great subject about "which the systems are conversant. The plan of the Arminian system is this : — God, having decreed to give his Son to he the Saviour of all men, having determined to save by Jesus Christ them that repent and believe, and having fixed a certain administration of the means of grace sufficient to bring all men to salvation, foresaw what persons would, under this administration, repent and believe ; and them he elected to everlasting life. The plan of the Cal- vinistic system is this: — God having, from all eternity, chosen a certain number of persons, did, in time, give his Son to be their Saviour : he bestows upon them, through him, that grace which effectually determines them to repent and believe, and so effectually conducts them, by faith and good works, to ever- lasting life. In the Arminian system, the faith and good works of some persons are viewed as independent of the decree by which they are elected. In the Calvinistic system, they are considered as the fruit of election ; and they were, from eternity, known to God, because they were, in time, to he produced by the execution of his decree. In the Arminian system, it is conceived that, although there are many who do not repent and believe, yet means sufficient to bring men to salvation are administered to all ; from which it follows, that, antecedently to the decree of election, these elected persons must have been considered as distinguished from others, by some predisposition in respect to faith and good works ; so that the doctrine of original sin can be admitted into this system only under such limitations as render it consistent Avith such predisposition. In the Calvinistic system, predestination being an appointment to the means as well as to the end, and all the conditions of salvation being given with Christ, by the decree of election, to those who are elected, every conception of any original superiority, or any ground of boasting, by nature, is excluded ; and the doctrine of original sin is admitted to the extent of representing all men as involved in the same guilt and misery, as equally unable to extricate themselves, and as discriminated from one another by the mere good pleasure of God. In the Arminian system, Christ being conceived as given hy God to be the Saviour of all the children of Adam, and as having purchased for all men a sufficient administmtion of the means of grace, what is called impdratio sahtiis Qhe obtaining of salvation] may be of much wider extent than what is called applicaiio salulis: [The application of salvation.] God wills all men to be saved, upon condition that they repent and believe ; OPINIONS CONCERNING PREDESTINATION. 1 7i> but the fulfilment of the condition is conceived, in this system, to depend upon man ; and, therefore, the purpose Avhicb, in the eternal counsel of divine love, extended to all, is attained with regard to many, or to few, according to the use which they make of the means of grace afforded them. In the Calvinistic system, what is called appUcaiio snlutis is conceived to be of equal extent with impelratio salidis. To all those whom God from the beginning decreed to save, he affords the means which^ infallibly conduct them to salvation : it is not in the power of man to increase or diminish their number ; and the divine pur- pose is eflectual to the very extent to which it was originally formed. This view of the points of difference between the Arminian and Calvinistic systems, suggests the principal difficulties that are peculiar to each, which I shall in this place barely mention. The difficulties under which the Arminian system labours are three. 1. It is not easy to reconcile the infinite diversity of situations, and the very unfavourable circumstances ia which many nations, and some individuals of all nations, are placed, with one funda- mental position of the Arminian system — that to all men there are administered means sufficient to bring them to salvation. 2. It is not easy to reconcile those views of the degeneracy of human nature, and those lessons of humility and self-abasement in the sight of God, which both Scripture and reason inculcate, with another fundamental position of that system — that the faitli and good works of those who are elected did not flow from their election, but were foreseen by God as the grounds of it. 3. It is not easy to reconcile the immutability and efficacy of the divine counsel, which enter into our conceptions of the First Cause, with a purpose to save all, suspended upon a condition which is not fulfilled with regard to many. The difficulties attending the Calvinistic system,, however much they may have the appearance of being multiplied by a variety of expressions, are reducible to two. 1. It appears to be inconsistent with the nature of man, to destroy his liberty, and to supersede his exertions, that they who are elected should be effectually determined to repent and believe. 2. It appears inconsistent with the goodness and justice of God, that, when all were involved in the same guilt and misery, he should ordain the effectual means of being delivered out of that condition only to a part of the human race, leaving the rest infallibly to perish. And if this be a true account of the divine dispensation, it seems to be a necessary consequence, that 176 OPINIONS CONCERNING PREDESTINATION, all the moral evil which is in the world;, and all the misory aris- ing from that moral evil, either here or hereafter, are to he ascribed to God. I have mentioned the difficulties peculiar to the two systems in this place, because they are suggested by the general view already given of the points of difference between them. But, in order to discern the force of the difficulties, and to judge of the attempts that have been made to remove them, it is neces- sary to attend more particularly to the account that is given, in each system, of the application of the remedy. I shall proceed, therefore, now to this third subject of discussion, respecting the Gospel remedy ; and, from the complete view which we shall thus attain of the characteristical features of the two systems, we shall be f[ualified to estimate the difficulties that adhere to each, and prepared to weigh the amount of the evidence which each professes to derive fi-ora Scripture. [ 177 ] CHAP. VIII. OPINIONS CONCERNING THE APPLICATION OF THE REBIEDV. As it is unquestionably the doctrine of Scripture^ that none partake of the salvation which the Gospel was given to aftbid, but those who repent and believe, we are entitled to say that the remedy offered in the Gospel is connected with a certain character of mind. The extent of the remedy being thus limited, in so far that it reaches only to persons of that character, I employ the phrase, The Application of the Remedy, in order to express the production of that character ; and I consider systems as differing from one another in respect of the applica- tion of the remedy, Avhen they differ as to the manner in which the character is produced. From the distinguishing features of the Socinian system, it will be perceived that, as it denies several of those fundamental principles on which the Arminians and Calvinists agree, it can- not be compared with them in respect to the application of the remedy. The Socinians adopt that doctrine which was intro- duced by Pelagius about the beginning of the fifth century, that the moral powers of human nature are not in the least injured by the sin of our first parents, but that all the children of Adam are as able to yield a perfect obedience to the commands of God as he was at his creation. They admit that men may be led, by the strength of passion, by unfavourable circumstances, and by imitation, into such sins as separate them from the favour of God, and render it difficult for them to return to the obedience of his laws ; but they hold that this difficulty never amounts to a moral impossibility ; and that at wliat time soever a sinner forsakes his transgressions, he is forgiven, not upon account of what Christ did, but from the essential goodness of the divine nature. They acknowledge that the Gospel gives to a sinful world more gracious and more effectual assistance in returning to their duty, than ever was afforded before ; but they consider this assistance as arising solely from the clear revelation there i2 178 OPINIONS CONCERNING THE given of the nature and the ■will of God, from the example there proposed, and from the hope of eternal life, that gift of God ^vliich is peculi;ir to this religion. By its doctrines and its pro- mises, it presents to the human mind the strongest motives to ohediencc. AH, therefore, ■vvho live in a Christian country, enjoy an outward assistance in the discharge of their duty, of very great value ; and those who receive the Gospel as the ■word of God, feel the power of it in their hearts. This inward power, the influence of the doctrine of Christ upon the mind, the Socinians understand to be, in many places of the Ne'w Testament, the whole import of these expressions, " the Spirit of God," the " Spirit of life," the " Spirit of the Lord ;" for, as they deny that the Spirit is a person distinct from the Father and the Son, they are obliged to consider all the expressions from which the Trinitarians infer the personality of the Spirit, as figures or circumlocutions ; and when it is said, " we walk after the Spirit — the Spirit of life makes us free — where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty — ye are washed and sancti- fied by the Spirit of our God," they find it easy to evade the argument which these and numberless phrases of the same kind are supposed to contain^ by understanding the meaning of the sacred 'v^'riters to be no more than this, that the influence of the doctrine and promises of the Gospel upon the mind, Avhen they are firmly believed and cordially embraced, produces such eflects. From these fundamental principles of the Socinian system, it follows that the application of the remedy is conceived in that system to be purely the work of man ; that, as, even with- out the advantages which the Gospel affbrds, he may in every situation, by the mere use of his natural po'^vers, do wnat is of itself sufficient to deliver him from the evils of sin, so his im- proving the assistance communicated by the Christian revelation, in such a manner as to attain the character connected with the enjoyment of its blessings, arises not in any degree from the agency of a superior being upon his mind, but is an exercise of his OAvn power depending wholly vipon himself.* It is one of those future contingencies which the Socinians suppose to be withdrawn from the divine foresight; and predestination, accord- ing to them, is nothing more than the purpose of calling both Jews and Gentiles to the knowledge of the truth, and the hope of eternal life by Jesus Christ — a purpose which God from the • A Deo liabemTis quod homines sumiis, a nobis ipsis quod justi. [We li.ivo it from God that we are men — from ourselves that we are righteous.] .^Pelagius. APPLICATION OF THE REiMEDY. I'Ji) beginning formed, without knowing whether the execution of this purpose would have the effect of bringing any individual to heaven. Neither the extent nor the application of the remedy entered into his decree ; but God did all that he proposed to do by giving the revelation, leaving to men to make use of it as they thought fit, and to receive such reward and such punish- ment as they shall appear to him to deserve. This system, which, as I said before, attempts to get rid of dif- ficulties by degrading the character of the Supreme Being, and excluding some of the first principles of religion, does not fall within a comparative view of the different systems of predesti- nation ; and there remain to be considered only two opinions concerning what I call the application of the remedy, which Ave distinguish by the names of Arminian and Calvinistic. Of each of these opinions I shall give a fair statement ; by which I mean, that I shall endeavour to shew in what manner the Arminian opinion is separated from Socinian principles by those Avho hold it, and in Avhat light the Calvinistic opinion is represented by those who appear to understand best the grounds upon which it may be defended ; and from this fair statement I shall proceed to canvass the difficulties formerly mentioned, which adhere to these two systems of predestination. The Arminians and Calvinists differ as to the measure of that injury which the moral powers of human nature received from the transgression of our first parents: but they agree in ac- knowledging that man has fallen from his original rectitude ; that there is a universal corruption of the whole race, the influ- sence of which extends to the understanding, the will, and the affections ; that in this state no man is of himself capable of giving any uniform and effectual resistance to temptation, of extricating himself from the dominion of sin, or of attaining, by the exercise of his own powers, that character which is con- nected with a full participation of the blessings of the Gospel. They agree that the Father of spirits can act upon the minds of men so as to administer a remedy to this corruption, and to re- cover them to the practice of virtue ; and they think it probable, even from the light of nature, that he will exert his divine power, and employ that various access which his continual pre- sence with his creatures gives him, in accomplishing this gracious purpose. They find the hope of this expressed, as a dictate of reason, in many passages of heathen writers ; they find it inspir- ino- all the prayers far divine assistance which occur both in the Old and in the New Testament ; and they find it confirmed by many promises, which good men under the dispensation of the law embraced, but the complete fulfilment of Avhich was looked 180 OPINIONS CONCERNING THE for as one of the peculiar characters of that better dispensation which the law announced. When they read these words of Jeremiah, quoted in the Epistle to the Hebrews, x. 16, 17?^ " This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord : I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them, and their sins and iniquities will I remember no more" — they conceive the prophet and the apostle to have understood, that, with the pardon of sin — that blessing which was typified by the sacrifices of the law, but is truly obtained by the sacrifice of the cross — there is conjoined under the Gospel an influence exerted by the Almighty upon the hearts and the minds of Christians ; and that these two taken together make up the character and the excellency of that better covenant which came in place of the first. The Armi- nians and Calvinists agree farther, that the Holy Ghost is a person distinct from the Father and the Son ; that he is a divine person : and that he bears a part in accomplishing the salvation of mankind ; that he inspired the prophets, who from the beginning of the world spake of this salvation, and cherished the expecta- tion of it in the breasts of pious men ; that having been given without measure to the man Christ Jesus, he descended, in ful- filment of his promise, at the day of Pentecost, upon his apostles, and endowed them with those extraordinary powers which were necessary for the successful publication of the Gospel ; that he continues to be the fountain of all spiritual influence — the dis- tributor of those gifts to men which Jesus Christ received ; and that the Father, in all ages, upon account of the intercession of the Son, gives the Holy Spirit to his children. The Anninians and the Calvinists agree, that, by the distribution of these gifts, the Holy Ghost exercises the office of the Sanctifier and Com- forter of Christians ; that he opens their understandings ; that he renews them in the spirit of their minds ; that he inclines their hearts to obey the truth ; that he helps their infirmities ; that all the graces in which they abound are the fruits of the Spirit ; and that as many as are the children of God are led by the Spirit of God. They agree farther in expressing these influ- ences of the Spirit by the word Grace. The Socinians contend that this use of the word is not wan-anted by Scripture ; that the word in general signifies favour ; that it is applied in a va- riety of meanings ; but that, as there is no unequivocal instance of the sacred writers employing this Avord to express an influence exerted by God upon the mind, all that is said in systems of theology about grace is founded upon a perversion of Scripture. To the Arminians and Calvinists, on the other hand, it appears that there are passages in the New Testament where the sense APPLICATION OF TIIK RE.-MEDY. 181 requires that the word be understood with the meaning wliich they affix to it. Of this kind are Heb. iv. 1(), 1 Cor. xv. 10. The controversy about the Scripture meaning of the word grace is not of much importance. Although in this, as in many other instances, the Scriptures may have been quoted and applied more from a regard to the sound than to the sense, and although the word grace may have been often understood to mean an influence upon the mind, when the sacred writers were speaking of the favour of God in general, or of the dispensation of the Gospel, which, being the brightest display of his favour to man, is often called the grace of God, yet this docs not afford any kind of argument against the reality of what is termed in theological language, grace, or even against the propriety of that use of the word ; for it matters little what words are employed upon any subject, provided the sense affixed to them be clearly defined ; and if there is various evidence in Scripture, as the Arminians and Calvinists agree in believing, that the Spirit of God does act immediately upon the mind of man, there is no word by which an influence so fraught with blessings can be more fitly marked than by the general word yj^^'i, grace; even although the passages where the sacred wTiters have applied the word in that sense, were more equivocal than they really are. With all these points of agreement, the difference between the Arminian and Calvinistic systems, as to the application of the remedy, is most material, because it respects the nature and the efficacy of that influence upon the mind which in both systems is called by the name of grace. The Arminians, who believe that the death of Christ was an atonement for the sins of the whole world, which, by redeeming all men from the curse, put them into a situation in which they might be saved, believe, in conformity to this fundamental principle, that the death of Christ also purchased for all men means sufficient to bring them to salvation. And therefore, as they acknowledge that the cor- ruption of human nature opposes obstacles to faith and repent- ance, which our natural powers are unable of themselves to surmount, they believe that the grace purchased by Christ re- stores all men to a situation in which they may do those works which are well pleasing to God. This grace is called common, because it is given indifferently to all ; preventing, because it comes before our own endeavours ; exciting, because it stirs up our powers, naturally sluggish and averse from God. Of some measure of this grace, no man in any situation is supposed to be destitute. It accompanies the light of nature in heathen coun- tries, as well as the preaching of the Gospel in those which are Christian; and every one who improves the measure given 182 OPINIONS CONCERNING THE him is thereby prepared for more. From the smallest degrees of this grace, and the most unfavourable circumstances in which it can be given, those who are not wanting to themselves are cer- tainly conducted to such degrees as produce faith and repent- ance ; and all whose minds have been regenerated by this exciting grace, receive what the Arminians call subsequent and co-operating grace : subsequent, because it follows after con- version ; co-operating, because it concurs with human exer- tions in producing those moral virtues which, having originated in that grace which is preventing, and being carried on to perfection by that which is subsequent, are fitly called the fruits of the Spirit. As higher degrees of grace are supposed to be given in conse- quence of the improvement of those which were previous, the Arminians consider the efficacy of all grace as depending upon the reception which it meets with. They cannot say that it is of the nature of grace to be effectual ; for although, according to their system, it be given to all with such impartiality that he who believes had not originally a larger portion of grace than he who does not believe, yet there are many in whom it does not produce faith and repentance. It is purely, therefore, from the event that grace is to be distinguished as effectual or ineffectual ; and the same grace being given to all, there is no other cause to which the difference in the event can be ascribed, than the difference in the character of those by Avliom it is received. As the event of the grace of God is conceived to depend upon men^ it follows, according to this system^ that the gi'ace of God may be resisted^ i. e. the obstacles opposed by the perverseness of the human will may be such as finally to prevent the effect of this grace. Accordingly, the Amiinians find themselves obliged to give such an account of the nature of grace as admits of its being resistible. It was thus described by the first Armi- nians:— Lents stiasio; iiohilissimus agcndi modus in conversione hominuni, qua; Jiat suas'wnibus, morali raiione conscnsuvi volun~ talis producens. [^Gentle suasion ; the most excellent mode of acting in the conversion of men, effecting it by suasions, pro- ducing a consent of the will with moral reason.] The English phrase answering to this description is JMoral Suasion ; and the meaning of the phrase is thus explained by the best Arminian writers. They conceive that all that impossibility of keeping the commandments of God, which arises from the corruption of hu- man nature, is removed by the grace of God ; and that, while the word of God proposes exhortations, warnings, and inducements, to man thus restored to the capacity of doing what is required of him, the Spirit of God opens his understanding to discern the force of these things, and is continually present with him, APPLICATION OF THE REMKDY. 183 suggesting good thoughts, inspiring good desires, and, by the most seasonable, friendly, and gentle counsel, inclining his mind to his duty. This seasonable, friendly, and gentle counsel, is called moral suasion ; but this counsel may be rejected ; for herein, say the Armiinians, consists the liberty of man, that, with every possible reason before him to choose one course, he may choose another, and the influence of any other being cannot be of such a kind as certainly and effectually to determine his choice, without destroying his nature. After all the assistance and direction, therefore, which he can derive from the grace of God, he may believe or he may not believe ; he may return to the habitual practice of sin after he has been converted ; and, by abusing those means of grace which he had formerly improved, he may in the end fail of attaining salvation. The account which I have now given of the Arminian doctrine with regard to the nature and efficacy of the grace of God, is agi'eeable to the three last of the five articles in which the early Arminians stated their system. In these articles, they discover an anxiety to vindicate themselves from the charge of Pelagianism, or from the appearance of ascribing so much to the natural powers of man as to render the grace of God unneces- sary. 3. Man has not saving faith from himself, and, being in a state of depravity and sin, he cannot, by the exercise of his own free will, think or do anything that is truly good ; but it is necessary that he be regenerated and renewed by God in Christ through his Holy Spirit, in his mind, his affections, or his will, and all his faculties, that he may understand, think, will, and perform any good thing ; according to that saying of Christ, " Without me ye can do nothing." 4. The fourth article, after saying that this grace of God is the beginning, the progress, and the perfection of all good, so that all our good works are to be ascribed to the grace of God in Christ, adds these words : But as to the manner of the operation of this grace, it is not irresistible; for it is said in Scripture of many, that they resisted the Holy Spirit. 5. The fifth article, after mentioning the strength and assist- ance furnished to those who are united to Christ by a true faith, expresses a doubt whether they may not by their own negligence make shipwreck of a good conscience, and forfeit their interest in Christ. The later Arminians laid aside the language of doubt upon this subject, and said, without hesitation, that those who, being united to Christ by faith, had been partakers of his grace, might through their own fault fall from a state of grace. The Calvinistic system gives a very different view of the ap- 184 OPINIONS CONCERNING THE plication of tlie remedy ; and the difference may be traced back to its fundamental principle, that Christ did not die for all men, but for those of every nation who are in the end to be saved. Them only he delivers from the curse, and for them only he purchases those influences of the Spirit by which faith and re- pentance are produced. Others enjoy, in common with them, the gifts of nature, the bounties of Providence, the light of con- science ; and all who live in a Christian country, by the motives proposed in the Gospel, and by the ordinances of religion, may be restrained from many open sins, and excited to many good actions. But that grace which forms in the mind of man the cha- racter connected with salvation, is confined to those whom God hath chosen. Being conferred in execution of an unchangeable decree, it cannot fail of attaining its effect; and, being the action of the Creator upon the mind of the creature, it is able to surmount all that opposition and resistance which arises from the corruption of human nature. It is distinguished by the Cal- vinists from that continual influence which the Supreme Cause exerts throughout his creation, and by which he upholds his creatures in being, preserves the faculties which he gave them, and may, in some sense, be said to concur with all their actions. And it is conceived to be an extraordinary supernatural influence of the Creator, by Avhich the disorders which sin had introduced into the faculties of human nature are corrected, and the mind is transformed and renewed, and created again unto good works. There have not been wanting some who have attempted to ex- plain the manner of this supernatural influence ; but the wiser Calvinists, without entangling themselves in an inextricable labyrinth of expressions, which, after every attempt to afiix clear ideas to them, must remain unintelligible, rest in that caution which our Lord gaye, when he spoke to Nicodemus upon the subject — John, iii. 7, 8 — " Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again : The wind blowcth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it Cometh, and whither it goeth : so is every one that is born of the Spirit." Although we cannot give a satisfying account of the causes why the wind blows at a particular season from one quarter, or why it ceases just when it does, we do not doubt of the fact, because we see and feel its effects ; so, although the manner of the operation of the Spirit is not an object of sense, and cannot be explained by words Ave may be assured of the reality of the operation from its effects. When we see such a diange upon the disposition and the life of the regenerate, as cannot be accounted for by any natural means, we are led to acknowledge the power of the Divine Agent by whom the APPLICATION OF THE REMEDY. 185 change was produced ; and we perceive the propriety witli which the Scriptures, in speaking of this change, make use of such expressions as being born again, creation, resurrection ; for the figure used in these expressions tends to mislead, unless the action marked by them implies an exertion of power, the effect of which is independent of any co-operation or any resistance in the subject of the action ; and therefore they may be considered as indicating such an operation of the Spirit as effectually re- moves that corruption of the powers of human nature which nothing less can remedy. This supernatural influence is seldom exerted without the use of means ; in other words, although the means of removing the corruption of human nature derive their efficacy entirely from the Spirit of God, yet, in accomplishing this object, the Spirit of God ordinarily employs the exhortations, the promises, and the threatenings of the word of God, the counsel and exampk* of good men, and all those instruments which have a tendency to improve the human mind. Hence that change which is the work of the Spirit, is not instantaneous, but consists of inan}^ previous steps, of many preparatory dispositions and affections, and of a gradual progress in goodness ; by all which a man is conducted from that state of degeneracy which is natural to the posterity of Adam, to the possession of that character without which none can be saved. His understanding is enhghtened with the knowledge of the truth — his will is inclined to folIoA\' the dictates of his understanding — he pursues a certain line of conduct, because it is his choice — and he has the feeling of the most perfect liberty, because he becomes willing to do that from which formerly he Avas averse. Augustine exj)ressed the effect of this influence by the significant phrase, victrix delectaiio — Qi victorious delight] — a delight in the commandments of God, which overcomes every inferior appetite ; and all the Calvinists, when they speak of the efficacy of divine grace, would be under- stood to mean that the grace of God acts upon man, not as a machine, but as a reasonable being. As the grace of God, which is conceived to derive its efficacy from his power of fulfilling his purpose in those for whom it is destined, overcomes all the opposition with which it is at first received, so it continues to be exerted amidst all the frailty and corruption which adhere to human nature in a present state. It is not exerted to such a degree as to preseire any man from every kind of sin; for God is pleased to teach Christians humility, by keeping up the remembrance of that state out oi which they were delivered, and to quicken their aspirations after higher degrees of goodness, by leaving them to struggle 186 APPLICATION OF THE REMEDY. with temptation, and to feel manifold infirmities. Butj although no man is enabled in this life to attain to perfection, the grace of God preserves those to whom it is given from drawing back to perdition. The doctrine of the perseverance of the saints flows necessarily from that decree by which they Avere from eternity chosen to salvation, and from the manner in which, according to the Calvinistic system, the decree was executed ; and all the principles of the system must be renounced before we can believe that any of those for Avhom Christ died, and who consequently become partakers of his grace, can fall from that grace either finally — by which is meant that they shall not in the end be saved — or totally, by which is meant that they shall, at any period of their lives, commit sins so heinous and so presumptuous, and persist in them so obstinately, as at that period to forfeit entirely the divine favour. All the parts of that delineation which I have now given, are found in Chapters IX. X. XVII. of the Confession of Faith. The whole doctrine is not expressed in the tenth Article of the Church of England, but we consider it to be implied in the seventeenth. I 187 ] CHAPTER IX. AR.MINIAN AND CALVINISTIC SYSTEMS COMPARED. After the view which I have given of the two great systems of opinion concerning the extent and the application of that remedy which the Gospel brings, we are prepared to estimate the difficulties that adhere to them. As every system which, ■with our limited information, we can hold upon subjects so extensive and so magnificent, must be attended with difficulties, it is not incumbent upon us to answer all the questions which our system may suggest ; and we have given a sufficient answer to many of them, when we shew that the same questions, or others not more easily solved, are suggested by the opposite system. But as difficulties are of real weight when they imply a contradiction to some received truth, we are called to defend the system of opinion Avhich we hold, by shewing that it is not subversive of the nature of man, or inconsistent with the nature of God. SECTION I. The Arminian system appears, upon a general view, most satisfying to a pious and benevolent mind. Pardon procured by the death of Christ for all that repent and believe, when conjoined with an administration of the means of grace suffi- cient to bring all men to faith and repentance, forms a remedy suited to the extent of the disease ; a remedy from Avhich none are excluded by any circumstance foreign to themselves, and which, if it does not in the end deliver all from the evils of sin, fails, not through any defect in its own nature, or any partiality in the Being from whom it proceeded, but purely through the obstinacy and perverseness of those to whom it is offered. But while this account of the Gospel appears to derive, from its 188 ARMINIAN AND CALVINISTIC correspondence with our notions of the goodness and justice of Godj the strongest internal recommendation, it is found to labour under these three difficulties. 1. The supposition of an administration of the means of grace sufficient to bring all men to faith and repentance, upon which this system pro- ceeds, appears to be contradicted by fact. 2. This system, while in words it ascribes all to the grace of God, does in effect resolve our salvation into something independent of that grace. 3. This system seems to imply a failure in the purpose of the Almighty, which is not easily reconciled with our notions of his sovereignty. 1. It does not appear agreeable to fact, that there is an admi- nistration of the means of grace sufficient to bring all men to faith and repentance ; for, although there is nothing in the nature of the Gospel to prevent it from becoming a universal religion, yet the fact is, that by much the greatest part of the world does not enjoy the benefit of its instructions."" And although the imperfect propagation of the Gospel may be owing to the coiTuption and indifference of Christians, yet with regard to the inhabitants of those nations to whom the most distant intimation of its existence never extended, it cannot surely be said that there has been any want of inquiry on their part. The Arminians are obliged to resolve this manifest inequality in dispensing the advantages for attaining faith and repentance into the sovereignty of God, who imparts his free gifts to Avhom he will. Still, however, they do not abandon their principle ; for they contend that the grace of God accompanies the light of nature, and that all who improve this universal revelation are conducted by that grace to higher degrees of knowledge. But here also the fact does not appear to accord with their system ; for the light of nature, although universal, is most unequal. In many countries superstition is rendered so inveterate by education, custom, and example, and the state of society is so unfavourable to the improvement of the mind, that none of the inhabitants has the means of extricating himself from error ; and even in those more enlightened parts of the world where, by the cultivation of the powers of reason or the advantages of foreign instruction, men have risen to more honourable concep- tions of the Deity, there does not appear any possibility of their attaining to the faith of Christ ; for, as the apostle speaks, liom. X. 17, "Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God. How shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard, and hoAv shall they hear without a preacher ?" * Book I. Ch. ix. 4. SYSTEMS COiMrARED. 189 'J'he Socinians, indeed, say, that all in every situation, who act up to the light afforded them, may be saved, without regard being had to the merits of Christ, But this opinion the Armi- nians strongly disclaim, and choose rather to say that those who improve the measure of knowledge derived from the works of nature, and the grace of God which accompanies it, are, in some extraordinary manner, made acquainted with the doctrine of Christ, so as to attain before they die that faith in him which the means afforded them could not produce. And thus the Arminians arc obliged, with regard to the greatest part of man- kind, to give up their fundamental position, that sufficient means of grace are administered to all, and to have recourse to the production of faith by an immediate impression of the Spirit of God upon the mind. The Arminians, feeling the force of this difficulty, leave, piously and wisely leave, the fate of that great part of mankind who do not enjoy the Gospel, to the mercy of God in Christ ; and, in their confessions of faith, they confine their doctrine, concerning the universal application of the remedy, to those who are called by the word. To this call they give the name of an election to grace and to the means of salvation, which they distinguish from an election to glor}'. Election to glory is the destination of eternal happiness to those who persevere in faith and good works ; election to grace is understood to be common to all who live in a Christian country, and to imply the giving to every one, by the preaching of the word and the power of the Spirit accompanying it, that grace which is sufficient to produce faith and to promote repentance unto life. But even after the Arminians have thus corrected and limited their doctrine with regard to the sufficiency of the means of grace, there remain two objections to it in point of fact. The first arises from the very unequal circumstances in w'hich the inhabitants of different Christian countries are placed. In some countries the Scriptures are given to the people, that they may search them ; in others, they are withheld. In some countries the Gospel is exhibited in a corrupt form, which tends to degrade the understanding and pervert the moral conduct ; in others, it is presented in its native simplicity, as cherishing every exalted affection and forming the mind to virtue. In the same countries there are infinite diversities amongst individuals as to their intellectual powers, the measure of their information, their em- jjloyments, their pursuits, their education, their society, the inducements to act properly, or the temptations to sin which arise from their manner of life. All these circumstances, having an effect upon the moral character, must be regarded in the 190 ARMINIAN AND CALVINISTIC Arminian system as a branch of the administration of the means of grace, because they are instruments which the Spirit of God may employ in that moral influence which he is considered as exerting over the mind of man. By means of these circum- stances, some are placed in a more favourable situation for attaining faith than others ; the same moral suasion by which some are preserved from almost any approach to iniquity, becomes insufficient to restrain others from gross transgression; and the Sovercif^n of tlie universe, who has ordained all these circumstances, thus appears to discriminate, in respect of the jneans of salvation, those very persons who in this system are said to be equally elected to grace. It may be said, indeed, that the secret operation of divine grace counterbalances the diversity of outward circumstances ; so that, taking the internal assistance and the external means together, all who live in a Christian countiy are upon a footing. This is the method of answering the objection adopted by Grotius, and other able defenders of Arminianism. But it is a departure from the principles of that system ; for it is substituting, in place of an administration of the means of grace sufficient for all, an ad- ministration in many instances defective ; and, in place of an internal grace common and equal to all, a grace imparted differ- ently to different persons, according to circumstances. The second objection, in point of fact, to the supposition that, in every Christian country, there is such an administration of the means of grace as is sufficient to bring all men to faith, arises from this undeniable truth, that, amongst those to whom the Gospel is preached, and in whose circumstances there is not that kind of diversity Avhich can account for the difference, some believe and some do not believe. Some, with all the out- ward advantages which the publication of the Gospel affords, continue the servants of sin ; Avhilst others attain, by the same advantages, that measure of perfection which is consistent with the present state of humanity. From this fact the Calvinists infer the reality of an inward discriminating grace, which appears to them the only satisfying account of the dift'erent fruits that proceed from the same external advantages, and which, although it is not, like the diversity of outward circumstances, an object of sense, may be certainly known by its eflects. But the Arminians, instead of admitting this inference, readily answer the objection which seems to arise from this fact, by saying that the grace which is sufficient to all, proves ineffectual with regard to many, because it is opposed. It is their own fault — the voluntary resistance which they might not have made — that prevents the grace of God from producing in them the effect SYSTEMS COJIPAIiKD. ]91 -vvlilch it was intended to produce in all, and which it actually does produce in others. To those who repent and believe, the same suthcicnt grace is imparted : by them also it might be resisted ; but because they do not resist, it proves etiectual. Now, this is an answer to the objection ; that is, it gives a reason why that grace which the Arminians say is sufficient to all who hear the Gospel, proves ineffectual with regard to many. But it remains to be inquired, whether the reason is such as ought to enter into a theological system, or whether the admitting of this reason is not i)rcgnant with objections no less formidable to their system, than the fact which it was brought to explain. For, 2. The second difficulty under which the Arminian system labours is this, that, while in words it ascril^es all to the grace of God, it does in effect resolve our salvation into something independent of that grace. It was the principle of the Pelagians that the grace of God respects only the remission of sin, and that it is not given m adjutoreinn, ve in pustcrum peccata commiUanlur. [To aid us, that sins may not be committed for the future.] Another of their aphorisms Avas, ad scienliam 7ios habere graiiam Christi, non ad charilaiem. [That we have the grace of'Christ for know- ledge, not for charity or moral qualities.] Arminius and his followers were most anxious to guard their system from the appearanceofapproachingtotheseprinciples. Theyacknowledged that man in his present state is not able to think or to do any thing truly good of himself; that he must be renewed in all his faculties by the spirit of God ; and that all our good works are to be ascribed to the grace of God in Christ. They renounce, by the terms in which the articles of their faith are expressed, even that modification of the Pelagian principles which was introduced soon after they were first published, and which is knoAvn by the name of Semi-Pelagianism. It was held, by the Semi-Pelagians, that, although man is unable to bring any good work to perfection, yet the first motions towards a good life, sorrow for sin, desire of pardon, purposes of obedience, and the first acts of faith in Christ, are the natural exercise of human powers, proceeding from the constitution and circum- stances of man, without any supernatural grace ; that to all in whom God observes these preparatory dispositions he gives, for the sake of Christ, his Holy Spirit ; and that, by the influence of this Spirit continually assisting their powers, they are enabled to make progress, and to persevere in the life of faith and obedience which they had begun. But the Arminians wish to discnminate themselves from the Semi -Pelagians, by mention- 192 ARMINIAN AND CALVINISTIC ing, in their confessions of faith, a preventing grace — gratia jiroBveniens sen jvoecedanea — which comes before, not only our works, but our purposes and desires of doing good ; by saying that the grace of God is the beginning as well as the progress and perfection of all good ; and by acknowledging that, without his grace, man cannot understand, or think, or will anything that is good. All those words, however, which they multiply in speaking of the grace of God, are accompanied with a clause which very much enervates their significancy ; for the conclusion of the fourth article runs thus : — " With regard to the manner of the operation of that grace, it is not irresistible ; for it is said, in the seventh chapter of the l>ook of Acts, and in many other places of Scripture, that they resisted the Holy Spirit." And, in place of the doubt expressed in the fifth article, whether those who have been united to Christ by true faith may not, by their own negligence, fall from grace, the Arminians, in the subsequent confessions of their faith, speak without hesitation of Christians who fall, through their own fault, from the faith which had been produced in them by the Spirit of God, and with regard to whom all the actions of the Spirit of God cease, because they do not fulfil the conditions required on their part. It is to be observed that, by the grace which may be resisted, the Arminians do not mean merely that grace which calls men to the knowledge of the Gospel, and furnishes them with the outAvard means of salvation, but that influence exerted by the Spirit of God upon the mind which they are accustomed to describe by a multitude of words ; and what they mean by calling this grace irresistible, is not merely that opposition is made to it ; for those who hold the corruption of human nature in the highest degree, are the most ready to admit this opposition. It is matter of experience ; and none can deny that it is often mentioned in Scripture, But the Arminians, by calling the grace of God resistible, mean that it may be defeated; in other words, that the resistance given by a person whom the Spirit of God calls to faith and obedience, may be such as to render him unfit for believing and for obeying the divine will ; so that he either remains unconverted after all the operations of grace upon his soul, or he returns, after a temporary conversion, to the state in which he was before. Here, then, is the grace of God supposed to be unable to attain its efi"ect of itself, and that effect supposed to depend upon the concurrence of man. It is allowed by the Arminians that none can be saved without the grace of God ; but it is not alloAved that the reason why some are saved and not others, is to be found in that grace ; for, while the grace of God and the will of man are conceived to be partial causes, SY.->TEMS COr.lPARED. 103 concurring in the production of the same effect, the grace of God is only a remote cause of salvation — a cause operating in- differently upon all, sufficient, indeed, but often ineffectual. The proximate, specific cause of salvation, by which the effects of the universal cause are discriminated, is to be found in the qualities of the subject ^vhich receives the grace of God, since upon these qualities it depends whether this grace shall over- come or shall be counteracted. The Arminians attempt to remove this objection to their system, by reasoning in the following manner. Although God is omnipotent, he cannot put forth his irresistible power in communicating his grace to the mind of man, because he must govern his creatures according to their natures. But a grace which cannot be resisted would destroy the morality of human actions ; and, instead of improving the character of a reasonable agent, would leave no room for anything that deserves the name of virtue. It follows, therefore, from the nature of man, au'l the purpose for which grace is bestowed upon him, that it must be left in his power and in his choice, whether he will comply with it or not ; in other words, the grace of God must be resist- ible in this sense and to this amount, that its efficacy must depend upon the concurrence of the being on whom it is exerted. This reasoning of the Arminians constitutes one of their chief objections to the Calvinistic system, which represents the mind of man as effectually determined by the grace of God ; and if the objection has all the weight which the reasoning seems to imply, that system cannot be true ; for it is impossible that that can be a just account of the grace of God, which is inconsistent with the character of man, and subversive of morality- The objection will be discussed, wdien we advance to the difficulties that belong to the Calvinistic system. In the meantime, it is to be remembered that the Arminians, in their zeal to steer clear of this difficulty, have adopted such an account of the grace of God as implies that, antecedently to its operations, the minds of some men are disposed to comply with it, and the minds of others to reject it ; and that, in whatever words they choose to magnify the grace of God, they cannot regard it as the cause of this difference ; for, if the grace which is given indifferently to two persons, John and Judas, which is sufficient for both, and Avhich may be resisted by both, is not resisted by John, and in consequence of that non-resistance conducts him to salvation, but is resisted by Judas, and in consequence of that resistance proves ineffectual with regard to him, the true cause of the efficac}' and inefficacy of the grace lies in the minds of these two persons. " Thou didst give to my neighbour," may VOL. II, K ]94 AR.'^II^•IAN AKU CALVINISTIC the former say, "■ as to me ; but my ■r ill has improved -what thou gavest, ■while the will of my neighbour has resisted all thine operations." This language, which the Arminians must suppose every one that is saved entitled to hold to the Almighty, by implying that man has something independent of the grace of God, whereof he may boast, and whereby he may distinguish himself from other men in the sight of God, not only contradicts the doctrine of original sin, and those lessons of humility which the Gospel uniforndy teaches, but seems also to involve the Arminians themselves in contradiction ; for, while they say that no man is able of himself to understand, to think, or to will Avhat is good, they suppose that only some men retain that carnal mind which the Scriptures call enmity to God, and by which the grace of God is defeated ; but that others are at all times ready of themselves to yield that compliance with the influences of the Spirit, by which they are rendered effectual. And thus, while in words they ascribe all good works to the grace of God, they suspend the beginning, the progress, and the continuance of these good works upon the will of man. 3. The last difficulty which adheres to the Arminian system is, that it proceeds upon the supposition of a failure of the pur- pose of the Almighty, which it is not easy to reconcile with our notions of his sovereignty. In this system the Almighty is conceived to have a purpose of bringing all men to salvation by Christ, and, iu execution of this purpose, to furnish all men with sufficient means of salva- tion ; yet, notwithstanding this purpose, and the execution of it by the grace of God, many continue in sin. Dr Clarke has stated the difficulty, and has given the Arminian solution of it in one of his sermons upon the grace of God ; and as it is manifest from all his writings that he is there speaking his own sentiments, it will not be thought that I do any injustice to the Arminian system, by stating the solution of this third difficulty, in the words of an author so distinguished for the clearness of his conceptions, and the accuracy of his expressions, as Dr Claike. '' The design of God in the gracious declarations of the Gospel is to bring all men, by the promise of pardon, to repentance and amendment here, and thereby to eternal salvation here- after. The only difficulty here is, that which arises, and indeed very obviously, from comparing the actual event of things with the declarations of God's gracious intention and design. If God designed, by the gracious terms of the Gospel, to bring all men to salvation, how comes the extent of it to be confined within so narrow a compass, and the effect of it to be in experience so inconsiderable, t\'en where in profession it secrus to have uni- SYSTKMS COMPARED. 195 versally prevailed? The answer to tliis is, that, in all moral matters, the intention or design of God never signifies (as.it does always in natural things) an intention of the event actually and necessarily to he accomplished ; but (which alone is con- sistent -with the nature of moral things) an intention of all the means necessary on his part to the putting that event into the power of the proper and iminediate agents."* According to this solution, that determination of the actions of men which forms part of the Calvinistic system, is incon- sistent with the nature of man, because the intention of God in moral matters never can go on to the event without destroying the character of moral agents. This objection to the Calvinistic system is the same in substance with that which I stated under the former head, and will be considered afterwards. In the meantime, it is to be remembered that the Arminians are obliged either to deny that there is in God an intention to bring all men to salvation, or to admit that a great part of what is done in his creation is independent of his Avill ; for, although all the actions of wicked men in this Avorld, and their everlast- ing condition hereafter, are, according to the Arminian system, foreseen by God, and being foreseen, may be connected in the great plan of his providence with other events which are under his power, yet they are foreseen as arising from a cause over which he has no control — from the will of man, which, after all his operations, determined itself in many cases to choose the very opposite of that wliich he intended, and endeavoured to make it choose. If it shall appear that this emancipation of the actions of the creature from the direction of the Creator is an unavoidable consequence of the character of reasonable beings, we must acquiesce in what appears to us an imperfection in the divine government. But until the inconsistency between the providence of God — I mean not merely his foresight, but his determination — and the freedom of his reasonable creatures be clearly established, vre should be led, by all the views of the sovereignty of the Creator which reason and Scripture give us, to suppose that no part of the universe is withdrawn from his control : and the harmony of the great plan of Providence must appear to us inconsistent with the motley combination of natural events appointed by God, and actions or his creatures contrary to his purpose. The amount of the three difficulties which have now been stated, maybe thus shortly summed up. The Arminian system lays dowDj as a fuiidamental position, an administration of the * Serm. XII. vol. II. lOf) AR3IINIAN AND CALVINISTIC means of grace sufficient to bring all men to faith and repent- ance— a position ■which it is not possible to reconcile -with what appears to be the fact; it resolves the salvation of those -vvho are saved into the character of their mind antecedently to the operations of divine grace ; and it resolves the final reprobation of others into actions performed by the creatures of God^ oppo- site to those which he furnished them with all the means neces- sary for performing, and conducting to an end different from that which he intended. SECTION II. The Arminian system was an attempt made by those who dis- claimed Socinian principles, to get rid of the difficulties which belonf>- to the Calvinistic system. The embarrassment and inconsistency with which we have seen that attempt to be attended, and from which very able men have not found it possible to disentangle themselves, is a proof that it is not an easy matter to devise a middle system between Socinianism and Calvinism. But if Calvinism be really involved in those insu- perable difficulties which are perpetually in the mouths of its adversaries — if it subverts the nature of man, and presents the most unwortby conceptions of the Father of all — it cannot be true. The attempts to get rid of these difficulties may have been hitherto unsuccessful ; but it is impossible to adopt any system to which such difficulties adhere ; and it were better, it may be thought, to acquiesce, under a consciousness of our own ignorance, in the embarrassment of the Arminians, or everv to advance to the simple, unencumbered scheme of Socinus, than by following what we account truth far beyond the measure of our understandings, to confound all our notions both of God and of man. Before we come, however, to this desperate resolution, it is proper to bestow a very careful examination upon the difficulties which belong to the Calvinistic system. They may be magni- fied by the misrepresentations of its enemies ; they may have arisen from some weakness in the reasoning, or some narrow- ness in the views of its friends ; there may be no other difficul- ties than such as our minds must always expect to feel in every efibrt to form a conception of the obscure and magnificent subjects about which the two systems are conversant; and they may belong to the Arminian, in as far as it keeps clear of SYSTKMS COMPARED. 197 Socinianism, no less than to the Calvinistic. I enter upon the examination of these difficulties with a thorough conviction of its being possible to state them in such a manner that they shall not atford any reasonable man a just ground for rejecting the system ; and my examination of them will have the appear- ance, which, iiv my situation, is decent, of an apology for Calvinism. I certainly desire that every one of my students should think as favourably of that system as I do ; because, if they become licentiates or ministers of this church, they have to subscribe a solemn declaration that they believe it to be true. But their conviction ought to arise from their own study, not from my teaching. They bring with them, from their previous studies, an acquaintance with the leading principles upon which my apology turns, sufficient to enable them to judge how far it is a fair one ; and even had I that attachment to a system, which I am conscious I have not, which would lead me to defend it by misrepresentation, I must be sensible that this would be the certain method of giving them an unfavourable impression of the system which I wish to recommend. The objections to the Calvinistic system, however multiplied in words or in divisions, may be reduced to two. It is conceived to be inconsistent with the nature of man as a free moral agent ; and it is conceived to represent the Almighty in a light repug- nant to our notions of his moral attributes. SECTION III. The Calvinistic system is conceived to be inconsistent with the nature of man as a free moral agent. It is acknowledged by all, that liberty is essential to the character of a moral ag^nt ; that we are not accountable for those actions which we are compelled to perform ; that in every part of our conduct, in which external force does not operate upon the motions of our bodies, we have a feeling that whatever we do, we might have done otherwise ; that we deserve praise for our good actions, because we might have acted wrong ; and that we deserve blame for our bad actions, because we might have acted well. In these points all are agreed. But it is said, by those who do not hold the Calvinistic system, that the effectual irresistible grace, which, according to that system, is communicated to the elect, and by which they are infallibly de- termined to a certain line of conduct, degrades them from the 198 ARMIXIAN AND CALVINISTIC character of agents to that of patients — machines acted upon by another being ; and thus destroys the morality of those very actions which they are determined to perform. As it is impos- sible that a religion proceeding from the Author of human nature, can so directly subvert the principles of that nature, the manner of applying the Gospel remedy -which is essential to the Calvinistic system, is considered as of itself a demonstrative proof that this system exhibits a false view of Christianity. The whole force of this objection turns upon the ideas that are formed of the liberty of a moral agent. To those who form one idea of liberty, the objection constitutes an insurmountable difficulty ; to those who form another idea, it admits of a satis- fying answer. There is one idea of liberty, adopted and strenuously defended by Dr Reid, in his " Essays on the Active Powers," which I shall give in his words : — " By the liberty of a moral agent, I understand a power over the determinations of his own will. If, in any action, he had power to will what he did, or not to will it, in that action he is free. But if, in every voluntary action, the determination of his will be the necessary consequence of something involuntary in the state of his mind, or of some- thing in his external circumstances, he is not free ; he has not what I call the liberty of a moral agent, but is subject to necessity."* The liberty here defined, is sometimes called liberty of indifference, because it is supposed that, after all the circumstances which can lead to the choice of one thing are pre- sented, the mind remains in equilibrio, till she proceeds to exert her OAvn sovereign power in making the choice. The exertions of this power are conceived to be independent of everything exter- nal : the mind alone determines ; and there is no fixed infallible connection between her determinations and any foreign object. The definition of liberty given by Dr Reid, is that which Arminian writers adopt. Some of them speak with more ac- curacy than others ; but all of them agree that the liberty of a moral agent consists in the self-determining power; that, although he is frequently determined in his actions and resolutions by some cause foreign to the mind, he is not constantly and invari- ably so determined; and that, as the mind has a power of choos- ing without any reason, it is in every case uncertain how far she will exert this power, and, consequently, it is uncertain what the choice of the mind will prove, until it be made. Upon this foundation, the Arminians build the impossibility of an absolute decree, electing particular persons to eternal life, and giving them * Essay IV., ch. i. SYSTEMS COMPARED. 199 the means of attaining it. They say that faith and repentance, being the exercise of a self-determining power, originate purely in the mind ; that the Almighty cannot give an efficacious de- termining grace, without destroying this self-determining power; and, therefore, that all the decrees of God, in relation to moral agents, were either from eternity suspended upon their own determinations, or become peremptory only by his foreseeing what these determinations are to be. Although this account of the liberty of moral agents be adopted by the Arminians, it is not easily reconciled Avith the opinion which they profess to hold with regard to the extent and the infallibility of the divine foreknowledge ; for, as the determina- tions of free agents are the exertions of a power which is con- ceived to be unconnected and uncontrolled in its operations, there does not appear to us any method by which they can be certainly foreknown. When a future event is connected with anything present, that connection is a principle of knowledge with regard to it — the more intimate the connection is, the future event may be the more certainly known ; and if the connection be indissoluble, a being to whom it is known is as certain that the future event will exist, as that any present object now is. But, if a future event has no connection with anything present, it can- not be seen in its cause ; and the Socinian conclusion seems to be the natunil one, that it cannot be foreseen at all. The Ar- minians, indeed, distinguish their system from Socinianisra, by rejecting this conclusion ; for, although tliey consider the actions of moral agents to be contingent in this sense of the word, that they are not connected with any preceding event as their cause, and although they do not pretend to exphiin the manner in which such events can be certainly foreknown, yet they admit their being foreknown by God; and upon his infallible foreknow- ledge of them, they build what they call the decree of election. The difficulty of reconciling what has been called liberty of indifference with the infallible foreknowledge of God, is not the only objection to this account of liberty. Liberty belongs toau agent, not to a faculty. A power in the mind to determine its own determinations is eitlier unmeaning, or supposes, contrary to the first principles of philosophy, something to arise without a cause ; and it lands those by whom it is defended in various inconsistencies. These points it is not my business to state more particularly. They are unfolded in the chapter of Mr Locke's Essay, entitled, " On Power ;" and they are elucidated, with much metaphysical acuteness, and with great fulness of illustration, in Edwards' '^ Essay on Free-will." On the other hand, Dr Clarke has stated the Arminian account of liberty in a 200 ARMINIAN AND CALVINISTIC close and guarded manner — in a form the most accurate and the least objectionable that the subject will admit of. This statement occurs in different parts of Dr Clarke's works; par- ticularly in his " Demonstration of the Being and Attributes of God," and in some of his replies to papers of Leibnitz. One of Dr Whitby's Discourses on the five points is an essay on the freedom of the will of man. The Arminian account of liberty is fully stated by King in his " Essay on the Origin of Evil ;" and there is a defence of it, loose, but copious and plausible, in the Essay already referred to, by Dr Reid, " On the Liberty of Moral Agents." Without pursuing the investigation hoAv far liberty of indif- ference is rational and consistent, I proceed to state the grounds of that other idea of the liberty of moral agents, which is essential and fundamental in the Calvinistic system. The liberty of a moral agent consists in the power of acting according to his choice ; and those actions are free which are performed without any external compulsion or restraint, in consequence of the determinations of his own mind. The determinations of the mind are formed agreeably to the laws of its nature, by the exercise of its poAvers in attention, delibera- tion, and choice : they are its own determinations, because they proceed upon the views which it entertains of the su1)ject in reference to which it determines ; and the manner in which the determinations are formed, implies that essential distinction hetween mind and matter, in consequence of which mind is by its constitution susceptible of a moral character. Matter is acted upon by other objects, and receives from this impulse a particular figure or motion ; but it has no consciousness of the change induced upon its state, no powers to put forth in accomplishing the change, no choice of the effect which is to follow. There is a physical impossibility that the effect can be any other than that which may be calculated from taking into account the quantity and direction of the impulse, in conjunc- tion Avith the size, the quality, and the situation of the body which receives it. But this indifference to every kind of impression, which enters into our conception of body, and in consequence of which we give it the epithets passive and inert, is repugnant to our idea of mind. We conceive that the actions of a man originate in the exertions of his mind; that poAvers are there put forth ; that the mind makes a selection out of many objects, any one of Avhich it was not physically im- possible to choose ; that, in the preference given to those means Avhicli are employed to l>ring aI)out an end, there is a choice — a Avill discovered, Avhioh renders the mind worthy of SYSfEMS COMPARED. 201 praise or blame, and gives to the conduct that direction by which it is denominated either good or bad. This exertion of the innate powers of action, by which mind is distinguished from mutter, may be called the self-determining power of the mind ; and if this were all that the Arminians meant by that phrase, the Calvinists would readily join in the use of it. But it is to be observed that a general principle of activity, and a determination to a particular mode of action, are totally different : and, after we have admitted that the actions of a man originate in the exertions of his mind, it remains to be inquired what determines the mind to one kind of exertiou rather than another. The Arminians say the mind determines itself; which to the Calvinists appears to be no answer to the question, because in their opinion it means no more than that the mind has a power of determining itself. They hold that no event happens, either in the natural or in the moral world, without a cause. They hold that God, who exists necessarily, is the only Being who has the reason of his exist- ence in himself. Because he now is, he alwa3's was, and he always will be. But every other being is contingent, i. e. it may be or it may not be : the reason of its existence, there- fore, cannot be in itself, but must be in something else. The whole universe is contingent, deriving the reason of its existence from the will of the Creator ; and every particular being or event in the universe has that connection with some- thing going before it, by which it forms part of the plan of Providence, and although known to us only when it comes into existence, Avas certain from the beginning, and was known as certain to Him in whose mind the whole plan originated^ These general principles, which constitute the foundation of the Calvinistic system, are equally applicable to the events of the natural and the moral world. The various changes upon matter, which are the events of the natural world, arise from a succession of operations, every one of which, being the effect of something previous, becomes in its turn the cause of something that follows. The particular determinations of mind, which may be considered as events arising in the moral world, have their causes also, which we are accustomed to call motives — that is, inducements to act in a particular manner, which arise from the objects presented to the mind, and the views of those objects which the mind entertains. The causes of the events in the natural world are efficient causes, which act upon matter : the causes of events in the moral world are fintd causes, with reference to which the mind, in which the action origi- nates, proceeds, voluntarily and deliberately, to put fyrtli k2 202 ARMIMAX AND CALVIXISTIC its own powers. But the direction of the action towards its final cause is not less certain than the direction of the motion produced in an inert, passive substance, by the force impressed upon it, Avhich is the efficient cause of the motion. While I continue to view an object in a particular light, its influence upon my conduct continues. While I propose to myself a cer- tain end, and perceive that certain means are necessary to attain that end, I employ those means. If I propose other ends, or change my opinion as to the means, there will be a consequent change in my conduct. Although the determinations of mind thus admit of certainty, by means of their connection with final causes, this certainty is essentially different from absolute necessity. A thing is said to be necessary, when its opposite implies a contradiction. The three angles of a triangle must be ecpial to two right angles. Absolute necessity, therefore, excludes the possibility of choice, because, when of two things one must be, and the other cannot be, there is no room for preferring the one to the other. But two opposite determinations of mind are equally possible ; both being contingent, either the one or the other may be ; and the certainty that one of them shall be, is only what is called moral necessity, which is in truth no necessity at all ; because it arises, rot frpm the impossibility of the other determination, but merely from the sufficiency of the causes that are employed to produce the efi'ect. The word effect implies, in every case, the previous existence of causes sufficient for its production. It appears because they are sufficient ; so that their sufficiency involves the certainty of its appearing. In every determination that is finally taken, there was this sufficiency of causes ; and, consequently, before it Avas taken, there was a certainty that it would be such as it is. Yet, in all its determinations, the mind acts according to its nature — deliberates, judges, chooses, without any feeling of restraint, but with a full impression that it is exerting its own powers. If the determinations of moral agents are thus certainly di- rected by motives, it is plain that the Almighty, whose will gave existence to the universe, and by whose pleasure every cause operates and every effort is produced, gives their origin to these determinations, by the execution of the great plan of his provi- dence ; for, as there entered into his plan all those efficient causes whose successive operation produces the motions and changes of the material world, so there are brought forward, in succession, by the execution of this j)lan, all those objects which present themselves to the mind as final causes. Could we sup- pose a being who, without any influence ia ordering the con- SYSTEMS COJIPARED. 203 nectlon of things, foresaw, from the beginning, what that con- nection would be, and had a mind capable of comprehending the whole series, he would, at the same time, foresee all the exertions of mind in reference to final causes. And if the being who possesses this foresight is no other than the Almighty, upon whose will the whole disposition of the events that are connected together depends, it is plain that, by altering this disposition, he would alter those exertions of mind which it calls forth, and, therefore, that all the exertions which are made constitute a part of his plan. But this does not, in the smallest degree, diminish what we call the liberty of moral agents ; for final causes operate upon them according to their nature, in the same manner as if there were no such foresight and pre-ordination : tliey shun what is evil ; they desire what is good ; they are di- rected in their determinations by the light in which objects ap- pear to them, without inquiring — without being impressed at the time of the direction with any desire to know — whether the good and evil came from the appointment of a wise being, or whether it arose fortuitously. It is present, and it operates be- cause it is present, not because it was foreseen. The mind feels its influence ; and this feeling is totally distinct from the calm judgment which the mind may, upon reflection, form with re- gard to the origin of that influence. It seems to result from the simple view we have taken of the subject, that the operation of motives will be uniform ; that, as the strength of the motive may in every case be estimated, the effect will appear to correspond to its cause ; and that there will be as little variety in the determinations of diff'erent minds, to whom the same final cause is presented, as in the motions of bodies which receive the same foreign impulse. Yet the fact is, that motives are very far from operating according to their ap- parent strength ; that men are daily acting in contradiction to those moral inducements which, in all reason, ought to deter- mine their conduct ; and that the same motives by which the determinations of one man are guided, have not an abiding influence, and often hardly any perceptible influence upon an- other man to whom they appear to be equally present. In some men, the understanding does not separate readily between truth and falsehood, or possesses in so slender a degree the faculty of comprehending the parts of a complex object, and of tracing consequences, that, in most cases, neither the end nor the means appear to them such as they really are ; in other men, whose understanding is not defective, there are particular after- tions and inferior appetites, which either insensibly bias the will and even pervert the understanding, or whose violence dictates 204 ARMINIAN AND CALVINISTIC a choice opposite to that wliich should result from the calm judg- ment of the understanding ; and in many men there is an indecision — a want of vigour — an apprehension of difficulties, by which the final determinations of their minds, and the con- duct which they pursue in life, are very different from what they themselves approve. However plausible, then, the theory may be, which represents motives as final causes calling forth the exertions of mind, yet when we come to ajiply this theory to fact, the real influence of these causes becomes a matter of very complicated calculation. We have to consider the strength of the motives not abstractedly, but in conjunction with the particular views formed by the mind to which they are presented ; and there enters into the forma- tion of these views such a variety of circumstances respecting the state of the mind, generally unknown to observers, or inex- plicable by them, and often unperceived by the mind itself, that the final determination appears in many cases nearly as wayward and capricious as if it was not connected with anything previous, but the mind did really exert that uncontrolled sovereignty over its own determinations to which the Arminians give the name of the self- determining power. Notwithstanding this complication of circumstances that require to be considered in estimating the influence of motives, it is a matter of frequent experience that we may be so well acquainted with the character of a person's mind, with all the springs of action by which he is moved, and with the situation in which he is placed, as to judge, with very little danger of mistake, what line of conduct he will pursue. And it is pos- sible, by the information and suggestions that are conveyed to his understanding, and by a skilful and continued application of the objects best fitted for rousing his passions and interesting his affections, to obtain an entire ascendancy over his mind, and to command his sentiments and purposes. Many persons find it for their interest or their pleasure to study the art of leading the minds of others, and to devote themselves to the practice of this art ; and the history of the world is full of instances in which the art has been successful. The success has sometimes proved hurtful to the civil and political liberties of mankind ; but it has never been considered as impairing that liberty of which we are now speaking — the liberty which is necessary to constitute the persons thus led, moral agents. Their determina- tions, although foreseen by their sagacious neighbours before the}' were formed — although formed upon the view of objects not sought after by themselves, but put in their way by those neigh- bours—were still their own determinations; the spontaneous SYSTEMS COMPARED. 205 result of their own active powers, in which they had all the feel- ings of choice, and liberty, and mental exertion — of self-appro- bation if they chose right ; of self-reproach if they chose wrong. Although the investigation of the character of others be to us laborious and full of mistake — although our efforts to direct the minds of others be often rendered abortive by some oversight and negligence on our part, by some change upon theirs, or by some unlooked-for event — we can easily account for this imper- fection by the present state of human nature ; and we do not find it difficult to rise, from what we ourselves experience, to the conception of that intuitive knowledge, and that entire direc- tion of the determinations of mind, which belong to the Supreme Being. He who formed the human heart knows what is in man ; he knows our thoughts afar off, long before they arise in our breasts — long before the objects by which they are to be excited have been presented to us. He who is intimately pre- sent through his whole creation, marks, without fatigue, or the possibility of misapprehension, every the minutest shade that distinguishes the character of one man from that of another ; every difference in their situation, every variety in the views which they form of the same objects. And all these things are known to him not merely as they arise. They originated in that plan which, from the beginning, was formed in the Divine Mind, and which was executed in time by his pleasure ; so that their being future, or present, or past, does not make the smallest ditference in tlie clearness, the facility, and the certainty with which he knows them. If all the circumstances presented to the minds of his crea- tures, and constituting moral inducements to a certain line of conduct, are a part of the plan of the Almighty, it is in his power to accommodate these circumstances to the varieties which he perceives in the characters of mankind, so as to lead them certainly in the path which he chooses for them. We observe, in the history of the human race, what Ave call a national character, formed b}' that concurrence of natural and moral causes which every sound theist ascribes to the providence of Him who is the Governor among the nations. We observe, in private life, how much the characters of those with whom we have intercourse depend upon their education, their society, their employments, and the events which befall them ; and we can conceive these and other circumstances combined in the lot of an individual, by the disposition of Heaven, so as to have a most commanding influence in eradicating from his breast the vices which were natural to him, and in calling forth the con- tinued and Yigorous exercise of every virtuous principle. This 20G ARMIXIAN AND CALVINISTIC influence is the meaning of an expression in theological books, gratia congrua — that is, grace exercised in congruity to the dis- position of him who is the subject of it, accommodating circum- stances to his character in that manner which the Almighty foresees will prove effectual for the purpose of leading hira to faith and repentance. This is the account which some writers of the Church of Rome, of great eminence in their day, chose to give of the eihcacy of divine grace. It was, probably, included in the expression used by Arminius, that the means of grace are admin- isteredjw,r/a sapienliam ; [^according to wisdom f\ and it seems to have been adopted by the earliest followers of Arminius. The account of the efficacy of divine grace, which may be shortly ex- pressed by the phrase graiiV/ co?igrua, proceeds upon the view that has been given of the influence of motives ; and to all who admit that the influence of motives upon the mind may certainly direct the conduct, this account cannot appear inconsistent with the principles of human nature. But it was rejected by the successors of Arminius, in their confessions of faith, as inconsistent with an intention to save all men, and as implying a precise and absolute intention of saving some, effectually carried into exe- cution by the congruity of the grace which is administered unto them. It is rejected by the modern Arminians, as inconsistent with Avhat they call the self-determining power of the mind : and it is considered by the Calvinists as liable to objections, and as insufficient of itself to produce the effects ascribed to it. Gratia congrua appears to the Calvinists to imply an exercise of scicntia media ; because it implies that the minds of those who are to be saved, are considered as having an existence, and as possess- ing a determinate character, independently of the divine decree, and that the administration of the means of grace is directed by reference to that character. It appears to the Calvinists to lie contradicted, as far as we can judge, by fact ; for, as the most favourable circumstances did not conduct the Jews, among whom our Saviour lived, to faith in the true Messiah, or pre- serve Judas, a member of his family, from the blackest guilt, while many among the heathen, without any preparation, were turned, at the first sound of the Gospel, from idols, to serve the living God ; so, in every age, the concurrence of all the advan- tages which education and opportunities can afford, proves ineffectual in regard to some ; while others, with the scantiest means of improvement, attain the character of those who shall be saved. Gratia congrua appears, further, to the Calvinists not to come up to the import of those expressions by which the Scripture describes the operation of the grace of God upon the soul, nor to imply a remedy suited to that degree of conuptioa SYSTEMS compahed. 207 in human nature, which they tliink may he fairly inferred both from experience and from Scripture. For all these reasons, the Calvinists consider the efficacy of divine grace as consisting in an immediate action of the Spirit of God upon the soul. This part of their doctrine may be easily represented in such a light as if it were subversive of the nature of a moral agent ; and much occasion has been given for such representations by the unguarded expressions of those who wish to magnify the divine power displayed in this action ; but, as it is of more importance to know bow the doctrine may be stated in consistency with those fundamental principles which cannot be renounced, than how it has been misstated, I shall not dilate on the exaggerations either of its friends or of its adversaries, but simply present such a view of it as appears to me perfectly agreeable both to the words of our Confession of Faith, and to the account which has been given of the liberty of a moral agent. It is manifest that the uncertainty in the operation of motives, which Avas formerly mentioned, arises from the corruption of human nature ; in other words, from the defects of the under- standing, and the disorders of the heart. If the understanding always perceived things as they are, and if the affections were so balanced in the soul as never to dictate any choice in opposi- tion to that which appears to be best, there would be a uniformity in the purposf s and the conduct of all to whom the same motives are presented ; ])ut if, according to the descrip- tions which the Calvinists find in Scripture, and which they adopt as the foundation of their system, the corruption of human nature be such as to blind the understanding, and to give inferior appetites that dominion in the soul which was originally assigned to reason and conscience, all the multiplicity of error, and all the caprice of ungoverned desire, come in to give a variety and uncertainty to the choice of the mind. The only method of removing this uncertainty of choice is by removing the corrup- tion from which it proceeds. And this is allowed, by all who hold that there is such a corruption, to be the work, not of the creature who is corrupt, but of the Creator. This work is expressed in Scripture by such phrases as the following : — " A new heart will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you.""' — " Ye must be bom again ;"t — " renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created you ;"X — " renewed in the spirit of your minds — created unto good works."§ While the * Ezek. xxxvi. 20. + John iii. 7. t Col iii. 10, § Eph. iv. 23 ; ii. 10, 203 ARMIMAN ANU CALVINISTIC Calvinists infer from these expressions, that there is an imme- diate action of God upon the souls of those who are saved, they observe that all these expressions are so very far from implying any action subversive of the nature of man, that they distinctly mark the restoration of the understanding, the affections, and all the principles of the human mind, to the state in which they were before they Avere corrupted. Although the Calvinists do not attempt to explain the manner of this action, they say it cannot appear strange to any sound theist — to any one who believes in God as the Father of spirits — that he has it in his power to restore to their original integrity those faculties which he at first bestowed, and which are continually preserved in exercise by his visitation ; and they place that efficacy of divine grace, which is characteristical of their system, in this renova- tion of the mind, conjoined with the exhibition of such moral inducements as are fitted to call forth the exertions of a mind acting according to reason. It appears to them indispensably necessary that these two, the renovation of the mind, and the exhibition of moral inducements, should go together ; for, although it is of the nature of mind to be called forth to action by motives, yet the strongest motives may be presented in vain to a mind which is vitiated, and moral suasion may be insuf- ficient to correct its heedlessness and to overcome its depravity ; so that, if the grace of God consisted merely in the exhibition of motives, or in a counsel of the same kind with that which a friend administers, it might be exerted without effect, and those whom God intended to lead to salvation might remain under the power of sin. But when, to the exhibition of the strongest motives, is joined that influence which, by renewing the facul- ties of the mind, disposes it to attend to them, the effect, according to the laws by which mind operates, is infallible ; and the Being who is capable of exerting that influence, and who, in the decree which embraces the whole system of the universe, arranged all the moral inducements that are to be exhibited in succession to his reasonable creatures, has entire dominion over their wills, and conducts them, agreeably to the laws of their nature, freely, i. e. with their consent and choice, and without the feeling of constraint, yet certainly, to the end which he proposes. This grace is irresistible, because all the principles which oppose its operation are subdued, and the will is inclined to follow the judgment of the understanding. What before was arbitrium servum, [a will in bondage,] according to a language formerly used upon this subject, becomes arbitrium liberum ; Qa free will ;] for the soul is rescued from a condition in which it was hurried on by ajipetite to act without dufi SYSTEMS COMPARED. 20U tlellberation upon false views of objects, and it recovers the faculty of discerning, and the faculty of obeying the truth. But in the exercise of these faculties consists what the Scriptures call " the glorious liberty of the children of God," the liberty of a moral agent. He is a slave, the servant of sin, led captive by his lusts, when the derangement of his nature prevents him from seeing things as they are, from pursuing what deserves his choice, from avoiding what he ought to shun. He is free, when he deliberates, and judges, and acts according to the laws of his nature. By this freedom he is assimilated to higher orders of being, who uniformly choose what is good. God acts always according to the highest reason ; he cannot but be just and good ; yet, in this moral necessity, which is inseparable from the idea of a perfect being, there is freedom of choice. The man Christ Jesus was uuiformly and infallibly determined to do those things which pleased his Father; yet he acted with the most entire freedom. " The spirits of just men made perfect," are unalterably disposed to fulfil the commandments of the Most High ; yet none will suppose that, when they are advanced to the perfection of their nature, they have lost what is essential to the character of a moral agent : so to man in a state of trial, according to the degree in Avhich his will is determined by the grace of God to the choice of what is good, to the same degree is the freedom of his nature restored. If the corruption of his nature, which indisposes him for that choice, were completely removed, he would always will and do what is good. If some remainders of that corruption are allowed to continue, there will be a proportional danger of his deviating from the right path. But the degree may be so small that he shall be effect- ually preserved from being at any time under the bondage of sin, and, in the general course of his life, shall be determined by those motives which the Gospel exhibits. These are the principles upon which the Calvinists are best able to defend their system against the objection, that it is sub- versive of the nature of man. They hold that, in the exercise of that faith and repentance which are indispensably necessary to salvation, the determination to act arises from the influence of God upon the soul ; but that it is a determination to act according to the nature of the soul, and therefore, that, although the effect of the determination is certain, the action continues to be free. The Arminians themselves allow that contingent events, such as the volitions and exertions of free agents, are certain beforehand ; for they admit that the foreknowledge of God extends to them. It is not, therefore, the bare certainty of the event which can appear to them inconsistent with liberty ; 210 AR3IINIAN AND CALVINISTIC and if the cause to which the Calvlnists ascrihe this certainty gives to the mind the full possession and exercise of its faculties, there is implied, in the certainty of the event, not the destruction, but the improvement of the liberty of man. SECTION IV. The second head to which all the difficulties tliat have been supposed to adhere to the Calvinistic system may be reduced, is this : — It is conceived to be dishonourable to God, and incon- sistent with those attributes of his natvire of which we are able to form the clearest notions. The amount of the difficulties which belong to this second head, may be thus shortly stated. Allowing that the determining grace of God may, without destroying the nature of man, eft'ectually lead to eternal life those to whom it is given, yet the bestowing such a favour upon some and not upon others, when all stood equally in need of it, constitutes a distinction amongst the creatures of God, which it appears impossible to reconcile with the impartiality of their common Father. It is true that many of his children receive a smaller portion in this life than others : but the unequal distri- bution of earthly comforts is subservient to the welfare of society, and calls forth the exercise of many virtues ; for while those who receive much have opportunities of doing good, those who receive little are placed in a situation which is often very favourable to their moral character ; and all are encouraged to look forward to a time when the present inequalities shall be removed. But the withholding from some that grace which is supposed to be essential to the formation of their moral character, can never be compensated. It leaves them sinful and wretched here, and consigns them to the abodes of misery hereafter : whilst others, not originally superior to them, are conducted, by the grace with which they are distinguished, through the prac- tice of virtue upon earth, to its highest rewards in heaven. The Almighty appears, according to this system, not only partial, but also chargeable with all the sin that remains in the world, by withholding the grace which would have removed it ; he appears unjust in punishing those transgressions which he does not furnish men with effectual means of avoiding ; and there seems to be a want of sincerity in the various expressions of his earnest desire that men should abstain from sin, in the reproaches for their not abstaining from it, and in the expostulations upon SYSTEMS CO:\IPAKED. 211 account of their obstinacy, with which the Scriptures abound, when he had determined beforehand to withhold from many that grace which he might have bestowed upon all, and without which he knows that every man must continue in sin. The picture which I have drawn easily admits of very high colouring, such as may be found in Whitby's Discourses on the five points. Even in the simple exhibition of it now given, it appears to contain objections and dithculties of a very serious nature ; and if these objections and difficulties fairly result from the Calvinistic system — if they are peculiar to that system, and if they do not admit of an answer — they are a clear proof that it does not contain a true representation of the extent and the applictition of the remedy ; for it is impossible that any doc- trine, inconsistent with the attributes of God, is contained in a divine revelation. But wc may find, upon an attentive exami- nation of the picture now drawn, that for the solution of some of the difficulties nothing more is necessary than a fair state- ment of the case ; that some belong to the Arminian system no less than to the Calvinistic ; and that others are to be placed to the account of the narrowness of our understandings, which, in following out principles that appear unquestionably true, meet upon all subjects with points which they are unable to explain. When the Calvinists are accused of charging God with partiality, because they say that the effectual, determining grace, ■which is imparted to some and not to others, proceeds from the mere good pleasure of God, they pretend to give no other answ^er than this, that the Almighty is not accountable to any for the manner in which he dispenses his favours ; and that, although the favour conferred upon the elect is infinitely superior to all the bounties of Providence — a favour which fixes their moral character and their everlasting condition — still it is a favour which originates entirely in the good pleasure of Him by w^hom it is bestowed, and in the communication of which there is no room for the rules of distributive justice, but it is lawful for the Creator to do what he will with his own. Justice is exercised, after men have acted their parts, in giving to every one according to his deserts ; and then all respect of persons, any kind of preference, which is not founded upon the superior worthiness of the objects preferred, is repugnant to our moral' feelings, and inconsistent with our conceptions of the Supreme Ruler. But the case is widely different with regard to the communication of that effectual grace Avhich is the fruit of election ; for, according to the view of the divine foreknow- ledge which is essential to the Calvinistic system, all things are brought into being by the execution of the divine decree, so 212 ARMINIAN AND CALVINISTIC that no circumstance in the manner of the existence of any indi- vidual can depend upon the conduct of that individual, but all that distinguishes him from others must originate in the mind which formed the decree : and, according to the view of the moral condition of the posterity of Adam, upon which the Calvinistic system proceeds, all deserved to suffer, so that the grace by which they are saved from suffering, is to be ascribed to the compassion of the Almighty, i. e. to an exercise of good- ness, which it is impossible for any to claim as a right. But the Arminians do not rest in accusing the Calvinists of charging God with partiality : they represent absolute reproba- tion as imposing upon men a necessity of sinning, from whence it follows that there is not only an vmequal distribution of favours according to the Calvinistic system, but that there is also gross injustice in punishing any sins which are committed. All Arminian books are filled with references to human life, with similes, and with repetitions of the same argument in various forms, by which it is intended to impress upon the minds of their readers this idea^ that, as we cannot, without glaring iniquity, first take away from man the power of obeying a command, and then punish his disobedience, so, if we adhere to those clear notions of the moral character of the Deity which reason and Scripture teach, we must renounce a system which implies that men suffer everlasting misery for those sins which God made it impossible for them to avoid. To this kind of reasoning the Calvinists answer, that, under all the amplification which it has often received, there is concealed a fallacy in the statement which totally enervates the objection ; and the alleged fallacy is thus explained by them: — If the decree of reprobation implied any influence exerted by God upon the mind leading men to sin, the consequences charged upon it would clearly follow. But that decree is nothing more than the withholding from some the grace which is imparted to others ; and God concurs in the sins committed by those from whom the grace is withheld, only by that general concurrence which is necessary to the preservation of his creatures. He in whom they " live and move, and have their being," continues with them the exercise of their powers ; but the particular direction of that exercise which renders their actions sinful, arises from the perverseness of their own will, and is the fruit of their own deliberation. They feel that they might have acted otherwise : they blame themselves, because, when it was in their power to have avoided sin, they did not avoid it ; and thus they carry about with them, in the sentiments and reproaches of their own minds, a decisive proof, which sophistry can never overpower, SYSTKMS COHPARI.D. 213 that there was no external cause compelling them to sin. It is admitted by the Calvinists, that all from whom the special grace of God is withheld, shall infallibly continue under the dominion of sin, because their doctrine with regard to the grace of God pro- ceeds upon thatcorruption of human nature which this grace alone is able to remove. But they hold that, although of two events one is certainly future, both may be equally possible in this sense, that neither implies a contradiction : and this is all that appears to them necessary to vindicate their doctrine from the charge of implying that men are compelled to sin. The Arminians are not entitled to require more, because, by admitting that the sins of men are foreknown by God, they admit that they are certain, and yet they do not consider this certainty of the event as in- fringing on the liberty of those by whose agency the event is accomplished. When it is said, then, that man, by the decree of reprobation, is put under a necessity of sinning, there is an equivocation in the expression. Those who wish to fix a re- proach upon the Calvinistic system mean, by a necessity of sinning, that co-action, that foreign impulse, which destroys liberty : those who defend this system admit of a necessity of sinning, in no other sense than as that expression may be em- ployed to denote merely the certainty of sinning which arises from the state of the mind ; and they have recourse to a distinction, formerly explained, between that physical necessity of sinning which frees tirom all blame, and that moral necessity of sinning Avhich implies the highest degree of blame. This distinction is supported by the sentiments of human nature ; it is the foundation of judgments, which Ave are accustomed daily to pronounce, with regard to the conduct of our neighbours ; and, when rightly understood and applied, it removes from the Calvinistic doctrine the odious imputation of representing men as punished by God for what he compels them to do. Still, however, a cloud hangs over the subject ; and there is a diflticulty in reconciling the mind to a system which, after laying this foundation, that special grace is necessary to the pro- duction of human virtue, adopts as its distinguishing tenet this position, that that grace is denied to many. The objection may be inaccurately stated by the adversaries of the system ; there may be exaggeration and much false colouring in what they say : it may be true that God is not the promoter or instigator of sin ; that the evil propensities of our nature, with which we ourselves are chargeable, lead us astray; and that every person Avho follows these propensities, in opposition to the dictates of reason and conscience, deserves to suffer. But, after all, it must be admitted, upon the Calvinistic system, that God might have 214 AR3IIXIAN AND CALVINISTIC prevented this de-snation and this sufferirg; that, as no dire ne- cessity restrains the Almighty from communicating any measure of grace to any number of his creatures, the unmerited favour which is shewn to some might have been shewn to others also ; and, therefore, that all the variety of transgression, and the consequent misery of his creatures, may be traced back to his unequal distribution of that grac'^ which he was not bound to impart to any, but which, although he might have imparted it to all, he chose to give only to some. Tliis appears to me the fair am.ount of the objection against the Calvinistic system, drawn from its apparent inconsistency ■with some of the moral attributes of the Deity, The objection is stated in terms more moderate than are commonly to be found in Anninian books ; but it is in reality the stronger for not being exaggerated. When this objection is calmly examined, without a predilec- tion for any particular system of theology, it will be found resolv- able into that question which has exercised the mind of man ever since he began to speculate. How was moral evil introduced, and how is it permitted to exist under the government of a Being whose wisdom, and power, and goodness, are without bounds ? The existence of moral evil is a flict independent of all the systems of philosophy or theology which are employed to account for it. It has been the complaint of all ages, that many of the rational creatures of God abuse the freedom which is essential to their character as moral and accountable agents, debase their nature, and pursue a line of conduct which is de- structive of their own happiness, and hurtful to their neighbour. And it is agreeable to both reason and Scripture to believe that the depravity and misery which are beheld upon earth, are the introduction to a state of more complete degradation and more unabated wretchedness hereafter. And thus, as it is no objec- tion to the truth of the Gospel that there is moral evil in the world, because it existed before the Gospel was given, so the diificulty of accounting for its existence is not to be charged to the account of any paiticular system of theology, because its existence is the great problem, to the solution of which the faculties of man have ever been unequal. Although, notwith- standing that difficulty, the proofs of the being, the perfections, and the govemment of God, appear, to those who understand the princi])les of natural religion, sufficient to remove every rea- sonable doubt, the difficulty still remains; and a sound theist believes that God is good, witliout being able to explain why there is evil in a world which he created. A short review of the attempts that were made, in ancient SYSTEMS COJIPARKD. 215 times, to solve this problem, may prepare )'ou for understanding the force of the answer given by the Calvinists to that objection against their system which we are now considering. Some philosophers, who held the pre-existence of souls, said that man in this state expiates by suffering the sins which he committed in a former state, and recovers, by a gradual purifi- cation, the perfection of his nature which he had lost. But, besides that this was assuming as true a position of which there is no evidence, that man existed in a previous state, the position, supposing it to be true, is of none avail, because it merely shifts the dif&culty from the state which we behold to a previous state, which was equally imder the government of God. It was the fundamental doctrine of the oriental philosophy, that there are two opposite principles in nature, the one good, the other evil. The good principle is limited and counteracted in his desire to communicate happiness by the evil principle ; and from the opposition between the two, there arises not such aAvorld as the good would have produced, but a Avorld in which virtue and vice, happiness and misery, are blended together. But, as the good principle is more powerful than the evil, he will at length prevail ; so that the final result cf the present strife will be the defeat of the evil principle, and the undisturbed fehcity of those that liave been virtuous. All the sects of Gnostics, which distracted the early ages of the Christian church, adopted some modification of this doc- trine, and were distinguished from one another only by the rank which they assigned to the evil spirit, by the manner in which they traced his generation, or the period which they assigned to his fall." The fame of Manes eclipsed all the other founders of the Gnostic sects ; and his doctrine, which was once diffused over a great part of the Christian world, is still familiar to every scholar under the name of Manicheism. Manes made the evil principle, which he called uatj, mailer, co-eternal with the Su- preme Being. To the power of this principle, independent of God, and acting in opposition to him, Manes ascribed all the evil that now is, and that will for ever continue to exist in the world. He considered the sins of men as proceeding from the suggestions and impulse of this spirit ; and the corruption of * IMoslieim's Church History, vol. i. The learned author has, with much erudition, discriminated the diHerent sects. But he has entered more mi- nutely into this discrimination than is consistent with the patience of his readers, or than can serve any good purpose ; for it is a matter of very little importance in what manner writers whose names are deservedly foi'- gotten, arranged the rank and the subordination of those beings to whom their imagination gave existence. 216 ahminian and calvinistic human nature as consisting in this, that, besides the rational soulj Avhich is an emanation from the Supreme Being Avho is light, the body is inhabited and actuated by a depraved mind, which originates from the evil principle, and i-etains the cha- racter of its author. This was the system by which JNIanes, treading in the steps of many who went before him, and study- ing to improve upon their defects, attempted to account for the existence of moral evil. But, as this system, in order to pre- serve the honour of the moral attributes of the Deity, admits such limitations of his power as are inconsistent with the independ- ence and sovereignty of the Lord of nature, it must be renounced by all who entertain those exalted conceptions of the divine ma- jestv which are agreeable to reason and illustrated by Scripture, or who pay due attention to the revelation given in Scripture, of those evil spirits who oppose the purposes of divine grace. We believe that the Almighty was before all things ; that every thing which is, derived its existence, its form, and its powers, from his Avill ; that his counsels are independent of every other being ; that the strength of his creatures, all of whom are his servants, cannot for a moment counteract the working of his arm ; and that the world is what he willed it to be. We learn from Scripture that there are higher orders of being, not the objects of our senses, who are the creatures of God, and of whom an innumerable company run to fulfil his pleasure. We learn that some of these beings, by disobeying their Creator, forfeited the state in which he first placed them ; that their depravity is accompanied Avith a desire to corrupt others ; that one of them was the tempter of our first parents, and that he still continues to exert an influence over the minds of their posterity^ by en- ticing them to sin. But the Scriptures guard us against sup- posing that this evil spirit is rendered by his apostacy independ- ent of the Supreme Being ; for, by many striking expressions in the ancient books, and by the whole series of facts and declar- ations in the New Testament, we are led to consider him as entirely under the command and control of the Creator, permitted to exert a certain degree of influence for a season, but restrained and counteracted during that season, by a power infinitely su- perior to his own, till the time arrive when he is to be bound in everlasting chains, and his works destroyed. It appears, then, that the account of the origin of evil, Avhich is characteristical of the Manichean system, does not receive any degree of countenance from that revelation of the invisible world which the Scriptures give. There is indeed mentioned in various parts of Scripture, incidentally and with much obscurity, a connection between us and other parts of the universe — an SYSTEMS C03IPARED. 217 influence exerted over the human race by beings far removed from our observation, who are the creatures and the subjects of Him who made us. The spirits who stand before the Almighty are sent forth to minister to the heirs of salvation ; and the spirits who rebelled against him seek to involve us in the guilt and the misery of their rebellion. This incidental opening suggests to our minds a conception of the unity of the great moral system, of the mutual subserviency of its parts, and of the multiplicity of those relations by which the parts are bound together ; a conception somewhat analogous to those ideas of reciprocal action in the immense bodies of the natural system, upon which the received principles of astronomy proceed, and which the progress of modern discoveries has very much con- firmed. Our faculties are not adequate to the full compre- hension of such connections, either in the natural or in the moral world. But the hints which are given may teach us humility, by shewing how much remains to be known ; tbey may enlarge and elevate our ideas of the magnificence and order of the works of God j and they conspire in imprinting on our minds this first lesson of religion — that every part of that work is his, that the superintendence and control of the Supreme Mind extends throughout the whole, and that we give a false account of every phenomenon either in the natural or in the moral world, when we withdraw it from the all-ruling provi- dence of Him without whose permission nothing can be, and whose energy pervades all the exertions of his creatures. If we say that moral evil exists in the world, because, by the constitution under which we live, the effects of the disobedience of our first parents are transmitted to their posterity, Ave explain, agreeably to the information aflForded in Scripture, the manner in which sin was introduced, but we do not account for its introduction ; for that constitution to which we ascribe its con- tinuance in the world, was established by God ; and, after we have been made to ascend this step, we are left just where we were, to inquire why the Almighty not only permitted moral evil to enter, but established a constitution by which it is pro- pagated. If we attempt, as has often been done, to account for moral evil by the necessary limitation in the capacities of all created beings, we are in danger of returning to the principles of the Gnostics, who ascribed an essential pravity to matter, which not even the power of the Almighty can subdue. If we say that moral evil is subservient to the good of the universe, Ave seem to be Avarranted by many analogies in the structure and operations of our OAvn frame, Avhere pain is a preparative for pleasure — in the appearances of the earth, and the vicissitudes A'OL. II, ' ' L 218 ARMINIAX AND CALVINISTIC to which it is subject^ wheie irregularity and deformity contri- bute to tlie beauty and preserTation of the whole — in society, where permanent and universal good often arises out of partial and temporary evil. Such analogies have often been observed, and they constitute both a delightful and a useful part of natural history ;* but when we attempt to apply them to the system of the universe, as an account of that evil which has been and which always will be, which affects the character as well as the happiness of rational agents, and excludes them from the hope of recovering that rank which they liad lost, we find that we have got beyond our depth. The idea may be just, but we are bewildered in the inferences which we presume to draw from it ; although we perceive numberless instances in which partial good arises out of partial evil, yet we are unable to explain what is the subserviency to good in the whole system of that evil which is permanent ; and, after being pressed with difficulties on every side, we are obliged to confess our ignorance of the extent and the relations of the great subject concerning which we speculate. Having seen the insufficiency of the various attempts made in ancient and modern times, to solve the great problem of natural religion, it only remains for us to rest in those funda- mental principles of which we have sufficient evidence. We know that God is wise and good, and that, as nothing in the uni- verse has power to defeat or counteract his purposes, all things that are, entered into the great plan which he formed from the beginning. Hence we infer that the universe — understanding by that word the whole series cf causes and effects, and the whole succession of created beings — is, such as we behold it, the work of God. Why it is not more perfect we know not. But from the single fact that it is, we infer that it answers the pur- poses of the Creator. He did not choose it on account of its imperfections : but these imperfections were not hidden from his view, nor are they independent of his will ; and he chose it out of all the possible worlds which he might have made, because, with all its imperfections, it promotes the end for which it was made. That end, being such as God proposed, must be good ; and the world, being the fittest to promote that end, must, notwithstanding its imperfections, be such as it was w^orthy of God to produce. It does not appear to me that human reason can go farther upon this subject. I am sensible that this is a method of accounting for the existence of evil, not very flattering to the * Palev's Natuip.l Theology. Gooduessof tlic Deity. SYSTEMS COMPARED. £]9 pride of our understandings, and not much fitted to afford a solution of those difiicultics which exercise our curiosity. It is deducing a vindication of what is done, not from our reasonings and views, but from the fact that it is done. But to this kind of vindication we are obliged perpetually to have recourse in all parts both of natural and of revealed religion ; and to those who consider it unsatisfying; I can give no better counsel than to read and ponder Bishop Butler's " Analogy," which, of all the books that ever were written by men, is the best calculated to check the extravagance of our shallow speculations concerning the government of God. When I stated the objection to the Calvinistic system, that it is inconsistent with the goodness of God, the objection appeared to be resolvable into the question concerning the origin of evil ; and now that we have attained the philosophical answer to that question, we find ourselves brought back to the principles of Calvinism. It was objected to the Calvinistic system, that, if God withholds from some the special grace which would have led them to repentance, their sin and misery may be traced back to him. But we have seen that all the moral evil in the world may, in like manner, be traced back to God, because the great plan, of which that moral evil is a part, originated from his counsel ; so that the answer to this objection against Cal- vinism is precisely the same with the philosophical answer to the question concerning moral evil. It is seen that some do not repent and believe : but their conduct, like every other event in the universe, was comprehended in the divine plan ; in other words, because God has not conferred upon them that grace which would have led them to pursue a different conduct, we infer that it was not his original purpose to confer thac grace, and we believe that the purpose is good because it is his. The Arminians are compelled to have recourse to the very same answer, although they attempt, by their system, to shift it for a little. They say that men do not repent and believe, because they resist that grace which might have led them to repentance and faith. But why do they resist this grace.'' The Arminians answer, that the resistance arises from the self- determining power of the mind. But why does one mind determine itself to submit to this grace, and another to resist it ? If the Arminians exclude the infiiilible operation of every foreign. cause, they must answer this question by ascribing the difference to the different character of the minds ; and then one question more brings them to God, the Father of spirits. For if these different characters of mind be supposed to have existed inde.. pendently of the divine will, a sufticient account is indeed given £20 Ar.MINIAN AXD CALVINISTTC why some are predestinated and others are reprobated ; but it is an account -which withdraws the everlasting condition of his reasonable offspring from the disposal of the Supreme Being ; whereas, if it be admitted that he who made them gave to their minds the qualities by which they are distinguished, and ordained all the circumstances of their lot which conspire in forming their moral character, the resistance given by some is referred to his appointment. It appears to be an incontrovertible truth, a truth the evidence of which is implied in the terms in which it is enunciated, that the gifts of nature and the gifts of grace proceed equally from the good pleasure of him who bestows them ; and if this fundamental proposition be granted, then the Calvinistic and Arminian systems lead ultimately to the same conclusion. The Arminian s ascribe the faith and good works of some to a predisposition in their own minds for receiving the means which God has provided for all, and to the favourable circumstances which cherish this disposition ; and the impeni- tence and unbelief of others to the obstinacy of their hearts, and to a concurrence of circumstances by which that obstinacy is prevented from yielding to the means of improvement. The Calvinists ascribe the faith and good works of some to an immediate and supernatural operation of the Spirit of God upon their souls, by which the means of improvement are rendered effectual ; and the impenitence and unbelief of others to that withholding of the grace of God by which the most favourable situation becomes ineffectual for leading them to eternal life. In either case that God who forms the heart and who orders the lot of all his creatures, executes his purpose ; and, although the steps be somcAvhat different in the two systems, yet, accord- ing to both, the ultima ratio, the true reason why some are saved and others are not, is the good pleasure of Him who, by a different dispensation of the gifts of nature and of grace, might have saved all. What the ends ai-e which God proposed to himself, by saving some instead of saving all, we are totally unqualified to explain. Agreeably to the expression used in our Confession of Faith^* the Calvinists are accustomed to say that the great end of the whole system is the glory of God, or the illustration of his attributes ; that, as he displayed his mercy by saving some from that guilt and misery in which all were involved, so he displays his justice by punishing others for that sin in which, according to his sovereign j)leasure, he chose to leave them. Arminian writers arc accustomed to reprobate, with much indignation^ an * Coiifess'.on of Faith, iii. 3. SYSTEMS COBIPARED. 221 expression which appears to them to represent the glory of God as a separate end, pursued by him for his own pleasure, Avithout any consideration of the happiness of his creatures, or any atten- tion to their ideas of justice. But, bearing in mind the whole character of the Deity — considering that He who may do what he will, being infinitely wise and good, can do nothing but ■what is right — it is obvious that his glory is inseparably con- nected with the happiness of his creatures. What the weakness of our understanding leads us to call different parts of a character, are united with the most indissoluble harmony in the divine mind ; and his works, which illustrate his attributes, do not display any one of them in such a manner as to obscure the rest. From this perfect harmony between the wisdom and goodness of God, his creatures may rest assured that every circumstance which concerns their welfare is effectually provided for in that system which he chose to produce ; and the whole universe of created intelligence could have chosen nothing for themselves so good, as that which is ordained to bo, because it illustrates the glory of the Creator. At the same time, it must be acknow- ledged that we do not make any advances in our acquaintance with the ends of the system by adopting this expression. The expression implies that there is a balance or proportion among the different attributes, that the display of one is bounded by the display of another, and that there are certain limits of every particular attribute implied in the perfection of the divine mind- But it leaves us completely ignorant of the nature of tliose limits, and it does not presume to explain why the justice of God required the condemnation of that precise number who are l«ft to perish, and how his mercy was fully displayed in the salvation of that precise number who are called the elect. We are still left to resolve the discrimination Avhich was made, and the extent of that discrimination, into the good pleasure of God; by which phrase is meant, not the will of a being acting cap- riciously for his OAvn gratification, but a will determined by the best reasons, although these reasons ar(! beyond our comprehen- sion ; and all doubts and objections, which the narrowness of our views might suggest, are lost in that entire confidence with which the magnificence of his works and the principles of our nature teach us to look up to a Being, of whom, and by whom, and to whom are all things. It may be thought, upon a superficial view, that the account which has been given of the origin of evil, represents sin as not less agreeable to the Almighty than virtue, since both enter into the plan which he ordained, and both are considered as the ful- filment of his purpose. This specious and popular objection has 222 ARMINIAN AND CALVINISTIC often been urged with an air of triumpli against the Calvinistie system. But the principles which hare been stated, furnish an answer to the objection. The eyil that is in the universe was not chosen by God upon its own account, but was permitted upon account of its connection with that good which he chooses- The precise notion of God's permitting e\i\ is this — that his power is not exerted in hindering that from coming into exist- ence, which could not hare existed independently of his Avill, and which is allowed to exist, because, although not in itself an object of his approbation, it results from something else. Ac- cording to this notion of the permission of eril, we say that although this world, notwithstanding the evil that is in it, pro- motes the end which the Creator proposed, and carries into effect the purpose which he had in creating it, yet he beholds the good that is in the world with approbation, and the evil with abhor- rence. We gather, from all the conceptions which we are led to form of the Supreme Being, that he cannot love evil : we feel that he has so constituted our minds that we always behold moral evil with indignation in others, with self-reproach in our- selves ; we often observe, we sometimes experience, the fatal effects which it produces ; and we find all the parts of that revelation which the Scriptures contain, conspiring to dissuade us from the practice of it. In this entire coincidence between the deductions of reason, the sentiments of human nature, the influence of conduct upon happiness, and the declarations of the divine w^ord, there is laid such a foundation of morality as no speculations can shake. This coincidence gives that direct and authoritative intimation of the will of our Creator, which Avas plainly intended to be the rule of our actions : and the assurance of the moral character of his government, which we derive from these sources, is so forcibly conveyed to our imderstandings and our hearts, that if our reasonings upon theological subjects should ever appear to give the colour of truth to any views that are opposite to this assurance, we may, without hesitation, conclude that these views are false. The}^ have derived their colour of truth from our presuming to cany our researches farther than the limited range of our faculties admits, and from our mistaking those difficulties which are unaccountable to an intelligence so finite as ours, for those contradictions which indicate to every intelligent being the falsehood of the proposition to which the}' adhere. These are the general principles upon which the ablest de- fenders of the Calvinistie system attempt to A'indicate that system from the charge of being inconsistent with the nature of man and the nature of God. As they furnish the answer to philo- SVSTEMS COMPARED. 223 soplilcal objections, I have stated them, as much as possible, in a philosophical form, with very little reference to the authority of Scripture, and without the use of those technical terms which occur in the books of theology. But it is not proper for us to rest in this form. To afford a complete view of the evidence, and of the application of these principles, I mean first to present a comprehensive account of that support which the Calvinistic system derives from Scripture ; secondly, to give a general history of Calvinism, of the reception which, at diiiferent periods, it has met with in the Christian church, and of what may be called its present state ; and then to conclude the subject by applying the principles which have been stated as an answer to the two objections, in a concise discussion of various questions that have agitated the Christian church, and in an explication of various phrases that have been currently used in treating of these questions. The questions turn upon general principles ; so that, although they have been spread out in great detail, and although they seem to belong to different subjects, all that is necessary in discussing them, is to shew the manner in which the general principles apply to the particular questions. The general principles will be elucidated by this vai-ious application ; and we shall be able, after having travelled quickly over much debatable matter, to mark the consistency with which all the parts of the Calvinistic system arise out of a few leading ideas. Reid on the Active Powers. King on tlie Origin of Evil. Clarke's Demonstration of the Being and Attributes of God. Whitby on the Five Points. Locke. Edwards on Free Will. Butler's Analogy. 224 SUPPORT WHICH SCRIPTURE GIVES CHAPTER X. GENERAL VIEW OF THE SUPPORT WHICH SCRIPTURE GIVES TO THE CALVINISTIC SYSTEM. Thk passages adduced from Scripture by the friends and the adversaries of this system are so numerous, and have received interpretations so vs'idely different, that I should engage in an endless field of controversy, if I attempted to notice particular texts, and to contrast in every instance the Arminian and the Calvinistic exposition of them. But a labour so tedious and fatiguing is really unnecessary ; for the same principles upon "which the Calvinistic exposition of one passage proceeds, apply to every other. Instead, therefore, of repeating the same lead- ing ideas with a small variation of form, I shall simply mention that an index of particular texts may be found in the proofs annexed to several chapters of the Confession of Faith, in the quotations that are made in every ordinary system under the several heads which belong to tlie doctrine of predestination, and in those books which should be read upon the subject. And I shall endeavour to arrange this multifarious matter under the three following heads, which appear to me to constitute the support which Scripture gives to the Calvinistic system. 1. All the actions of men, even those which the Scripture holds forth to our abhorrence, are represented as ])eing comprehended in the great plan of divine providence. 2. The predestination of which the Scripture speaks is ascribed to the good pleasure of God. 3. And t!ie various descriptions of that change of character by which men ai'e prepared for eternal life, seem intended to mag- nify the poAver, and to declare the efficacy of that grace by Avhich it is produced. I shall then state the answers given by the Cal- vinists to tliat objection against their system which has been drawn from the commands, the counsels, and the expostulations of Scripture. TO THE CALVINISTIC SYSTEM. 225 SECTION I. All the actions of men, even those which the Scripture holds forth to our abhorrence, are represented as being comprehended, in the great plan of divine providence. I do not mean merely that all the actions of men are foreseen 1)y God. Of this the predictions in Scripture aiford evidence which even the Armin- ians admit to be incontrovertible. But I mean that the actions of men are foreseen by God, not as events independent of his will, but as originating in his determination, and as fulfilling his purpose. By many sublime expressions, the Scriptures impress our minds with an idea of the universal sovereignty of God, of the extent and efficacy of his counsel, and of the uncontrolled operation of his power throughout all his dominions. Even those beings and events that appear to counteract his designs, are represented as subject to his will, as not only at length to be subdued by him, but as promoting, while they operate, the end for which he ordained them — Psal. Ixxvi. 10 — Prov. xvi. 4 — Is. xlv. 7 — Lam. iii. 37, 3B. Such expressions receive a striking illustration from many of the histories recorded in S ip ure. The barbarity of the brethren of Joseph, which filled their minds with deep remorse, was intended by God as an instrument of providing a settlement for the posteiity of Abraham. " As for you," said Joseph to his brethren. Gen. 1. 20, " ye thought evil against me ; but God meant it unto good, to bring to pass, as it is this day, to save much people alive." God did not merely turn it to good after it happened, but he " meant it unto good." The obstinacy of Pharaoh, in refusing to let the people go out of that country to which the wickedness of the sons of Jacob had led them, was, in like manner, a part of the plan of divine pro- vidence ; for, as God said unto Moses, Exod, x. 1, 2, " I have hardened his heart, and the heart of his servants, that I might shew these my signs before him ; and that thou mayest tell in the ears of thy son, and of thy son's son, Avhat things I have wrought in Egypt." — " I have hardened his heart," not by ex- erting any immediate influence leading him to sin, but by dis- posing matters in such a manner that he shall not consent : he shall suffer for his obstinacy ; but that obstinacy is appointed by me to give an opportunity of exhibiting those signs which shall transmit the law of INIoscs to futiire ages with unquestionable proofs of its divine original. The folly of the princes whose territories adjoined to the wilderness, in refusing the children ;^f Israel a free passage when they went out of Egypt ; the com- l2 226 SUPPORT ujiicn scripture gites binatlon of the kings of Canaan^ wliich brouglit destruction upon themselves ; and tlie oppression and ravages of those who car- ried Israel into captivity — are all held forth in the historical and prophetical books of Scripture, as proceeding from the ordination of God. Of Cyrus, the good prince, whose edict recalled the Jews from captivity, the Almighty says. Is. xliv. xlv. " He is my shepherd, and shall perform all my pleasure, even saying to Jerusalem, thou shalt be built ; mine anointed, whose right hand I have holden ; whom, for Jacob my servant's sake, I have called by his name." But of Nebuchadnezzar also, the destroyer of nations, whose pride is painted in the strongest colours, and whose punishment corresponded to the enormity of his crimes, thus saith the Almighty, Jer. xxvii. 4—8, " I have made the earth, and have given it unto whom it seemed meet unto me : and now have I given all these lands into the hand of Nebuch- adnezzar the king of Biibylon my servant." And again, Ezek. XXX. 24, 25, " I will strengthen the arms of the king of Babylon, and put my sword in his hand — and he shall stretch it out upon the land of Egypt." The infidelity of the Jews who lived in our Saviour's time, the envy and malice of their rulers, and the injustice and vio- lence with which an innocent man Mas condemned to die, were crimes in themselves most atrocious, and are declared in Scrip- tuie to have been the cause of that unexampled misery which the Jewish nation suffered. Yet all this is also declared, Acrs, ii 23, to have happened^ " by the determinate counsel and fore- kno\Yledge of God." And, Acts^ iv. 27, " Both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles and the people of Israel, were gathered together to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done." And Peter, after relating the manner in which our Lord was put to death, adds the following word?, Acts, iii. 18 : — " Those things which God before had shewed by the mouth of all his prophets that Christ should suffer, he hath so fulfilled;" i.e. the purpose of God in delivering the world embraced all the wicked actions of the persecutors of his Son, and could not have been accomplished in the manner which he had foretold without these actions. Hence it came to be necessary that these actions should be performed : and this necessity is intimated, as in many other places of Scripture, so particularly Matth. xvi. 21, " Jesus began to shew unto his disciples how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed and be raised again the third day." In the original, the same verb hi governs the infinitives a^i'Khiv, 'xahiv, a-oz-ai/^'/ji'a/, iji^^nvai ; i. e. the form of the expression represents his going to Jerusalem,which was TO THE CALVINISTIC SYSTEM. 227 an action depending upon his own will, and his suffering many things of the chief priests, which depended upon their will, as being as unalterably fixed, and as having the same necessity of event as his resurrection from the dead, which was accom- plished by an exertion of divine power without the intervention of man. This last example is more particular and more interesting to us than any of the former ; but it is exactly of the same order with the rest ; and all of them conspire in establishing the fol- lowing positions : that actions contrary to the law of God and to the principles of morality, may form part of that plan origi- nally fixed and determined in the divine mind ; that these actions do not lose any of their moral turpitude by being so determined, but continue to be the actions of the moral agents by whom they are performed, for which they deserve blame and suffer punishment ; and that actions thus wicked and punishable, are made the instruments of great good. When Ave find these positions true in many particular instances, and also agreeing with general expressions in Scripture, we conclude, by fair induction, that they may hold true in the great system of the universe ; and we seem to be warranted to say, not merely that the providence of God brings good out of evil when the evil happens — that is allowed by the Socinians who deny the diAdne foreknowledge — not merely that God, foreseeing wicked actions which were to be performed, connected them, in the plan of his providence, Avith the events Avhicli he had determined to produce — thisis Avhat the Arminians say — but that the Supreme Being, to Avbom the series of CA^ents of good and of bad actions that constitute the character of this Avorld, Avas from the begin- ning present, determined to produce this Avorld ; that the bad, no less than the good actions, result from his determination, and contribute to the prosperity of the whole ; and yet, that the liberty of moral agents not being in the least affected Ijy this determination, they deserve praise or blame, in the same man- ner as if their actions had not been predetermined. But these are some of the fundamental principles of Calvinism ; and if the Scriptures, both by general expressions and by instances illustrating and exemplifying such expressions, gives its sanction to those principles, Ave haA'e found a considerable support Avhich the Calvinistic system derives from Scripture. 228 SUPPORT WHICH SCRIPTURE GIVES SECTION II. The predestination of which the Scripture speaks, is ascribed to the good pleasure of God. There does not occur, in the Greek Testament, any substan- tive word equivalent to predestination. But the verb t^oo^i^oj, j}rio. is used in different places ; rroohcic, s-AXoy/j, Ex/.szro/, also occur ;* and there does not appear to be any unwarrantable departure from the style of the New Testament in the language C':)mmonly used upon this subject. But it is not agreed, and it is not incontrovertibly clear, whether the sacred writers employed the words upon which this language has been framed, in the sense affixed to it by the Calvinists. There are two systems upon this point ; and, as these systems extend their influence to the interpretation of a great part of Scripture, it is proper to state distinctly the grounds upon which they rest. The system by which all those who do not hold the Calvinistic tenets, expound that predestination of which the Scripture speaks, is of the following kind. It appears from Scripture that God was pleased very early to make a discrimination amongst the children of Adam, as to the measure in which he imparled to them religious knowledge. The family of Abra- ham were selected, amidst abounding idolatry, to be the depo- sitories of faith in one God, and of the hope of a Messiah : and they are presented to us in Scripture under the characters of the church, the peculiar people, the children of God. But the Old Testament contains many hints, which are fully unfolded in the New, of a purpose to extend the bounds of the church, and to admit men of all nations into that relation with the Supreme Being which for many ages was the portion of the posterity of Abraham. This purpose, formed in the divine mind from the beginning, began to be executed when the apostles of Jesus went forth preaching the Gospel to every creature. It was a purpose so different from the prejudices in which they had been educated, and it appeared to their own minds so magnificent, so interesting and delightful, (after they were enabled to comprehend it,) that it occupies a considerable place in all their discourses and writings. It made a blessed change upon the moral and religious condition of the persons to whom these discourses and writings were generally addressed ; for all former communications from heaven had been confined to • * Ephes. i. Eom. ix. xi, 1 Pet. i. 1. TO THE CALVINISTIC SYSTEM. 229 the land of Juclea ; and the other nations of the earth, having been educated in idolatry, had no hereditary title to the pri- vileges of the people of God. But the execution of that pur- pose declared in the Gospel placed them upon a level with the chosen race. Accordingly, Paul, the Apostle of the Gentiles, in many of his epistles, addresses the whole body of professing Christians to whom he writes, as elect, saints, predestinated to the adoption of children ; and magnifies the purpose, or, as he often calls it, the mystery, which in other ages was not made known, but had been revealed to him, and was published to all, that T'x idvri, the Gentiles, who were aliens from the common- wealth of Israel, were called to be fellow-citizens with the saints, and of the household of faith. Eph. iii. 3 — 7- By contrasting the enormity of the vices which had been habitual to them while they lived in idolatry, with the spiritual blessings, or the advantages for improving in virtue and attaining eternal life, which they enjoyed through the Gospel, he cherishes their thankfulness to God for his unmerited grace in pardoning their past transgressions, and he excites them to the practice of those virtues which became their new faith. When we employ this loading idea of all the epistles of Paul as a key to the meaning of particular passages, which are much quoted in support of the Calvinistic system, the predestination of which he speaks appears to be nothing more than the purpose of placing the inhabitants of all countries, where the Gospel is preached, in the same favourable circumstances with respect to religion as the Jews were of old : the elect are the persons chosen out of the world, and called to the knowledge of the Gospel ; and the spiritual l)lessings Avbich the apostle represents as common to all the members of the Christian societies whom he addresses, are the advantages flowing from that knowledge. It is allowed that predestination, even in this sense, originates in the good pleasure of God. As he chose the posterity of Abraham, not because they were more mighty or more virtuous than other nations, but because he loved their fathers, so he dispenses to whomsoever he will the inestimable blessings connected with the publication of the Gospel. To nations who had been the most corrupt this saving light was sent ; to indi- viduals Avhose attainments did not seem to prepai-e them tor this heavenly knowledge, the Spirit revealed those " things that are freely given to us of God ;" and our Lord has taught us, that, instead of presuming to complain of that revelation, which the Almighty was not bound to give to any, having been sent to some parts of the world and not to others, it is our wisdom and our duty to acquiesce in the sovereignty of the divine 230 SUPPORT WHICH SCRIPTURE GIVES administration, and to say with liim, Matth. xi. 25, 26, " Even so, Father, for so it seemed good in tby sight." But, ahhough those who admit of predestination only in this sense, acknowledge that it originates in the good pleasure of God, yet they do not consider this acknowledgment as giving any countenance to the Calvinistic system. They say that we are not waiTanted to record expressions which originally marked a purpose of sending the blessings of the Gospel to all countries, as implying a purpose of confining eternal life to some individuals in all countries ; and that, although the Sovereign of the universe is accountable to none in dispensing the knowledge of the Gospel, any more than in dispensing the measures of skill, sagacity, or bodily strength, 1)y which individuals are distin- guished, because in the end he will render to all men according to their improvement of the advantages which they enjoy — yet it does not follow that it is consistent with the impartiality and universal beneficence of our Father in heaven, to make such a distinction, in conferring inward grace, as shall certainly conduct some of his creatures to everlasting happiness, whilst others are left without remedy to perish in their sins. The system of interpretation which I have now explained has been adopted and defended by very able men ; by Whitby, the author of the commentarj^ upon the New Testament ; by Dr Clarke, whose sermons discover more knowledge of Scripture than any other sermons that have been printed ; and by Taylor of Norwich, author of a Key to the Epistle to the Romans, who, in a long introductory essay, has unfolded the ideas now stated, and made various use of them. The system is extremely plaus- ible. It draws an interpretation of epistles, letters to different churches, from the known situation of these churches, and from the known ideas of the writer ; and by considering parti- cular passages in connection with the scope of the epistle, it gives an explication of them, which, in general, is most rational and satisfying. The light which every one who has lectured upon an epistle can communicate to the people by the apjilication of this system, is so pleasing to himself and so instructive to them, that he is apt to be confirmed in thinking it the full interpreta- tion of the writer's meaning. And I have no difiiculty in say- ing, that, if the Calvinistic doctrine derived no other support from Scripture than that which can fairly be drawn from our finding the words predestination, elect, and other similar words frequently recurring in the epistles, it might seem to an intelli- gent inquirer and a sound critic, that that doctrine had arisen rather by detaching particular texts from the contexts, and applying them in a sense which did not enter into the mind of TO THE CALVINISTIC SYSTEM. 231 the sacred writers, than by forming an enlarged comprehension of their views. But, after paying this just tribute to the system which I have explained, and after admitting that more stress is laid upon some particular texts, which are commonly quoted as Scripture authority for the Calvinistic doctrine, tlian they can well bear — I proceed to state fully the grounds of the other system of inter- pretation, according to which there is mention made in Scripture of a predestination of individuals, arising from the mere good pleasure of God ; and I entertain no doubt that the observations now to be made, will appear sufficient to warrant the Calvinists in saying that they do not pervert Scripture, when they pretend to find a general language, pervading many parts of it, which evidently favours their doctrine. 1. The former interpretation proceeded upon this ground, that the epistles are addressed to Christian societies, all the members of which enjoyed in common the advantages of the preaching of the Gospel, but all the members of which cannot be supposed to have been in the number of those who shall finally be saved ; and hence it is inferred that such expressions as occur in the beginning of the Epistle to the Ephesians, mean nothing more than that change upon their condition, that external advantage common to the whole society, which God, in execu- tion of the purpose formed by him from the beginning, had, through the publication of the Gospel, conferred upon all. Ad- mitting that many of the persons addressed as saints and elect, shall not finally be saved, still these words imply something more than a change upon the outward condition ; and there is no necessity for our departing so far from their natural and obvious meaning as to bring it down to mere external advan- tage, because the apostle was not warranted to make a distinc- tion between those who are predestinated to life, and those who are left to perish in their sins. This distinction is one of those secret things which belong to the Lord, and which he has not intrusted to his ministers. They are bound in charity to believe that all to whom the external blessings are imparted, and who appear to improve them with thankfulness, receive also that inward grace by which these blessings are made eifectual to salvation ; and they have no title to separate any persons from the society of the faithful, but those who have been guilty of open and flagi-ant transgressions. Such persons the apostle frequently marks out in his epistles ; and he Avarns the Chris- tians against holding intercourse with them ; but to all who remained in the society he sends his benediction, and of all of them he hoped things that accompany salvation. 232- SUPPORT WHICH scripture gives 2. Although many passages in the epistles, which speak of predestination and of the elect, might seem to receive their fiili interpretation from the purpose of God to call other nations besides the Jews to the knowledge of the Gospel, yet there are places in the epistles of Paul which intimate that he had a further meaning. Of this kind is the ninth chapter to the Romans, and a part of the eleventh ; two passages of Scripture which give the greatest trouble to those who deny the truth of the Calvinistic doctrine, which have received a long commentary from Armi- nius himself, and from many Arminian writers, but which, after all the attempts that have been made to accommodate them to their system, are fitted, in my opinion, to leave upon the mind of every candid reader an indelible impression that this system does not come up to the mind of the apostle. The ninth chapter to the Romans is one of the most difficult passages in Scripture ; and I am far from saying that the Calvinistic system makes it plain. There is not only an obscurity but an extent in the subject which is beyond the reach of our faculties, and which represses our presumptuous attempts to penetrate the counsels of the Almighty. But, after reading that chapter, and the eleventh, with due care in the original, the amount of them, it will probably be thought, may be thus stated. God chose the posterity of Abraham out of all the families of the earth. He made a distinction in the posterity of the patriarch, by confining to the seed of Isaac the blessings which he had promised ; of the twin sons of Isaac, Esau and Jacob, he declared, before they were born, that he preferred the younger to the elder, ancl, rejecting Esau, he transmitted the blessing through the children of Jacob. In all these limitations, God exercised his sovereignty, and executed his own purpose according to the election of grace ; and he made still a further limitation with regard to the children of Jacob ; for all they who are descended from the patriarch, according to the flesh, are not the children of promise ; all who are of Israel are not truly Israel, or the people of God. The calling of the nation of Israel is indeed without repentance ; and, therefore, Israel as a nation shall yet be gathered ; but many individuals who belong to that nation shall perish. " Israel," as the apostle speaks, understanding by that word all the de- scendants of Jacob, " hath not obtained that which he seeketh for ; but the election hath obtained it," i. c. those who are elected have obtained it: a remnant is saved, while the rest were blinded ; and in place of that great body of Israelites, who thus appear by the event not to have been elected, God hath called a people which before wei-e not his people ; he is made manifest by the Gospel to them that asked not after him, and, TO THE CALVINISTIC SYSTEM. 233 through the fall of a great part of Israel, salvation is come to the Gentiles. To all the objections which human reason can suggest against this dispensation, the answer made by the apostle is conveyed in this question, " Who art thou that repliest against God ?" He represents, by a striking similitude, the condition of the crea- tures as entirely at the disposal of him who made them ; and he concludes all his reasoning in these words, Rom. xi. 33 — 36, " Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God ! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out ! For who hath known the mind of the Lord, or who hath been his counsellor ? Or Avho hath first given to him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again .'' For of him, and through him, and to him, are all things ; to whom be glory for ever, amen." In these verses, the very principles which are the foundation of Calvinism are laid down by an inspired apostle, and applied by him to account for this fact, that, of a nation which was chosen by God, many individuals perish ; and the account which they furnish is this, that, under the declared purpose of calling the whole nation to the knowledge of the truth, there Avas a secret purpose respecting individuals, which secret purpose stands in the salvation of some and the destruc- tion of others ; while the declared purpose stands also respecting the whole nation. If these principles apply to the peculiar people of God under the IMosaic dispensation, they may be applied also to Christians, who, by enjoying the Gospel, come in place of that peculiar people, and are so designed in Scripture ; and the apostle seems to teach us, by his reasoning with regard to Israel, that we have not attained his full meaning, when we interpret what he says concerning the predestination of Christians merely of those outw-ard privileges which, being common to all, are abused by many ; but that with regard to them, as with regard to Israel, there is a purpose of election according to grace Avhich shall stand, because they who are elected shall obtain the end which all profess to seek, while the rest are blinded. According to this method of interpreting these two chapters, we learn from the apostle that there is the same sovereignty, the same exercise of the good pleasure of God, in the election of individuals as in the illumination of nations, that both are accounted for upon the same principles, and that with respect to both, God silences all who say that there is unrighteousness in him, by that declaration which he employed when he con- ferred a signal mark of his favour upon Moses, " 1 will have mercy upon Avhom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion upon whom I will have compassion." 234 SUPPORT WHICH SCRIPTURE GIA^ES 3. There are passages both in the Epistles and in other parts of Scripture, which appear to declare the election of some indi- viduals and the reprobation of others, Avithout any regard to the nations to which they belong. I do not mean that there are passages of this kind, the application of Avhich in support of the Calvinistic system has not been controverted; for, upon a subject which the Scriptures have left involved in much obscur- ity, and upon which they have chosen rather to fui'nish inci- dental hints than a complete delineation, it is easy for ingenious men to give a plausible exposition of particular texts, so as to accommodate them to their own system. I do not consider that all the texts which are quoted in support of the Calvinistic system admit, according to the rules of sound and fair criticism, of that interpretation Avhich is adopted by those who quote them ; nor do I mean to hold forth as insignificant the objec- tions made to the Calvinistic interpretation of the texts which I am now to mention. But I arrange them under this third head, because it appears to me that the interpretation con- nected with that arrangement is the most natural, and that, when taken in conjunction with the other support which the Calvinistic system derives from Scripture, they contain an argu- ment of real weight. 1. Our Lord calls the Christians sx/.jzro/, [^elcct,]] Matth. xxiv. 22, 24, and Luke xviii. 7? Avhen this name does not seem to have any reference to the purpose of calling the Gentiles, or to the election of his apostles to their office. The name is given to those Jews who had embraced the Gospel before the destruc- tion of Jerusalem. They Avere distinguished from their country- men by their faith in Christ ; and on account of this distinction were permitted to escape that destruction which overtook all the rest of their nation. Now, the fiiith of these Christian Jews is represented by the name sx/.sxro/, a w^ord which here can have no reference to the distinction between Jews and Gentiles, but seems employed on purpose to remind them that their faith flowed, not from any exertion of their own, but from the good pleasure and appointment of God, who chose them out from amongst their countrymen. 2. Our Lord comprehends his true disciples, all who are to be saved by hira, under this general expression, John vi. 37, 30, rrav o hihor/ti or hiboiat jj^tji 6 Tary^o. [All that the Father gave me, or gives me.] He applies, indeed, in John xvii., the phrase ovg hsooizag iioi^ [whom thou hast given me,] to all the twelve apostles, not excluding Judas ; so that their being given him by God means nothing more in that place than the phrase used, John XV. 16, oup^ '••jij.zic, n,i i^iXs^aaDi, aXX' syu ■jij,agj^0.s^a/j,r,v—' TO THE CALVINISTIC SYSTEM. 235 [ve have not chosen me, hut I have chosen you] — their desig- nation and election to the office of Apostles, without any respect to their personal character or to their own salvation. But when the two chapters are compared, it is instantly perceived that the same phrase is used in different senses ; because, it is said, John vi. 39, "■ this is the Father's will, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing ;" whereas it is said, John xvii. jl2, " those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost but the son of perdition." Our Lord's expression in chap, vi., being thus clearly discriminated from the similar expression in chap, xvii., seems to imply that the infallible salvation of all true Christians arises from the destination of God. 3. Acts xiii. 48. Kai sTisnuciav offoi yiffav rirayii,zvni sic 'Cr 251 the abilities, the eloquence, and the reputation of Arminiu?;, not only spread through the Lutheran churches, but made an im- pression upon the minds of many who had been educated iu the principles of Calvinism ; and, proceeding from a university founded in one of the Reformed churches, it encountered, at its first appearance, a most formidable opposition. Arminius died in 1609 ; but the hold which his principles had taken of the minds of men, and the zeal with which they were propagated by his disciples, excited much commotion immediately after his death. The inhabitants of the United Provinces, who held these principles, presented to the States-General, in 1610, a petition or remonstrance, from which they received the name of Remonstrants. By this they have ever since been distinguished. It happened that Grotius, and other leading men in the States, who were at that time in opposition to the Prince of Orange, favoured the principles of the Remonstrants. This circumstance naturally formed a union between the House of Orange and the contra-remonstrants or Calvinists ; and thus political interests came to mingle their influence in the discussion of theological questions. Many conferences were held between the Arminians and the Calvinists, without convincing either party. JMany schemes to accomplish a reconciliation proved abortive ; and, at length, it was resolved, by the States of Hol- land, to summon a meeting of deputies from all the Protestant churches, after the manner of the General Councils which had been held in former ages, where the points in dispute might he canvassed and decided. In the year 1618, there assembled at Dort, a town in the province of .South Holland, deputies from the churches of thw United Provinces, from Britain, and from many states in Ger- many, who formed wliat is known in ecclesiastical history, by the name of the S3 nod of Dort, Si/tiodus Dordracena. The learned and eloquent Episcopius, the successor of Arminius, appeared at the head of the leading men amongst the Arminians or Remonstrants, to defend their cause. But, being dissatisfied with the manner in which the Synod proposed to proceed, Episcopius and his adherents refused to submit to the directions which were given them as to the method of their defence ; and, in consequence of this refusal, they were excluded from sitting in the assembly. After an hundred and fifty-four meetings, the five articles, in which the Arminians had, at a former conference, stated their